Characterization of aerosol emissions from wastewater aeration basins

Figures & data

Table 1. Overview of sampling campaigns and facilities

Facility A “CAB”
18 MGD or 0.79 m^3/sec with covered aeration basins (CABs) and granular activated carbon beds as off-gas treatment
Above-basin sampling	Oct. 28, 2008–Nov. 14, 2008 6 samples
Off-gas sampling (post-treatment)	Jan. 10, 2009–Jan. 23, 2009 6 samples
Facility B “OAB”
200 MGD or 8.76 m^3/sec with several open aeration basins (OABs)
Edge of aeration basin sampling	May 5, 2009–May 25, 2009 6 samples
Fenceline sampling	May 26, 2009–June 1, 2009 6 samples

Figure 1. PM_2.5 (a) and PM₁₀ (b) mass and organic carbon (OC) concentrations observed during the study and the average values for Phoenix (Upadhyay et al., 2011b). Bars represent the range (min–max) of observations.

Figure 2. PM_2.5 (a) and PM₁₀ (b) average relative composition of major ions observed during the study.

Figure 3. Size distribution of 3-coprostanol in aerosol observed at the open aeration basin (OAB) plant at curb and fence sites.

Figure 4. Gas-phase NH₃ collected by denuders at the closed aeration basin (CAB) site and open aeration basin (OAB) site.

Figure 5. Daily ammonia emissions. Cattle and pig slurry data come from Balsari et al. (2007) and are scaled to the same-size slurry as the covered aeration basin (CAB).

Upadhyay , N. , Clements , A. , Fraser , M. and Herckes , P. 2011b . Chemical speciation of PM2.5 and PM10 in South Phoenix, Arizona . J. the Air Waste Manage. Assoc. , 61 : 302 – 310 . doi: 10.3155/1047-3289.61.3.302

 PubMedGoogle Scholar

Balsari , P. , Airoldi , G. , Dinuccio , E. and Gioelli , F. 2007 . Ammonia emissions from farmyard manure heaps and slurry stores—Effect of environmental conditions and measuring methods . Biosystems Engineering , 97 : 456 – 463 . doi: 10.1016/j.biosystemseng.2007.03.033

 Web of Science ®Google Scholar