Opportunities for and Benefits of 

Combined Heat and Power at 

Wastewater Treatment Facilities
 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Combined Heat and Power Partnership
 

April 2007 
Foreword 

The U.S. Environm ental Protection Agency (EPA) Com bined Heat 

and Power (CHP) Partnership is a voluntary program that seeks to 

reduce the environm ental im pact o f power generation by prom oting 

the use of CHP. CHP is an efficien t, clean, an d reliable approach to 

generating power and therm al energy from a si ngle fuel source. CHP 

can in crease operational efficiency and decreas e energy co sts, while 

reducing the em issions of greenhouse gases that contri bute to global 

climate change. The CHP Partnership works closely with energy users, 

the CHP industry, state and local go vernments, and other stakeholders 

to support the developm ent of ne w CHP projects and prom ote their 

energy, environmental, and economic benefits. 

The CHP Partnership provides resources about CHP technologies, 

incentives, emissions profiles, and other information on its Web site at 

www.epa.gov/chp. For more information, contact Neeharika NaikDhungel at (202) 343-9553 or naik-dhungel.neeharika@epa.gov.

Report prepared by: Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG) and Energy and Environmental 

Analysis, Inc., an ICF International Company, for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 

Combined Heat and Power Partnership, April 2007. 
Table of Contents 

Executive Summary........................................................................................................................ ii 

1.0 Introduction............................................................................................................................... 1 

2.0 Data Sources ............................................................................................................................. 2 

3.0 The Market................................................................................................................................ 2 

3.1 Wastewater Treatment Facilities with Anaerobic Digestion .................................................... 2 

3.2 Wastewater Treatment Facilities with CHP.............................................................................. 4 

4.0 Technical Fit ............................................................................................................................. 4 

4.1 Electric and Thermal Generation Potential from CHP Systems at Wastewater Treatment 

Facilities.................................................................................................................................... 5 

4.2 National Electric Generation Potential from CHP at Wastewater Treatment Facilities........... 7 

4.3 Potential Carbon Dioxide Emission Benefits ........................................................................... 8 

5.0 Cost-Effectiveness .................................................................................................................... 8 

6.0 Wastewater Treatment Biogas as Renewable Energy ............................................................ 12 

7.0 Additional Resources.............................................................................................................. 12 

7.1 Organizations .......................................................................................................................... 12 

7.2 Articles.................................................................................................................................... 13 

7.3 Case Studies............................................................................................................................ 13 

Appendix A: Anaerobic Digester Design Criteria ........................................................................ 15 

Appendix B: Full List of Wastewater Treatment Facilities in the United States (> 5 MGD) with 

at Least One Anaerobic Digester ............................................................................................ 17 

List of Tables 

Table 1: United States Wastewater Treatment Facilities with Anaerobic Digestion and Off-Gas 

Utilization by Number .............................................................................................................. 3 

Table 2: United States Wastewater Treatment Facilities with Anaerobic Digestion and Off-Gas 

Utilization by Flow Rate........................................................................................................... 3 

Table 3: Number of Wastewater CHP Systems and Total Capacity by State ................................ 4 

Table 4: Electric and Thermal Energy Potential with CHP for Typically Sized Digester: 

Mesophilic................................................................................................................................. 6 

Table 5: Electric and Thermal Energy Potential with CHP for Typically Sized Digester: 

Thermophilic............................................................................................................................. 7 

Table 6: Potential Carbon Dioxide Emission Offsets with CHP at Wastewater Treatment 

Facilities.................................................................................................................................... 8 

Table 7: CHP System Performance Characteristics for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.................... 9 

Table 8: Estimated Capital Costs for Three CHP Systems at Wastewater Treatment Facilities.. 10 

Table 9: Net Power Cost Estimates for Three CHP Systems at Wastewater Treatment Facilities
 

................................................................................................................................................. 11
 

Table B1: Facilities with No Off-Gas Utilization......................................................................... 17 

Table B2: Facilities with Off-Gas Utilization............................................................................... 38 

i 
Executive Summary 

As part of its broader outreach and education efforts to expand knowledge of the benefits and 

applications of combined heat and power (CHP), the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s 

(EPA’s) CHP Partnership (CHPP) has undertaken targeted efforts to increase CHP use in three 

specific market sectors: dry mill ethanol production, hotels/casinos, and wastewater treatment. 

The CHPP’s work in these sectors is intended to serve two main audiences: energy users and 

industry Partners. Sector-specific information on the technical and economic benefits of CHP is 

provided so energy users can consider employing CHP at their own facilities. Market analyses 

help our CHP industry Partners increase their penetration into these sectors. This guide presents 

the opportunities for and benefits of CHP applications at municipal wastewater treatment 

facilities (WWTFs), also known as publicly owned treatment works (POTWs). 

CHP is a reliable, cost-effective option for WWTFs that have, or are planning to install, 

anaerobic digesters. The biogas flow from the digester can be used as “free” fuel to generate 

electricity and power in a CHP system using a turbine, microturbine, fuel cell, or reciprocating 

engine. The thermal energy produced by the CHP system is then typically used to meet digester 

heat loads and for space heating. A well-designed CHP system offers many benefits for WWTFs 

because it: 

•	 Produces power at a cost below retail electricity. 

•	 Displaces purchased fuels for thermal needs. 

•	 Qualifies as a renewable fuel for green power programs. 

•	 Enhances power reliability for the plant. 

•	 Offers an opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas and other air emissions. 

The primary purpose of this guide is to provide basic information for assessing the potential 

technical fit for CHP at WWTFs that have anaerobic digesters. It is intended to be used by CHP 

project developers, WWTF operators, and other parties who are interested in exploring the 

benefits of CHP for a WWTF. The guide provides the following information: 

•	 The size of facilities that have the greatest potential for employing cost-effective CHP. 

•	 Rules of thumb for estimating a CHP system’s potential electricity and thermal outputs 

based on wastewater flow rate. 

•	 The emission reduction benefits associated with CHP at WWTFs. 

•	 The cost-effectiveness of CHP at WWTFs. 

•	 Strategic issues involved with employing CHP at WWTFs. 

Through its market and technical analyses, the CHPP has found that: 

•	 CHP is a strong technical fit for many WWTFs. 

•	 CHP is commercially available and has been proven effective in application at WWTFs. 

•	 CHP can be a compelling investment at WWTFs, depending on local electricity prices 

and fuel costs. 

•	 CHP offers additional values and benefits for WWTFs, including offset equipment costs, 

increased reliability, and emission reductions. 

•	 CHP has been underutilized at WWTFs to date. 

ii 
 

Specifically, the CHPP estimates that if all 544 WWTFs in the United States that operate 

anaerobic digesters and have influent flow rates greater than 5 MGD were to install CHP, 

approximately 340 MW of clean electricity could be generated, offsetting 2.3 million metric tons 

of carbon dioxide emissions annually. These reductions are equivalent to planting approximately 

640,000 acres of forest, or the emissions of approximately 430,000 cars. 

Engineering Rules of Thumb for Considering CHP at a WWTF 

•	 A typical WWTF processes 100 gallons per day of wastewater for every person 

served.1 

•	 Approximately 1.0 cubic foot (ft3) of digester gas can be produced by an anaerobic 

digester per person per day.2

 This volume of gas can provide approximately 2.2 Watts 

of power generation.3 

•	 The heating value of the biogas produced by anaerobic digesters is approximately 600 

British thermal units per cubic foot (Btu/ft3

).4 

•	 For each 4.5 MGD processed by a WWTF with anaerobic digestion, the generated 

biogas can produce approximately 100 kilowatts (kW) of electricity.5 

1

 Great Lakes-Upper Mississippi Board of State and Provincial Public Health and Environmental Managers, 

“Recommended Standards for Wastewater Facilities (Ten-State Standards),” 2004. 2

 Metcalf & Eddy, “Wastewater Engineering: Treatment, Disposal, Reuse,” 1991. 

3

 Assumes the energy content of biogas is 600 Btu/ft3, and the power is produced using a 30 percent efficient electric 

generator. 

4

 Metcalf & Eddy, “Wastewater Engineering: Treatment, Disposal, Reuse,” 1991. 5

 See section 4.1: Electric and Thermal Generation Potential from CHP Systems.
 

iii 
 

1.0 Introduction 

Today, more than 16,000 municipal wastewater treatment facilities (WWTFs) operate in the 

United States, ranging in capacity from several hundred million gallons per day (MGD) to less 

than 1 MGD. Roughly 1,000 of these facilities operate with a total influent flow rate greater than 

5 MGD, but only 544 of these facilities employ anaerobic digestion to process the wastewater. 

Moreover, only 106 WWTFs utilize the biogas produced by their anaerobic digesters to generate 

electricity and/or thermal energy. In places where the spark spread1 is favorable, great potential 

for combined heat and power (CHP) at WWTFs exists. 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) Combined Heat and Power Partnership 

(CHPP) has developed this guide to provide basic information for assessing the potential 

technical fit of CHP at WWTFs that have anaerobic digesters. The guide is intended to be used 

by CHP project developers, WWTF operators, and other parties who are interested in exploring 

the benefits of CHP for a WWTF. 

Though outside the scope of the remainder of this guide, WWTFs that do not presently employ 

anaerobic digesters for biosolids management should note that the benefits of CHP deployment 

at a WWTF are in addition to the typical benefits of anaerobic digesters, which include: 

•	 Production of biogas that can offset purchased fuel and be used in a CHP system. 

•	 Enhanced power reliability at the facility if biogas is used to produce backup power. 

•	 Reduced odors and uncontained methane emissions. 

•	 Additional revenue streams, such as soil fertilizers that can be produced from digester 

effluent. 

The CHPP based its analyses of the opportunities for and benefits of CHP within the wastewater 

treatment market sector on data obtained from the 2004 Clean Watersheds Needs Survey 

(CWNS), Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc.’s (EEA’s) Combined Heat and Power 

Installation Database, and additional independent research. The guide is organized as follows: 

•	 Section 2 introduces the wastewater treatment data used for the CHPP’s analyses, 

including information on data collection and limitations. 

•	 Section 3 describes the potential market for CHP at WWTFs. 

•	 Section 4 explains the technical fit for CHP at WWTFs, presenting the CHPP’s analyses 

of electric and thermal energy generation potential at WWTFs, and the associated 

greenhouse gas emissions benefits. 

•	 Section 5 presents cost-effectiveness information for CHP at WWTFs. 

•	 Section 6 presents some strategic issues related to installing CHP at WWTFs, including 

the potential eligibility for renewable fuel credits and clean energy funding. 

•	 Section 7 lists additional sources of relevant information. 

•	 Appendix A presents the anaerobic digester design criteria and models used in the 

analyses. 

•	 Appendix B includes a full list of WWTFs in the United States with flow rates greater 

than 5 MGD that have at least one anaerobic digester. This list includes the potential 

electricity capacity a CHP system could produce at each facility. 

1

 Spark spread is the differential between the price of electricity and the price of natural gas or other fuel used to 

generate electricity, expressed in equivalent units. 

1 
 

2.0 Data Sources 

To develop an overview of the wastewater treatment sector and the potential energy available for 

CHP, the CHPP used publicly available information contained in the 2004 Clean Watersheds 

Needs Survey (CWNS) Database,2 EEA’s Combined Heat and Power Installation Database,3 and 

conducted independent research. 

The CWNS is conducted as a joint effort between EPA’s Office of Wastewater Management and 

the states in response to Section 205(a) and 516 of the Clean Water Act. The CWNS contains 

information on POTWs, facilities for control of sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs), combined 

sewer overflows (CSOs), stormwater control activities, nonpoint sources, and programs designed 

to protect the nation’s estuaries. Wastewater facilities voluntarily report facility-specific 

information through a survey, and information obtained from the survey is maintained in the 

CWNS Database. The collected data are used to produce a Report to Congress that provides an 

estimate of clean water needs for the United States. The 2004 CWNS contains information on 

16,676 operating wastewater treatment facilities. 

Several limitations exist when using the CWNS data to analyze the potential for CHP at 

WWTFs. First, the data are voluntarily reported. As such, a completely accurate picture of 

wastewater activity cannot be obtained from the CWNS. Second, although facilities report if they 

have anaerobic digesters, the CWNS does not indicate how many digesters are in operation at a 

facility, or how facilities use the produced biogas. Third, the data contained in the 2004 CWNS 

are two years old, and therefore might not reflect the current state of operations for each plant. 

The Combined Heat and Power Installation Database is maintained by EEA for the U.S. 

Department of Energy and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. The database lists all CHP systems 

in operation in the United States. Information is gathered in real time and originates from 

industry literature, manufacturer contacts, regional CHP centers, and EPA. The database is a 

work in progress, and EEA notes that all data might not be complete. 

The CHPP also conducted independent research, which included reviewing case studies of 

WWTFs that employ CHP, acquiring accepted carbon dioxide emissions factors for power 

generation, and utilizing the extensive CHP resources and contacts available to the CHPP. 

3.0 The Market 

3.1 Wastewater Treatment Facilities with Anaerobic Digestion 

To evaluate the market potential for CHP systems in the wastewater treatment sector, the CHPP 

queried the CWNS Database to determine the number of WWTFs using anaerobic digestion. The 

CHPP focused on facilities with anaerobic digesters because anaerobic digesters have the ability 

to produce “free” fuel (i.e., biogas), and they have a heat load that a CHP system can meet. The 

CHPP then categorized WWTFs by influent flow rate to evaluate the CHP potential for various 

sizes of WWTFs. The minimum flow rate for WWTFs included in the analysis is 5 MGD, which 

is based on previous analyses performed by the CHPP that showed that WWTFs with influent 

flow rates less than 5 MGD could not produce enough biogas from anaerobic digestion of 

2

 The 2004 CWNS is available through EPA’s Office of Wastewater Management. 

3

 EEA’s Combined Heat and Power Installation Database can be accessed online at: 

www.eea-inc.com/chpdata/index.html 

2
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

biosolids to make CHP technically and economically feasible. Table 1 shows the number of 

WWTFs with anaerobic digestion and off-gas utilization, and Table 2 shows the flow rate to 

WWTFs with anaerobic digestion and off-gas utilization. 

Table 1: United States Wastewater Treatment Facilities with Anaerobic Digestion and OffGas Utilization by Number 

WWTFs by 

Wastewater 

Flow Rates 

(MGD) 

Total 

WWTFs 

WWTFs with 

Anaerobic 

Digestion 

WWTFs with 

Anaerobic Digestion 

and Gas Utilization 

Percentage of WWTFs with 

Anaerobic Digestion that 

Utilize Biogas 

> 200 15 10 5 50 

100 – 200 26 17 9 53 

75 – 100 27 16 7 44 

50 – 75 30 18 5 28 

20 – 50 178 87 25 29 

10 – 20 286 148 19 13 

5 – 10 504 248 36 15 

Total 1,066 544 106 19 

Source: 2004 Clean Watersheds Needs Survey 

Table 2: United States Wastewater Treatment Facilities with Anaerobic Digestion and OffGas Utilization by Flow Rate 

Source: 2004 Clean Watersheds Needs Survey 

WWTFs by 

Wastewater 

Flow Rates 

(MGD) 

Total 

WWTFs 

Total 

Wastewater 

Flow at 

WWTFs 

(MGD) 

Wastewater 

Flow to 

WWTFs with 

Anaerobic 

Digestion 

(MGD) 

Wastewater Flow 

to WWTFs with 

Anaerobic 

Digestion and Gas 

Utilization (MGD) 

Wastewater Flow to 

WWTFs with 

Anaerobic 

Digestion and No 

Gas Utilization 

(MGD) 

> 200 15 5,147 3,783 1,530 2,253 

100 – 200 26 3,885 2,652 1,462 1,190 

75 – 100 27 2,321 1,350 604 745 

50 – 75 30 1,847 1,125 327 798 

20 – 50 178 5,373 2,573 698 1,876 

10 – 20 286 3,883 2,036 261 1,775 

5 – 10 504 3,489 1,728 257 1,471 

Total 1,066 25,945 15,247 5,140 10,107 

The 2004 CWNS identified 16,676 operational WWTFs in the United States. As Tables 1 and 2 

show, only 1,066 of these facilities have flow rates greater than 5 MGD. The data in Table 1 

indicate that for WWTFs with total influent flow rates greater than 5 MGD, nearly 50 percent 

(544/1,066) operate anaerobic digesters for biosolids management. However, only about 19 

percent (106/544) of the WWTFs with anaerobic digestion utilize digester gas for heating or 

electricity generation. The CHPP assumes that the remaining WWTFs with anaerobic digestion 

flare their digester gas. The data in Table 1 also indicate that larger WWTFs tend to use their 

digester gas, while smaller WWTFs do not. Specifically, 50 percent of WWTFs with design 

influent flows greater than 200 MGD utilize the biogas generated from anaerobic digesters, while 

only 13 percent of WWTFs with influent flows ranging between 10 and 20 MGD utilize the 

digester gas. 

3
 
The data in Table 2 indicate that, for WWTFs with total influent flow greater than 5 MGD, 

roughly 58 percent (15,247 MGD/25,945 MGD) of all wastewater flow goes to facilities with 

anaerobic digestion. However, only 20 percent (5,140 MGD/25,945 MGD) of wastewater flow 

goes to facilities with anaerobic digestion and gas utilization. 

3.2 Wastewater Treatment Facilities with CHP 

As of December 2006, wastewater treatment CHP systems were in place at 76 sites in 24 states, 

representing 220 megawatts (MW) of capacity. Table 3 shows the number of sites by state, as 

well as the total CHP capacity in each state. California and Oregon have the largest number of 

facilities with CHP systems, and Massachusetts has the largest installed capacity. 

Table 3: Number of Wastewater CHP Systems and Total Capacity by State 

State Sites Capacity (MW) 

AR 1 1.7 

AZ 1 4.2 

CA 23 38.1 

CO 2 7.9 

CT 1 0.2 

FL 1 6.0 

IA 2 3.4 

ID 2 0.5 

IL 2 4.3 

MA 1 76.0 

MN 2 5.1 

MT 3 1.1 

NE 3 5.4 

NH 1 0.4 

NJ 3 4.6 

NY 5 13.3 

OH 1 0.1 

OR 10 5.9 

PA 3 22.4 

UT 2 2.6 

VA 1 3.0 

WA 3 13.6 

WI 2 0.5 

WY 1 0.03 

Total 76 220.1 

Source: EEA Combined Heat and Power Installation Database 

4.0 Technical Fit 

Anaerobic digestion is the key indicator of CHP potential at WWTFs because the process 

generates biogas containing approximately 60 percent methane. The biogas can be used as fuel 

for a number of purposes: 

•	 To fire boilers and hot water heaters needed to maintain optimal digester temperatures 

and provide space heating. 

•	 To generate electricity to operate pumps and blowers used throughout the treatment 

process. 

•	 To generate electricity using equipment such as microturbines for onsite use and/or to sell 

back to the grid. 

4
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

Anaerobic digestion produces biogas on a continuous basis, allowing for constant electricity 

production. Internal process heat used for the digesting process represents the most common use 

of wastewater treatment methane, but great potential exists for facilities to use the generated 

biogas for CHP applications. 

4.1 Electric and Thermal Generation Potential from CHP Systems at Wastewater 

Treatment Facilities 

To determine the electricity and thermal energy generation potential for CHP at WWTFs, the 

CHPP modeled the fuel produced and required by two typically sized digesters—one mesophilic 

digester and one thermophilic digester.4 Each digester model was based on a total influent flow 

rate of 9.1 MGD.5 This wastewater flow rate produces roughly 91,000 standard cubic feet (ft3) of 

biogas per day, which has an energy content of 58.9 million British thermal units per day 

(MMBtu/day).6

 Both types of digesters were modeled for summer and winter operation. 

Appendix A contains the digester design criteria used for the analysis. 

The CHPP estimated the biogas utilization of each model digester under four possible cases of 

biogas utilization. The first case assumes no CHP system, where only the amount of biogas 

needed for the digester heat load is utilized and the rest is flared. The other three cases assume 

that a CHP system utilizes the captured biogas to produce both electricity and thermal energy. 

The three modeled CHP systems include an internal combustion engine, a microturbine, and a 

fuel cell. In its analysis, the CHPP used a current industry average electric efficiency for each 

CHP technology as listed in the “Catalogue of CHP Technologies.”7

 However, the possibility for 

employing a CHP system capable of achieving greater electric efficiencies exists. The use of any 

CHP technology must be determined by both the site and policy conditions of a particular 

location. Tables 4 and 5 present the results for each of these models. In each table, the results 

represent an average of winter and summer digester operation. 

As Tables 4 and 5 illustrate, an influent flow rate of 9.1 MGD can produce approximately 200 

kilowatts (kW) of electricity along with roughly 25 MMBtu/day of thermal energy. Using the 

biogas from a typically sized digester, a fuel cell CHP system can produce the most electricity 

(roughly 285 kW). The thermal output of a fuel cell also most closely matches the heat load of 

4

 Two conventional anaerobic digestion processes exist: mesophilic and thermophilic. Both have heat loads. The 

mesophilic process takes place at ambient temperatures typically between 70° F and 100° F; the thermophilic 

process takes place at elevated temperatures, typically up to 160° F. Due to the temperature differences between the 

two processes, the residence time of the sludge varies. In the case of mesophilic digestion, residence time may be 

between 15 and 30 days. The thermophilic process is usually faster, requiring only about two weeks to complete. 

However, thermophilic digestion is usually more expensive because it requires more energy and is less stable than 

the mesophilic process. 

5

 The total influent flow rate of 9.1 MGD is based on the sludge capacity of a typically sized digester (i.e., 20 ft. 

deep and 40 to 60 feet in diameter). See Appendix B for the digester design parameters. 

6

 Biogas generation was calculated based on 100 gallons of wastewater flow per day per capita, and approximately 

1.0 cubic foot per day of digester gas per capita (See “Engineering Rules of Thumb” in Executive Summary for 

sources). Although the values used to calculate gas generation are empirical, they do provide a good estimate of gas 

volume. For example, the city of Rockford, Illinois, operates an anaerobic digester for biosolids management at its 

wastewater treatment plant. The wastewater plant receives on average 32 MGD of raw wastewater, and its anaerobic 

digester produces 320,000 ft3

 per day of biogas (i.e., 1.0 ft3/100 gallons of raw wastewater). 7

 The “Catalogue of CHP Technologies” can be downloaded from the CHPP Web site at: 

www.epa.gov/chp/project_resources/catalogue.htm. 

5
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

the digester (which minimizes the amount of heat that is wasted).8

 In many cases, however, the 

use of fuel cells is limited due to high cost. The two more common CHP systems employed at 

WWTFs—internal combustion engines and microturbines—can produce roughly 200 kW of 

electricity and 25 MMBtu/day of thermal energy with a wastewater flow rate of 9.1 MGD. This 

analysis indicates that roughly 100 kW of electric capacity can result from a total wastewater 

influent flow rate of 4.5 MGD. 

Table 4: Electric and Thermal Energy Potential with CHP for Typically Sized Digester: 

Mesophilic 

Total POTW Flow (MGD) 

No CHP 

system 

9.1 

Microturbine 

CHP 

9.1 

Fuel Cell 

CHP 

9.1 

Combustion 

Engine CHP 

9.1 

Internal 

Heat Requirement for Sludge (Btu/day) 5,148,750 5,148,750 5,148,750 5,148,750 

Wall Heat Transfer (Btu/day) 541,727 541,727 541,727 541,727 

Floor Heat Transfer (Btu/day) 507,869 507,869 507,869 507,869 

Roof Heat Transfer (Btu/day) 326,231 326,231 326,231 326,231 

Total Digester Heat Load (Btu/day) 6,524,577 6,524,577 6,524,577 6,524,577 

Heat Required for Digester Heat Load* 

(Btu/day) 8,155,721 

Heat Potential of Gas (Btu/day) 54,370,800 5 4,370,800 54,370,800 54,370,800 

% of Gas Used for Digester Heat Load 

(Btu/day) 15.0% 

Amount of Gas Flared** (Btu/day) 46,215,079 

Electric Efficiency 0.28 0.43 0.30 

Power to Heat Ratio 0.61 1.95 0.64 

Electric Production (Btu/day) 15,223,824 23,379,444 16,311,240 

Electric Production (kW) 186 286 199 

Heat Recovery (Btu/day) 24,957,089 11,989,458 25,486,313 

Additional Heat Available*** (Btu/day) 18,432,512 5,464,882 18,961,736 

Note: Assumes 50 percent summer and 50 percent winter. 

*Assumes 80 percent efficient boiler. 

**Assumes no other uses except boiler. 

***Assumes digester is only heat load.
 

8

 Table 5 indicates that the thermal generation from a fuel cell CHP system does not meet the thermophilic digester 

heat load. Running less biogas through the fuel cell and using it to produce heat for the digester would rectify this, 

but less electricity would be produced. 

6
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 5: Electric and Thermal Energy Potential with CHP for Typically Sized Digester: 

Thermophilic 

No CHP 

system 

Microturbine 

CHP 

Fuel Cell 

CHP 

Internal 

Combustion 

Engine CHP 

Total POTW Flow (MGD) 9.1 9.1 9.1 9.1 

Heat Requirement for Sludge (Btu/day) 11,155,625 11,155,625 11,155,625 11,155,625 

Wall Heat Transfer (Btu/day) 490,799 490,799 490,799 490,799 

Floor Heat Transfer (Btu/day) 419,334 419,334 419,334 419,334 

Roof Heat Transfer (Btu/day) 343,303 343,303 343,303 343,303 

Total Digester Heat Load (Btu/day) 12,409,061 12,409,061 12,409,061 12,409,061 

Heat Required for Digester Heat Load* 

(Btu/day) 15,511,327 

Heat Potential of Gas (Btu/day) 54,370,800 5 4,370,800 54,370,800 54,370,800 

% of Gas Used for Digester Heat Load 

(Btu/day) 28.53% 

Amount of Gas Flared** (Btu/day) 38,859,473 

Electric Efficiency 0.28 0.43 0.30 

Power to Heat Ratio 0.61 1.95 0.64 

Electric Production (Btu/day) 15,223,824 23,379,444 16,311,240 

Electric Production (kW) 186 286 199 

Heat Recovery (Btu/day) 24,957,089 11,989,458 25,486,313 

Additional Heat Available*** (Btu/day) 12,548,027 -419,603 13,077,251 

Note: Assumes 50 percent summer and 50 percent winter. 

*Assumes 80 percent efficient boiler. 

**Assumes no other uses except boiler. 

***Assumes digester is only heat load.
 

4.2 National Electric Generation Potential from CHP at Wastewater Treatment 

Facilities 

The 2004 CWNS identified 10,107 MGD of wastewater flow at facilities greater than 5 MGD 

that have anaerobic digestion but no biogas utilization. If these facilities were to employ a CHP 

system, approximately 225 MW of electric capacity could be produced.9

 The CWNS also 

identified 5,140 MGD of wastewater flow at facilities greater than 5 MGD that have anaerobic 

digestion with biogas utilization. Anecdotal evidence suggests that very few facilities with 

anaerobic digestion and off-gas utilization use the biogas for electricity generation. As such, 

assuming these facilities only use the captured biogas for digester heat loads, an additional 115 

MW of electric capacity could be produced.10 CHP at WWTFs represents an excellent technical 

fit, with the ability to generate roughly 340 MW of electric capacity that could be used for onsite 

electricity needs or sold back to the electric grid. Appendix B lists all WWTFs greater than 5 

MGD in the United States that have at least one anaerobic digester, and notes the electric 

generation potential associated with CHP utilization for each facility. 

9

 Assumes 100 kW of electric capacity results from a wastewater influent flow rate of 4.5 MGD. 

10 The CHPP recognizes that the total flow rate identified by the 2004 CWNS at facilities that have anaerobic 

digestion and use the captured biogas does not yield the CHP capacity reported in Table 3 when using 4.5 MGD = 

100kW. This is most likely due to the two-year time difference between 2006 data and the 2004 dataset, and the fact 

that not all WWTFs report data for the CWNS.
 

7
 
 

 

 

 

4.3 Potential Carbon Dioxide Emission Benefits 

The CHPP estimated the potential carbon dioxide emission offsets associated with increased use 

of CHP at WWTFs. To estimate these emission reductions, the CHPP assumed the following: 

•	 Biogas from WWTFs is biogenic; therefore, utilizing it in a CHP system yields no net 

positive carbon dioxide emissions. 

•	 100 kW of electric grid capacity is offset with an influent flow rate of 4.5 MGD. 

•	 WWTFs with anaerobic digestion and no off-gas utilization use natural gas for their 

digester heat loads. 

Using CWNS data, a total of 2.3 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emission reductions can 

be achieved through increased use of CHP at WWTFs. These reductions are equivalent to 

planting approximately 640,000 acres of forest, or the emissions of approximately 430,000 cars. 

Table 6 presents these results. 

Table 6: Potential Carbon Dioxide Emission Offsets with CHP at Wastewater Treatment 

Facilities 

All WWTFs with 

anaerobic digestion, but 

no gas utilization 

(>5MGD) 

digestion and gas utilization, 

assuming all gas used for 

digester heat load only 

(>5 MGD) 

All WWTFs with anaerobic 

Total POTW Flow (MGD) 10,107 5,140 

(kW/MGD) 22 22 

Total Electric Offset (kW) 224,598 114,221 

(MMBtu/day) 18,392 9,353 

Electrical Emission Offset (tons CO2/year) 1,527,229 776,685 

(metric tons CO2/year) 1,388,390 706,078 

Number of 9.1 MGD digesters 1,111 

Heat Load per Digester* (MMBtu/day) 12 

Total Heat Offset (MMBtu/day) 13,139 

Heat Emission Offset (tons CO2/year) 280,553 

(metric tons CO2/year) 255,048 

Potential Offsets (metric tons CO2/year) 1,643,438 706,078 

Acres of Forest 448,330 192,618 

Cars 298,887 128,412 

Total Potential Offsets (metric tons CO2/year) 2,349,516 

Acres of Forest 640,948 

Cars 427,299 

5.0 Cost-Effectiveness 

A well designed CHP system can be an attractive investment for a WWTF. A CHP system 

allows a WWTF to generate both electric and thermal energy on site, offsetting the costs of grid 

power and purchased fuel. To highlight the cost savings of generating energy with a CHP system 

8
 
 

 

 

 

 

at a WWTF, the CHPP estimated the cost-effectiveness of three representative CHP systems11 

that would be appropriate for different size WWTFs: 

• 130 kW microturbine 

• 300 kW carbonate fuel cell 

• 1,060 kW reciprocating engine 

Each WWTF considering CHP will need to perform its own site-specific feasibility analysis to 

determine potential biogas generation rates; methods to compress, clean, and dry the biogas 

before combustion; and the specific costs and benefits of generating onsite heat and electricity 

for their WWTF. In states where electricity prices are low, using biogas directly in boilers might 

be the best investment for a WWTF. 

Based on influent flow rates and typical digester heat loads (as presented in Section 4.1, Tables 4 

and 5), the microturbine would be appropriate for a small WWTF with a minimum influent flow 

rate of 6.8 MGD. The fuel cell could serve a medium-size WWTF with a minimum influent flow 

rate of 10.7 MGD. The reciprocating engine would be appropriate for a large WWTF with at 

least a 41.4 MGD influent flow rate. 

Table 7 presents the system performance characteristics for the three sample CHP systems on 

which the economic analyses are based. The electric output that can be generated from the 

digester gas input and the amount of heat that can be recovered drive the project economics. 

Table 7: CHP System Performance Characteristics for Cost-Effectiveness Analysis 

Performance Characteristic 

CHP System Type 

Microturbine Fuel Cell Reciprocating Engine 

Minimum WWTF Size (MGD) 6.8 10.7** 41.4 

Digester Biogas Produced/day (MMBtu) 40.7 58.0 247.4 

Nameplate Capacity (kW) 130 300 1,060 

Compressor/Aux. (kW) (4) — — 

Net Output* (kW) 126 300 1,060 

Electrical Efficiency 26 .1% 42.3% 35.1% 

Electricity Production/day (kWh) 3,024 7,200 35,440 

Electric/Thermal Output Ratio 0.86 2.84 0.82 

Heat Rate (Btu/kWh HHV) 13,050 8,060 9,724 

Thermal Output (Btu/kWh) 3,984 1,200 4,173 

Heat Production/day (MMBtu) 12.0 8.6 106.2 

* The net power output of the microturbine system is adjusted because the fuel must be compressed to about 75 to 

100 psig using an electrically driven fuel compressor. 

** The fuel cell does not produce enough waste heat to meet the digester heat load. About 10 percent of the 

available digester gas must go directly to a supplemental boiler. The 10.7 MGD size is 10 percent more than the 9.7 

MGD needed to fuel a 300 kW fuel cell. 

11 Data used for performing these analyses were based on actual prices and performance characteristics of 

commercially available equipment (as stated by the manufacturers). To avoid implicitly endorsing any 

manufacturers or products, the CHPP has removed the brand names from the discussion of these systems. 

9
 
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 8 presents the capital costs for the three sample CHP systems. Generally, the largest cost 

component is the gen-set package, which contains the prime mover and the generator. However, 

for small projects, the fuel treatment system is often the largest cost component. The fuel 

treatment system removes moisture, siloxanes, and sometimes hydrogen sulfide to ensure that the 

biogas is of operational quality. Fuel treatment systems consist of chillers, moisture separators, 

siloxane removal vessels, heat exchangers, blowers, and associated connections. The costs for 

fuel treatment in Table 8 do not include hydrogen sulfide removal because the majority of 

WWTFs already have hydrogen sulfide removal in place. Fuel compression is required for the 

microturbine case; these costs are included in the fuel treatment category. Switchgear and 

controls are required for system operation and paralleling with the utility grid. Additional 

switchgear (transfer switches, wiring, and electrical panels) would also be needed if the WWTF 

decides to configure back-up capabilities into the system (i.e., to allow the system to serve 

critical loads during a utility outage). The heat recovery equipment in each of these sample 

systems produces hot water for the digesters and other facility needs. 

For the three CHP systems, the major equipment costs range from 58 to 65 percent of the total 

installed costs. Remaining costs include those for design, engineering, consulting, installation, 

and obtaining necessary permits. Typically, municipal facilities use a design-bid-build approach 

in which the facility is first designed and then the system components are competitively bid. In 

order to have a better integrated package, some facility managers suggest employing a designbuild approach. However, using this contracting avenue might necessitate a special municipal 

directive.12 

The capital costs shown in Table 8 do not include any credits for federal or state incentive 

programs that might be available either to stimulate renewable energy, reduce greenhouse gas 

emissions, promote high efficiency, or to support particular technologies, such as fuel cells. 

These credits can significantly enhance the economic value of CHP to WWTFs. 

Table 8: Estimated Capital Costs for Three CHP Systems at Wastewater Treatment 

Facilities
 

Capital Cost 

CHP System Type 

126 kW (net) 

Microturbine 300 kW Fuel Cell 1,060 kW Internal Combustion Engine 

Cost ($) 

Cost per kW 

($/kW) Cost ($) 

Cost per kW 

($/kW) Cost ($) 

Cost per kW 

($/kW) 

Gen-Set $143,000 $1,135 $1,200,000 $4,000 $685,000 $646 

Fuel Treatment and 

Compression $202,000 $1,603 $194,000 $647 $369,000 $348 

Switchgear & Controls $19,500 $155 $97,600 $325 $125,000 $118 

Heat Recovery $26,000 $206 $23,200 $77 $100,000 $94 

Total Equipment Costs $390,500 $3,099 $1,514,800 $5,049 $1,279,000 $1,207 

Consulting and Design $23,400 $186 $125,000 $417 $150,000 $142 

Installation $114,400 $908 $457,000 $1,523 $604,500 $570 

Permits & Inspection $9,750 $77 $25,000 $83 $25,000 $24 

Contingency 5% $26,903 $214 $106,090 $354 $102,925 $97 

Total Project Costs $564,953 $4,484 $2,227,890 $7,426 $2,161,425 $2,039 

12 Gresham Waste Water Treatment Plant: Case Study, Energy Trust of Oregon (prepared by Energy and 

Environmental Analysis, Inc.) September 2006. 

10 
 

 

 

 

The CHPP estimated net power costs for each of the sample CHP systems based on three cases: 

•	 Case 1 assumes that the WWTF previously used digester gas for all thermal 

requirements, and that there was no purchased fuel used at the site. In this case, the CHP 

system replaces the thermal load with recovered heat from the prime mover. As 

previously mentioned, the fuel cell does not produce enough waste heat after generation 

of electricity, so this unit must be sized appropriately to allow some of the digester gas to 

fuel a supplemental boiler to provide the necessary make-up heat. 

•	 Case 2 assumes that the WWTF previously used digester gas in a boiler for digester heat 

loads and purchased natural gas for other facility needs. In this case, the excess thermal 

energy produced by the CHP system (beyond what’s required for the digester heat load) 

displaces natural gas purchased for other facility needs such as space heating. 

•	 Case 3 assumes that the WWTF previously did not use digester gas and purchased 

natural gas for both digester heat loads and other facility needs. In this case, the thermal 

energy produced by the CHP system displaces natural gas purchased for all of the 

facility’s thermal needs including the digester heat load. 

Table 9 presents the net power cost estimates for each CHP system. The capital recovery costs 

are estimated for municipal facilities. Municipal facilities are assumed to have a cost of capital 

(municipal bonds) of 5 percent and a capital repayment horizon of 20 years. In cases where it is 

assumed that natural gas is being replaced, the CHPP assumes a natural gas price of 

$7.00/MMBtu. In these cases, a thermal credit is incorporated into the net power costs to account 

for the avoided fuel costs. The fuel savings and the digester heat requirements assume that the 

necessary thermal energy would have been produced from an 80 percent efficient boiler. 

Table 9: Net Power Cost Estimates for Three CHP Systems at Wastewater Treatment 

Facilities
 

Cost Element 

CHP System Type 

126 kW (net) 

Microturbine 300 kW Fuel Cell 1,060 kW Internal Combustion Engine 

Maintenance ($/kWh) $0.022 $0.030 $0.018 

Case 1: CHP thermal replaces biogas-fueled boiler for digester heating and other local use* 

Capital Recovery ($/kWh) $0.043 $0.072 $0.020 

Unit Power Cost ($/kWh) $0.065 $0.102 $0.038 

Case 2: Excess thermal energy (above digester needs) replaces natural gas elsewhere on site** 

Digester Heat Needed (Btu/kWh) 2,979 1,840 2,219 

Natural Gas Displaced (Btu/kWh) 1,006 (640) 1,953 

Thermal Credit ($/kWh) $0.009 No Excess $0.017 

Net Unit Power Cost ($/kWh) $0.056 $0.102 $0.021 

Case 3: 100 percent natural gas replacement with CHP thermal energy*** 

Natural Gas Displaced (Btu/kWh) 4,980 1,500 5,216 

Thermal Credit ($/kWh) $0.035 $0.011 $0.037 

Net Unit Power Cost ($/kWh) $0.030 $0.091 $0.001 

*Assumes: Municipal Capital Recovery Factor of 8.0 percent (5 percent interest rate, 20 years); 95 percent capacity
 

factor. 

**Assumes: Digester fuel requirement as a percent of total gas produced = 28.5 percent (consistent with 

thermophilic average in Table 5); avoided boiler efficiency of 80 percent; avoided boiler fuel cost of $7.00/MMBtu. 

***Assumes: Avoided boiler efficiency of 80 percent; avoided boiler fuel cost of $7.00/MMBtu. 

11 
 

 

 

A facility manager can easily compare the net costs presented in Table 9 to the WWTF’s current 

cost of purchased power to get a quick estimate of whether a CHP system might be costeffective. If a WWTF purchases power for less than the net power cost, a CHP system may not 

be cost-effective. However, each WWTF needs to perform its own cost-effectiveness analysis to 

determine the economic feasibility of investing in a CHP system at their particular facility with 

site-specific digester, heating, and electric loads. A system-specific level 1 feasibility analysis 

will uncover additional costs and value streams that are not captured in this basic costeffectiveness analysis. 

6.0 Wastewater Treatment Biogas as Renewable Energy 

The use of biogas from anaerobic digestion at WWTFs is often eligible for renewable fuel credits 

and clean energy funding. For example, biogas-fueled electricity generation qualifies as a 

renewable energy source in each state with a renewable portfolio standard (i.e., 22 states and the 

District of Columbia as of October 2006). National voluntary renewable energy credit (REC) 

programs also consider new electricity generation fueled by biogas from WWTFs as eligible 

sources for RECs. 

In addition, some states offer financial incentives (e.g., grants, rebates) for the production of 

clean onsite generation (such as biogas-fueled CHP) that reduces peak period electricity demand. 

For an up-to-date list of states that provide such incentives, see the Partner Resources section of 

the CHPP Web site at: www.epa.gov/chp/funding_opps.htm. 

7.0 Additional Resources 

EPA Combined Heat and Power Partnership (CHPP) – The CHPP is a voluntary program 

that seeks to reduce the environmental impact of power generation by promoting the use of CHP. 

The CHPP works closely with energy users, the CHP industry, state and local governments, and 

other stakeholders to support the development of new projects and promote their energy, 

environmental, and economic benefits. Web site: www.epa.gov/chp/ 

The CHPP offers a number of tools and resources that can help a WWTF implement a CHP 

system. These include: 

•	 Description of the CHP project development process, including information on key 

questions for each stage of the process along with specific tools and resources: 

www.epa.gov/chp/project_resources/proj_dev_process.htm 

•	 The CHP and biomass/biogas funding database with bi-weekly updates of new state and 

federal incentive opportunities : www.epa.gov/chp/funding_opps.htm 

•	 The CHP Catalogue of Technologies, which describes performance and cost 

characteristics of CHP technologies: www.epa.gov/chp/project_resources/catalogue.htm 

7.1 Organizations 

The following organizations work closely with the wastewater treatment industry and offer a 

wealth of knowledge concerning wastewater treatment and the use of anaerobic digestion. 

12
 
 

EPA Office of Wastewater Management (OWM) – The OWM oversees a range of programs 

contributing to the well-being of the nation’s waters and watersheds. 

Web site: www.epa.gov/owm/
 

National Association of Clean Water Agencies (NACWA) – NACWA represents the interests 

of more than 300 public agencies and organizations. NACWA members serve the majority of the 

sewered population in the United States and collectively treat and reclaim more than 18 billion 

gallons of wastewater daily. 

Web site: www.nacwa.org/ 

Water Environment Federation (WEF) – Founded in 1928, the WEF is a not-for-profit 

technical and educational organization with members from varied disciplines who work toward 

the organization’s vision of preservation and enhancement of the global water environment. 

Web site: www.wef.org/Home 

Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF) – WERF helps improve the water 

environment and protect human health by providing sound, reliable science and innovative, 

effective, cost-saving technologies for improved management of water resources. 

Web site: www.werf.us/ 

Air and Waste Management Association (A&WMA) – A&WMA is a nonprofit, nonpartisan 

professional organization that provides training, information, and networking opportunities to 

thousands of environmental professionals in 65 countries. 

Web site: www.awma.org/
 

7.2 Articles 

The following journal article and conference presentation highlight the technologies available for 

digester gas utilization. 

Hinrichs, Doug; Jimison, John; Lemar, Paul. (November/December 2005). Using Biogas to Fuel 

DG and CHP plants. Platts Power: Business and Technology for the Global Generation 

Industry, Vol 49, No. 9, 67-70. 

Mosteller, Kevin L. (2002). Energy Crisis Impact on Anaerobic Digester Gas Utilization 

Technology: Fuel Cells, Co-Generation, and Other Options. South Carolina 

Environmental Conference. Retrieved June 20, 2006.

7.3 Case Studies 

Following are selected case studies that demonstrate the benefits and operational characteristics 

of installing CHP systems at a variety of WWTFs. These case studies highlight a variety of 

technologies and biogas utilization options. 

•	 “Waukesha Engine Energizes New Hampshire Water Utility Digesting Sludge for 

Fuel” – New Hampshire’s Water Utility uses its 12 to 18 MGD of wastewater to produce 

electricity and hot water for the facility with a 365 kW internal combustion engine. The 

anaerobic digesters at the facility handle approximately 60,000 gallons of sludge per day, 

and what is left after the digestion process is sold as compost. 

13
 
Web site: 

https://dresser.com/internet/businessunits/waukesha/pages/documents/publications/casehisto 

ry/nh_water_utility.pdf 

•	 “Maintenance Helps Million Hour Engines Thrive at Tucson, Arizona Wastewater 

Cogeneration Plant” – The Ina Road WWTF treats approximately 35 MGD of 

wastewater. The facility uses six internal combustion engines to generate approximately 

2.5 MW of electricity and thermal energy that is used for hot water; chilled water; 

heating, ventilation, and cooling (HVAC); and to run the anaerobic digesters. By utilizing 

biogas, the facility pays no more than $0.05/kWh, which compares very favorably with 

the local average of $0.08 to $0.11/kWh.
 

Web site: 

www.grove.it/internet/businessunits/waukesha/pages/documents/publications/casehistory/tuc 

sonwater_utility.pdf 

•	 “King County (Washington) Fuel Cell Demonstration Project” – In 2003, King 

County’s South WWTF installed a 1 MW molten carbonate fuel cell (MCFC) 

demonstration project that generates electricity and thermal energy for onsite needs. 

Web site: www.fce.com/downloads/king_county_brochure_03.pdf 

•	 “Essex Junction WWTF (Vermont): 60 kW CHP Application” – The Essex Junction 

WWTF uses two 30 kW microturbines to generate electricity and thermal energy. The 

CHP system’s operational efficiency is 80 percent and produces annual energy savings of 

412,000 kWh (36 percent of the facility’s electricity demand). The project was installed 

in 2003 and has an estimated payback of seven years. 

Web site: 

http://www.northeastchp.org/uploads/Essex%20Junction%20Project%20Profile.pdf 

•	 “Albert Lea WWTF (Minnesota): 120 kW CHP Application” – The Albert Lea 

WWTF uses four 30 kW microturbines to generate 120 kW of electricity and 28 MMBtu 

of thermal energy per year, which is used for space heating and to heat the facility’s 

anaerobic digesters. The CHP system was installed in 2003 and has an estimated payback 

of four to six years. 

Web site: 

www.chpcentermw.org/pdfs/Project_Profile_Albert_Lea_Wastewater_Treatment_Center.pdf 

•	 “Columbia Boulevard Wastewater Treatment Plant (Portland, Oregon): 320 kW 

Fuel Cell and Microturbine Power Plants” – The Columbia Boulevard WWTF uses a 

200 kW CHP system to produce electricity and thermal energy for the facility. A primary 

motivation for the CHP system was to provide back-up power for the facility after it 

experienced several extended power outages during the mid-1990s. The CHP system was 

financed by tax dollars, as well as multiple national, state, and utility grants. 

Web site: www.chpcenternw.org/NwChpDocs/ColumbiaBlvdWastewaterCaseStudyFinal.pdf 

14
 
 

 

 

Appendix A: Anaerobic Digester Design Criteria 

The following anaerobic digester design criteria were used to estimate the total wastewater 

influent flow rate that a typically sized digester can treat, as well as the biogas generation rate 

and the heat load of a typically sized digester. 

System Design Requirements Mesophilic Thermophilic 

Reactor Type2 Complete Mix Complete Mix 

Reactor Shape2 Circular Circular 

Organic Load1

 (lbs/day VS) 13730 13730 

Percent Solids in Flow1

 (% w/w) 8 8 

Sludge Density1

 (lbs/gal) 8.5 8.5 

Flow to Reactor (lbs/day) 171625 171625 

Flow to Reactor (gal/day) 20191 20191 

Flow to Reactor (ft3

/day) 2699 2699 

Reactor Depth3

 (ft) 20 20 

Design Load2

 (lbs VS/ft3/day) 0.25 0.5 

Total Reactor Volume (ft3

) 54920 27460 

Reactor Area (ft) 2746 1373 

Reactor Diameter2

 (ft) 60 42 

Retention Time (days) 20 10 

Influent Temp - Winter2

 (°F) 50 50 

Air Temp - Winter2

 (°F) 50 50 

Earth Around Wall Temp - Winter2

 (°F) 40 

Earth Below Floor Temp - Winter2

 (°F) 40 40 

Reactor Temp2

 (°F) 95 130 

Influent Temp - Summer2

 (°F) 80 80 

Air Temp - Summer2

 (°F) 80 80 

Earth Around Wall Temp - Summer2

 (°F) 50 

Earth Below Floor Temp - Summer2

 (°F) 50 50 

Sp. Heat Sludge2

 (Btu/lb*°F) 1.0 1.0 

Area Walls (ft2

) 3769.9 2627.3 

Area Roof (ft2

) 2827.4 1373.3 

Area Floor (ft2

) 2827.4 1373.3 

U Walls - Concrete2

 (Btu/hr*ft2*°F) 0.119748 0.119748 

U Roof - Concrete2

 (Btu/hr*ft2*°F) 0.160251 0.160251 

U Floor - Concrete2

 (Btu/hr*ft2*°F) 0.149685 0.149685 

Gas Generation2

 (ft3/lb VS) 12 12 

Gas Heat Content2

 (Btu/ft3) 600 600 

VS Removal Percent @ 20 days1

 (%) 55 55 

VS Removed (lbs/day) 7,552 7,552 

Gas Generation (ft3

/day) 90,618 90,618 

Heat Potential of Gas (Btu/day) 54,370,800 54,370,800 

Gas Generation per Capita2

 (ft3/day/person) 1 1 

Population Served by POTW2

 (persons) 90,618 90,618 

Flow per Capita3

 (gal/day/person) 100 100 

Total POTW Flow (MGD) 9.1 9.1 

Sources: 

1. Eckenfelder, Principals of Water Quality Management, 1980. 

2. Metcalf and Eddy, Wastewater Engineering and Design, 1991. 

3. Recommended Standards for Wastewater Facilities (10-State Standards), 2004. 

15 
 

Notes 

Mesophilic digester is below grade (wall heat transfer with ground). 

Thermophilic digester is completely above ground (wall heat transfer with air). 

With no CHP, only the amount of energy needed for digester heat load is used from gas. The rest is flared. 

With CHP applications, all of the gas energy is run through electric generator. The heat needed for the digester heat 

load is used from the heat recovered and the rest is dumped.
 

16
 
Appendix B: Full List of Wastewater Treatment Facilities in the United States (> 5 MGD) 

with at Least One Anaerobic Digester 

The following tables present an estimate of the potential electric capacity from CHP utilization 

at each facility based off the CHPP analysis. Each WWTF considering CHP will need to perform 

its own site-specific feasibility analysis to determine the true potential biogas generation rates; 

methods to compress, clean, and dry the biogas before combustion; and the costs and benefits of 

generating onsite heat and electricity. 

The potential electric capacity calculation assumes that 100 kW of capacity is produced for 

every 4.5 MGD of influent flow. The plant data comes from the 2004 CWNS. Several limitations 

exist when using the CWNS data. First, the data are voluntarily reported. As such, the following 

tables might not include all WWTFs in the United States with influent flow rates greater than 5 

MGD. Second, although facilities report if they have anaerobic digesters, the CWNS does not 

indicate how many digesters are in operation at a facility, or how facilities use the produced 

biogas. Third, the data contained in the 2004 CWNS are more than two years old, and therefore 

might not reflect the current state of operations for each plant. 

Table B1: Facilities with No Off-Gas Utilization 

State 

ALABAMA 

Facility 

Name 

ANNISTON 

CHOCCOLOC 

CO WWTP 

County 

CALHOUN 

Authority 

Name 

CITY OF 

ANNISTON WW 

& SB 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

9.11 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

202 

ALABAMA 

DECATUR 

DRY CREEK 

WWTP 

MORGAN 

CITY OF 

DECATUR WW 

DEPT 

18.08 402 

ALABAMA GADSDEN 

WEST WWTP ETOWAH 

GADSDEN 

WATERWORKS 

AND SEWER 

BOARD 

9.71 216 

ALABAMA 

MOBILE 

WILLIAMS 

WWTP 

MOBILE 

MOBILE, BOARD 

OF WATER AND 

SEWER 

COMMISSIONER 

S 

20.471 455 

ALABAMA 

MONTGOMER 

Y CATOMA 

CREEK WWTP 

MONTGOMERY 

MONTGOMERY 

WW & SAN SWR 

BD 

20.005 445 

ALABAMA 

MONTGOMER 

Y 

ENCONCHATE 

WWTP 

MONTGOMERY 

MONTGOMERY 

WW&SAN SWR 

BD 

10.591 235 

ALABAMA TUSCALOOSA 

WWTP TUSCALOOSA TUSCALOOSA 

WW & SWR BD 16.5 367 

ALABAMA 

ALBERTVILLE 

EASTSIDE 

WWTP 

MARSHALL ALBERTVILLE, 

CITY OF 6.04 134 

ARIZONA 

PHOENIX 

91ST AVE 

WWTP 

MARICOPA CITY OF 

PHOENIX 124 2756 

ARIZONA ROGER RD 

TRTMNT PLNT PIMA PIMA COUNTY 

WWMD 29.6 658 

17 
State 

ARIZONA 

Facility 

Name 

YUMA 

FIGUEROA 

WPCF 

County 

YUMA 

Authority 

Name 

CITY OF YUMA 

PUBLIC WORKS 

DEPT 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

8.5 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

189 

ARKANSAS 

LITTLE ROCK 

FOURCHE 

CREEK STP 

PULASKI LITTLE ROCK 13.1 291 

ARKANSAS SPRINGDALE 

STP WASHINGTON SPRINGDALE 12.2 271 

CALIFORNIA 

LAGUNA 

WASTEWATE 

R TREATMENT 

PLANT 

SONOMA SANTA ROSA, 

CITY OF 17.5 389 

CALIFORNIA DUBLIN-SAN 

RAMON WWTF ALAMEDA 

DUBLIN SAN 

RAMON 

SERVICES 

DISTRICT 

9.9 220 

CALIFORNIA SUNNYVALE 

WWTF SANTA CLARA SUNNYVALE, CITY OF 16.22 360 

CALIFORNIA 

CENTRAL 

CONTRA 

COSTA WWTF 

CONTRA COSTA 

CENTRAL 

CONTRA COSTA 

SANITARY 

DISTRICT 

49.39 1098 

CALIFORNIA HAYWARD 

WPCF ALAMEDA HAYWARD, CITY 

OF 13.7 304 

CALIFORNIA DALY CITY 

WWTP SAN MATEO DALY CITY, CITY 

OF 6.27 139 

CALIFORNIA 

SAN 

JOSE/SANTA 

CLARA WPCP 

SANTA CLARA 

SAN JOSE, CITY 

OF, 

ENVIRONMENTA 

L SERVICES 

DEPARTMENT 

143.3 3184 

CALIFORNIA SAN MATEO 

WWTF SAN MATEO SAN MATEO, 

CITY OF 12.7 282 

CALIFORNIA SANTA CRUZ 

WWTF SANTA CRUZ SANTA CRUZ, 

CITY OF 15.32 340 

CALIFORNIA 

SANTA 

BARBARA 

WWTF 

SANTA 

BARBARA 

SANTA 

BARBARA, CITY 

OF 

8.8 196 

CALIFORNIA WATSONVILL 

E WWTF SANTA CRUZ WATSONVILLE, 

CITY OF 7.4 164 

CALIFORNIA 

VENTURA 

WATER 

RECLAMATIO 

N FACILITY 

VENTURA VENTURA, CITY 

OF 10 222 

CALIFORNIA HILL CANYON 

WWTP VENTURA THOUSAND 

OAKS, CITY OF 10.3 229 

CALIFORNIA VALENCIA 

WRP LOS ANGELES 

COUNTY 

SANITATION 

DISTRICTS OF 

LOS ANGELES 

COUNTY 

14 311 

CALIFORNIA TERMINAL 

ISLAND WWTP LOS ANGELES 

CITY OF LOS 

ANGELES, 

BUREAU OF 

SANITATION 

16 356 

CALIFORNIA 

SACRAMENTO 

REGIONAL 

WWTF 

SACRAMENTO 

SACRAMENTO 

COUNTY 

REGIONAL 

SANITATION 

DISTRICT 

165 3667 

18
 
 

 

 

 

State 

CALIFORNIA 

Facility 

Name 

BAKERSFIELD 

WWTP #2 

County 

KERN 

Authority 

Name 

BAKERSFIELD, 

CITY OF 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

17.3 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

384 

CALIFORNIA BAKERSFIELD 

WWTP #3 KERN BAKERSFIELD, 

CITY OF 11.3 251 

CALIFORNIA CHICO WPCP BUTTE CHICO, CITY OF 7.5 167 

CALIFORNIA LODI WPCF SAN JOAQUIN LODI, CITY OF 6.2 138 

CALIFORNIA MODESTO 

WWTF STANISLAUS MODESTO, CITY 

OF 27.4 609 

CALIFORNIA VISALIA 

WWTP TULARE VISALIA, CITY OF 12 267 

CALIFORNIA YUBA CITY 

WRP SUTTER YUBA CITY, CITY OF 5.5 122 

CALIFORNIA CLEAR CREEK 

WWTF SHASTA REDDING, CITY 

OF 7.93 176 

CALIFORNIA TRACY WWTP SAN JOAQUIN TRACY, CITY OF 7.1 158 

CALIFORNIA MADERA STP MADERA MADERA, CITY 

OF 5.85 130 

CALIFORNIA DAVIS WWTF YOLO DAVIS, CITY OF 6.5 144 

CALIFORNIA SOUTH 

TAHOE WWTF EL DORADO SOUTH TAHOE PUD 5 111 

CALIFORNIA 

PALM 

SPRINGS 

WWRF 

RIVERSIDE PALM SPRINGS, 

CITY OF 8.29 184 

CALIFORNIA PALM DESERT 

WWRF RIVERSIDE COACHELLA VLY CO WTR DIST 5.38 120 

CALIFORNIA 

SAN JACINTO 

REGIONAL 

WRF 

RIVERSIDE 

EASTERN 

MUNICIPAL 

WATER 

DISTRICT 

8.72 194 

CALIFORNIA 

IEUA 

REGIONAL 

PLANT NO.1 

SAN 

BERNARDINO 

INLAND EMPIRE 

UTILITIES 

AGENCY 

38.8 862 

CALIFORNIA CORONA 

WWTF #1 RIVERSIDE CORONA, CITY 

OF 9.007 200 

CALIFORNIA RIALTO WWTP SAN 

BERNARDINO RIALTO, CITY OF 7.4 164 

CALIFORNIA 

SAN 

CLEMENTE 

WRP 

ORANGE SAN CLEMENTE, 

CITY OF 5 111 

COLORADO PUEBLO 

WWTP PUEBLO PUEBLO, CITY 

OF 16.8 373 

COLORADO 

BOULDER 

75TH STREET 

WWTP 

BOULDER BOULDER, CITY 

OF 5.86 130 

COLORADO 

FORT 

COLLINS 

DRAKE WW 

RECLAMAT 

FAC 

LARIMER FORT COLLINS, 

CITY OF 13 289 

COLORADO GREELEY 

WWTP WELD GREELEY W & S 

DEPT 8.42 187 

COLORADO LONGMONT 

WWTP BOULDER LONGMONT, CITY OF 7.39 164 

COLORADO 

LITTLETON/EN 

GLEWOOD 

WWTP 

ARAPAHOE LITTLETON/ENG 

LEWOOD 32.67 726 

COLORADO BOULDER 

CREEK BOULDER BOULDER, CITY OF 16 356 

19
 
State 

CONNECTICUT 

Facility 

Name 

DANBURY 

WPCF 

County 

FAIRFIELD 

Authority 

Name 

DANBURY CITY 

OF 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

6.37 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

142 

CONNECTICUT 

EAST 

HARTFORD 

WPCF 

HARTFORD METROPOLITAN 

DISTRICT 5.963 133 

CONNECTICUT TORRINGTON 

MAIN WPCF LITCHFIELD TORRINGTON, 

CITY OF 5.28 117 

DELAWARE WILMINGTON 

STP NEW CASTLE WILMINGTON 

CITY COUNCIL 71.23 1583 

FLORIDA BUCKMAN 

STREET STP DUVAL JEA 37.96 844 

FLORIDA SOUTH WWTF ORANGE ORANGE CO FL 

SEW & W DEPT 14.98 333 

FLORIDA 

ALTAMONTE 

SPGS MAIN 

STP 

SEMINOLE ALTAMONTE 

SPRINGS, CITY 5.46 121 

FLORIDA MAIN STREET 

PLANT ESCAMBIA ECUA 14.63 325 

FLORIDA THOMAS P. 

SMITH WTP LEON TALLAHASSEE, 

CITY OF 13.39 298 

FLORIDA 

HOWARD F 

CURREN 

AWTP 

HILLSBOROUGH TAMPA 50.5 1122 

FLORIDA PLANT CITY 

STP HILLSBOROUGH PLANT CITY, CITY OF 5.3 118 

FLORIDA LARGO STP PINELLAS LARGO, TOWN 

OF 13 289 

FLORIDA 

MARSHALL 

STREET 

AWTTP 

PINELLAS CLEARWATER, 

CITY OF 6.34 141 

FLORIDA 

ST 

PETERSBURG 

SOUTHWEST 

WWTP 

PINELLAS 

ST 

PETERSBURG, 

CITY OF 

10.1 224 

FLORIDA 

ST 

PETERSBURG 

NORTHEAST 

WWTP 

PINELLAS 

ST 

PETERSBURG, 

CITY OF 

11.5 256 

FLORIDA 

ST 

PETERSBURG 

NORTHWEST 

WWTP 

PINELLAS 

ST 

PETERSBURG, 

CITY OF 

11.04 245 

FLORIDA 

ALBERT 

WHITTED 

WWTP 

PINELLAS 

ST 

PETERSBURG, 

CITY OF 

7.9 176 

FLORIDA LOXAHATCHE 

E R. REG STP PALM BEACH 

LOXAHATCHEE 

RIVER 

ENVIRONMENTA 

L CONTROL 

DISTRICT 

7.5 167 

FLORIDA 

DAYTONA 

BEACH REG. 

STP 

VOLUSIA DAYTONA 

BEACH, CITY OF 6.05 134 

FLORIDA BETHUNE 

POINT WWTP VOLUSIA DAYTONA 

BEACH, CITY OF 8.46 188 

GEORGIA 

MACON 

POPLAR 

STREET 

WPCP 

BIBB MACON-BIBB 

CO. WSA 16.75 372 

20
 
State 

GEORGIA 

Facility 

Name 

INTRENCHME 

NT CREEK 

WWTP 

County 

DEKALB 

Authority 

Name 

ATLANTA 

PUBLIC WORKS 

DEPT 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

14.57 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

324 

GEORGIA SOUTH RIVER 

WWTP FULTON 

ATLANTA 

PUBLIC WORKS 

DEPT 

32.26 717 

GEORGIA R M CLAYTON 

WPCP FULTON 

ATLANTA 

PUBLIC WORKS 

DEPT 

87.52 1945 

GEORGIA JOHNS 

CREEK WPCP FULTON 

FULTON CO BD 

OF 

COMMISSIONER 

S 

7.05 157 

GEORGIA 

FULTON CO-

CAMP CREEK 

WPCP 

FULTON 

FULTON CO BD 

OF 

COMMISSIONER 

S 

10.07 224 

GEORGIA 

COBB 

COUNTY 

SUTTON 

WPCP 

COBB 

COBB COUNTY 

WATER & 

SEWER 

31.84 708 

GEORGIA 

COBB 

NOONDAY 

CREEK WPCP 

COBB 

COBB COUNTY 

WATER AND 

SEWER 

8.75 194 

GEORGIA 

GWINNETT 

CROOKED 

CREEK STP 

GWINNETT 

GWINNETT 

COUNTY WATER 

POL 

14.13 314 

GEORGIA 

SOUTH 

COLUMBUS 

WPCP 

MUSCOGEE COLUMBUS BD 

OF WAT COMM. 30 667 

GEORGIA 

ALBANY 

JOSHUA 

ROAD WPCP 

DOUGHERTY ALBANY, CITY 

OF 19.09 424 

GEORGIA AUGUSTA 

WWTP RICHMOND AUGUSTA, CITY 

COUNCIL OF 30.64 681 

GEORGIA 

ATHENS 

NORTH 

OCONEE 

WPCP 

CLARKE ATHENS, CITY 

OF 7.9 176 

GEORGIA 

GAINESVILLE 

FLAT CREEK 

WPCP 

HALL GAINESVILLE, 

CITY OF 5.68 126 

GEORGIA MILLEDGEVIL 

LE WPCP BALDWIN MILLEDGEVILLE, 

CITY OF 5.9 131 

GEORGIA ROME WPCP FLOYD 

ROME WATER 

AND SEWER 

DEPT 

9.68 215 

GEORGIA THOMASVILLE 

WPCP THOMAS THOMASVILLE, 

CITY OF 5.29 118 

HAWAII SAND ISLAND 

WWTF HONOLULU HONOLULU, 

CITY AND CO 77.6 1724 

HAWAII KAILUA WWTF HONOLULU HONOLULU, 

CITY & CO 6.93 154 

HAWAII HONOULIULI 

WWTF HONOLULU HONOLULU, CITY & CO 24.6 547 

IDAHO POCATELLO 

STP BANNOCK POCATELLO, 

CITY OF 6.34 141 

IDAHO TWIN FALLS 

STP TWIN FALLS TWIN FALLS, 

CITY OF 7.95 177 

21
 
 

 

State 

IDAHO 

Facility 

Name 

BOISE, CITY 

OF- LANDER 

STREET 

County 

ADA 

Authority 

Name 

BOISE, CITY OF 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

14.6 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

324 

IDAHO 

BOISE, CITY 

OF--WEST 

BOISE 

ADA BOISE, CITY OF 11.5 256 

IDAHO IDAHO FALLS 

STP BONNEVILLE IDAHO FALLS, CITY OF 10.5 233 

IDAHO NAMPA STP CANYON NAMPA, CITY OF 9.89 220 

IDAHO 

CALDWELL 

SEWAGE TRT 

FACIL 

CANYON CALDWELL, CITY 

OF 7.31 162 

ILLINOIS QUINCY STP ADAMS QUINCY, CITY 

OF 7 156 

ILLINOIS 

KANKAKEE 

RIVER 

METROPOLIT 

AN AGENCY 

KANKAKEE 

KANKAKEE 

RIVER 

METROPOLITAN 

AGENCY (KRMA) 

14.68 326 

ILLINOIS FREEPORT 

STP STEPHENSON 

FREEPORT 

WATER & 

SEWER CO 5.1 113 

ILLINOIS 

UCSD-

NORTHEAST 

STP 

CHAMPAIGN 

URBANA & 

CHAMPAIGN 

S.D. 

10 222 

ILLINOIS 

FOX LAKE NW 

REGIONAL 

WRF 

LAKE FOX LAKE, 

VILLAGE OF 6.4 142 

ILLINOIS 

JOLIET - 

EASTSIDE 

STP 

WILL JOLIET, CITY OF 16 356 

ILLINOIS 

JOLIET-

WESTSIDE 

STP 

WILL JOLIET, CITY OF 5.9 131 

ILLINOIS 

ELMHURST 

SEWAGE 

TREATMENT 

DUPAGE ELMHURST, 

CITY OF 10.4 231 

ILLINOIS 

WHEATON SD 

SEWAGE TR 

PLNT 

DUPAGE 

WHEATON 

SANITARY 

DISTRICT 

7 156 

ILLINOIS DEKALB MAIN 

PLANT DEKALB 

DEKALB 

SANITARY 

DISTRICT 

6 133 

ILLINOIS BELLEVILLE 

STP #1 ST. CLAIR BELLEVILLE, 

CITY OF 5.95 132 

ILLINOIS ALTON S T P MADISON ALTON, CITY OF 8.42 187 

ILLINOIS ROCK ISLAND 

MAIN STP ROCK ISLAND ROCK ISLAND, 

CITY OF 8 178 

ILLINOIS 

SPRINGFIELD 

SD E SUG 

CRK 

SANGAMON SPRINGFIELD 

SANITARY DIST 9.27 206 

ILLINOIS DECATUR SD 

STP MACON DECATUR SAN. 

DIST. 38.4 853 

ILLINOIS PEORIA STP PEORIA 

GREATER 

PEORIA 

SANITARY D 

27 600 

ILLINOIS 

BLOOMINGTO 

N-NORMAL 

STP 

MCLEAN BLOOMINGTON

-

NORMAL SD 16 356 

22
 
State 

ILLINOIS 

Facility 

Name 

THORN 

CREEK BASIN. 

S.D. STP 

County 

COOK 

Authority 

Name 

THORN CREEK 

BASIN S.D. 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

13 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

289 

ILLINOIS JACKSONVILL 

E STP MORGAN JACKSONVILLE, CITY OF 5.95 132 

ILLINOIS GALESBURG 

STP KNOX GALESBURG 

SANITARY DIST 10 222 

ILLINOIS MCELWAIN 

REG STP COOK HINSDALE 

SANITARY DIST 10.48 233 

ILLINOIS GLENBARD 

WW AUTH DUPAGE GLEN ELLYN, VILLAGE OF 10 222 

ILLINOIS DOWNERS 

GROVE STP DUPAGE 

DOWNERS 

GROVE SAN 

DIST 

8 178 

ILLINOIS STICKNEY 

WRD COOK CHICAGO MWRDGC 812 18044 

ILLINOIS HANOVER 

PARK WRP COOK CHICAGO 

MWRDGC 9 200 

ILLINOIS JOHN E EGAN 

WRP COOK CHICAGO 

MWRDGC 27 600 

ILLINOIS CALUMET 

WRP COOK CHICAGO MWRDGC 232.58 5168 

INDIANA SOUTHPORT 

WWTP MARION INDIANAPOLIS SAN. DIST. 125 2778 

INDIANA SPEEDWAY, 

TOWN OF MARION SPEEDWAY, TOWN OF 7.5 167 

INDIANA EAST 

CHICAGO STP LAKE EAST CHICAGO, CITY OF 15 333 

INDIANA 

GARY 

SANITARY 

DISTRICT 

LAKE GARY SANITARY 

DISTRICT 41.32 918 

INDIANA HAMMOND 

WWTP LAKE HAMMOND SD 48 1067 

INDIANA VALPARAISO 

STP PORTER VALPARAISO, 

CITY OF 6 133 

INDIANA TERRE HAUTE 

WWTP VIGO TERRE HAUTE 

S.D. 13.34 296 

INDIANA SOUTH BEND 

WWTP ST. JOSEPH 

SOUTH BEND 

BOARD OF 

PUBLIC 

37.7 838 

INDIANA 

W LAFAYETTE 

SEWAGE 

WRKS 

TIPPECANOE 

WEST 

LAFAYETTE, 

CITY OF 

9 200 

INDIANA MOSS ISLAND 

ROAD PLANT MADISON ANDERSON, 

CITY OF 20.53 456 

INDIANA EASTSIDE 

WWTP VANDERBURGH EVANSVILLE, 

CITY OF 18 400 

INDIANA 

EVANSVILLE 

WESTSIDE 

WWTP 

VANDERBURGH EVANSVILLE, 

CITY OF 20.6 458 

INDIANA JEFFERSONVI 

LLE STP CLARK JEFFERSONVILL 

E, CITY OF 5.2 116 

INDIANA COLUMBUS 

WWTP BARTHOLOMEW COLUMBUS, 

CITY OF 7.94 176 

INDIANA CONNERSVILL 

E WWTP FAYETTE CONNERSVILLE, 

CITY OF 6.58 146 

INDIANA ELKHART 

WWTP ELKHART ELKHART, CITY OF 16.31 362 

23
 
 

State 

INDIANA 

Facility 

Name 

GOSHEN 

WWTP 

County 

ELKHART 

Authority 

Name 

GOSHEN, CITY 

OF 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

12.5 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

278 

INDIANA KOKOMO MUN 

WWTP HOWARD KOKOMO, CITY 

OF 19.5 433 

INDIANA LAPORTE 

WWTP LA PORTE LAPORTE, CITY OF 5.06 112 

INDIANA LOGANSPORT 

WWTP CASS LOGANSPORT, 

CITY OF 6.76 150 

INDIANA MICHIGAN 

CITY STP LA PORTE MICHIGAN CITY 12 267 

INDIANA NEW CASTLE 

STP HENRY NEW CASTLE, CITY OF 8 178 

IOWA AMES WWTP STORY AMES, CITY OF 5.89 131 

IOWA 

COUNCIL 

BLUFFS 

WWTP 

POTTAWATTAMI 

E 

COUNCIL 

BLUFFS, CITY 

OF 

6.71 149 

IOWA DAVENPORT 

WWTP SCOTT DAVENPORT, CITY OF 19.02 423 

IOWA DES MOINES 

MAIN WWTP POLK 

DES MOINES 

WASTEWATER 

RECLAMATION 

FACILITY 

33.35 741 

IOWA IOWA CITY 

NORTH WWTP JOHNSON IOWA CITY, CITY 

OF 5.91 131 

IOWA OTTUMWA 

WWTP WAPELLO OTTUMWA, CITY 

OF 5.36 119 

IOWA SIOUX CITY 

WWTP WOODBURY SIOUX CITY, CITY OF 18.29 406 

IOWA WATERLOO 

WWTP BLACK HAWK WATERLOO, 

CITY OF 16.91 376 

KANSAS HUTCHINSON 

WWTP RENO HUTCHINSON, 

CITY OF 5.506 122 

KANSAS WICHITA 

WWTP #1 + #2 SEDGWICK WICHITA, CITY 

OF 40.617 903 

KANSAS KCK WWTP 

#1-KP WWTP WYANDOTTE KANSAS CITY, 

CITY OF 23.1 513 

KANSAS LAWRENCE 

WWTP DOUGLAS LAWRENCE, 

CITY OF 7.77 173 

KANSAS PITTSBURG 

WWTP CRAWFORD PITTSBURG, 

CITY OF 5.423 121 

KANSAS 

TOPEKA 

OAKLAND 

WWTP 

SHAWNEE TOPEKA, CITY 

OF 10.23 227 

KANSAS 

JO CO 

MISSION 

TOWNSHIP 

MSD #1 WWTP 

JOHNSON JOHNSON CO 

UNIFIED SD 7.1 158 

KANSAS JO CO TOM 

CRK WWTP JOHNSON JOHNSON CO. 

UNIFIED SD 5 111 

KANSAS 

JO CO 

TURKEY 

CREEK MSD 

#1 WWTP 

JOHNSON JOHNSON CO 

UNIFIED SD 6.86 152 

KENTUCKY LFUCG TOWN 

BRANCH STP FAYETTE 

LEXINGTON-

FAYETTE 

URBAN COUNTY 

GOVERNMENT 

19.85 441 

KENTUCKY LFUCG W 

HICKMAN STP JESSAMINE LEX-FAYETTE 

UCG 17.56 390 

24
 
 

State 

KENTUCKY 

Facility 

Name 

RWRA 

OWENSBORO 

WEST & CS 

County 

DAVIESS 

Authority 

Name 

REG WATER 

RESOURCE 

AGENCY 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

8.146 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

181 

KENTUCKY 

MSD - MORRIS 

FORMAN STP 

& CSO 

JEFFERSON LOU-JEFF CO 

MSD 60.36 1341 

KENTUCKY ELIZABETHTO 

WN HARDIN ELIZABETHTOW N, CITY OF 5.21 116 

LOUISIANA 

HOUMA S 

REG TRTMT 

PLT 

TERREBONNE 

TERREBONNE 

PARISH 

CONSOLIDATAE 

D GOVERNMENT 

8 178 

LOUISIANA KENNER TF 

STP #1 JEFFERSON KENNER, CITY 

OF 5.3 118 

LOUISIANA 

LAKE 

CHARLES 

PLANT A 

CALCASIEU LAKE CHARLES, 

CITY OF 5 111 

LOUISIANA 

MONROE 

WATER POLL 

CONTROL 

CENTER 

OUACHITA MONROE, CITY 

OF 17 378 

LOUISIANA HARVEY 

PLANT JEFFERSON JEFF PARISH DD & S 7.5 167 

LOUISIANA BRIDGE CITY 

OLD PLANT JEFFERSON JEFF PARISH DD & S 6 133 

LOUISIANA MARRERO 

PLANT JEFFERSON JEFF PARISH DD 

& S 6.4 142 

LOUISIANA MUNSTER 

BLVD PLANT ST. BERNARD 

ST BERNARD 

PARISH 

GOVERNMENT 

6.5 144 

MARYLAND COX CREEK 

WWTP ANNE ARUNDEL ANNE ARUNDEL 

COUNTY DPW 11.11 247 

MARYLAND ANNAPOLIS 

CITY WWTP ANNE ARUNDEL ANNE ARUNDEL 

COUNTY DPW 6.609 147 

MARYLAND SOD RUN 

WWTP HARFORD HARFORD 

COUNTY DPW 11.476 255 

MARYLAND 

WESTERN 

BRANCH 

WWTP 

PRINCE 

GEORGE'S 

WASHINGTON 

SUBURBAN 

SANITARY 

COMMISSION 

17.679 393 

MARYLAND CUMBERLAND 

WWTP ALLEGANY CUMBERLAND, 

MAYOR OF 10.886 242 

MARYLAND MATTAWOMA 

N WWTP CHARLES CHARLES CO. 

PLANNING DEPT 7.675 171 

MARYLAND FREDERICK 

CITY WWTP FREDERICK FREDERICK, 

CITY OF 6.5 144 

MARYLAND HAGERSTOW 

N WPCF WASHINGTON HAGERSTOWN, 

CITY OF 8.149 181 

MARYLAND OCEAN CITY 

WWTP WORCESTER 

OCEAN CITY 

WASTEWATER 

DEP 

10.783 240 

MARYLAND SENECA 

CREEK WWTP MONTGOMERY WASH SUB SAN 

COM 6.392 142 

MASSACHUSETTS 

LYNN 

REGIONAL 

WPCF 

ESSEX LYNN, CITY OF 25.8 573 

MASSACHUSETTS PITTSFIELD 

WWTF BERKSHIRE PITTSFIELD, 

CITY OF 10.57 235 

25
 
 

State 

MASSACHUSETTS 

Facility 

Name 

LEOMINSTER 

WWTP 

County 

WORCESTER 

Authority 

Name 

LEOMINSTER 

DPW 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

6.03 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

134 

MASSACHUSETTS MWRA DEER 

ISLAND WWTP SUFFOLK MWRA 348 7733 

MICHIGAN 

GRAND 

RAPIDS 

WWTP 

KENT GRAND RAPIDS, 

CITY OF 54.6 1213 

MICHIGAN WYOMING 

WWTP KENT WYOMING 

WWTP 14 311 

MICHIGAN FLINT WPCF GENESEE FLINT, CITY OF 43.3 962 

MICHIGAN MARYSVILLE 

STP ST. CLAIR MARYSVILLE, CITY OF 6.14 136 

MICHIGAN WARREN 

WWTP MACOMB WARREN, CITY OF 30 667 

MICHIGAN PONTIAC STP OAKLAND PONTIAC DEPT 

OF PUB WKS 8 178 

MICHIGAN DETROIT STP WAYNE DETROIT BOARD 

OF WATER CO 660.5 14678 

MICHIGAN ANN ARBOR 

WWTP WASHTENAW 

ANN ARBOR 

DEPT OF PUB 

WKS 

15.14 336 

MICHIGAN YCUA WWTP WASHTENAW WASHTENAW 

COUNTY DPW 8.27 184 

MICHIGAN MONROE 

METRO WWTP MONROE 

MONROE 

METROPOLITAN 

WASTE 

15.794 351 

MICHIGAN SAGINAW STP SAGINAW SAGINAW DPW 

PU 8.3 184 

MICHIGAN JACKSON 

WWTP JACKSON JACKSON, CITY 

OF 13.43 298 

MICHIGAN 

BENTON 

HARBOR-ST 

JOSEPH 

BERRIEN 

BENTON 

HARBOR ST 

JOSEPH J 

7.21 160 

MICHIGAN MIDLAND 

WWTP MIDLAND MIDLAND , CITY 

OF 8.5 189 

MICHIGAN 

HURON 

VALLEY 

WWTP-SOUTH 

WAYNE HURON VALLEY 14 311 

MINNESOTA AUSTIN WWT 

FACILITY MOWER AUSTIN, CITY OF 7.875 175 

MINNESOTA GRAND 

RAPIDS STP ITASCA GRAND RAPIDS, 

CITY OF 10.31 229 

MISSISSIPPI 

HCW&SWMA -

WEST BILOXI 

POTW 

HARRISON HARR. CO. 

WWMD 8.83 196 

MISSISSIPPI 

HCW&SWMA, 

GULFPORT 

POTW 

HARRISON HARR. CO. 

WWMD 10.22 227 

MISSISSIPPI NATCHEZ 

POTW ADAMS NATCHEZ,CITY 

OF, WORKS, C 5 111 

MISSOURI 

CAPE 

GIRARDEAU 

WWTP 

CAPE 

GIRARDEAU 

CAPE 

GIRARDEAU, 

CITY OF 

6.4 142 

MISSOURI 

HINKSONPERCHE 

PLANT 

BOONE COLUMBIA, CITY 

OF 14.5 322 

MISSOURI ROCK CREEK 

WWTP JACKSON INDEPENDENCE, CITY OF 8.2 182 

26
 
State 

MISSOURI 

Facility 

Name 

TURKEY 

CREEK WWTP 

County 

JASPER 

Authority 

Name 

JOPLIN, CITY OF 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

8.2 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

182 

MISSOURI K.C. BLUE 

RIVER STP JACKSON KANSAS CITY, 

CITY OF 75 1667 

MISSOURI K. C. WEST 

SIDE WWTP JACKSON KANSAS CITY, CITY OF 19.31 429 

MISSOURI ST JOSEPH 

WWTP BUCHANAN ST JOSEPH, 

CITY OF 19 422 

MISSOURI COLDWATER 

CREEK WWTP ST. LOUIS ST LOUIS MSD 27.59 613 

MISSOURI MISSOURI 

RIVER WWTP ST. LOUIS ST LOUIS MSD 24 533 

MISSOURI SPRINGFIELD 

SW WWTP GREENE SPRINGFIELD, CITY OF 35 778 

MISSOURI SPRINGFIELD 

NW WWTP GREENE SPRINGFIELD, 

CITY OF 5.35 119 

MONTANA MISSOULA 

STP MISSOULA MISSOULA, CITY OF 7.52 167 

MONTANA BOZEMAN 

WWTP GALLATIN BOZEMAN, CITY OF 5 111 

MONTANA GREAT FALLS 

STP CASCADE GREAT FALLS, 

CITY OF 9.9 220 

MONTANA BILLINGS 

WWTP YELLOWSTONE BILLINGS, CITY 

OF 15.8 351 

NEBRASKA THERESA 

STREET STP LANCASTER LINCOLN, CITY OF 20.2 449 

NEBRASKA NORTHEAST 

STP LANCASTER LINCOLN, CITY 

OF 6.5 144 

NEVADA LAS VEGAS 

WWTF CLARK LAS VEGAS, 

CITY OF 62 1378 

NEW JERSEY 

BERGEN 

CNTY 

UTILITIES 

AUTHORITY 

BERGEN 

BERGEN 

COUNTY 

UTILITIES 

AUTHORITY 

75.19 1671 

NEW JERSEY 

JOINT 

MEETING OF 

ESSEX & 

UNION 

UNION J M OF ESSEX & 

UNION 85 1889 

NEW JERSEY 

LINDEN 

ROSELLE SA 

STP 

UNION LINDEN 

ROSELLE SA 12 267 

NEW JERSEY 

MOLITOR 

WATER 

POLLUTION 

CONTROL 

FAC 

MORRIS 

MADISON 

CHATHAM JT 

MTG 

7.58 168 

NEW JERSEY 

RAHWAY 

VALLEY SEW. 

AUTHORITYSTP 

MIDDLESEX RAHWAY 

VALLEY SA 31.85 708 

NEW JERSEY 

NORTH 

HUDSON S.A. 

- ADAM ST. 

WTP 

HUDSON NORTH HUDSON 

SA 13.053 290 

NEW JERSEY 

NORTH 

BERGEN MUA 

- CENTRAL 

STP 

HUDSON 

NORTH 

BERGEN, TWP. 

OF 

7.68 171 

27
 
State 

NEW JERSEY 

Facility 

Name 

PARSIPPANYTROY HILLS 

STP 

County 

MORRIS 

Authority 

Name 

PAR-TROY HILLS 

TOWNSHIP 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

12.66 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

281 

NEW JERSEY MOUNTAIN 

VIEW STP PASSAIC WAYNE TOWNSHIP 6.9 153 

NEW JERSEY MIDDLESEX 

CNTY UA MIDDLESEX MIDDLESEX 

COUNTY UA 177.633 3947 

NEW JERSEY MIDDLETOWN 

SA (TOMSA) MONMOUTH MIDDLETOWN 

TOWNSHIP S.A. 8.04 179 

NEW JERSEY 

SOUTHERN 

WPC FAC -

OCUA 

OCEAN OCEAN COUNTY 

UA 7 156 

NEW JERSEY 

OCEAN TWP. 

SEWERAGE 

AUTHORITY 

MONMOUTH 

TOWNSHIP OF 

OCEAN 

SEWERAGE 

AUTHORITY 

5.23 116 

NEW JERSEY 

SOUTH 

MONMOUTH 

REG STP 

MONMOUTH 

SOUTH 

MONMOUTH 

RSA 

7.198 160 

NEW JERSEY NEPTUNE 

TWP REG STP MONMOUTH TWP OF NEPTUNE SA 5.978 133 

NEW JERSEY 

ATLANTIC 

COUNTY 

UTILITIES 

AUTH WWTF 

ATLANTIC ATLANTIC CO 

UA (CSTL) 31.333 696 

NEW JERSEY 

GLOUCESTER 

CNTY UTIL 

AUTH 

GLOUCESTER 

GLOUCESTER 

COUNTY 

UTILITIES 

AUTHORITY 

19 422 

NEW JERSEY 

ELSA STP -

EWINGLAWRENCE 

S.A. 

MERCER 

EWINGLAWRENCE 

SEWERAGE 

AUTHORITY 

11.306 251 

NEW JERSEY 

TRENTON 

SEWER 

UTILITY 

MERCER TRENTON, CITY 

OF 20 444 

NEW MEXICO ALBUQUERQU 

E #2 PLANT BERNALILLO ALBUQUERQUE, 

CITY OF 47.9 1064 

NEW MEXICO LAS CRUCES 

STP DONA ANA LAS CRUCES, 

CITY OF 5.5 122 

NEW YORK LONG BEACH 

WPC PLANT NASSAU LONG BEACH 

(CITY) DPW 5.217 116 

NEW YORK 

BAY PARK 

(NASSAU C) 

STP & SD#2 

NASSAU NASSAU 

COUNTY DPW 53.017 1178 

NEW YORK 

CEDAR 

CREEK 

(NASSAU C) 

STP/SD#3 

NASSAU NASSAU 

COUNTY DPW 57.067 1268 

NEW YORK 

ROCKLAND 

COUNTY (CO) 

SD#1 

ROCKLAND 

ROCKLAND 

COUNTY SEWER 

DISTRICT NO.1 

21.335 474 

NEW YORK 

WESTCHESTE 

R (CO) 

PEEKSKILL SD 

STP 

WESTCHESTER WESTCHESTER 

CO DEF 6.4 142 

28
 
 

 

 

State 

NEW YORK 

Facility 

Name 

WESTCHESTE 

R (CO)PORT 

CHESTER SD 

STP 

County 

WESTCHESTER 

Authority 

Name 

WESTCHESTER 

CO DEF 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

5.25 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

117 

NEW YORK 

WESTCHESTE 

R (CO) 

YONKERS 

JOINT STP 

WESTCHESTER WESTCHESTER 

COUNTY DEF 79.428 1765 

NEW YORK 

SCHENECTAD 

Y (C) SEWERS 

& STP 

SCHENECTADY SCHENECTADY, 

CITY OF 13.325 296 

NEW YORK 

GLOVERSVILL 

EJOHNSTOWN 

(C) WWTP 

FULTON 

GLOVERSVILLEJOHNSTOWN 

JOINT WATER 

BOARD 

7.29 162 

NEW YORK WATERTOWN 

(C) WWTP JEFFERSON WATERTOWN, CITY OF 9.105 202 

NEW YORK ROME (C) STP ONEIDA ROME, CITY OF 6.683 149 

NEW YORK 

BINGHAMTONJOHNSON 

CITY JT.S 

BD.STP 

BROOME 

BINGHAMTON -

JOHNSON CITY 

JOINT SEWAGE 

BOARD 

19.079 424 

NEW YORK ENDICOTT (V) 

STP BROOME ENDICOTT, 

VILLAGE OF 6.387 142 

NEW YORK CORTLAND 

(C) WWTP CORTLAND CORTLAND, 

CITY OF 6.167 137 

NEW YORK 

ONONDAGA 

(CO) METRO 

SYRACUSE 

STP 

ONONDAGA 

ONONDAGA 

COUNTY DEPT. 

OF DRAINAGE & 

SANITATION 

64.395 1431 

NEW YORK 

ONONDAGA 

(CO) OAK 

ORCHARD 

WWTP 

ONONDAGA 

ONONDAGA 

COUNTY DEPT. 

OF DRAINANGE 

& SANITATION 

5.583 124 

NEW YORK 

ITHACA (C) 

ITHACA AREA 

STP 

TOMPKINS ITHACA, CITY OF 6.1 136 

NEW YORK 

CHEMUNG 

(CO) ELMIRA 

SD STP 

CHEMUNG 

ELMIRA, CITY OF 

(CHEMUNG CO. 

SD OWNER) 

6.081 135 

NEW YORK 

WEBSTER (T) 

WWTP & 

ONSITES 

MONROE WEBSTER, 

TOWN OF 6.171 137 

NEW YORK JAMESTOWN 

(C) WWTP CHAUTAUQUA JAMESTOWN 

DPW 5.891 131 

NEW YORK 

BUFFALO 

(SEWER 

AUTH.)BIRD 

ISLAND STP 

ERIE 

BUFFALO 

SEWER 

AUTHORITY 

149 3311 

NEW YORK TONAWANDA 

(T) WWTP ERIE TONAWANDA, 

TOWN OF 19.625 436 

NEW YORK LOCKPORT 

(C) WWTP NIAGARA LOCKPORT DPW 8.8 196 

NEW YORK 

NORTH 

TONAWANDA 

(C) WWTP 

NIAGARA 

NORTH 

TONAWANDA, 

CITY OF 

5.746 128 

NORTH CAROLINA 

SOUTH 

BURLINGTON 

WWTP 

ALAMANCE BURLINGTON, 

CITY OF 7.4 164 

29
 
State 

NORTH CAROLINA 

Facility 

Name 

EAST 

BURLINGTON 

WWTP 

County 

ALAMANCE 

Authority 

Name 

BURLINGTON, 

CITY OF 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

7.9 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

176 

NORTH CAROLINA 

BUNCOMBE 

COUNTY MSD 

WWTP 

BUNCOMBE MET SEW DIST 

OF BUNCOMBE 20.08 446 

NORTH CAROLINA 

NORTH 

DURHAM 

WATER REC. 

FAC. 

DURHAM DURHAM, CITY 

OF 8.3 184 

NORTH CAROLINA 

SOUTH 

DURHAM 

WATER REC. 

FAC. 

DURHAM DURHAM, CITY 

OF 8.4 187 

NORTH CAROLINA ROCKY 

MOUNT WWTP EDGECOMBE ROCKY MOUNT, 

CITY OF 13 289 

NORTH CAROLINA 

ARCHIE 

ELLEDGE 

WWTP 

FORSYTH CITY/COUNTY 

UTILITIES COM 23.55 523 

NORTH CAROLINA 

HIGH POINT 

EASTSIDE 

WWTP 

GUILFORD HIGH POINT, 

CITY OF 8.23 183 

NORTH CAROLINA 

NORTH 

BUFFALO 

WWTP 

GUILFORD GREENSBORO, 

CITY OF 14.3 318 

NORTH CAROLINA MCALPINE 

CREEK WWTP MECKLENBURG 

CHARLOTTEMECKLENBURG 

UTI 

28.68 637 

NORTH CAROLINA IRWIN CREEK 

WWTP MECKLENBURG 

CHARLOTTEMECKLENBURG 

UTI 

11.48 255 

NORTH CAROLINA SUGAR 

CREEK WWTP MECKLENBURG 

CHARLOTTEMECKLENBURG 

UTI 

13.3 296 

NORTH CAROLINA J A LOUGHLIN 

WWTP NEW HANOVER WILMINGTON 

DEPT OF PUB W 9.69 215 

NORTH CAROLINA 

MKEAN 

MAFFITT 

WWTP (S) 

NEW HANOVER WILMINGTON, 

DEPT OF PUB W 8.48 188 

NORTH CAROLINA MASON FARM 

WWTP ORANGE ORANGE WAT 

AND SEW AUTH 5.8 129 

NORTH CAROLINA MT. AIRY 

WWTP SURRY MT AIRY, TOWN 

OF 5.448 121 

NORTH CAROLINA HOMINY 

CREEK WWTP WILSON WILSON, CITY 

OF 8.93 198 

NORTH DAKOTA FARGO WWTP CASS 

FARGO 

MUNICIPAL 

WWTP 

12.58 280 

OHIO 

ALLIANCE 

WWTP & 

SEWERS 

STARK CITY OF 

ALLIANCE 6.2 138 

OHIO 

ASHTABULA 

WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

ASHTABULA CITY OF 

ASHTABULA 7 156 

30
 
State 

OHIO 

Facility 

Name 

UPPER MILL 

CREEK WWTP 

& SEWERS 

County 

BUTLER 

Authority 

Name 

BUTLER 

COUNTY 

DEPARTMENT 

OF 

ENVIRONMENTA 

L SERVICES 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

9.11 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

202 

OHIO 

NORTH 

REGIONAL 

WWTP 

MONTGOMERY 

TRI CITIES 

NORTH 

REGIONAL 

WASTEWATER 

AUTHORITY 

7.937 176 

OHIO SOUTHERLY 

WWTP CUYAHOGA 

NORTHEAST 

OHIO REGIONAL 

SEWER 

DISTRICT 

200 4444 

OHIO 

COLUMBUS 

JACKSON 

PIKE WWTP & 

SEWERS 

FRANKLIN 

COLUMBUS 

DIVISION OF 

SEWERAGE AND 

DRAINAGE 

68 1511 

OHIO 

COLUMBUS 

SOUTHERLY 

WWTP & 

SEWERS 

FRANKLIN 

COLUMBUS 

DIVISION OF 

SEWERAGE AND 

DRAINAGE 

92 2044 

OHIO 

ELYRIA WWTP 

& SEWER 

SYSTEM 

LORAIN CITY OF ELYRIA 7.89 175 

OHIO 

EUCLID WWTP 

& SEWER 

SYSTEM 

CUYAHOGA CITY OF EUCLID 20.64 459 

OHIO 

FAIRFIELD 

WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

BUTLER CITY OF 

FAIRFIELD 6.7 149 

OHIO 

FINDLAY 

WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

HANCOCK CITY OF 

FINDLAY 9.07 202 

OHIO 

FOSTORIA 

WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

WOOD CITY OF 

FOSTORIA 5.7 127 

OHIO 

FREMONT 

WPCC & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

SANDUSKY CITY OF 

FREMONT 5 111 

OHIO 

LITTLE MIAMI 

DRAINAGE 

BASIN/WWTP 

HAMILTON 

MSD OF 

GREATER 

CINCINNATI 

34.3 762 

OHIO 

SYCAMORE 

CREEK 

DRAINAGE 

BASIN/WWTP 

HAMILTON 

MSD OF 

GREATER 

CINCINNATI 

6.7 149 

OHIO 

GREATER 

MENTOR 

WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

LAKE 

LAKE COUNTY 

DEPARTMENT 

OF UTILITIES 

11.26 250 

31
 
State 

OHIO 

Facility 

Name 

LAKEWOOD 

WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

County 

CUYAHOGA 

Authority 

Name 

CITY OF 

LAKEWOOD 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

7 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

156 

OHIO 

LIMA WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

ALLEN CITY OF LIMA 12 267 

OHIO 

LORAIN 

BLACK RIVER 

WWTP 

LORAIN CITY OF LORAIN 13.1 291 

OHIO 

MANSFIELD 

WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

RICHLAND CITY OF 

MANSFIELD 12 267 

OHIO 

MASSILLON 

WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

STARK CITY OF 

MASSILLON 11 244 

OHIO 

MIDDLETOWN 

WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

BUTLER CITY OF 

MIDDLETOWN 16 356 

OHIO 

NEWARK 

WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

LICKING CITY OF 

NEWARK 10 222 

OHIO 

NILES WWTP 

& SEWER 

SYSTEM 

TRUMBULL CITY OF NILES 5.31 118 

OHIO 

NORTH 

OLMSTED 

WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

CUYAHOGA CITY OF NORTH 

OLMSTED 7 156 

OHIO 

ROCKY RIVER 

WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

CUYAHOGA CITY OF ROCKY 

RIVER 16.063 357 

OHIO 

SANDUSKY 

WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

ERIE CITY OF 

SANDUSKY 12.5 278 

OHIO 

SPRINGFIELD 

WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

CLARK CITY OF 

SPRINGFIELD 14 311 

OHIO 

WASHINGTON 

CH WWTP & 

SEWERS 

FAYETTE 

CITY OF 

WASHINGTON 

COURT HOUSE 

5.36 119 

OHIO 

WOOSTER 

WWTP & 

SEWER 

SYSTEM 

WAYNE CITY OF 

WOOSTER 6 133 

OKLAHOMA ENID WWT GARFIELD ENID, CITY OF, 

S-20931 8.5 189 

OKLAHOMA STILLWATER 

WWT PAYNE 

STILLWATER, 

CITY OF, S20947 6.8 151 

OKLAHOMA NORMAN 

(MAIN) WWT CLEVELAND NORMAN, CITY 

OF S-20616 12 267 

32
 
State 

OKLAHOMA 

Facility 

Name 

TULSA 

NORTHSIDE 

WWT 

County 

TULSA 

Authority 

Name 

TULSA 

METROPOLITAN 

UTILITY 

AUTHORITY, S-

21309 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

36.1 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

802 

OREGON MEDFORD 

STP JACKSON MEDFORD, CITY OF 20.05 446 

OREGON MCMINNVILLE 

WWTP YAMHILL MCMINNVILLE, 

CITY OF 5.5 122 

PENNSYLVANIA 

VALLEY 

FORGE 

SEWER AUTH 

CHESTER VALLEY FORGE 

SEWER AUTH 9.3 207 

PENNSYLVANIA WEST 

GOSHEN STP CHESTER WEST GOSHEN 

SEWER AUTH 5.57 124 

PENNSYLVANIA AMBLER 

BORO STP MONTGOMERY AMBLER, BOROUGH OF 5.79 129 

PENNSYLVANIA WARMINSTER 

STP BUCKS 

WARMINSTER 

TWNSHP MUN 

AUT 

6 133 

PENNSYLVANIA 

PHILADELPHI 

A WATER 

DEPT (SE) 

PHILADELPHIA 

PHILADELPHIA 

WATER DEPT - 

WPC DIVISION 

94.8 2107 

PENNSYLVANIA DOWNINGTO 

WN AREA STP CHESTER 

DOWNINGTOWN 

AREA REGIONAL 

AUTH 

6.41 142 

PENNSYLVANIA 

NORRISTOWN 

MUN WASTE 

AUTH 

MONTGOMERY 

NORRISTOWN 

MUN WASTE 

AUTH 

6.08 135 

PENNSYLVANIA 

HARRISBURG 

AUTHORITY 

STP 

DAUPHIN HARRISBURG 

AUTHORITY 13.2 293 

PENNSYLVANIA ALLENTOWN 

CITY STP LEHIGH ALLENTOWN 

AUTHORITY 34 756 

PENNSYLVANIA LEBANON 

CITY STP LEBANON 

LEBANON 

AUTHORITY, 

CITY OF 

6 133 

PENNSYLVANIA BETHLEHEM 

CITY STP NORTHAMPTON 

BETHLEHEM 

AUTHORITY, 

CITY OF 

12.6 280 

PENNSYLVANIA 

READING 

AREA FRITZ 

ISLAND STP 

BERKS READING, CITY 

OF 15.66 348 

PENNSYLVANIA EASTON 

AREA STP NORTHAMPTON 

EASTON AREA 

JOINT SEW 

AUTH 

6.7 149 

PENNSYLVANIA 

SCRANTON 

SEWER 

AUTHORITY 

LACKAWANNA SCRANTON SEW 

AUTH 15.9 353 

PENNSYLVANIA 

WYOMING 

VALLEY SAN 

AUTH 

LUZERNE 

WYOMING 

VALLEY SAN 

AUTH 

22.3 496 

PENNSYLVANIA YORK CITY 

SEW AUTH YORK 

YORK CITY 

SEWER 

AUTHORITY 

11.74 261 

PENNSYLVANIA JOHNSTOWN 

CITY STP CAMBRIA JOHNSTOWN, 

CITY OF 9 200 

PENNSYLVANIA 

ALTOONA 

EASTERLY 

STP 

BLAIR ALTOONA CITY 

AUTHORITY 5.858 130 

33
 
State 

PENNSYLVANIA 

Facility 

Name 

ALTOONA 

WESTERLY 

STP 

County 

BLAIR 

Authority 

Name 

ALTOONA CITY 

AUTHORITY 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

6.2 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

138 

PENNSYLVANIA 

SHAMOKINCOAL TWP 

STP 

NORTHUMBERL 

AND 

SHAMOKINCOAL TWP JT 

AUTH 

6 133 

PENNSYLVANIA INDIANA 

BORO STP INDIANA INDIANA, BOROUGH OF 7.25 161 

PENNSYLVANIA KISKI VALLEY 

WPCA 

WESTMORELAN 

D 

KISKI VALLEY 

WPCA 6 133 

PENNSYLVANIA ERIE CITY 

STP ERIE ERIE SEWER 

AUTHORITY 68.59 1524 

PENNSYLVANIA NEW CASTLE 

STP LAWRENCE NEW CASTLE SAN AUTH 6.02 134 

RHODE ISLAND 

VEOLIA 

WATER - 

CRANSTON 

WPCF 

PROVIDENCE CRANSTON, 

DPW 13.4 298 

RHODE ISLAND 

WOONSOCKE 

T REGIONAL 

WWTF 

PROVIDENCE 

WOONSOCKET 

DPW SEWAGE 

DIV 

7.85 174 

RHODE ISLAND BUCKLIN PT 

STP PROVIDENCE NARRAGANSETT BAY COMM. 23.6 524 

SOUTH CAROLINA METRO WWTP RICHLAND COLUMBIA, CITY 

OF 44.575 991 

SOUTH CAROLINA MANCHESTER 

CREEK WWTP YORK ROCK HILL, CITY 

OF 15 333 

SOUTH CAROLINA FLORENCE/M 

AIN PLANT FLORENCE FLORENCE 

UTILITIES DIVISI 9.9 220 

SOUTH DAKOTA 

RAPID CITY 

WWT 

FACILITY 

PENNINGTON RAPID CITY, 

CITY OF 10.3 229 

SOUTH DAKOTA 

SIOUX FALLS 

WWT 

FACILITY 

MINNEHAHA SIOUX FALLS, 

CITY OF 11.79 262 

TENNESSEE OOSTANAULA 

WWTP MCMINN ATHENS UTILITY 

BOARD 6.318 140 

TENNESSEE MOCCASIN 

BEND WWTP HAMILTON CHATTANOOGA, 

CITY OF 70.227 1561 

TENNESSEE CLEVELAND 

UTILITIES STP BRADLEY CLEVELAND 

UTILITIES 8.21 182 

TENNESSEE COOKEVILLE 

STP PUTNAM COOKEVILLE, 

CITY OF 6.83 152 

TENNESSEE 

JACKSON UD 

WWTP - 

MILLER 

AVENUE 

MADISON 

JACKSON 

ENERGY 

AUTHORITY 

11.5 256 

TENNESSEE BRUSH 

CREEK STP WASHINGTON JOHNSON CITY, 

CITY OF 7.471 166 

TENNESSEE KINGSPORT 

STP SULLIVAN KINGSPORT, 

TOWN OF 7.74 172 

TENNESSEE KUWAHEE 

WWTP KNOX 

KNOXVILLE 

UTILITIES 

BOARD 

35.3 784 

TENNESSEE FOURTH 

CREEK WWTP KNOX 

KNOXVILLE 

UTILITIES 

BOARD 

9.09 202 

34
 
 

State 

TENNESSEE 

Facility 

Name 

NASHVILLE -

DRY CREEK 

WWTP 

County 

DAVIDSON 

Authority 

Name 

METRO. 

NASHVILLE 

DEPT. OF 

WATER & 

SEWER SVCS. 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

17.6 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

391 

TENNESSEE 

NASHVILLE -

WHITE'S 

CREEK WWTP 

DAVIDSON 

METRO. 

NASHVILLE 

DEPT. OF 

WATER & 

SEWER SVCS. 

34.935 776 

TEXAS 

WACO 

REGIONAL 

WWTP 

MCLENNAN BRAZOS RIVER 

AUTHORITY 21.23 472 

TEXAS RIVER ROAD 

WWTP POTTER AMARILLO 12.01 267 

TEXAS HOLLYWOOD 

ROAD WWTP RANDALL AMARILLO 5.33 118 

TEXAS 

MIDLAND 

PLANT #1 

WWTP 

MIDLAND MIDLAND 13.21 294 

TEXAS HASKELL ST 

WWTP EL PASO EL PASO 16.792 373 

TEXAS LAREDO STP WEBB LAREDO 10.2 227 

TEXAS CARTER'S 

CREEK WWTP BRAZOS COLLEGE STATION 6.5 144 

TEXAS 

CENTRAL 

WWTP - 

DALLAS 

DALLAS DALLAS 166.704 3705 

TEXAS 

SOUTHSIDE 

WWTP - 

DALLAS 

DALLAS DALLAS 78.81 1751 

TEXAS ROWLETT 

CREEK WWTP DALLAS GARLAND 17.066 379 

TEXAS POST OAK 

CREEK WWTP GRAYSON SHERMAN 11.69 260 

TEXAS VILLAGE 

CREEK STP TARRANT FORT WORTH 138.9 3087 

TEXAS WILSON 

CREEK WWTP COLLIN NORTH TEXAS 

MWD 31.327 696 

TEXAS WESTSIDE 

STP #2 SMITH TYLER 9.56 212 

TEXAS SOUTHSIDE 

STP #2 SMITH TYLER 5.12 114 

TEXAS LONGVIEW 

MAIN WWTP GREGG LONGVIEW 14.41 320 

TEXAS HILLEBRANDT 

WWTP JEFFERSON BEAUMONT 24 533 

TEXAS VINCE BAYOU 

WWTP HARRIS PASADENA 6.82 152 

TEXAS DOS RIOS 

WWTP BEXAR SAN ANTONIO 58 1289 

VIRGINIA 

NORTHSIDE/S 

OUTHSIDE 

STP 

DANVILLE DANVILLE, CITY 

OF 16.05 357 

VIRGINIA MARTINSVILL 

E STP MARTINSVILLE MARTINSVILLE, 

CITY OF 5.35 119 

VIRGINIA 

HARRISONBU 

RGROCKINGHAM 

ROCKINGHAM HARRISONBURG 

-ROCKINGHAM 7.5 167 

35
 
State 

VIRGINIA 

Facility 

Name 

RICHMOND 

STP 

County 

RICHMOND CITY 

Authority 

Name 

RICHMOND, 

CITY OF 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

59.53 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

1323 

VIRGINIA FALLING 

CREEK STP CHESTERFIELD CHESTERFIELD 

COUNTY 7.5 167 

VIRGINIA 

SOUTH 

CENTRAL 

REGIONAL 

WWTP 

PETERSBURG 

SOUTH 

CENTRAL 

WASTEWATER 

AUTHORITY 

20 444 

VIRGINIA MOORES 

CREEK STP 

CHARLOTTESVIL 

LE 

RIVANNA 

WATER AND 

SEWER 

10.37 230 

VIRGINIA HOPEWELL 

STP HOPEWELL HOPEWELL, CITY OF 33.69 749 

VIRGINIA JAMES RIVER 

W P C F 

NEWPORT 

NEWS 

HAMPTON 

ROADS SAN 

DIST 

13.99 311 

VIRGINIA YORK RIVER 

W P C F YORK 

HAMPTON 

ROADS SAN 

DIST 

6.66 148 

VIRGINIA ARMY BASE W 

P C F NORFOLK 

HAMPTON 

ROADS SAN 

DIST 

14.18 315 

VIRGINIA 

VIRGINIA 

INITIATIVE 

PLANT 

NORFOLK HAMPTON ROAD 

SAN DIST 28.05 623 

VIRGINIA NANSEMOND 

W P C F SUFFOLK 

HAMPTON 

ROADS SAN. 

DIST 

17 378 

VIRGINIA ALEXANDRIA 

STP ALEXANDRIA ALEXANDRIA 

SANITATION 36.8 818 

VIRGINIA ARLINGTON 

CO WPCP ARLINGTON ARLINGTON 

COUNTY 22.43 498 

WASHINGTON 

W. 

BREMERTON/ 

CHARLESTON 

STP 

KITSAP BREMERTON, 

CITY OF 7.6 169 

WASHINGTON CENT. KITSAP 

REG. STP KITSAP 

KITSAP CO. 

COMMISSIONER 

S 

8 178 

WASHINGTON RICHLAND 

STP BENTON 

RICHLAND 

UTILITY 

SERVICES 

6 133 

WASHINGTON SPOKANE STP SPOKANE SPOKANE, CITY 

OF 44 978 

WASHINGTON 

TACOMA 

CENTRAL STP 

#1 

PIERCE TACOMA, CITY 

OF 26 578 

WASHINGTON WALLA WALLA 

STP WALLA WALLA WALLA WALLA, 

CITY OF 6.18 137 

WASHINGTON 

YAKIMA 

REGIONAL 

WWTP 

YAKIMA YAKIMA, CITY 

OF 11.308 251 

WEST VIRGINIA FAIRMONT 

STP MARION FAIRMONT, TOWN OF 6.06 135 

WEST VIRGINIA MORGANTOW 

N WPC FAC MONONGALIA MORGANTOWN UTILITY BOARD 8.3 184 

WEST VIRGINIA WHEELING 

WPC FAC OHIO 

WHEELING 

SANITARY 

BOARD 

10 222 

36
 
 

State 

WEST VIRGINIA 

Facility 

Name 

PINEY CREEK 

STP 

County 

RALEIGH 

Authority 

Name 

BECKLEY, CITY 

OF 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

8 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

178 

WISCONSIN APPLETON 

WWTP OUTAGAMIE APPLETON, CITY 

OF 14.564 324 

WISCONSIN BELOIT WWTP ROCK BELOIT, CITY OF 5.67 126 

WISCONSIN 

BROOKFIELD -

FOX RIVER 

WPCC 

WAUKESHA 

BROOKFIELD 

FOX WATER 

POLLUTION 

CONTROL 

6.74 150 

WISCONSIN EAU CLAIRE 

WWTP EAU CLAIRE EAU CLAIRE, CITY OF 6.4 142 

WISCONSIN 

HEART OF 

THE VALLEY 

MSD 

OUTAGAMIE 

HEART OF THE 

VALLEY 

METROPOLITAN 

SEWERAGE 

DIST. 

5.84 130 

WISCONSIN JANESVILLE 

WWTP ROCK JANESVILLE, CITY OF 12.23 272 

WISCONSIN 

KENOSHA, 

CITY OF - 

WWTP 

KENOSHA KENOSHA, CITY 

OF 21.8 484 

WISCONSIN LA CROSSE 

WWTP LA CROSSE LA CROSSE, CITY OF 10.18 226 

WISCONSIN MADISON 

MSD STP DANE MADISON MSD 41 911 

WISCONSIN MANITOWOC 

WWTP MANITOWOC MANITOWOC, CITY OF 8.72 194 

WISCONSIN RACINE STP RACINE RACINE, CITY 

OF 25.71 571 

WISCONSIN 

SHEBOYGAN 

REGIONAL 

WWTP 

SHEBOYGAN SHEBOYGAN, 

CITY OF 12 267 

WISCONSIN SUN PRAIRIE 

STP DANE SUN PRAIRIE, 

CITY OF 6.321 140 

WISCONSIN WAUKESHA 

STP WAUKESHA WAUKESHA 

CITY OF 11.56 257 

WISCONSIN WAUSAU 

WWTP MARATHON WAUSAU, CITY 

OF 5.31 118 

WISCONSIN 

SALEM 

UTILITY 

DISTRICT STP 

KENOSHA SALEM, TOWN 

OF 6.96 155 

WYOMING 

METRO 

CHEYENNE 

WWTP 

LARAMIE 

CHEYENNE 

BOARD OF PUB 

UTILITIES 

5.491 122 

PUERTO RICO 

BARCELONET 

A REGIONAL 

SYSTEM 

BARCELONETA PRASA 6.15 137 

37
 
Table B2: Facilities with Off-Gas Utilization 

State Facility Name County Authority Name 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

ARIZONA WILDCAT HILL 

WWTF COCONINO 

CITY OF 

FLAGSTAFF, 

UTILITIES DEPT. 

7.8 173 

ARIZONA TOLLESON WWTF MARICOPA TOLLESON, CITY 

OF 13 289 

ARIZONA INA ROAD STP PIMA PIMA CO WW 

MGMT DEPT 31 689 

ARKANSAS LITTLE ROCK 

ADAMS FIELD STP PULASKI LITTLE ROCK 30 667 

CALIFORNIA ELK RIVER WWTF HUMBOLDT EUREKA, CITY OF 5 111 

CALIFORNIA RICHMOND WWTF CONTRA COSTA RICHMOND, CITY 

OF 6.6 147 

CALIFORNIA EAST BAY MUD 

MAIN WWTP ALAMEDA EAST BAY MUD 80 1778 

CALIFORNIA SAN LEANDRO 

WPCP ALAMEDA SAN LEANDRO, 

CITY OF 6 133 

CALIFORNIA SO SF-SAN 

BRUNO WWTF SAN MATEO CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO 10.97 244 

CALIFORNIA ORO LOMA WWTF ALAMEDA 

ORO LOMA 

SANITARY 

DISTRICT 

17.3 384 

CALIFORNIA SAN PABLO WWTF CONTRA COSTA 

WEST COUNTY 

WASTEWATER 

DISTRICT 

7.8 173 

CALIFORNIA INDUSTRIAL 

SHORE SUB FAC CONTRA COSTA DELTA DIABLO 

SAN DIST 7.45 166 

CALIFORNIA ALVARADO WWTF ALAMEDA UNION SANITARY 

DISTRICT 30 667 

CALIFORNIA LIVERMORE WRP ALAMEDA LIVERMORE, CITY 

OF 6.4 142 

CALIFORNIA MRWCPA WWTF MONTEREY 

MONTEREY 

REGIONAL WATER 

POLLUTION 

CONTROL 

AGENCY 

21.5 478 

CALIFORNIA SIMI VALLEY 

WWTP VENTURA SIMI VALLEY, CITY 

OF 9 200 

CALIFORNIA JOINT WPCP LOS ANGELES LACSD 322 7156 

CALIFORNIA LANCASTER WRP LOS ANGELES 

COUNTY 

SANITATION 

DISTRICTS OF 

LOS ANGELES 

COUNTY 

13.2 293 

CALIFORNIA PALMDALE WRP LOS ANGELES 

COUNTY 

SANITATION 

DISTRICTS OF 

LOS ANGELES 

COUNTY 

9.2 204 

CALIFORNIA HYPERION WWTP LOS ANGELES 

CITY OF LOS 

ANGELES, 

BUREAU OF 

SANITATION 

362 8044 

38
 
State Facility Name County Authority Name 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

Potential 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

CALIFORNIA OXNARD WWTP VENTURA OXNARD, CITY OF 22.4 498 

CALIFORNIA FRESNO-CLOVIS 

REGIONAL WRF FRESNO FRESNO, CITY OF 75 1667 

CALIFORNIA MERCED STP MERCED MERCED, CITY OF 7.7 171 

CALIFORNIA EASTERLY WWTP SOLANO VACAVILLE, CITY 

OF 8.4 187 

CALIFORNIA VICTOR VALLEY 

REGIONAL WWRP SAN BERNARDINO 

VIICTOR VALLEY 

WASTEWATER 

RECLAMATION 

AUTHORITY 

10.7 238 

CALIFORNIA SAN BERNARDINO 

WRP SAN BERNARDINO 

SAN BERNARDINO 

MUNICIPAL 

WATER 

DEPARTMENT 

26.5 589 

CALIFORNIA OCSD WRP NO. 1 ORANGE 

ORANGE COUNTY 

SANITATION 

DISTRICT 

88 1956 

CALIFORNIA OCSD WWTP NO. 

2 ORANGE 

ORANGE COUNTY 

SANITATION 

DISTRICT 

151 3356 

CALIFORNIA ENCINA WPCF SAN DIEGO 

ENCINA 

WASTEWATER 

AUTHORITY 

26.2 582 

CALIFORNIA LATHAM WWTP ORANGE 

SOUTH ORANGE 

COUNTY 

WASTEWATER 

AUTHORITY 

10.9 242 

CALIFORNIA POINT LOMA 

WWTF SAN DIEGO 

CITY OF SAN 

DIEGO 

METROPOLITAN 

WASTEWATER 

DEPART. 

184 4089 

CALIFORNIA HALE AVENUE 

RRF SAN DIEGO ESCONDIDO, CITY 

OF 15.625 347 

COLORADO C SPRINGS WWTP EL PASO COLORADO 

SPRINGS, CITY OF 32 711 

COLORADO 

 METRO 

RECLAMAT DIST 

CENTRAL PLANT 

ADAMS METRO WW 

RECLAM DISTRICT 160 3556 

CONNECTICUT BRISTOL STP HARTFORD BRISTOL, CITY OF 9.569 213 

CONNECTICUT FAIRFIELD WPCF FAIRFIELD FAIRFIELD, TOWN 

OF 9.078 202 

CONNECTICUT GREENWICH 

WPCF FAIRFIELD GREENWICH 

CHIEF EXECUTIVE 9.413 209 

CONNECTICUT ROCKY HILL 

WPCF HARTFORD METROPOLITAN 

DISTRICT 7.09 158 

CONNECTICUT MANCHESTER 

WPCF HARTFORD MANCHESTER, 

TOWN OF 6.449 143 

CONNECTICUT MERIDEN WPCF NEW HAVEN MERIDEN, CITY OF 9.672 215 

CONNECTICUT 

MILFORD -

HOUSATONIC 

WPCF 

NEW HAVEN MILFORD, TOWN 

OF 6.827 152 

CONNECTICUT WALLINGFORD 

WPCF NEW HAVEN WALLINGFORD, 

TOWN OF 5.364 119 

FLORIDA BROWARD CNTY 

N. DIST REG BROWARD 

BROWARD 

COUNTY 

UTILITIES 

70 1556 

FLORIDA PLANTATION STP BROWARD BROWARD CO. 

UTILITIES 11 244 

39
 
State Facility Name County Authority Name 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

Potential 

GEORGIA UTOY CREEK 

WWTP FULTON ATLANTA PUBLIC WORKS DEPA 32.314 718 

ILLINOIS DANVILLE STW VERMILION DANVILLE S D 10.1 224 

ILLINOIS FOX METRO WRD 

STP KENDALL FOX METRO WRD 24.5 544 

INDIANA FORT WAYNE 

WPCP ALLEN FORT WAYNE BOARD OF PUBLI 85 1889 

INDIANA MUNCIE WWTP DELAWARE 

MUNCIE 

SANITARY 

DISTRICT 

24 533 

INDIANA LAFAYETTE 

WWTP TIPPECANOE LAFAYETTE, CITY OF 16 356 

INDIANA MARION WWTP GRANT MARION, CITY OF 12 267 

INDIANA RICHMOND SD WAYNE 

RICHMOND 

SANITARY 

DISTRIC 

18 400 

IOWA FT. DODGE WWTP WEBSTER FT DODGE, CITY 

OF 6.5 144 

KENTUCKY ASHLAND WPCP BOYD ASHLAND, CITY 

OF 6.01 134 

KENTUCKY MCCRACKEN CO 

JSA-PADUCAH MCCRACKEN PADUCAH, CITY OF 6.65 148 

MASSACHUSETTS BROCKTON WPCF BRISTOL BROCKTON, CITY 

OF 15.73 350 

MISSISSIPPI 

HCW&SWMA, 

EAST BILOXI 

POTW 

HARRISON HARR. CO. WWMD 8.5 189 

NEVADA CARSON CITY 

WWTF CARSON CITY CARSON CITY 

PUBLIC WORKS 5 111 

NEVADA RENO-SPARKS 

WWTF WASHOE 

CITY OF SPARKS 

PUBLIC WORKS 

DEPT. 

30 667 

NEW JERSEY NORTHERN WPC 

FAC -OCUA OCEAN OCEAN COUNTY 

UA 23 511 

NEW JERSEY CENTRAL WPC 

FAC - OCUA OCEAN OCEAN COUNTY 

UA 23 511 

NEW JERSEY HAMILTON TWP 

WPCF MERCER 

HAMILTON 

TOWNSHIP WPC 

OFFICE 

17 378 

NEW YORK 

NEW YORK (C) -

WARDS ISLAND 

WPCP 

NEW YORK NYCDEP 250 5556 

NEW YORK 

NEW YORK (C) -

HUNTS POINT 

WPCP 

BRONX NYCDEP 122.12 2714 

NEW YORK 

NEW YORK (C) -

BOWERY BAY 

WPCP 

QUEENS NYCDEP 129.11 2869 

NEW YORK 

NEW YORK (C) -

TALLMAN ISLAND 

WPCP 

QUEENS NYCDEP 61.06 1357 

NEW YORK NEW YORK (C) -

JAMAICA WPCP QUEENS NYCDEP 96.09 2135 

NEW YORK 

NEW YORK (C) -

26TH. WARD 

WPCP 

KINGS NYCDEP 64.06 1424 

NEW YORK NEW YORK (C) -

RED HOOK WPCP KINGS NYCDEP 60 1333 

40
 
 

State Facility Name County Authority Name 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

Potential 

NEW YORK 

NEW YORK (C) -

PORT RICHMOND 

WPCP RICHMOND NYCDEP 34.03 756 

NEW YORK 

NEW YORK (C) -

CONEY ISLAND 

WPCP 

KINGS NYCDEP 93.09 2069 

NEW YORK 

NEW YORK (C) -

OWLS HEAD 

WPCP 

KINGS NYCDEP 87.09 1935 

NEW YORK 

NEW YORK (C) -

NEWTON CREEK 

WPCP 

KINGS NYCDEP 271.26 6028 

NEW YORK 

NEW YORK (C) -

NORTH RIVER 

WPCP 

NEW YORK NYCDEP 170 3778 

NEW YORK 

NEW YORK (C) -

OAKWOOD BEACH 

WPCP 

RICHMOND NYCDEP 24.02 534 

NEW YORK NEW YORK (C) -

ROCKAWAY WPCP QUEENS NYCDEP 21.02 467 

OHIO DAYTON WWTP & 

SEWER SYSTEM MONTGOMERY CITY OF DAYTON 72 1600 

OHIO 

MILL CREEK 

DRAINAGE 

BASIN/WWTP 

HAMILTON MSD OF GREATER 

CINCINNATI 151 3356 

OHIO 

LANCASTER 

WWTP & SEWER 

SYSTEM 

FAIRFIELD CITY OF 

LANCASTER 5.52 123 

OHIO 

PORTSMOUTH 

LAWSON RUN 

WWTP & SEWERS 

SCIOTO CITY OF 

PORTSMOUTH 5 111 

OHIO 

ZANESVILLE 

WWTP & SEWER 

SYSTEM 

MUSKINGUM CITY OF 

ZANESVILLE 7.75 172 

OREGON KELLOGG CREEK 

STP CLACKAMAS CLACKAMAS CO 

SERV DIST 1 7.9 176 

OREGON TRI CITY WPCP CLACKAMAS 

WATER 

ENVIRONMENT 

SERVICES 

7 156 

OREGON GRESHAM STP MULTNOMAH GRESHAM, CITY 

OF 10.531 234 

OREGON TRYON CREEK 

STP CLACKAMAS PORTLAND, CITY 

OF 6.98 155 

OREGON ROCK CREEK STP WASHINGTON CLEAN WATER 

SERVICES, INC 32.02 712 

OREGON SALEM WILLOW 

LAKE STP MARION SALEM, CITY OF 29.7 660 

OREGON 

MWMC -

EUGENE/SPRINGF 

IELD STP 

LANE 

METROPOLITAN 

WASTEWATER 

MANAGEMENT 

COMMISSION 

24.7 549 

OREGON CORVALLIS STP BENTON CORVALLIS, CITY 

OF 7.75 172 

OREGON GRANTS PASS 

STP JOSEPHINE GRANTS PASS, 

CITYOF 5.2 116 

OREGON ALBANY STP LINN ALBANY, CITY OF 5.7 127 

OREGON ST HELENS STP COLUMBIA ST HELENS, CITY 

OF 30.7 682 

41
 
State Facility Name County Authority Name 

Total 

Influent 

(MGD) 

Electric 

Capacity 

(kW) 

Potential 

PENNSYLVANIA PHILADELPHIA 

WATER DEPT (NE) PHILADELPHIA 

PHILADELPHIA 

WATER DEPT - 

WPC DIVISION 

196.7 4371 

PENNSYLVANIA PHILADELPHIA 

WATER DEPT (SW) PHILADELPHIA PHILADELPHIA WATER DEPT 198.5 4411 

PENNSYLVANIA E NORR PLYM 

WHIT STP MONTGOMERY E. NOR./PLY/WHIT 

JSA 6.26 139 

SOUTH CAROLINA MAULDIN RD 

PLANT GREENVILLE WCRSA 29 644 

TEXAS SOUTHEAST 

PLANTS 1 2 .3 LUBBOCK LUBBOCK, CITY OF 20.78 462 

TEXAS PECAN CREEK 

WWTP DENTON DENTON 13.324 296 

TEXAS 

TEXARKANA 

SOUTH REGIONAL 

WWTP 

BOWIE TEXARKANA 13.63 303 

VERMONT RUTLAND WPCF RUTLAND RUTLAND, CITY 

OF 5.7 127 

VIRGINIA 

WESTERN 

VIRGINIA WATER 

AUTH. WWTP 

ROANOKE CITY 

WESTERN 

VIRGINIA WATER 

AUTHORITY 

40.5 900 

VIRGINIA ATLANTIC W P C F VIRGINIA BEACH HAMPTON ROADS 

SAN DIST 34.65 770 

WASHINGTON WEST POINT 

WWTP KING MUN OF METRO SEATTLE 325 7222 

WASHINGTON BUDD INLET STP THURSTON OLYMPIA, CITY OF 17.9 398 

WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON 

WWTF KANAWHA CHARLESTON, CITY OF 14 311 

WEST VIRGINIA PARKERSBURG 

WWTF WOOD PARKERSBURG 

SAN BD 8.812 196 

42
 
 United States Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Air and Radiation (6202J) 

EPA-430-R-07-003 

 April 2007 

 www.epa.go v/chp