LBWD’s Prototype-Scale Testing of NF Membranes for Seawater Desalination Robert C. Cheng, Tai J. Tseng, Kevin L. Wattier February 17, 2011 MSSC National.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Scott Reinert , P.E. Water Resources Manager El Paso Water Utilities
Advertisements

Decentralised Wastewater Management
Treatment of Waste Brine from a Brackish Reverse Osmosis Plant
w-fn005 1 Ocean Outfall Legislation Compliance City of Hollywood Department of Public Utilities LARGE USER MEETING October 2, 2008.
This presentation is an abbreviated version of the original PowerPoint presentation of June 23, This version was presented at the Commissioners’
Intel Water Reclaim Project Final Report 5/25/05.
Brackish Groundwater Desalination in Texas J. Kevin Ward.
1 Impact of Membrane Technology in Southern California Craig R. Bartels, PhD Hydranautics.
Membrane Applications in Water Treatment
Creating a Sustainability Index for Water Planning in Southern California Presented at: AWWA ACE-09 June 18, 2009 Dan Rodrigo Vice President CDM 523 West.
Texas Innovative Water 2010 Affordable Desalination Collaboration ADC “What Are Efficient Methods to Reduce the Energy Requirements of Brackish Ground.
CarolloPaperTemplateWithLogo.pptx/ Affordable Desalination Collaboration Findings Related to Regulatory Criteria, Process and Costs for Seawater Desalination.
Presented by: Kevin J. Spencer, P.G. R.W. Harden and Associates, Inc. Benefits and Challenges of Developing Brackish Groundwater Supplies WATER Supply.
MSSC 2011 Annual Salinity Summit Charles Ahrens Vice President / Water Resources and Conservation Challenges in Brackish Groundwater Desalination Project.
Cornerstone Engineering Group The Foundation for Your Civil Engineering Needs Camanche Reservoir Water Treatment Plant Project Cecilia Zamora Evangelina.
Effective Use Of Peracetic Acid to Reduce Effluent Disinfection Byproduct in Water Resource Recovery Facilities Isaiah Shapiro, EIT Dimitri Katehis PhD,
Municipal and Industrial Conservation and Water Reuse Workgroup Elizabeth Lovsted Sr. Civil Engineer Urban Water Institute Annual Water Policy Conference.
American Society of Farm Managers & Rural Appraisers Kevin Morrison, P.G. Project Coordinator – Desalination Engineering Brackish Groundwater Desalination.
1 South Orange Coastal Ocean Desalination (SOCOD) Project, Ocean Desalination Costs and Recent Public Opinions November 2011 Status Update Karl Seckel,
Seawater Desalination and Water Supply Reliability in Marin County Louis Armstrong, URS Corporation.
Newark Desalination Facility
Dana Point Ocean Desalination Project Project Update May 2007.
2 nd Public Meeting - Options March 30, Agenda  Overview of Water Issues  What is a WIRP?  Purpose of WIRP  Evaluation Process  WIRP Objectives.
BAWSCA’s Strategy In 2009, BAWSCA embarked on the Long- Term Reliable Water Supply Strategy to: o Determine the Water Supply Problem When, where, and how.
Volvo Group North America, LLC Reuse of Wastewater - A Manufacturer’s Experience Steve Pierett, Env.Mgr. CEM, CRM, CP EnMS-Industrial.
Constructive Water Dialogue: a key to success Fawzi Karajeh California Department of Water Resources For the The Southern California.
Corporate 2012 MSSC Annual Salinity Summit Desalination Experience in Israel Presenter Name: Fredi Lokiec – EVP Special Projects 27 January 2012.
Sustainable Water Futures – Opportunities at Water and Wastewater Utilities The Future of Recycled Water Richard Atwater.
Cottonwood Water & Sanitation DistrictSeptember 2002 Arber Indirect Potable Reuse at Cottonwood Water and Sanitation District Rick Arber, Ben Johnson Richard.
Water for Monterey County Regional Project Capital and O&M Cost Description 1 Lyndel Melton, P.E. RMC Water and Environment.
July 2007 AMTA Event Type “Theme” Location - Date Improving America’s Water Through Membrane Filtration & Desalting America’s Authority in Membrane Technology.
Short and Long Range Water Supply Planning and Aquifer Performance Test (APT)
Desalination Becomes A Reality In Tampa Bay Florida Jim Jensen Senior Project Manager PB Water Area Manager Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc.
Infrastructure management system Managers and engineers need clear guidelines for life-cycle management of infrastructure systems for water, sewer, and.
Los Angeles Department of Water and Power Seawater Desalination Update by: Alvin Bautista, P.E. October 2007.
1 Update Ocean Desalination Feasibility Studies Karl Seckel Assistant General Manager.
South Orange Coastal Ocean Desalination (SOCOD) Project Dana Point/Doheny Beach, California November 2010 Status.
Feasibility of Aquifer Recharge Using Reclaimed Water in the Tampa Bay Area March 31, 2009 Phil Waller, P.E.
Considerations for Brackish Groundwater Use as a Water Supply for Small Water Systems and Municipalities Eddie C. Livingston, MSCE, P.E. Livingston Associates,
Texas Innovation Water 2010 Seawater Desalination What is the benefit to the State from implementing the Brownsville Seawater Demonstration Project?
Maximizing Water Supply Sustainability for the Goleta Valley Ryan Drake Water Supply and Conservation Manager 2015 Central Coast Sustainability Summit.
Produced Water Treatment For Recycle 22 nd IPEC – Denver, CO Dan Mueller, P.E.
Status update presentation #1 for the Cayucos Sustainable Water Project Status update presentation #1 for the Cayucos Sustainable Water Project November.
Nikolay Voutchkov, PE, BCEE
POTABLE REUSE THE ALTERNATIVE WATER SUPPLY. Florida Section WateReuse Association November 9, 2015 Chuck Drake, PG.
MSSC 2011 Annual Salinity Summit February 17 – 18, 2011 Thirty Years of Success in Implementing Desalination By Roger K. Noack, P.E. HDR Engineering, Inc.
City of San Diego’s Recycled Water Study Item W15a October 10, 2012 Presentation to the California Coastal Commission.
January  Principle: Elements with the lowest production and highest rejection in the first positions and elements with the highest production in.
KEY SUCCESS FACTORS for WATER REUSE PROJECTS Jacques LABRE Vice – President Relations with Institutions Suez Environnement
Workshop on Future Water Supplies in Arizona June 21, Day 1 – Highlights Portfolios & Infrastructure Bradley M. Hill, R.G. Water Resources Manager.
The Ethics of Desalination M.Flood E.Herman M.Stoughton.
Water System Master Plan & Rate Study City of DeKalb, Illinois City Council Presentation May 16, 2015.
December 10, 2009 TOWN OF PALM BEACH WATER COMMITTEE Discussion of Water Plant Options.
Silicon Valley Advanced Water Purification Center And Future of Purified Water Use Tour Guides: Miguel Silva Tour Coordinators: Amy Fry, Michelle Pelayo-Osorio.
Chapter 6 Reverse Osmosis and Nanofiltration
Desalination for Drinking Water Purposes TCEQ Trade Fair David A. Williams, P.E Robert W. Sims, P.E. Austin, Texas May, 2016.
Southern California Water Dialogue September 23, 2015.
Overview of Desalination Trends and Jaffna Project
Brine Concentration Pilot Project (AquaSel) Update
1 | emwd.org AquaSel Brine Concentration Demonstration Project Khos Ghaderi, P.E. May 18, 2016.
California Avocado Commission Workshop Fallbrook, California May 17, 2016.
CHANNEL ISLANDS BEACH COMMUNITY SERVICES DISTRICT
AquaSel Brine Concentration Pilot Project Update
Nikolay Voutchkov, PE, BCEE
RO / NF Applications in Brackish Water Desalination: membrane characterization and hybridization with EDR Ghazaleh Vaseghi; Neil Moe; Abbas Ghassemi; James.
Sam Aminfard CATEE 2017 – Texas Energy Summit November 15, 2017
Brackish Water Desalination Project
Poseidon Distribution Options
California Water Commission
CENTRAL FLORIDA POTABLE REUSE TEST PROJECTS .
Presentation transcript:

LBWD’s Prototype-Scale Testing of NF Membranes for Seawater Desalination Robert C. Cheng, Tai J. Tseng, Kevin L. Wattier February 17, 2011 MSSC National Salinity Summit 1

Research Partners   US Bureau of Reclamation   CA Dept. of Water Resources   LA Department of Water and Power   Southern Nevada Water Authority   Tampa Bay Water Authority  UCLA  University of New Hampshire  Clemson University  University of Illinois  Montana State University  University of Central Florida  Virginia Tech  University of Nevada, Reno  University of Iowa AcademiaGovernment Industry  DuPont  Water Research Foundation (AwwaRF)  Black & Veatch  CH2M Hill  MWH

Water resources…under stress Los Angeles Aqueduct: reduction California Aqueduct: “Southern California Loses Up to 30 Percent of Its Supplies from Delta Next Year and Possibly Longer” -Business Wire News Colorado River Aqueduct: ~50% reduction …more pressure to act locally to reduce dependence on imports City of Long Beach ~500,000 residents

Reliability, at lowest reasonable rates “New” Conjunctive Use Seawater Consumers Potable “Traditional” Groundwater Surface water Conservation 2007 Declaration 16+% decrease in use “100 by 100” Initiative Seawater barrier Irrigation Indirect recharge Reclaimed

LBWD’s Resource Mix Conservation 15% Reclaimed 9% Imports 32% Groundwater 44% Conservation 15% Reclaimed 12% Imports 30% Groundwater 33% Desal 10% 5

Shifts in water resources 47% 2007 (declaration of drought) 2010 (shortage allocation) 53% Imports (MWD) (MWD) Groundwater (LBWD) $478 - $574/af Groundwater 53% < $400/af $300/af 47% Imports $740 - $3,134/af

Desal research...to lessen risks  Full plant cost will be costly  Other full-scale experiences point out value for research  Substantial interest for accurate operational and cost information  Federal – USBR (federal authorization)  State – CA DWR (CA Prop 50 funding)  Local – LA DWP (research site, power)

O&M- Electrical Power 44% Debt (Capital) 37% Membrane Replacement 5% Labor 4% Maintenance & Parts 7% Consumables 3% Federal Roadmap Estimate Power + Debt = 81% Non-energy O&M = 19%

Concept - “The Long Beach Method” Two Pass Nanofiltration Nanofiltration  Energy Savings  Lower pressure requirements, lower energy consumption  Quality Protection  Twice the protection of single-pass technology

NF membrane for seawater desal  Proof-of-concept  Initiated testing ~2001  verified through 2-yr AwwaRF project, “A Novel Approach to Seawater Desalination Using Dual-Staged Nanofiltration”  Patent application  US patent , granted 12/5/06  “Two stage nanofiltration desalination system”  Prototype plant construction/operations 

11 How to integrate seawater into system? Post treatment / Distribution Pretreatment NF 2 or RO A $20 M, 10-year investment A $20 M, 10-year investment Leverage various partnerships for technical input and other support Leverage various partnerships for technical input and other support Federal/State/Local Funds, 50% funding by Reclamation Federal/State/Local Funds, 50% funding by Reclamation Under Ocean Floor Intake and Discharge Prototype UV/ClO 2 Mitigation of WQ impacts due to integration of new source

Jul 07 -Jan 04 - Jul 04 - Jan 05 -Jul 05 -Jan 06 -Jul 06 -Jan 07 -Jan 08 - Construction Jan 09 -Jul 08 -Jan 10 -Jul 09 - Jul 10 - Design Desal Prototype Research ClO 2 and UV Under Ocean Floor Desal Site Alternative Study Site Restoration (2012) Post-treatment Design Research schedule Jan 11 -

South Train North Train MF Unit Prototype Plant Flow Diagram 13 Intake/ discharge Project site

Prototype Plant  300,000 gpd facility, 8-in vessels 14

Energy Recovery Operation PX Booster pump PX 15

Other Issues  Technical  Water quality met (boron, bromide, etc.)  Blending issues with existing water  Environmental  Impingement/entrainment  Discharge  Public Trust  Sound investment  Transparency  Permitting

Research Objectives  Compare NF 2 against RO  Water quality (TDS, boron, bromide), energy, reliability  Optimize NF 2 process  Energy recovery device  Biofouling control method: UV vs. ClO 2  Vary configuration/membranes  Analyze cost for full-scale plant 17

Research Approach  Phase I- NF 2 vs. RO  Short tests to determine trends  General WQ and energy recovery monitoring  May ’06 – Dec ‘07  Phase II-NF 2 vs. RO  2+ weeks of selected conditions from Phase I  Detailed WQ analyses  Jan ’08 – Dec ‘08  Phase III and IV-NF 2 optimization test  2+ weeks tests: NF 5 vs. 7, mixed membrane  UV vs. ClO 2  Jan ’09 – Jan ‘10 18

NF 2 vs. RO Process MembranesPressure (psi)Recovery (%) NF 2 Pass 1 NF % NF 2 Pass 2 NE % RO Pass 1 SWC % RO Pass 2 NE % 19 MF Energy Recovery 1 st Pass NF (South Train) Cartridge Filter Combined Effluent Tanks Cartridge Filter Backwash water Influent Tank Energy Recovery 2 nd Pass NF (South Train) 2 nd Pass NF (North Train) 1 st Pass RO or NF (North Train)

Water Quality Goal  Total dissolved solids (TDS)  TDS <500 mg/L-secondary WQ standard  Bromide - accelerate disinfectant decay  Bromide < mg/L to maintain residual  Boron - toxic to plants at high level  California notification level = 1 mg/L  No “backsliding” of water quality from new source 20

 Selecting appropriate base addition location is critical Base Addition Strategy Base Injection Pt Option 1 Base Injection Pt Option 2 More base required to alter pH HIGH potential for fouling Alk = 122 mg/L Ca 2+ = 447 mg/L Alk = 10.4 mg/L Ca 2+ = 11.7 mg/L Less base required to alter pH 97% rejection of Ca 2+. Decreased potential for fouling Pass 1 Pass 2

NF 2 vs. RO, Boron 22 CaNL

Specific Energy Summary Permeate B <0.8 mg/L NF2SWRO (2 pass) Specific Energy (kWh/kgal) Maximum Minimum 50% value 75% value 25% value 50 th percentile specific savings = 20%

NF 2 vs. RO  Two-pass RO required to meet all water quality objectives  Boron < 1 mg/L  Consistent with USBR DWPR Report 127  NF 2 required less specific energy than RO/NF  NF 2 required 20% less energy (50 th percentile)

Mixing Membranes in NF 2 Pass 1 - two stage configuration Stage 1 holds 5 elements/vessel 25 ULP RO Improve flux and water quality by changing membrane types within a vessel

NF 2 Optimization Test 26 ConfigurationPressureFlux Prod. TDS kWh/1000 gal Last elem flow Last element pressure Ranking NF-NF-NF-NF-NF NF-NF-NF-NF-ULP ULP-NF-NF-NF-NF ULP-ULP-NF-NF-NF NF-NF-NF-ULP-ULP ULP-ULP-ULP-NF-NF NF-NF-ULP-ULP-ULP BW-NF-NF-NF-NF BW-BW-NF-NF-NF BW-BW-BW-NF-NF Source: Trussell, R.S., Sharma, R.R., Trussell, R.R Optimization modeling of nanofiltration membranes for seawater desalination: Scale-up from pilot to prototype scale. In AWWA Membrane Technology Conference (Memphis, TN).

NF 2 Optimization Test – Energy 27 No UV/ClO 2 UV ClO 2

NF 2 Optimization Summary  No clear difference in energy consumption between 5 & 7 elements in series  More ULP membranes in lead position reduced energy consumption 28

Cost Analysis  Cost curves  Based on historical information  Cost models  Use location-specific parameters  NF 2 cost model  Based on ADC cost model (funded by Reclamation)  Modified by LBWD, used Prototype data 29

NF 2 Cost Model Scenarios  Scenarios tested  Highest overall system recovery  Lowest specific energy (kWh/kgal)  Highest flux (gfd)  Different production rate  50 mgd  5 mgd 30

Variables analyzed VariableBaselineVariableEffect Project life30 yrs25 yrsCapital Interest rate5%4%, 6%Capital Membrane life6.5 yrs10 yrsNon-energy O&M Energy cost$0.12/kWh$0.15/kWhEnergy O&M

Cost Analysis Two pass RO NFNF 2 Scenario 1Scenario 2Scenario 1Scenario 2Scenario 3 Pass 1 Pass 2 Pass 1 Pass 2 Pass 1 Pass 2 Pass 1 Pass 2 Pass 1 Pass 2 Flux (gfd) Recovery (%)42%82%35%75%46%75%45%78%44%80% Overall recovery (%)34%27%38%41%39% Energy (kWh/kgal) Optimization parameter Capital, energy Energy Capital 32

50 mgd vs. 5 mgd   Energy O&M independent of size   Capital and Non-Energy O&M   Capacity dependent items Membrane replacements, solid disposal, maintenance, labor Chemical cost   Capital reduction factors varied for 50 mgd vs 5 mgd 20% – process piping, solid disposal, etc. 32% - pumps, chemical systems, etc. 44% – yard piping, site work, etc.   Capacity independent item Permitting - $10M (15% of overall capital cost for 5 mgd, 3% of overall capital cost for 50 mgd)

Cost Analysis 34

Inflation  Produced water cost can more than double over project life  Historical increase of 3% for goods (  Energy increased by 4% Inflation projection for energy from historical data Inflation projection for energy from historical data 35

Cost Analysis  Project life = 30 years  50 mgd RO-NF ~ $3.6 B RO-NF ~ $3.6 B NF 2 ~ $3.2 B NF 2 ~ $3.2 B  5 mgd RO-NF ~ $0.58 B RO-NF ~ $0.58 B NF 2 ~ $0.57 B NF 2 ~ $0.57 B 36

Costs  ADC model used  Inputs modified to include research findings  Size of facility has significant impacts  Scaling down from 50 mgd to 5 mgd can increase cost up to 100%  Sensitivity analysis  Membrane life, power, interest rate, project life  Most sensitive to interest rate and power  Cost of desalinated water (2010)  $1,350/AF for NF 2, $1,640/AF for RO/NF (50 mgd)  $2,454/AF for NF 2, $2,496/AF for RO/NF (5 mgd)

Next steps ?  Report for USBR in print

Research Presentations

Questions?