For many food and beverage (F&B) companies, treating wastewater isn’t just a legal requirement. It’s a big expense that impacts water use, energy costs, staffing, and compliance with regulations.
Surprisingly, much of the industry still uses old chemicals, like coagulants and polyacrylamide (PAM) flocculants, which haven’t changed since the 1970s. These products were created for stable operations, but today’s plants face unpredictable conditions—everything from shifts in ingredients to tougher regulations.
This outdated approach leads to several costly problems:
- High chemical and water costs
- Increased operational expenses due to labor and equipment issues
- Risk of regulatory fines
- Higher costs for transporting sludge and increased carbon emissions
Working with major North American F&B producers, we’ve seen how these legacy chemicals waste time and resources, affecting profitability.
The Problem with PAM
Wastewater from food and beverage operations can vary greatly. Factors like temperature, pH, and content of fats, oils, and grease change frequently, complicating treatment. PAM is often the go-to, but it has its flaws. As a non-selective polymer, it binds with everything in the water, requiring operators to use much more than needed to achieve desired results.
In fact, it’s estimated that you pay for 100% of the dosing while only getting about 20% effectiveness. This can lead to needing as much as five times the theoretical dose to meet key performance indicators (KPIs).
Regulatory Issues and Costs
According to the EPA, 25% of F&B producers faced wastewater compliance issues in the last three years, costing an average of $50 million annually. In some cases, fines reached up to $30 million.
Maintaining the right PAM dosage is crucial for compliance but challenging when the input fluctuates. Using too little can leave harmful contaminants, while overdosing leads to sticky clogs in equipment, raising maintenance costs and downtime.
Water Use and Labor Costs
Using PAM often means having to mix large amounts with water. Finding the right balance is tricky, as influent water changes throughout the day, which can mean wasting both time and water. In larger facilities, water use can reach millions of gallons daily, adding significant annual costs.
Real-World Impact
A notable case involved one of North America’s biggest winemakers. During grape harvest season, fluctuations in pectin, sugar, and total suspended solids (TSS) strained their existing chemistry program. The result was higher costs cutting into profit margins.
To tackle these challenges, we introduced a tailored chemistry program. By using SCADA-integrated pumps, we improved dosing stability during flow changes. This approach maintained effluent within KPIs and reduced treatment costs by 20-25%, saving approximately $100,000 annually and conserving nearly 5 million gallons of water.
Sludge Weight and Emissions
The ratio of water to solids in dewatered sludge matters. Drier sludge weighs less and is cheaper to transport. If companies are overusing PAM, they produce heavier sludge, increasing disposal costs. Many global brands are now under pressure to cut their overall carbon emissions, including from sludge transportation.
One frozen food producer faced issues with sludge hauling costs and greenhouse gas emissions. Their existing treatment chemistry produced weak flocs that couldn’t be properly dewatered, resulting in the need to dispose of wet sludge. By switching to a more effective chemistry solution, they reduced sludge volume by 75%, leading to savings of $800,000 annually.
Conclusion
The food and beverage industry needs to rethink wastewater treatment. Continued reliance on legacy systems can be costly, not just financially, but also in terms of compliance and environmental impact. Modern solutions that adapt to changing conditions can lead to significant savings and a more sustainable operation.
For more insights on wastewater management, consider exploring reports from the Environmental Protection Agency for detailed compliance information.
