River Bank Filtration for Cilandak Water Treatment Plant Raw Water Optimization

Draft REPORT
2012

WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT SECTION

WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT & PROCESS OPTIMIZATION DEPARTMENT WATER ENGINEERING SERVICES DIRECTORATE

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

LIST OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES LIST OF ATTACHMENTS 1. BACKGROUND 2. OBJECTIVE 3. HYDROGEOLOGICAL STUDY 3.1 Exploration Wells and Pumping Test 3.2 Water Quality 4. RBF WELLFIELD DESIGN AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT 4.1 Design 4.2 Cilandak Shallow Aquifer Simulation 5. COST AND BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECT 5.1 Cost 5.2 Benefit 5.3 Cost and Benefit Analysis 6. WELLFIELD CONSTRUCTION 7. RBF FURTHER STAGES FOR THE FUTURE ATTACHMENTS ii ii ii 1 2 2 2 3 6 6 7 7 7 7 9 9 11

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | i

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

LIST OF TABLES
Table 3.1 Water Quality of Surface Water and RBF Wells 4

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Riverbank Filtration Techniques Figure 3.1 Pilot pumping tests at two RBF wells Figure 3.2 Pumping Test of Cilandak wells Figure 3.3 Electrical Logs Interpretation 1 2 3 3

Figure 3.4 Manganese, Ammonium and Turbidity of Cilandak raw water (2009 2010) 4 Figure 4.1 Wellfield and its Piping Figure 4.2 Well / Borehole Design Figure 5.1 Ammonium at Cilandak raw water Figure 5.2 Manganese at Cilandak raw water Figure 5.3 Detergent at Cilandak raw water Figure 6.1 Drilling Activity Figure 6.2 Coarse Sand Additions Figure 6.3 New Well Constructed 6 6 7 8 8 10 10 11

LIST OF ATTACHMENTS
Attachment 1 Estimation Cost for Electrical Consumption of RBF Pumps Attachment 2 Chemical Saving Calculation 11 12

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | ii

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

1. BACKGROUND
Cilandak Water Treatment Plant is classical clarification / filtration treatment plant, treating Krukut river waters since 1980, with a production capacity of 400 l/s. As there is an increasing urban development in the upstream of Cilandak WTP, raw water becomes progressively more polluted with domestic used water, thus rising Ammonia, Detergent and Organic load, exceeding WTPs ability to eliminate it completely, mainly during dry season. In addition, Chemical OPEX has highly increased (mainly Activated Carbon and Chlorine consumption) and raw water shortages are common when dry season reaches its peak. Based on the above, riverbank filtration (RBF) technique could solve this deficit as RBF is a cost-effective, natural treatment technology that takes advantage of geological and biological natural filtration, instead of chemicals use, to treat surface water and groundwater supplies. So, this technology is at the forefront as a method for not only treating existing raw surface water supplies but also for developing new and sustainable water supplies. The use of chemicals and production of sludge are minimized. Moreover, RBF is a technique to capture water of the river by inducing it to flow through the bank. So the advantages of RBF are:
As bank storage Natural treatment process occurred Reduce dramatically turbidity Heavy metal sorption Adsorption and inactivation of microorganisms Biodegradation of organic pollutants

The illustration of RBF is available at Figure 1.1 below:

Figure 1.1 Riverbank Filtration techniques

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 1

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

2. OBJECTIVE
River Bank Filtration in Cilandak Water Treatment Plant is a project aiming to improve raw water quality in a first stage by capturing it by shallow wells near Krukut River through natural biological and mechanical filtration. In a second stage, after upsizing transmission, RBF water will be added at the outlet of the Plant in order to increase Cilandak WTP production.

3. HYDROGEOLOGICAL STUDY
Hydrogeology Study is important for the project as it studies the water beneath the earths surface, in particular groundwater. It also involves the flow and chemical interactions of groundwater within aquifers and requires understanding of geology, math, physics and chemistry. Groundwater dynamics, exploration, drilling and aquifers tests, sustainable allocation of groundwater, contamination, and computer modeling are part of the study. By the study, we will be able to explain in detail the impact of RBF wells to the surrounding areas groundwater.

3.1 EXPLORATION WELLS AND PUMPING TEST

Feasibility study of RBF in Cilandak consisted in 2 exploration wells of 6 inches diameter and 30 meters depth. These boreholes were drilled at about 10 and 20 m respectively from Krukut River. The superficial geology of the region (Quaternary) is quite homogenous, composed by three meters of red silt (soil) overlaying black volcanic sands until 30 m depth. Water table was detected at 1 m below the soil surface level. Hydraulic conductivity of the sands is in the order of 20 m/day, resulting from long term pumping tests, as seen in Figure 3.1 and 3.2.

Figure 3.1 Pilot pumping tests at two RBF wells

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 2

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

Figure 3.2 Pumping Test of Cilandak Wells Electrical logging is also a valuable water well drilling tool. It could locate and determine the exact thickness and position of water bearing formations at specific site. For Cilandak wells, the electrical logs interpretation is illustrated in Figure 3.1.

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 3

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

Figure 3.3 Electrical Logs Interpretation

3.2 WATER QUALITY

The quality of Krukut River as Cilandak raw water is much fluctuated. Below is the graph of Cilandak raw water quality 2009 2010.

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 4

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

10 8 6 4 2 0 Jan-09 Jul-09 Jan-10 Jul-10 Jan-11 Jul-11

500 400 300 200 100 0 Jan-12

mg/L

Manganese

Ammonium

Turbidity

Figure 3.4 Manganese, Ammonium and Turbidity of Cilandak raw water (2009 2011) We estimate that Cilandak WTP has a limited capacity to eliminate Ammonium, a frequent indicator of organic pollution, no more than 0,5 mg/l in raw water. As Krukut River waters very often exceeds this concentration of Ammonium, it can be found in the treated water in very fluctuant contents, normally below PERMENKES regulation maximal limits (1 mg/l) . However, being Ammoniun a high consumer of Chlorine, it is very difficult to maintain a well stable concentration of Free Chlorine in the treated water. Another concern of raw water quality impacting on treated water is the high concentration of Detergent. While compared to the water coming from the RBF wells, the surface water was highly polluted. Table 3.1 below shows the values by each parameter analyzed.

Table 3.1 Water Quality of Surface Water and RBF Wells Surface Water
pH Turbidity Conductivity Nitrite Sulfate Color Ammonium Iron Manganese Detergent NTU mhos/cm mg/L mg/L PtCo mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L 0.8 15.4 1.6 0.4 7.0 79 180 0.2 13

RBF Water
6.9 2 209 <0.01 6 <4 <0.1 0.6 0.2 0.1

Drinking Water Standar

6.5-8.5 5 3 250 15 1.5 0.3 0.4 0.05

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 5

NTU

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

Fluoride Sulfide Chromium Phosphate Cuprum Hardness Chloride Organic Matter Fecal Coliform

mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L mg/L Col/100mL

<0.1 0.003 <0.023 2.7 77 16 22 1,600,000

0.2 0.001 0.004 0.3 0.02 83 4 3 10

1.5 0.05 2 500 250 10

4. RBF WELLFIELD DESIGN AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.1 DESIGN
There are 10 wells constructed in the area of Cilandak WTP, at the Krukut Riverbank. Each well has 6 inches diameter and 30 meters depth. Figure 4.1 below shows the wellfield design and its piping, while Figure 4.2 is showing the well / borehole design.

Figure 4.1 Wellfield and Pipeline design

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 6

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

Figure 4.2 Well / Borehole Design

4.2 CILANDAK SHALLOW AQUIFER SIMULATION

An aquifer model was designed in order: 1) to optimize the design of the wellfield 2) to simulate the impact of the wellfield over groundwater levels in Cilandak area. The model was designed using the software Aquifer Simulation for Windows (ASMWIN 6.0), a finite difference two dimenssional aquifer model. The input data were taken from the hydrogeological study. Wellfield configuration: Hydraulic conductivity: Speciphic yield (aquifer storage): Krukut River leakeage: Time: 10 wells, 15 lps each one 2 x 10-5 m/s 15% 10-4 1/s Transient condition, until 30 years since start running

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 7

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

Figure 4.3 Origin of water pumped by RBF wellfield. After less than 3 months of started pumping, more than 90% of the water will come from Krukut River leakeage.

Figure 4.4. Water levels drawdown after 100 days and 30 years after start pumping. Water table will On the West of Krukut River the levels will not be affected. e

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 8

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

5. COST AND BENEFIT ANALYSIS OF THE PROJECT

5.1 COST
The total CAPEX of RBF Project is 1.3 BIDR, with the breakdown below: a. Drilling wells: 368 MIDR b. Pumps: 560 MIDR c. Piping: 372 MIDR For electricity OPEX raised due to 10 pumps utilization, it will be about 44.2 KWH or about 267 MIDR electricity cost year Detail calculation available in Attachment 1. yearly. 1

5.2 BENEFIT
Assumption of combining 250 l/ of Krukut River and 150 l/s of RBF, will decrease some l/s s of parameters, such as Ammonium and Detergent. It will impact on reducing chemical use especially for Chlorine and Activ Activated Carbon. For Ammonium, the highest value recorded in 201 was around 3.4 mg/l, while mixing the 2011 water from surface water and wells was resulted not more than 2 mg/l, based on the rom mg/l calculation. Figure 5.1 below shows the detail of raw water quality data in 2011 and the 201 calculated quality of mixed water water.

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 9

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

Figure 5.1 Ammonium at Cilandak raw water

The same methodology also applied for manganese quality. For the highest value in 2011, which was 0.7 mg/l, it could be decreased into 0.5 mg/l by mixing the raw water coming from the surface water and wells. Figure 5.2 shows the whole data recorded in 2011 and its calculated mixed water for manganese parameter.

Figure 5.2 Manganese at Cilandak raw water

For Detergent, 2 mg/l had been recorded in 2011 to be the highest value. By mixing the water from Krukut River and water coming from RBF, the value could be decreased up to 1.3 mg/l. refer to Figure 5.3 for the whole data and mixed water values.

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 10

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

Figure 5.3 Detergent at Cilandak raw water

5.3 COST AND BENEFIT ANALYSIS

Total investment of RBF Project construction Cost of electrical due to pumps utilization Chlorine saving Activated Carbon saving Coagulant saving KMnO4 saving Total chemical saving Total saving = = = = = = 1,300,000,000 IDR 267,000,000 IDR

Saving is calculated based on the chemicals reduction, data of 2011. 405,979,451 IDR 749,218,725 IDR 291,963,591 IDR 42,285,600 IDR

= 1,489,447,364 IDR = total chemical saving electrical cost = 1,489,447,364 IDR 267,321,600 IDR = 1,222,125,764 IDR

Payback period of the project is calculated based on the investment divided by total saving: = 1,300,000,000 IDR / 1,222,125,764 IDR = 1.06 years Detail calculation can be found on the Attachment 2.

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 11

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

6. WELLFIELD CONSTRUCTION
The initial 2 wells, the construction was made in the end of 2010. For the rest 8 wells was drilled in mid of 2011. Figures below show the activities during construction.

Figure 6.1 Drilling Activity

Figure 6.2 Coarse Sand Additions

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 12

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

Figure 6.3 New Well Constructed

7. RBF FURTHER STAGES FOR THE FUTURE

Based on the results given from the Project of RBF at Cilandak WTP, RBF could be useful to the other places in order to improve the raw water quality. Of course, it will need further assessment. For Cilandak in particular, the second stage, after upsizing transmission, RBF water will be added at the outlet of the Plant in order to increase Cilandak WTP production.

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 13

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

Attachment 1
Estimation Cost for Electrical Consumption of RBF Pumps
Pump of RBF wells: For 6 wells use pump with capacity 12 l/s@20, each electrical power is 3.7 Kw For 4 wells use pump with capacity 15 l/s@20, each electrical power is 5.5 Kw

Power Electricity of the 10 pumps: For 12 lps For 15 lps 6 pumps x 3.7 Kw 4 pumps x 5.5 Kw Total power = 22.2 = 22 Kw Kw

= 22.2 Kw + 22 Kw = 44.2 Kw

Estimation of electrical cost is 700 IDR/Kwh Total estimation of electrical cost for RBF pumps per year: = 700 IDR / Kwh x 44.2 Kw x 24 hours x 30 days x 12 months = 267,321,600 IDR / year

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 14

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

Attachment 2
Table 1 Activated Carbon Saving Calculation
2011 Actual Data Month Jan-11 Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 May-11 Jun-11 Jul-11 Aug-11 Sep-11 Oct-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 Total Detergent Avg. (mg/l) 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.4 0.7 0.6 0.7 Activated Carbon Consumption (Kg) 18,000 20,450 33,000 29,925 37,800 18,025 17,100 33,500 28,400 25,000 11,150 32,800 305,150 Cost of Activated Carbon (IDR) 131,400,000 149,285,000 240,900,000 218,452,500 275,940,000 217,442,500 166,170,000 244,550,000 207,320,000 309,700,000 81,395,000 430,840,000 2,673,395,000 Detergent Avg. (mg/l) 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.3 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.4 0.5 Calculation with Mixed Water (Krukut + RBF) % Removal 27% 29% 29% 21% 19% 26% 27% 33% 28% 32% 31% 32% Activated Carbon Consumption (Kg) 13,074 14,448 23,375 23,582 30,713 13,378 12,469 22,365 20,553 17,045 7,654 22,336 220,992 Activated Carbon Saving Cost of Activated Carbon (IDR) 95,442,568 105,473,098 170,637,500 172,150,068 224,201,250 161,383,105 121,165,625 163,264,915 150,034,211 211,159,091 55,875,666 293,389,179 1,924,176,275 749,218,725

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 12

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

Table 2 Chlorine Saving Calculation

2011 Actual Data Month Jan-11 Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 May-11 Jun-11 Jul-11 Aug-11 Sep-11 Oct-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 Total Ammonium Avg. (mg/l) 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.7 1.4 1.6 2.2 1.6 1.0 Chlorine Consumption (Kg) 14,455 13,245 14,500 12,855 13,545 12,500 14,300 15,800 13,050 15,350 15,750 15,250 170,600 Cost of Chlorine (IDR) 104,798,750 96,026,250 105,124,275 93,200,708 98,201,250 90,626,233 103,675,653 114,547,463 94,612,863 111,287,500 114,187,500 110,563,588 1,236,852,033 Ammonium Avg. (mg/l) 0.32 0.35 0.47 0.28 0.35 0.35 0.44 0.92 1.00 1.42 1.02 0.65 Calculation with Mixed Water (Krukut + RBF) % Removal 30% 31% 33% 29% 31% 31% 32% 35% 35% 36% 35% 34% Chlorine Consumption (Kg) 10,118.50 9,154.63 9,771.74 9,119.02 9,361.99 8,639.71 9,680.00 10,253.19 8,440.40 9,827.11 10,180.18 10,056.44 114,603 Saving klorin Cost of Chlorine (IDR) 73,359,125 66,371,085 70,844,620 66,114,252 67,874,393 62,638,720 70,180,442 74,333,992 61,193,158 71,246,558 73,806,319 72,909,917 830,872,582 405,979,451

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 13

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

Table 3 Coagulant Saving Calculation 2011 Actual Data Month Raw Water Volume (m3) 1,057,931 958,828 1,049,449 1,011,999 1,043,812 1,009,513 1,002,624 1,038,651 988,391 1,066,708 1,025,331 1,062,904 12,316,141 Turbidity (NTU) 80.3 70.3 70.7 78.5 91.4 78.6 67.6 50.0 72.3 72.4 70.3 71.0 Coagulant Consumption (kg) 35,063 32,204 35,403 36,406 35,192 42,421 39,429 44,445 45,418 51,968 36,046 37,266 471,261 Cost of Coagulant (IDR) 59,607,100 54,746,863 60,185,653 61,890,200 59,826,400 72,115,700 67,029,198 75,556,160 77,210,039 88,346,265 61,277,435 63,352,685 801,143,698 Turbidity (NTU) 50.9 44.7 44.9 49.8 57.9 49.9 43.0 32.0 45.9 46.0 44.7 45.1 Calculation with Mixed Water (Krukut + RBF) % Removal Coagulant Consumption (kg) Cost of Coagulant (IDR)

Jan-11 Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 May-11 Jun-11 Jul-11 Aug-11 Sep-11 Oct-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 Total

37% 36% 36% 37% 37% 37% 36% 36% 36% 36% 36% 36%

22,242 20,471 22,502 23,101 22,284 26,918 25,080 28,445 28,858 33,018 22,914 23,685
299,518 Coagulant Saving

37,811,513 34,800,611 38,254,404 39,272,532 37,882,256 45,760,790 42,636,476 48,355,489 49,057,652 56,131,226 38,952,511 40,264,647
509,180,107 291,963,591

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 14

WRD & PO DEPARTMENT

WATER RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT SECTION

Table 4 KMnO4 Saving Calculation 2011 Actual Data Month Jan-11 Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 May-11 Jun-11 Jul-11 Aug-11 Sep-11 Oct-11 Nov-11 Dec-11 Total Manganese Avg. (mg/l) 0.09 0.095 0.111 0.111 0.093 0.076 0.127 0.386 0.432 0.524 0.335 0.344 825 926 1,461 365.73 1,023 4,601 39,190,683 43,980,298 69,397,331 17,372,175 48,607,662 218,548,148 KMnO4 Consumption (kg) Cost of KMnO4(IDR) Calculation with Mixed Water (Krukut + RBF) Manganese Avg. (mg/l) 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.13 0.12 0.15 0.32 0.35 0.40 0.28 0.29 18% 20% 23% 15% 16% 675.98 739.43 1,122.23 310.46 862.68 3,711 KMnO4 Saving 32,108,946 35,123,154 53,306,156 14,746,902 40,977,389 176,262,549 42,285,600 % Removal KMnO4 Consumption (kg) Cost of KMnO4 (IDR)

Riverbank Filtration for Cilandak WTP Raw Water Optimization | 15