Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “waste treatment”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
DOE OSTI2021

Annual Update Pantex Plant Site Treatment Plan/Compliance Plan for Development of Mixed Waste Treatment Capacities and Technologies

This updated STP identifies how DOE proposes to obtain commercial treatment or as appropriate, develop technologies for the site's mixed waste in inventory that does not currently have a developed disposition path. This updated STP also provides the methodology to be implemented if mixed waste is generate or identified that requires development of a disposition path.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS1990

Importance of biological systems in industrial waste treatment potential application to the space station

In addition to having applications for waste management issues on planet Earth, microbial systems have application in reducing waste volumes aboard spacecraft. A candidate for such an application is the space station. Many of the planned experiments generate aqueous waste. To recycle air and water the contaminants from previous experiments must be removed before the air and water can be used for other experiments. This can be achieved using microorganisms in a bioreactor. Potential bioreactors (inorganics, organics, and etchants) are discussed. Current technologies that may be applied to waste treatment are described. Examples of how biological systems may be used in treating waste on the space station.

Revis, Nathaniel↗
DOE OSTI2022

Hanford Waste Treatment Plant LAB Facility Stack Effluent Monitoring: Sampling Probe Location Qualification Evaluation

The Waste Treatment Plant laboratory (LAB) facility stack monitor locations were qualified using scale model stacks to mitigate the risk of identifying that sampling locations do not meet the qualification criteria on the full-scale stack. As required by the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1-1999 standard, the scale model and its sampling location were geometrically similar to the actual stack and the Reynolds numbers for both the actual and model stacks were >10,000. An additional criterion is that the product of the hydraulic diameter and mean velocity (DV) of the full-scale stack must be between 1/6 DV and 6 DV of the scale model stack tests. Verification tests of the LAB stacks were performed at normal operating conditions. The minimum 1/6 DV value, along with the maximum 6 DV value from the scale model testing determines the range of conditions for which the full-scale stack may be operated and remain in compliance with the stack verification criterion. Based on these DV values, the corresponding stack flow rates for each of the LAB stacks are 625 to 47,237 scfm for LB-C2, 1,704 to 103,131 scfm for LB-S1, and 467 to 18,088 scfm for LB-S2. The remaining criteria for the stack verification to be considered valid involve the flow angle and velocity uniformity results. First, the flow angle at the full-scale stack must be =20°. Second, the velocity uniformity at the full-scale stack must be =20% coefficient of variance (COV). Finally, the velocity uniformity results for the actual and scale model stack tests must agree within 5% COV. These criteria were met through the full-scale stack tests at the LAB facility. Flow angle results were primarily less than 10 degrees, except for the LB-C2 Fan A results, which were an average of 17.6 degrees; all flow angle results were within the =20° criterion. The velocity uniformity results for each test condition averaged between 1.5 and 3.5% COV, which were all within the range of the target %COV values from the scale model tests. Based on these stack verification test results, the three LAB filtered exhaust stack sampling locations meet the qualification criteria provided in the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard for all fan operating configurations. This includes single-fan as well as dual-fan operations for LB-C2, each of the dual-fan operating conditions for LB-S1, and each single-fan operating condition for LB-S2. Further changes to the system configuration or operating conditions that are outside the bounds described in this report may require additional tests or analyses to determine compliance with the standard.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Hanford Waste Treatment Plant LAB Facility Stack Effluent Monitoring: Sampling Probe Location Qualification Evaluation

The Waste Treatment Plant laboratory (LAB) facility stack monitor locations were qualified using scale model stacks to mitigate the risk of identifying that sampling locations do not meet the qualification criteria on the full-scale stack. As required by the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1-1999 standard, the scale model and its sampling location were geometrically similar to the actual stack, and the Reynolds numbers for both the actual and model stacks were >10,000. An additional criterion is that the product of the hydraulic diameter and mean velocity (DV) of the full-scale stack must be between 1/6 DV and 6 DV of the scale model stack tests. Verification tests of the LAB stacks were performed at normal operating conditions. The minimum 1/6 DV value, along with the maximum 6 DV value from the scale model testing, determines the range of conditions for which the full-scale stack may be operated and remain in compliance with the stack verification criterion. A practical range for the full-scale stack qualification uses the average DV through 6 DV from the scale model tests to compute the corresponding flow rates. Table S1 lists the operating flow rates along with the average and maximum qualified stack flow rates for each of the LAB facility stacks. For each stack, the operating flow is below the maximum qualified stack flow, which means that the scale model test results are acceptable for stack qualification. The remaining criteria for the stack verification to be considered valid involve the flow angle and velocity uniformity results. First, the flow angle at the full-scale stack must be ≤20°. Second, the velocity uniformity at the full-scale stack must be ≤20% coefficient of variance (COV). Finally, the velocity uniformity results for the actual and scale model stack tests must agree within 5% COV. These criteria were met through the full-scale stack tests at the LAB facility. Flow angle results were primarily less than 10°, except for the LB-C2 Fan A results, which were an average of 13.7°; all flow angle results were within the ≤20° criterion. The velocity uniformity results for each test condition averaged between 1.5 and 4.1% COV, which were all within the range of the target percent coefficient of variation values from the scale model tests. Based on these stack verification test results, the three LAB filtered exhaust stack sampling locations meet the qualification criteria provided in the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard for all fan operating configurations. This includes single-fan as well as dual-fan operations for LB-C2, each of the dual-fan operating conditions for LB-S1, and each single-fan operating condition for LB-S2. Further changes to the system configuration or operating conditions that are outside the bounds described in this report may require additional tests or analyses to determine compliance with the standard.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

Hanford Waste Treatment Plant Effluent Management Facility Stack Effluent Monitoring: Sampling Probe Location Qualification Evaluation

The Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Effluent Management facility (EMF) stack monitor location was qualified using the LV-S1 scale model stack as a baseline, augmented by the LB-S1 and LV-S2 scale model stacks to address the Direct Feed Low Activity Waste Effluent Management Facility Vessel Vent Process (DVP) injection into the main Active Confinement Ventilation (ACV) system duct. As required by the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1-1999 standard, the scale models and its sampling locations were geometrically similar to the actual stack and the Reynolds numbers for both the actual and model stacks were >10,000. An additional criterion is that the product of the hydraulic diameter and mean velocity (DV) of the full-scale stack must be between 1/6 DV and 6 DV of the scale model stack tests. Verification tests of the EMF stack was performed at normal operating conditions. The minimum 1/6 DV value, along with the maximum 6 DV value from the scale model testing determines the range of stack flow rates for which the full-scale stack may be operated and remain in compliance with the stack verification criterion. Based on the LV-S1 scale model test DV values, the corresponding stack flow rates for the EMF stack are as listed in Table S1. Table S1. Effluent Management Facility Stack Qualified Flow Range. Stack Parameter EM-1 Minimum Qualified Stack Flow (scfm) 781 Maximum Qualified Stack Flow (scfm) 53,432 The remaining criteria for the stack verification to be considered valid involve the flow angle and velocity uniformity results. First, the flow angle at the full-scale stack must be =20°. Second, the velocity uniformity at the full-scale stack must be =20% coefficient of variance (COV). Finally, the velocity uniformity results for the actual and scale model stack tests must agree within 5% COV. These criteria were met through the full-scale stack test at the EMF. Flow angle results were less than 5°; all flow angle results were within the =20° criterion. The velocity uniformity results for each test condition ranged between 2.2% COV and 4.3% COV, which were all within the range of the target % COV values from the scale model tests on the LV-S1, LB-S1, and LV S2 scale models. Based on these stack verification test results, the EMF filtered exhaust stack sampling location meets the qualification criteria provided in the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard for all fan operating configurations. This includes each combination of ACV fan with the DVP exhausters. Further changes to the system configuration or operating conditions that are outside the qualified flow rates described in this report may require additional tests or analyses to determine compliance with the standard.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2023

Hanford Waste Treatment Plant Effluent Management Facility Stack Effluent Monitoring: Sampling Probe Location Qualification Evaluation

The Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Effluent Management Facility (EMF) stack monitor location was qualified using a combination of scale model stacks to mitigate the risk of identifying that the sampling location does not meet the qualification criteria on the full-scale stack. The LV-S1 scale model stack was used as a baseline, augmented by the LB-S1 and LV-S2 scale model stacks to address the Direct Feed Low Activity Waste Effluent Management Facility Vessel Vent Process (DVP) injection into the main Active Confinement Ventilation (ACV) system duct. As required by the American National Standards Institute/Health Physics Society (ANSI/HPS) N13.1-1999 standard, the scale model and its sampling locations were geometrically similar to the actual stack, and the Reynolds numbers for both the actual and model stacks were >10,000. An additional criterion is that the product of the hydraulic diameter and mean velocity (DV) of the full-scale stack must be between 1/6 DV and 6 DV of the scale model stack tests. The LV-S1, LB-S1, and LV-S2 scale model stack tests have met the criteria of the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard to demonstrate the stack sampling locations are well mixed. Verification tests of the EMF stack were performed at normal operating conditions. The minimum 1/6 DV value and the maximum 6 DV value from the scale model testing determine the range of stack flow rates for which the full-scale stack may be operated while remaining in compliance with the stack verification criterion. A practical range for the full-scale stack qualification uses the average DV through 6 DV from the scale model tests to compute the corresponding flow rates. Table S1 lists the operating flow rate along with the average and maximum qualified stack flow rate based on the LV-S1 scale model DV values. The operating flow is below the maximum qualified stack flow, which means that the scale model test results are acceptable for stack qualification. The remaining criteria for the stack verification to be considered valid involve the flow angle and velocity uniformity results. First, the flow angle at the full-scale stack must be ≤20°. Second, the velocity uniformity at the full-scale stack must be ≤20% coefficient of variance (COV). Finally, the velocity uniformity results for the actual and scale model stack tests must agree within 5% COV. These criteria were met through the full-scale stack test at the EMF. Flow angle results were <5°; all flow angle results were within the ≤20° criterion. The velocity uniformity results for each test condition ranged between 2.2% COV and 4.3% COV, all of which were within the range of the target % COV values from the scale model tests on the LV-S1, LB-S1, and LV S2 scale models. Based on these stack verification test results, the EMF filtered exhaust stack sampling location meets the qualification criteria provided in the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard for all planned fan operating configurations. This includes each combination of ACV fans with DVP exhausters. Further changes to the system configuration or operating conditions that are outside the qualified flow rates described in this report may require additional tests or analyses to determine compliance with the standard.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2022

WASTE TREATMENT PLANT (WTP) LIQUID EFFLUENT TREATABILITY EVALUATION (SEPTEMBER 2004)

A forecast of the radioactive, dangerous liquid effluents expected to be produced by the Waste Treatment Plant (WTP) was provided by Bechtel National, Inc. (BNI 2004). The forecast represents the liquid effluents generated from the processing of Tank Farm waste through the end-of-mission for the WTP. The WTP forecast is provided in the Appendices. The WTP liquid effluents will be stored, treated, and disposed of in the Liquid Effluent Retention Facility (LERF) and the Effluent Treatment Facility (ETF). Both facilities are located in the 200 East Area and are operated by Fluor Hanford, Inc. (FH) for the US. Department of Energy (DOE). The treatability of the WTP liquid effluents in the LERF/ETF was evaluated. The evaluation was conducted by comparing the forecast to the LERF/ETF treatability envelope (Aromi 1997), which provides information on the items which determine if a liquid effluent is acceptable for receipt and treatment at the LERF/ETF. The format of the evaluation corresponds directly to the outline of the treatability envelope document. Except where noted, the maximum annual average concentrations over the range of the 27 year forecast was evaluated against the treatability envelope. This is an acceptable approach because the volume capacity in the LERF Basin will equalize the minimum and maximum peaks. Background information on the LERF/ETF design basis is provided in the treatability envelope document.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS1986

Carbon dioxide evolution rate as a method to monitor and control an aerobic biological waste treatment system

An experimental system was developed to study the microbial growth kinetic of an undefined mixed culture in an erobic biological waste treatment process. The experimental results were used to develop a mathematical model that can predict the performance of a bioreactor. The bioreactor will be used to regeneratively treat waste material which is expected to be generated during a long term manned space mission. Since the presence of insoluble particles in the chemically undefined complex media made estimating biomass very difficult in the real system, a clean system was devised to study the microbial growth from the soluble substrate.

Lee, S. S.↗
DOE OSTI2021

Evaluation of Ammonium and Iodine Decontamination Factors for Hanford's Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant Feed in the Effluent Treatment Facility

Savannah River National Laboratory (SRNL) reviewed the unit operations in the Effluent Treatment Facility (FTP) at the Hanford site to estimate the partitioning of iodine and ammonia when processing Waste Treatments and Immobilization Plant (WTP) feed. The evaluation consisted of literature and vendor data reviews and no experiments were performed. A list of the unit operations reviewed, along with estimated decontamination factors (DFs) for both iodine and ammonium are shown in the table below. With the exception of the Peroxide Decomposer, reasonable estimations of the decontamination factors for all operations are provided.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
DOE OSTI2025

Tests of a High Temperature Sample Conditioner for the Waste Treatment Plant LV-S2, LV S3, HV S3A and HV-S3B Exhaust Systems

Tests were performed to evaluate a sample conditioning unit for stack monitoring at Hanford Tank Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant (WTP) exhaust stacks with elevated air temperatures. The LV-S2, LV-S3, HV-S3A and HV-S3B exhaust stacks are expected to have elevated air temperature and dew point. At these emission points, exhaust temperatures are too high to deliver the air sample directly to the required stack monitoring equipment. As a result, a sample conditioning system is considered to cool and dry the air prior to its delivery to the stack monitoring system. The method proposed for the sample conditioning is a dilution system that will introduce cooler, dry air to the air sample stream. This method of sample conditioning is meant to reduce the sample temperature while avoiding condensation of moisture in the sample stream. An additional constraint is that the ANSI/HPS N13.1-1999 standard states that at least 50% of the 10 µm aerodynamic diameter (AD) particles present in the stack free stream must be delivered to the sample collector. In other words, depositional loss of particles should be limited to 50% in the sampling, transport, and conditioning systems. Based on estimates of particle penetration through the LV-S3 sampling system, the diluter should perform with about 80% penetration or better to ensure that the total sampling system passes the 50% or greater penetration criterion.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS1995

Application of NASA's Advanced Life Support Technologies for Waste Treatment, Water Purification and Recycle, and Food Production in Polar Regions

NASA's advanced life support technologies are being combined with Arctic science and engineering knowledge to address the unique needs of the remote communities of Alaska through the Advanced Life Systems for Extreme Environments (ALSEE) project. ALSEE is a collaborative effort involving NASA, the State of Alaska, the University of Alaska, the North Slope Borough of Alaska, and the National Science Foundation (NSF). The focus is a major issue in the state of Alaska and other areas of the Circumpolar North, the health and welfare of its people, their lives and the subsistence lifestyle in remote communities, economic opportunity, and care for the environment. The project primarily provides treatment and reduction of waste, purification and recycling of water. and production of food. A testbed is being established to demonstrate the technologies which will enable safe, healthy, and autonomous function of remote communities and to establish the base for commercial development of the resulting technology into new industries. The challenge is to implement the technological capabilities in a manner compatible with the social and economic structures of the native communities, the state, and the commercial sector. Additional information is contained in the original extended abstract.

Bubenheim, David L.↗
DOE OSTI2025

FY24 Development of Improved Grout Waste Forms for Alternative Low Activity Waste Treatment

Since the WTP Low Activity Waste (LAW) Vitrification Facility was not designed to process the entire inventory of Hanford LAW, up to half of the retrieved Hanford LAW will require supplemental immobilization. Immobilizing LAW in a cementitious waste form known as Cast Stone has been investigated as a possible candidate supplemental immobilization technology. In FY21, Washington River Protection Solutions, LLC (WRPS) tasked Atkins and the Vitreous State Laboratory (VSL) of The Catholic University of America (CUA) to perform testing to evaluate methods for reducing the release of COCs, particularly nitrate, 99Tc, and 129I, from cementitious waste forms made from aqueous LAW derived from Hanford Tank Waste. FY22 work built on the FY21 results and further developed formulations while targeting higher waste loadings. The objective of this work was to perform laboratory-scale testing to further refine the most promising formulation(s) that were identified in the FY23 work. The goal of the refinement was to further reduce the release rates for 99Tc, Cr, 129I, and nitrate while maintaining workability of the fresh grout, and to increase waste loading.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗
NASA NTRS1983

Solid waste treatment processes for space station

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the state-of-the-art of solid waste(s) treatment processes applicable to a Space Station. From the review of available information a source term model for solid wastes was determined. An overall system is proposed to treat solid wastes under constraints of zero-gravity and zero-leakage. This study contains discussion of more promising potential treatment processes, including supercritical water oxidation, wet air (oxygen) oxidation, and chemical oxidation. A low pressure, batch-type treament process is recommended. Processes needed for pretreatment and post-treatment are hardware already developed for space operations. The overall solid waste management system should minimize transfer of wastes from their collection point to treatment vessel.

Marrero, T. R.↗
NASA NTRS1974

National economic models of industrial water use and waste treatment

The effects of air emission and solid waste restrictions on production costs and resource use by industry is investigated. A linear program is developed to analyze how resource use, production cost, and waste discharges in different types of production may be affected by resource limiting policies of the government. The method is applied to modeling ethylene and ammonia plants at the design stage. Results show that the effects of increasingly restrictive wastewater effluent standards on increased energy use were small in both plants. Plant models were developed for other industries and the program estimated effects of wastewater discharge policies on production costs of industry.

Thompson, R. G.↗
NASA NTRS1985

Waste treatment in silicon production operations

A battery of special burners, each adapted for the treatment of a particular range of waste material formed during the conversion of metallurgical grade silicon to high purity silane and silicon, is accompanied by a series arrangement of filters to recover fumed silica by-product and a scrubber to recover muriatic acid as another by-product. All of the wastes are processed, during normal and plant upset waste load conditions, to produce useful by-products in an environmentally acceptable manner rather than waste materials having associated handling and disposal problems.

Coleman, Larry M.↗
DOE OSTI2025

Hanford 200 West Area Flowsheet Data to Support Waste Treatment and Disposal Request for Proposal

This report documents the 200 West Area (200W) flowsheet supplemental data needed to support the Request for Proposal (RFP) to procure onsite and/or offsite treatment and disposal capabilities for West Area pretreated1 tank waste (PTW). The data provided in this document is based on the results of a 200W flowsheet model run evaluating single-shell tank (SST) retrievals for all S, SX, and U Farms, except for Tank S-112, which was retrieved in March of 2007 (HNF-EP-0182, Waste Tank Summary Report for Month End August 31, 2024). The evaluation also includes the waste inventory in double-shell tanks (DSTs) in SY Farm.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗