Water Services National Training Group

1. Water Services National Training Group 11th Annual Conference 6th September 2007

2. Midleton FOG Project Sam Crowley B.E. (Civil) Graduate Engineer, Cork County Council M. Eng. Sc. Student Civil & Env. Eng. UCC (Prof. G. Kiely, Supervisor)

3. Midleton FOG Project • Town of Midleton (population 9,019) proposed by Cork County Council as a suitable location for a case study. • Midleton has a history of FOG related problems. • €68,372 spent in 2005 including cleaning of pumping stations €39,687 of this for FOG related work. • Approximately 58% of total spent on drain cleaning was FOG related. • There are 63 FOG generators in Midleton.

4. Midleton FOG Project • Local authority identified “FOG Hotspots” within the town. • Each FOG hotspot was analysed and potential FOG generators were visited. • The FOG problem at each site was evaluated. • CCTV surveys • Inspection of existing Grease Removal Unit (GRU) • GRU maintenance procedures investigated • Staff interviews to determine blockage history and current kitchen practices • Site survey to determine adequacy of existing systems. • Potential solutions tailored to each site were selected and installed. • Each solution is to be on trial for a minimum of 6 months.

5. Midleton FOG Project Total of 16 trial sites including: • 4 Active Systems • 8 Passive Systems (including 3 Grease trap bacteria treatment systems) • 1 Portable System • 1 Bacteria dosing system in a manhole • 1 Aerated bacteria dosing system for a pumping station • 1 Root cutting site • 3 of the systems are being maintained by contractors • 8 are maintained by the staff of the Food Service Establishment (FSE)

6. Midleton FOG Project Total of 16 trial sites including: • 1 Hotel • 1 Hospital • 1 Fish Monger with kitchen (Fish Pies etc.) • 3 Shops with hot food counters • 1 Shopping centre with butcher, bakery and delicatessen • 2 Fast food establishments • 1 Small family restaurant • 1 Butcher • 1 Café with hot food kitchen • 1 Manhole at a FOG hotspot (Chinese Restaurant) • 1 Pumping station for a housing estate • 1 Sewer in a housing estate • 1 Site still to be determined

7. Rating of systems • Conformity to I.S. EN 1825 Standards • Performance • Effluent sample analysis • CCTV surveys (before and after) • Blockage History (before and after) • Maintenance - User Friendliness • Ease of access • Hygiene • Odours • Maintenance interval

8. Rating of systems • Cost • To purchase • To install • To maintain • User Satisfaction • Waste • Reliability • Contractor or in-house cleaning • Level of Confidence • The trial sites themselves are also under observation. • Willingness to maintain the system • Kitchen practices

9. Performance so far • Early stages of trials • Major improvements observed already • Effluent sample analysis

10. Performance so far

11. Performance so far • Statistics being compiled regarding the waste being removed from the systems • Maintenance procedures observed and rated • Supplier/manufacturer procedures under observation • Not adhering to I.S. EN 1825 standards • One supplier withdrew system from trials • Contractor behaviour under observation

12. Issues arising from trials • Active/Automatic vs. Passive debate

13. Automatic/Active vs. Passive Systems

14. Issues arising from trials • Active/Automatic vs. Passive debate • Disposal of waste • Cost • Traceability • Large quantities • Small quantities • Clarity • Lack of disposal records for waste FOG (both by contractors and business owners).

15. Issues arising from trials • Licensing • Regular policing and enforcement required • Method based consent • Lack of co-operation between different departments • Planning • Environmental Department • Environmental Health Officers • Fear of prosecution by EHO (Environmental Health Officers) leading to fear of grease traps! • New premises gaining planning permission and grease trap subsequently not being installed.

16. Issues arising from trials • Trade Effluent Licences awarded to establishments without thorough site investigation • Inadequate GRU’s approved • Lack of resources • Lack of records for FOG related incidents • More difficult for prosecution • Harder to compile statistics

17. Issues arising from trials • Incorrectly installed or situated traps. • Appliances passing through grease trap. • Traps maintained incorrectly or not at all. • Lack of knowledge of existence of GRU (Grease Removal Unit). • Forgery of grease trap maintenance records by staff to avoid doing the work.

18. Issues arising from trials • Poor kitchen practices negating grease trap maintenance. • Willingness to install trap but guidance not available. • Willingness to apply for discharge licence but confusion caused by application form and process.

19. Portable Interceptor • Similar to passive interceptor • Maintained by contractor • Unit swapped with clean unit every two weeks. • Full unit is removed from site and cleaned at contractors premises • Removes need for maintaining unit within kitchen – hygiene and odour issues

20. Outputs of Midleton Case Study • Better understanding of systems on the market in Ireland • Greater appreciation of all points of view • User • Supplier • Contractor

21. Outputs of Midleton Case Study • Greater understanding of kitchen practices • Where most FOG is generated in different types of FSE • Wok cooker, combination oven etc. • Tools for handling FOG related issues • Ireland specific FOG letters • Grease Trap Guidance sheets • Kitchen Practice Guidance sheets • Grease Trap Maintenance Record sheets

24. Conclusion • Disposal of waste is a significant issue which needs to be addressed • Waste stream is dramatically increasing without adequate disposal routes. • MEngSc Thesis: “Recovery of Waste FOG for use as a Biofuel in Ireland”

25. Acknowledgments • Noel O’Keeffe - A/County Engineer, Cork Co. Co. • Matt Shortt - WSNTG • Tadgh O’Connor -DEHLG • Shane Kennedy -Cork Co. Co. • WRc • Midleton Town Council • Cork Co. Co. Environmental Section

26. Water Services National Training Group 11th Annual Conference 6th September 2007