Sheets, John

Dr. Johnathon Sheets is an environmental engineer with over 10 years of engineering design experience, and serves as a technical leader on strategic projects including water reclamation, wastewater surveillance, industrial pretreatment, and water reuse. Dr. Sheets' goal is to develop synergies between his technical expertise areas to improve public health and environmental sustainability.

Titles from this speaker

Alternative Water Supplies in the Midwest: Reuse Roadmapping in Ohio

Abstract

Introduction The Midwest region is known for its abundant water resources. Historically, this 'water wealth' has fostered a perception that alternative water sources are not worthwhile investments. Recent developments are challenging this status quo. Over the past decade, the state of Ohio has seen an influx of technology companies, particularly data centers [1], creating substantial demand for cooling water. Rapid industrial development is typically followed by community growth, further increasing demand. Climate change may also lead to drought, reducing supply [2]. Consequently, stakeholders in Ohio are considering treated wastewater (recycled water) to meet demand. Planning for recycled water systems requires collaboration among the key stakeholders involved, including utilities, technology companies, and regulators. This paper presents a case study where we applied a reuse roadmapping approach for a major Midwest city experiencing significant technology sector growth — Columbus, Ohio. Two areas were considered for recycled water: 1.A 5-mile radius around the existing Southerly Wastewater Treatment Plant (Figure 1a)[3]. 2.New Albany International Business Park — an area experiencing rapid technology development (Figure 1b)[4]. Water Demand Billing data and infrastructure planning documentation provided by utility and municipal partners, along with an analysis of publicly available development announcements, showed that existing potable water demand (<2 MGD) in the project areas were significantly lower than future estimated growth (>10 MGD) (Table 1). Water Supply and Quality Columbus An evaluation of existing infrastructure showed that recycled water supply could easily be met by treated effluent from the Southerly WWTP, a 114-mgd ADF (330-mgd peak) treatment facility that provides primary/secondary treatment and disinfection for wastewater in a large portion of the region. Water quality data provided by the City of Columbus showed that SWWTP effluent generally has low TSS (<30 mg/L), low BOD (<25 mg/L), low nitrogen (<20 mg/L TN), and low pathogen content. Therefore, it is likely that the effluent will require minimal additional treatment to meet quality requirements for non-potable use or irrigation. New Albany The City of New Albany does not have a dedicated WWTP to treat wastewater. Flow is currently collected via a series of interceptors and conveyed via trunk sewer to the Southerly WWTP nearly 30 miles south. Therefore, a sewer mining concept was considered, where sewage from a main trunk sewer is treated and distributed to users in the business park. The estimated future flow available was 5 MGD. Water quality data for sewage from the business park was unavailable since the user base is not established. Therefore, medium strength wastewater (190 mg/L BOD, 210 mg/L TSS, 40 mg/L TKN, 7 mg/L TP, 90 mg/L alkalinity, 30 mg/L sulfate, 500 mg/L TDS) was considered for this analysis. Treatment for organics and nutrients is likely required to support non-potable use or irrigation. Water Quality Requirements and Regulations Water quality requirements for recycled water are a balance between regulatory requirements and user requirements at specific facilities. Although reuse of treated wastewater for industrial uses is not currently defined in the Ohio administrative code, experiences from similar states (e.g., Virginia) suggest that this use case could be defined within existing codes describing treated wastewater irrigation (OAC 3745-42-13). A summary of projected water quality requirements was developed (Table 2)[5]. Treatment Strategy and Preliminary Cost Analysis Columbus Based on user water quality preferences and regulatory review, a tertiary treatment and disinfection system was considered to provide 20 MGD of recycled water to customers in the Southerly WWTP area. The opinion of probable construction cost for the treatment, pumping, and distribution system was >$200M, with O&M costs estimated at >$3M/year. The total estimated cost of treatment and distribution was >$3 per thousand gallons, similar to the potable water cost for commercial users in the Columbus area. New Albany Based on user water quality preferences and regulatory review, a membrane bioreactor (MBR) system with disinfection was considered to provide 5 MGD of recycled water to customers in the New Albany area (Figure 2). The opinion of probable construction cost for the 5 MGD treatment, pumping, and distribution system was >$200M, with O&M costs estimated at >$4M/year. The total estimated cost of treatment and distribution was >$10 per thousand gallons, significantly higher than commercial water rates. Conclusion This presentation synthesizes a case study from a water-rich region to inform the momentum for water recycling in the region. This study highlights the complexities of estimating water demands amidst uncertain future developments. Additionally, we explore challenges when development occurs miles away from the largest facilities capable of providing recycled water. Sewer mining was explored as an option to provide remote access. Cost advantages were apparent when demand was near existing treatment infrastructure. Collaboration with regulatory authorities, utilities, and users is critical to establish frameworks for demand estimation, regulatory review, and permitting.

In the Midwest, the demand for sustainable water sources is growing due to rapid technological and residential expansion. A strategic approach involving utilities, technology firms, and regulators is necessary to implement recycled water systems effectively. Central Ohio municipalities such as Columbus, New Albany, and Marysville OH serve as case studies, showcasing the potential for recycled water to meet non-potable needs and support local water resources.

SpeakerSheets, John

Presentation time

09:30:00

10:00:00

Session time

08:30:00

10:00:00

SessionDriving the Circular Water Economy by Reusing Industrial and Municipal Effluents

Session number308

Session locationRoom 338

TopicCircular Water Economy, Industrial Issues and Treatment Technologies, Intermediate Level, One Water Management, Water Reuse and Reclamation

Author(s)

Sheets, John, Stachler, Erin, Zornes, Greta

Author(s)J.P. Sheets1, E. Stachler1, G.L. Zornes2

Author affiliation(s)1CDM Smith, OH, 2CDM Smith, LA

SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation

Document typeConference Paper

PublisherWater Environment Federation

Print publication date Oct 2024

DOI10.2175/193864718825159632

Volume / Issue

Content sourceWEFTEC

Word count11

Life Cycle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Modeling of Wastewater Residuals

Abstract

Introduction The U.S. EPA estimates that water resource recovery facilities (WRRFs) emit nearly 40 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2eq) greenhouse gas (GHG) each year, representing nearly 1% of all domestic emissions sources. Landfills, which are interlinked with WRRFs by residuals management especially for small to moderate WRRFs, represent an additional 1.5% of all U.S. GHG emissions. WRRFs and landfills may also represent the single largest sources of GHGs in municipalities that own and operate these systems. To mitigate concerns about the long-term economic and environmental sustainability of landfill disposal, WRRFs are investigating technologies that reduce the mass and volume of biosolids before end-use. Mass reduction, such as anaerobic digestion or thermal drying, is a strategy to lower hauling and disposal costs, which typically are the largest line items in a WRRF's biosolids management budget. Several moderately sized WRRFs (<10 million gallon per day [MGD]) are considering thermal drying systems that use heat to remove moisture from dewatered sludge and can represent a 70-80% decrease in the mass of material hauled. Though capitally intensive, the process can represent a significant reduction in operating costs due to the mass reduction and the higher quality biosolids product (Class A) produced. The process is especially economically attractive in areas where natural gas prices are low and biosolids are hauled long distances, such as Ohio. Widespread adoption of sludge drying can potentially impact the GHG footprint of WRRFs and the municipalities that own them. Increased use of natural gas will undoubtedly raise direct GHG emissions at the facilities. However, dried biosolids will require fewer trucks, reducing fossil fuel demands associated with truck traffic. Additionally, high quality biosolids have been shown to improve soil health upon land application and contribute to carbon sequestration. It is currently unclear what net impact sludge drying will have on GHG emissions. Quantification of these emissions is critical to better understand the environmental impacts of the technology. Study Objectives The goal of this study was to quantify impacts of sludge drying technology and anaerobic digestion on greenhouse gas emissions at WRRFs. The goal was met by completing the following objectives: - Develop a mass and energy balance model to quantify direct and indirect GHG emissions for sludge treatment and disposal at a moderate sized (<10MGD) WRRF. - Compare GHG emissions profiles for the following sludge treatment trains: 1.Sludge Dewatering with Landfilling of Undigested Sludge 2. Sludge Dewatering with Drying and Land Application of Class A biosolids 3. Sludge Thickening, Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion, Digestate Dewatering, and Land Application of Class B Biosolids. Biogas combusted at combined heat and power (CHP) for renewable electricity and heat generation. 4. Sludge Thickening, Mesophilic Anaerobic Digestion, Digestate Dewatering, Drying, and Land Application of Class A Biosolids. Biogas combusted at CHP for renewable electricity and heat generation. Heat requirements not met by CHP fueled by Natural Gas. Scenario 1 was considered a baseline condition because it is a common procedure for small to moderate size biological nutrient removal (BNR) WRRFs in Western Ohio. Scenarios 2 through 4 are common treatment trains evaluated during biosolids master planning efforts at moderate size facilities. Methodology The mass and energy balance model (Microsoft Excel based) allows users to input facility sludge flow data and select common sludge handling unit operations such as sludge thickening, dewatering, digestion, drying, and others. Mass flows are resolved around the whole process and individual unit operations. Energy requirements (electricity and heat) are calculated based on typical parameters provided by equipment vendors. The baseline model was developed around a ~10 MGD BNR WRRF that does not include primary treatment and produces a waste activated sludge (WAS) flow of 100,000 gpd with 10,000 lb/d of total suspended solids (TSS). This treatment train is common to many small to moderate sized WRRFs in the state of Ohio. The boundary of the analysis only includes sludge treatment operations, residuals transportation (via diesel truck) and end-use (e.g., landfill, land application). Emissions for unit processes outside of the solids treatment and end-use boundary were not included (e.g. liquid train treatment). Direct GHG emissions were quantified by multiplying modeled utility consumption (kWh/yr; MMBTU/yr) by US EPA and USEIA emissions factors for the region of interest. Indirect GHG emissions were primarily attributed to the residuals end-use method. End use emissions were quantified using the Biosolids Emissions Assessment Model (BEAM) model version 1.1 from the Canadian Council of Ministers of the Environment (CCME). Total GHG emissions for a particular case were calculated as the sum of net direct (consumption - production) and indirect GHG emissions (residuals end use). Results and Discussion Figure 1 shows the impact of sludge treatment train and residuals end-use on GHG emissions. The results show that sludge dewatering and landfilling was associated with the most GHG emissions (>5,000 T CO2eq/yr), mostly from uncaptured methane emissions at landfills. The integration of sludge drying, and Class A land application reduced GHG emissions by nearly 80% compared to dewatering and landfilling. This is attributed primarily to limited methane release in farm fields (due to low moisture content coupled with aerobic oxidation) and somewhat to net negative emissions from Class A land application GHG emissions were lowest for Scenario 3 (anaerobic digestion, Class B land application option) because of the potential to recover renewable power and heat. In fact, more heat and power is produced than needed, resulting in negative emissions for Scenarios 3 and 4. Scenario 4 (anaerobic digestion with drying, Class A land application) was comparable to Scenario 2 (Sludge Dryer Only). Figure 1 clearly shows that technologies for mass and volume reduction are likely to reduce GHG emissions associated with sludge treatment and end-use. However, many WRRFs typically make technology decisions based on a cost-benefit analysis. Table 1 summarizes approximate capital expenditures and GHG emissions offsets compared to Scenario 1. The results show that Scenario 2 & Sludge Drying provides the greatest net reduction in GHG emissions normalized to spent capital. This indicates that sludge drying may provide a cost-effective means to improve the GHG emissions profile at small to moderately sized WRRFs. Conclusions and Future Work WRRFs require cost-effective and environmentally sustainable solutions for sludge treatment and end-use. The results from this work show that technologies for mass and volume reduction are likely to reduce GHG emissions associated with sludge handling. This modeling work showed that land application of Class A and Class B biosolids provides significant benefits including soil carbon sequestration and fertilizer offsets compared to landfilling. Sludge drying was shown to provide the most greenhouse gas emissions offsets per unit of capital expenditure, indicating the technology may be a cost-effective method to improve the environmental footprint of municipalities that own and operate small to moderate sized WRRFs. This is significant because sludge drying may become a technology to prepare for higher cost end-use outlets caused by emerging contaminant regulations (e.g. PFAS). Sludge drying is also a potential precursor process to PFAS destruction technologies such as high-temperature incineration, gasification, and pyrolysis. Future applications of this work include an evaluation of the GHG emissions profile of PFAS destruction technologies and more sustainable landfilling practices, such as enhanced methane capture for renewable natural gas (RNG).

This paper was presented at the WEF Residuals and Biosolids Conference in Columbus, Ohio, May 24-27, 2022.

SpeakerSheets, John

Presentation time

11:15:00

11:45:00

Session time

10:45:00

11:45:00

Session number11

Session locationGreater Columbus Convention Center, Columbus, Ohio

TopicDrying, Greenhouse Gases, Modeling

Author(s)

J. Sheets

Author(s)J. Sheets1; E. Staunton2; D. Ford3; D. Craig4

Author affiliation(s)CDM Smith; 1CDM Smith; 2CDM Smith; 3CDM Smith; 4

SourceProceedings of the Water Environment Federation

Document typeConference Paper

PublisherWater Environment Federation

Print publication date May 2022

DOI10.2175/193864718825158415

Volume / Issue

Content sourceResiduals and Biosolids

Word count10

Description: Wastewater Surveillance Program Management and Execution: Lessons Learned from the...

Wastewater Surveillance Program Management and Execution: Lessons Learned from the COVID-19 Pandemic

Abstract

Introduction
The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has exposed modern society's vulnerability to infectious diseases. Reliance on clinical testing of symptomatic individuals has proven challenging due to the inability to identify asymptomatic cases and time lags between disease onset and clinical reporting to public health agencies.
Wastewater surveillance is a disease-tracking tool that supports early response, such as public health decision making and vaccination efforts. Public health agencies have partnered with local officials, wastewater utilities, research institutions, engineers, and physicians to implement practical wastewater surveillance programs. CDM Smith has focused on building these partnerships to facilitate SARS-CoV-2 wastewater testing programs around the globe. Our work aims to support the use of wastewater data to inform specific public health interventions.
Program development involves careful planning of sampling sites via geographic information system (GIS) analysis, safe and efficient sampling support (Figure 1), analytical methodology development, data analysis and management, and collaboration between wastewater utilities and public health officials. The case studies describe each of these important aspects in the context of real-world programs developed at facility, neighborhood, city, and statewide scales. The primary goal of this report is to share lessons learned from these experiences to support further development of wastewater surveillance as a public health tool.
Wastewater Surveillance Program Planning and Analytical Support
Our approach to planning programs relies on early engagement of key stakeholders, including public health officials, utility leaders, and key research partners. The team defines program objectives, devises a cost-efficient approach to wastewater sampling and analysis, develops communication plans, establishes data presentation techniques, and informs on public health interventions.
State of Michigan The program between the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS), Michigan State University (MSU), Great Lakes Water Authority (GLWA), Detroit Water and Sewer District (DWSD), and CDM Smith relied on weekly collaborative engagements necessary for data sharing and understanding. The involvement of public health officials and utility leaders is essential for effective data analysis that supports public health action. For example, the team devised a best approach to sample from three distinct interceptors associated with three of the largest counties in the state of Michigan: the Detroit River Interceptor (DRI, Wayne County); the Oakwood-Northwest-Wayne County Interceptor (ONWI, Oakland County); and the North Interceptor-East Arm (NIEA) (Figure 2). Through GIS and hydraulic analyses, the team gathered census and hydraulic data needed to normalize SARS-CoV-2 wastewater data. Normalized data was then compared to local COVID-19 case data provided by the public health entities. This collaborative workflow helped show that wastewater data may provide an early warning of COVID-19 peaks by four weeks, as described in Miyani et al (2021).
State of Massachusetts In collaboration with CDM Smith, the Massachusetts Department of Health (MaDPH) implemented facility and neighborhood programs with the objectives of identifying COVID-19 cases sooner than clinical testing and confirming absence of disease. 24-hour composite wastewater samples were collected three days per week and analyzed for SARS-CoV-2 and other sewage markers. Results were communicated via email to state and city officials, and COVID-19 case data were evaluated for correlation with wastewater virus concentrations.
Collaboration with the MaDPH allowed our team to target sampling sites that corresponded with areas of concern. For example, wastewater samples from a smaller community (<1000 residents) showed a rapid rise in SARS-CoV-2 concentration (Figure 3). Public health officials in the area used these data to support interventions including educational campaigns, free masks, and mobile testing units. Within a few weeks of the interventions, SARS-CoV-2 concentration in wastewater receded (Figure 3).
US Agency for International Development Collaborating with the USAID, CDM Smith helped develop city-scale surveillance programs in Amman, Jordan and Cairo, Egypt. These program building projects focused on analyzing existing research infrastructure to support sampling campaigns and analytical testing, implementing wastewater monitoring and action plans, training seminars, and data visualization dashboards. Interestingly, our work suggested that grab sampling methods could be used to gather comparable analytical results to composite sampling (Figure 4). Grab sampling is easier and less costly to perform, indicating this simple method could support rapid program start-up in areas with limited access to funding. However, the projects also revealed that global supply chain shortages for analytical equipment could impact program development. Therefore, development of simple, widely available analytical methods is important to deliver programs throughout the world.
Wastewater Surveillance Sampling Support
After careful planning of sampling sites and analytical method development, program managers require sample collection services that are safe, reliable, and cost efficient. Our work from several programs has revealed methods to improve the efficiency of wastewater sampling logistics.
US Department of Veterans Affairs and City of Chicago The United States Department of Veterans Affairs developed a program to monitor eight conjugate living centers (CLCs) throughout the U.S (CA, NC, PA(2), TN, TX, WA (2)). The goal of the program was to provide an early warning system to prevent outbreaks in CLCs. From January to June 2021, CDM Smith assisted in sample coordination, collection, and delivery to the VA analytical laboratories. The City of Chicago, Current Water, and others developed a program to monitor the City's collection system for evidence of SARS-CoV-2 to prevent COVID-19 outbreaks. CDM Smith assisted in sample coordination, collection, and delivery to analytical laboratories. Planning the logistics of sample delivery were critical to the success of these projects. Program managers and delivery service providers must coordinate early to prevent issues in sample delivery.
Conclusions and Recommendations
Wastewater surveillance is an effective tool to measure community-level biomarker data. The approach is being used effectively at many scales for COVID-19. CDM Smith's wastewater surveillance work revealed several important findings:
A successful program starts with collaboration between public health agencies, local officials, research agencies, and their partners.
Normalizing viral concentration data to other wastewater data is helpful to mitigate competing influences in the sewer system.
Wastewater surveillance data was used to inform specific public health actions such as awareness campaigns. International development of wastewater surveillance programs requires low-cost sampling and analytical methods that are widely available in the host country.
Planning and coordination is a critical step to ensure wastewater samples are collected and delivered in a cost-efficient manner.
Future applications of the approach include early identification and understanding of disease outbreaks, understanding antibiotic resistance, and addressing health disparities Widespread development of programs could provide public health officials a proactive tool to respond to disease outbreaks. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) established the National Wastewater Surveillance System (NWSS) to improve acceptance of the approach. Wastewater surveillance is being funded through a combination of federal, state, and local support.

Wastewater surveillance is a disease-tracking tool that supports early response to infectious disease, such as public health decision making and vaccination efforts. Public health agencies have partnered with local officials, wastewater utilities, research institutions, engineers, and physicians to implement practical wastewater surveillance programs. The primary goal of this presentation is to share lessons learned from real-world wastewater surveillance programs to support widespread adoption.

SpeakerSheets, John

Presentation time

15:30:00

15:55:00

Session time

15:30:00

17:00:00

TopicIntermediate Level, Disinfection and Public Health, Research and Innovation

Author(s)

Sheets, John

Author(s)Johnathon Sheets1; Greta Zornes2; Scott Craig3; Ali Zarei-Baygi4

Author affiliation(s)CDM Smith, Columbus, OH1; CDM Smith, New Orleans, LA2; CDM Smith, Manchester, NH3; CDM Smith, Los Angeles, CA4