From my old day job: thoughts on research opportunities

While I was still working, I published a paper on LinkedIn examining the possibility of converting energy-consuming activated sludge plants to possibly energy-producing anaerobic plants - which involves some significant technical issues. The paper is at: 

• “A Speculation: Convert Activated Sludge Wastewater Treatment Plants to AnMBRs?”   https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/speculation-convert-activated-sludge-wastewater-treatment-white/  
  

I came close to getting the research necessary for that underway a few times, but ran into a range of problems, so the research wasn’t done and the project never examined to see if the benefits outweighed the risks (which is not assured, no matter how much one likes an idea) - despite interest from one contractor and from overseas.

Maybe somebody will, one day, take that public paper and undertake the research necessary to see if this is viable - the sorts of energy we are considering here is around 0.5% of that of an industrialised city, although that is based on data from almost a decade ago.

My other major area of work was wastewater treatment, for which I also proposed research. 

The following brief notes (which include technical aspects) may be of interest to others in that field who are looking for a research project. 

In general, lagoon research has the major failing of not considering the effects of latitude – unlike the work by Gloyna and Bliss, which does include latitude. That has possibly been done to makes lab work simpler, more manageable, and repeatable, but it also severely limits the potential real life use of the results of that research. 

In addition, modern research fails to account for the dynamic interactions between the sludge layer and the liquor layers of lagoons. Sludge generates the inorganic forms of nutrients that algae need - meaning the atmosphere is not the only form of nutrients (influent inorganic nutrients are in low concentrations, if present at all).  

My modelling always allowed for the net accumulation of sludge (it undergoes anaerobic digestion in the sludge layer), as that reduces the active treatment volume, but this is a different effect.  

There hasn’t been any work that I consider good on that since the work by Parker, Skerry, Griggs, and Humphries at Shepperton - which was clearly flawed, as it didn’t set an upper limit on how much sludge is the upper limit (it concluded that “more sludge is better” – which is clearly absurd, as if the lagoon is full of sludge  then the influent just skates over and goes out untreated). 

The other aspect that is over-simplified is the effect of the depth of the active (treatment, or liquor - noting anoxic and anaerobic treatment is real) zone. That has to be of adequate depth to, for instance, provide adequate contact time for odorous gases released from the sludge layer (if the two main anaerobic processes are out of balance) to be oxidised.  

Now, research tends to focus on what is thought to be of interest / most potential value, or can get funding, which results in a bias towards higher tech options, and what is viewed as simpler tech, such as lagoons (although many people were surprised by the number of equations and the interactivity of my [spreadsheet] models), gets overlooked - despite the real life cost and operational advantages of that for many circumstances (especially agricultural reuse of effluent, cash-strapped water authorities, or plants in areas that cannot support the operational demands of higher tech plants). 

There is also a clear bias that leads to many people underestimating the complexity of lagoons (which is not helped by me finding that complexity easy to understand and work with - and interesting).  

There are other problems with research in the modern world around IP and ownership of data. 

Bliss was able to use data from the existing plants in the 1960s to undertake his work (and some water authorities make their data available for specific projects), but, in general, the commercialisation/privatisation of wastewater treatment has made that difficult. 

So the other option is to consider doing brand new research - such as, say ... having a series of small (field trial scale) lagoons side by side to examine issues such as: 

• the optimum depth of sludge; 

• treatment in non-aerobic liquor layers; 

• the effect of depth (including measuring gas concentrations at differing depths); 

• the effect of latitude; 

• better capture of nuance (especially around generation/capture of VSS, and capture of NVSS);

• temperature (noting that treatment of organic matter is mildly exothermic); 

• mixing/flow options (CFD does not account for the active process interactions of the sludge layer); 
  

• etc. 

And, most important of all, these would have to be continued for at least one normal sludge accumulation/desludging cycle - ideally well into the second cycle to enable comparison of new commissioning versus performance after desludging. 

 

So ... food for thought, and maybe research, perhaps. 

 

Thoughts on the return of commercial sail vessels

I published some thoughts on the mistakes people are making with attempts at returning commercial sail (mainly failing to include better [safer, less costly] cargo handling, and also failing to include new matters such as solar power and air injection to break down the boundary layer) on one of my other blogs. 

Those thoughts (including rough hand sketches) can be found at: 

“WAY, WAY, WAY OFF TOPIC: thoughts on the return of commercial sail vessels”   https://politicalmusingsofkayleen.blogspot.com/2022/01/way-way-way-off-topic-thoughts-on.html   

 

Lowerable masts on yachts

Some time ago, in the 70s, I think, I read a book called "Once is Enough", by Miles Smeeton about a yacht called the Tzu Hang, which attempted to round Cape Horn twice: she was rolled and dismasted the first time, and pitch-poled and dismasted the second - and got around the third time as deck cargo on a freighter. What stuck in my mind was that, both times, after the mast was gone, the boat rode the rest of the storm out relatively easily. As a result, I've wanted, ever since then, to develop a mast which is capable of being lowered at sea, in rough conditions.

I know that boats like Thames barges and other inland boats can do this, with good crews being able to "shoot a bridge", lowering the mast, using their momentum to pass the low point, and the raising the rig and resuming sailing, but all of that is based on flat water: it wouldn't work on a boat that is moving in a sea, and placing loads on the mast, as the shrouds come loose (and thus there is a good chance of breaking or at least damaging the rig).

My solution is to create an "X" plan arrangement of wishbone masts, with cross trusses on the side and a hinge at the back point. I've not had the chance to try it, but now I've found someone who is doing something similar - albeit possibly for different reasons. Have a look here, particularly at the second photo of what the author has called "a quadrapod":

http://junkrighouseboat.blogspot.com.au/2016/04/update.html

Blogiography

This is simple list of the posts made on this blog, using hyperlinks so you can go to anything you may find interesting. Once there, the bulk of the content has been made by posting scanned images of hand written notes: double-click, and you should be able top get a readable version.

With regard to this blog, I would love to either make my living from a job where I am paid to think, or to be in a position to do something with these ideas, but I am in neither the job I have know involves a certain amount of being paid to think, but there is quite a bit of mundane, dreary or unpleasant administration, commercial and competitive stuff as well – and some good training and interaction with good people) . So I have created this web site to at least allow me the opportunity to get my ideas out where, maybe, someone can either use them, or be inspired by them, to come up with something that is of benefit to this world or the people who share it. All I ask for is at least appropriate credit where it is due.

Kayleen

A possibly better format for the FIFA World Cup

Post scripts: flying cars and seat belts with air bags

A possible better use of supertankers?

Better cooling of cars

Better operation of car air conditioning

Beaten to the punch: improved protection of military personnel carriers

Towards a more stable catamaran


Arm chair idea: footy tactics


Further thoughts on housing


No refrigerant air cooling


Towards a safer light aircraft


Towards fire resistant planes and trees


Some thoughts on improved housing


Increasing G absorbance of seat mounts


Towards a stall resistant wing

I'll add some thoughts on future postings (such as use of paddle wheel propulsion on multihulls) in the near future.

A possibly better format for the FIFA World Cup

I've read somewhere that FIFA apparently wants a way to get more teams into the World Cup. From my point of view, as an Aussie, I'd like a way to make sure the best two teams are in the finals. This post is based on my ideas to acheive that.

Post scripts: flying cars and seat belts with air bags

One of the things I was thinking about when I started work on the "towards a safer light aircraft" idea was a plane that was similar to a car to drive. The controls are different - they have to be, to some extent, but one of the features of having wings in a hexagonal shape that I was going to try and work on (probably by having the ailerons in the lower part of the shap larger than those in the upper) is to try and get the correct bank for a turn automatically (this is obviously not a design for advanced flying!)

Interstingly, someone has now come up with a car that can, by means of folding wings, convert to a plane. See http://www.terrafugia.com/, and http://www.theage.com.au/drive/motor-news/flying-cars-closer-to-reality-20091113-idqt.html. The cruising speeds are OK: 185kmh in the air, and 100 kmh on the ground.

On another topic, someone has developed a seat belt with an air bag: see http://www.theage.com.au/drive/motor-news/seatbelts-with-airbags-20091113-id9y.html. That's a good alternative to my "Increasing G absorbance of seat mounts" post. All we need is for someone to start applying car safety technology to planes.

Oh, that's what the inventors of the flying car have started doing ....

A possible better use of supertankers?

Supertankers are a highly contentious matter. They are a highly visible, concentrated risk way of transporting a dangerous, environmentally damaging material. There are arguments that it is easier to manage the risks by having them in well designed place: maybe that is true, but when things go wrong (e.g. Exxon Valdiz), they go wrong in a big way.

Be that as it may, that's not the topic I wish to write about here.

The idea of a vessel's life cycle is (generically) that, when a vessel exceeds it's useful life, it is scrapped, and the materials reused. That's good from the point of view of conserving materials, but it involves a significant amount of energy, and, as I understand it, very considerable risk to some workers in places like Chittagong, India. If another use could be found for a vessel like a supertanker, one that delayed the need to scrap it, that would save quite a bit of energy consumption.

I have also seen pictures/documentaries at various times over the last few decades of large fleets of temporarily decommissioned ships, including supertankers. I think I first saw this in the 1970s, during the oil crisis then - it looked a bit like some of the aircraft boneyards, but with massive ships rather than planes. Are all tankers/supertankers currently being utilised, or are some idle, doing nothing but deteriorating and/or costing money? If so, could they possibly be put to use via other means?

The other comment that contributed to my thinking on this was a comment I heard on ABC's Radio National about renewable energy, when someone said a relatively small area of Australia (something like 50km x 50km) could be used to provide energy by solar means for Australia AND also enough to export to south east Asia.

(As an aside, because of the materials used in photovoltaic cells, I consider using solar heat a better way of getting energy from the sun, even if it is a lower efficiency.)

So ... what if some supertankers could be converted to large batteries? Would it make sense - from an energy balance point of view - to use the solar generation capability in parts of WA, and perhaps some of the shipping facilities associated with the iron ore and other mining industries there, to charge a supertanker, and then send it to wherever it was needed, to hook into the power grid and provide renewable energy?

The energy involved in moving the mass is obviously going to be a consideration, as are the ways that the ship would be converted to a battery. Can this be done efficiently (or efficiently enough) and without creating a different environmental risk, or a different set of damages to the environment (with respect to obtaining suitable materials)?

Most electrical power transmission is via grids using cables, which can be laid across ocean floors, but that is expensive, damaging to some extent to local environments, and prone to damage from earthquakes (and we are all now well aware of the potential for such damage from the Asian tsunami - actually, maybe this could be used for disaster relief, by providing a large source of power if power girds can be repaired enough).

Would a converted ship be safer?

I don't know. Would the charge make the ship more susceptible to lightning strikes? Would discharge of the charge if the vessel sank kill the crew and marine life for some distance?

The type of technology used would be crucial.

Car batteries are lead-acid batteries: they aren't going to be suitable. Gel batteries or similar involve less risk of spillage, but maybe they could potentially still be damaging if the ship sank.

Lithium ion batteries are, I understand, the most efficient form of battery in that the highest power density. However, they're mostly used for small applications: would they be impracticable (e.g. weight, cost, risk) for this sort of large application? I suspect so.

Maybe molten salt batteries are more appropriate.

Maybe new technology would have to be invented, possibly including the use of parasails as is starting to be the case on some large cargo vessels.

It's all just a thought :)