Treatment Technologies
Effluent Treatment Plant Companies (ETP)
Turnkey ETP builders for industrial effluent compliance, physicochemical, biological, and tertiary treatment trains.
This page is a good fit if you need:
- Reverse Osmosis (RO) or Ion Exchange capabilities
- Suppliers with food-beverage sector experience
- Providers operating in United Kingdom or Netherlands
- Providers
- 98
- Verified
- 4
- Countries
- 20
Can't find the right fit? Post a brief and let qualified suppliers come to you.
Post a projectHow to choose a effluent treatment plant companies (etp) provider
Start with providers that clearly operate in your target geography and project footprint.
Look for industry exposure that matches your water challenge, compliance constraints, and deployment context.
Use technologies, service scope, and proof signals to narrow the list before reaching out to suppliers.
Not sure where to start? Our experts can help.
Filter results
Verified providers
4 claimed companies in this category
Country
Industry
Technology
Find a Effluent Treatment Plant Companies (ETP) Provider
Showing 1-20 of 98
98 results from 98 matched providers
Designing and Operating Effluent Treatment Plants for Industrial Discharge Compliance
An Effluent Treatment Plant (ETP) treats industrial wastewater to discharge or reuse standards set by national consent regulators: CPCB in India, EPA in the US, environment agencies under the EU Industrial Emissions Directive 2010/75/EU, and equivalent bodies under MARPOL Annex IV for marine discharge. A typical ETP train sequences: equalization (HRT 8 to 24 h to dampen flow and load shocks), neutralization (target pH 6.5 to 8.5), primary clarification (overflow rate 1.0 to 1.5 m3/m2/h), biological treatment (CASS, MBBR, MBR, or conventional ASP with F/M 0.2 to 0.4 kg BOD per kg MLVSS per d), secondary clarification, tertiary polishing (sand filter, activated carbon, UV), and sludge dewatering to at least 20 percent solids.
Design loadings vary radically by industry: textiles 800 to 2,500 mg/L COD with color; pharmaceuticals 5,000 to 25,000 mg/L COD with refractory organics; dairy 2,000 to 6,000 mg/L COD with high FOG; pulp and paper 1,500 to 4,000 mg/L COD with AOX. Each demands a tailored unit-operations train: anaerobic UASB or EGSB upstream for high-COD streams to recover biogas (0.35 m3 CH4 per kg COD removed), ozone or Fenton AOP for refractory color, and dissolved air flotation for FOG. Compliance metrics typically include BOD under 30 mg/L, COD under 250 mg/L, TSS under 50 mg/L, oil and grease under 10 mg/L, and total nitrogen under 10 mg/L for sensitive receiving waters.
Aguato lists ETP designers, EPC contractors, and O&M operators across textile, pharmaceutical, chemical, dairy, F&B, and pulp and paper sectors. Demand at least 3 reference plants at your industry, flow band, and consent specification; verify the EPC contractor will guarantee compliance with liquidated damages tied to consent parameters for the first 12 months; and require operator training plus a 5-year consumables budget so the plant does not drift into non-compliance after handover.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the difference between an ETP and an STP?
An ETP (Effluent Treatment Plant) treats industrial wastewater: variable, high-strength, often containing toxics, refractory organics, heavy metals, or extreme pH. An STP (Sewage Treatment Plant) treats domestic sewage with predictable composition (BOD 200 to 400 mg/L, COD 400 to 800 mg/L, biodegradable organics). ETPs require tailored physico-chemical pre-treatment (neutralization, DAF, AOP), often anaerobic plus aerobic biological stages, and sophisticated controls. STPs can use standardized packaged ASP, SBR, or MBBR systems. The CAPEX per m3 per day for ETPs typically runs 3 to 8x higher than STPs.
How do I size an ETP for a textile dyeing unit?
Start with a 7-day composite sampling to characterize flow, COD (typically 800 to 2,500 mg/L), BOD/COD ratio (often 0.3 to 0.4 indicating refractory load), color (ADMI or Pt-Co units), TDS (3,000 to 15,000 mg/L from salts), pH (10 to 12 from caustic), and temperature (35 to 50 C). Design HRT: equalization 24 h, neutralization 1 h, DAF 30 min, anoxic-aerobic biological 18 to 24 h at F/M 0.2 kg BOD per kg MLVSS per d, ozone polishing for residual color. Reuse path requires nanofiltration or RO; size at 70 percent recovery with concentrate management plan (typically MEE evaporator).
What consent standards apply to ETP discharge?
India: CPCB general standards: BOD 30 mg/L, COD 250 mg/L, TSS 100 mg/L for river discharge; state pollution boards often tighter. EU: IED BAT-AELs by sector (BREF for textiles, BREF for chemicals): COD typically 100 to 300 mg/L, total N 10 to 25 mg/L. US: NPDES permits set technology-based effluent limits per 40 CFR by industrial category. UAE and KSA: discharge to sea typically allows COD under 150, oil and grease under 15; ZLD increasingly mandated for inland industrial parks. Always design to the strictest applicable standard plus a 30 percent safety margin.
Can an ETP achieve Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD)?
Yes: ZLD combines a conventional ETP with concentration and crystallization steps: RO at 70 to 80 percent recovery on biologically treated effluent, then a 2-stage MEE (multiple-effect evaporator) concentrating brine to 25 to 30 percent TDS, then an ATFD (agitated thin-film dryer) or crystallizer producing dry salt cake (over 90 percent solids) for landfill or recovery. CAPEX adds 800 to 2,500 USD per m3 per day capacity over a conventional ETP; OPEX adds 1.5 to 4 USD per m3 in energy (typically 25 to 50 kWh per m3 for the evaporator). ZLD is mandated for textile and tannery clusters in India and increasingly for industrial parks in MENA.
A pharmaceutical API manufacturer in the East Midlands operated a 1,200 m3/day ETP treating solvent-contaminated process water and equipment wash effluent with COD peaking at 18,000 mg/L and refractory BOD/COD ratios of 0.15. The existing single-stage aerobic plant was consistently breaching its Trade Effluent Consent limit of 500 mg/L COD.
Designed a two-stage biological train: upstream anaerobic UASB reactor (HRT 24 h, OLR 8 kg COD per m3 per day) followed by MBBR aerobic polishing (HRT 12 h, carrier fill 50 percent). Added a Fenton AOP pre-treatment stage at pH 3.5 to break down refractory organic load before the UASB. Biogas from the UASB (35 percent COD removal) was captured for CHP displacing 18 percent of site electricity.
Consent COD limit of 500 mg/L achieved with 95th-percentile effluent at 280 mg/L. Trade Effluent Consent renewed without special conditions. Annual energy bill reduced by 14 percent through biogas CHP. Sludge production fell 40 percent versus the previous aerobic-only system, cutting disposal costs by 60,000 GBP per year.
Questions to Ask Shortlisted Providers
- 1
What is the feedwater characterisation basis for your process design, and what happens when our peak COD exceeds the design basis by 50 percent?
ETP designs fail when actual loading exceeds the design basis. Understanding whether the designer has used mean, 95th-percentile, or worst-case loading, and what the operational response is for load spikes, determines whether the plant will hold consent through variability.
- 2
What Trade Effluent Consent parameters will you guarantee, and on what measurement protocol?
Consent compliance is the legal output of an ETP. Guarantees should tie to the specific consent parameters (BOD, COD, TSS, pH, specific substances) measured on composite samples over defined averaging periods, matching the methodology the sewerage undertaker uses for enforcement.
- 3
What is the sludge production rate per m3 of influent treated, and what dewatering cake solids will you guarantee?
Sludge disposal is often 20 to 40 percent of ETP OPEX. A plant that produces 30 percent more sludge than designed, or that dewaters to 12 percent solids rather than 22 percent, dramatically increases disposal cost and may breach Sludge Regulations if agricultural land spreading is planned.
- 4
Is the biological system designed with a named technology partner, and what performance data do you have from reference sites at our industry and loading?
Generic ETP designs applied to pharmaceutical, textile, or distillery effluents often fail. Named technology partners (MBBR media supplier, UASB licensor) provide process guarantees. Reference plant data from your specific industry is the strongest predictor of performance.
- 5
What is your approach to odour control during peak loading events, and what community impact assessment has been done?
ETPs in or near residential areas face planning conditions and public complaints on odour. Understanding the odour control strategy (biofilter, chemical scrubber, covered tanks) and its sizing basis for peak-load events determines whether the plant will generate enforcement action from the EA or local authority.
What Drives Cost in This Category
High COD variability (peak-to-average ratio above 3x) requires larger equalization tanks and oversized biological units, adding 20 to 40 percent to CAPEX over a flat-load equivalent. Correct characterization through 7-day composite sampling before design avoids costly mid-life upgrades.
Aerobic-only ASP for high-COD streams (above 5,000 mg/L) has high aeration energy cost: 0.8 to 1.5 kWh per kg COD removed. Adding an upstream anaerobic stage (UASB, CSTR) removes 50 to 70 percent COD at 0.05 to 0.1 kWh per kg, with biogas energy recovery offsetting 10 to 30 percent of site electricity. The anaerobic stage adds 15 to 25 percent CAPEX but cuts OPEX energy by 30 to 50 percent on high-strength streams.
Achieving COD under 125 mg/L (standard Trade Effluent Consent) costs 30 to 50 percent less than achieving COD under 50 mg/L (direct river discharge consent) or COD under 10 mg/L (water reuse standard), which requires tertiary polishing (sand filter, GAC, RO). Each log-reduction step in effluent quality roughly doubles polishing cost.
Mechanical dewatering (belt press or centrifuge) producing 18 to 25 percent solids cake costs 800 to 2,000 GBP per tonne for landfill disposal. Agricultural land spreading (when compliant with Sludge Regulations) costs 50 to 150 GBP per tonne of dry solids. The difference in disposal route can represent 100,000 to 500,000 GBP per year for a medium-sized industrial ETP.
Key Regulations & Standards
Any discharge of industrial wastewater (trade effluent) to public sewer in England and Wales requires Trade Effluent Consent under the Water Industry Act 1991 Section 119. Consent conditions specify flow, COD, BOD, TSS, pH, and industry-specific parameters. Breach is a criminal offence with unlimited fines. Consent must be obtained before discharge; operating without consent risks prosecution by the sewerage undertaker (typically Thames Water, Severn Trent, or Yorkshire Water).
Discharging treated effluent directly to watercourse or groundwater requires an Environmental Permit under the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2016. The Environment Agency sets discharge limits aligned with the WFD Environmental Quality Standards for the receiving water. Industrial ETPs discharging to controlled waters must also conduct a Habitats Regulations Assessment if the receiving watercourse flows through or near a Natura 2000 site.
Large industrial installations (above IED thresholds by sector) must apply Best Available Techniques (BAT) for wastewater treatment per the relevant BREF document (e.g., CWW BREF for common wastewater treatment, Textiles BREF, Food and Drink BREF). BAT-Associated Emission Levels (BAT-AELs) set binding limits. UK retained the IED framework post-Brexit via the Environmental Permitting Regulations.
ETP sludge applied to agricultural land must comply with SI 1989/1263 limits for heavy metals (Zn 300 mg/kg, Cu 80 mg/kg, Ni 50 mg/kg in soil) and must be registered and reported to the EA. Sludge from ETPs treating pharmaceutical, chemical, or mixed-industrial effluent is frequently unsuitable for agricultural spreading due to micro-contaminant loads, pushing disposal to landfill or incineration at significantly higher cost.