1 / 24

Treatment of Waste Brine from a Brackish Reverse Osmosis Plant

Treatment of Waste Brine from a Brackish Reverse Osmosis Plant. El Paso Water Utilities and Fort Bliss Eastside Brackish Groundwater Desalination Facility Joel C. Rife, P.E., DEE September 16, 2002. HEAD WATERS OF COLORADO RIVER. REAL BIG PIPE. REAL BIG PUMPS.

rad
Télécharger la présentation

Treatment of Waste Brine from a Brackish Reverse Osmosis Plant

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Treatment of Waste Brine from a Brackish Reverse Osmosis Plant El Paso Water Utilities and Fort Bliss Eastside Brackish Groundwater Desalination Facility Joel C. Rife, P.E., DEE September 16, 2002

  2. HEAD WATERS OF COLORADO RIVER REAL BIG PIPE REAL BIG PUMPS CONFLUENCE OF OHIO AND MISSISSIPPI RIVERS

  3. Brackish Water Treatment Becoming Feasible • Membrane Technologies More Affordable • Problem is What to do with the Waste Reject Water • Direct Discharge Not An Option • Activated Sludge Microbes Have No Interest In TDS • Historically Hasn’t Been a Problem with Desalination Plants (Dump in Ocean)

  4. Brackish RO Facility Design Criteria Permeate Flow (Drinking Water to Storage) 18 MGD Evaporation/Concentration Options • RO Plant Recovery 90 Percent • TDS in Reject 11,000 mg/L • Reject Flow 1.8 MGD Deep Well Disposal Option • Recovery 85 percent (permitting constraints – max. allowable TDS) • TDS in reject 8,000 mg/L • Reject flow 3.2 MGD

  5. Evaporation Options • Full-Scale Evaporation Ponds • Turbo-Mist Evaporator and Pond System • TNRCC Pond Liner Requirements - Clay w/permeability <1 x 107 cm/sec - Plastic liner with leak detection

  6. Full-Scale Evaporation Ponds • Designed for 5 Consecutive “Critical” Years Storage per TNRCC Requirements • 5-Foot Depth • 431 Acres • Compared Single Pond vs. 4-cell vs. 15-cell • Recommendation – 4-cell • 60-mil HDPE Liner

  7. Turbo-Mist Evaporator and Pond • Proprietary Machine by Slimline Mfg. LTD • Nozzles in Ring at End of 100 MPH Wind • Pilot Test Found 15-20% Water Evaporated Through Turbo-Mist Units • Wind Must Remain Below 10 MPH to Prevent Excessive Drift • 3000 Connected HP

  8. Cost ComparisonEvaporation Options Full-Scale Evaporation Pond • Capital Cost $25.42 Million • 20-yr Present Worth $44.36 Million Turbo-Mist and Pond • Capital Cost $13.8 Million • 20-yr Present Worth $56.74 Million

  9. Deep Well Disposal Evaluation Criteria • Depth • Confining Zone • Simplicity of Geological Structure • Risk of Inducing Seismicity • Injection Zone TDS • One-Hour Pressure Buildup • Distance Traveled After 30 Years

  10. Deep Well Disposal • Capital Cost $9.69 Million • 20-yr Present Worth $27.69 Million • Cost Significantly Less Than Evaporation Regulatory Requirements Are a Concern: • Well Classification Delay Until Hydrogeology and Water Chemistry are Characterized • Permit (Extensive Public Participation) • Authorization by Rule (Less of a Delay)

  11. Solar Gradient PondsEvolved From Conceptual Zero-Discharge RO Plant Product Water Concentrator RO Evaporator

  12. Solar Gradient Ponds • Effective for Seawater RO Brine Disposal – 60 Installations World-Wide • Thermal Energy Can Be Used For Heating or To Produce Electricity • Capital Cost $35.2 Million Cost Comparison per 1000 Gallons Delivered RO With Full-Scale Evaporation $1.95 RO With Deep Well Disposal $1.46 RO With Solar Gradient Ponds $2.04

  13. Membrane Concentrator System • Goal: Decrease Reject Volume While Deep Well Permitting Process is Completed • Challenge: “Treat the Untreatable” • Solution: Pretreatment Prior to Further Concentration by Reverse Osmosis Pretreatment Options Investigated: • Lime Softening • High-Rate Nanofiltration

  14. Lime Softening Pretreatment • Objective is to Reduce Silica and Carbonate Hardness Back to Original Brackish Reject Water Concentrations • Use of Magnesium Salts for Silica Removal Common Practice for Boiler Feed Water • Lack of Data for Treatment of High Silica Concentrations • Jar Testing Required to Prove Out Silica Removal and Determine Dosage Requirements

  15. Results of Lime Treatment Jar Testing • Silica and Hardness Removal Goals Achieved with Lime Only • Recirculated Lime Floc Critical • Further Reductions of Silica with Magnesium Salt Addition • Polymer Required to Achieve Acceptable Silt Density Index (<3) • Barium Still a Problem – Final RO Recovery of 60% Due to High Barium

  16. Lime Softening Pretreatment / RO Process

  17. High-Rate NF Softening Option • Suggested by Osmonics Based on Successful Oil Field Experiments • Concept is to Remove Cations (Ca, Mg, Fe, Ba) That Act as Nucleating Sites for Silica, While Passing Silica • “Slick” Single Pass Membrane is Key to Prevent Silica Buildup On Membrane • Successful Bench Scale Experiment Conducted on Simulated Reject

  18. X-Ray Analysis of NF Membrane

  19. NF Pretreatment / RO Process

  20. Summary of Costs

More Related