Professional Documents
Culture Documents
November 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.....................................................................................................................ES1 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................................ES1 DEMAND PROJECTIONS .....................................................................................................ES2
NEW WATER
SELECTION OF OPTIMUM TECHNOLOGY ..........................................................................ES3 PROPOSED DESIGN ............................................................................................................ES3 TREATMENT SITE OPTIONS ...............................................................................................ES4 BRINE DISPERSION MODELLING .......................................................................................ES4 ENERGY REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................................................ES4 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS ...............................................................................ES5 ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT ..................................................................................................ES5
DUBLIN REGION (W ATER SUPPLY AREA)- DEMAND PROJECTIONS....................................... 2 PREVIOUS STUDIES & MILESTONES .................................................................................... 2
WATER SUPPLY OPTIONS ................................................................................................... 3
1.4.1
SOURCE ................................................................................................................................................. 5 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 DEMAND PROJECTIONS PROCESS ....................................................................... 5 REPORTS REVIEW....................................................................................................... 5 DEMAND ESTIMATION METHODOLOGY ................................................................... 6 DOMESTIC DEMAND.................................................................................................... 6 2.4.1 2.4.2 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 2.11 2.12 Population ......................................................................................................... 6 Per Capita Consumption (PCC)........................................................................ 7 COMMERCIAL)....................................................... 7
CUSTOMER SIDE LEAKAGE LOSSES..................................................................................... 8 DISTRIBUTION LEAKAGE LOSSES ........................................................................................ 9 HEADROOM ...................................................................................................................... 9 AVERAGE/PEAK DEMAND PROJECTIONS GDA (2007-2011-2031) .................................... 10 PRODUCTION CAPABILITY OF EXISITING SOURCES ............................................................. 10 DEMAND/SUPPLY BALANCE .............................................................................................. 12 NEW SOURCE PRODUCTION REQUIREMENTS ..................................................................... 13
MDW0158RP0080F01
F01
2.13 2.14
SUMMARY ...................................................................................................................... 16 2.14.1 Demand Drivers.............................................................................................. 16 2.14.2 Supply Sources .............................................................................................. 16 2.14.3 Leakage.......................................................................................................... 17 2.14.4 Water Conservation........................................................................................ 17 2.14.5 Longterm Demand / Supply Considerations. ................................................. 17
Option A .......................................................................................................... 18 Option B .......................................................................................................... 18 Option C .......................................................................................................... 19 Option D .......................................................................................................... 19 Option E .......................................................................................................... 19 Option F .......................................................................................................... 19 Option G .......................................................................................................... 19 Option H .......................................................................................................... 20 Option I............................................................................................................ 20
3.1.10 Option J .......................................................................................................... 20 3.2 3.3 DESALINATION AS A TREATMENT PROCESS ....................................................................... 20 DESALINATION W ATER SUPPLY INFRASTRUCTURE ........................................................... 20 3.3.1 3.3.2 3.3.3 3.3.4 3.3.5 Technical Evaluation of Desalinated Water Supply ........................................ 21 Routing and Site Selection.............................................................................. 23 Economic Evaluation of Desalinated Water Supply........................................ 24 Modelling of Brine Dispersion Impacts............................................................ 25 Environmental Assessments........................................................................... 25
Introduction ..................................................................................................... 27 Energy Source ................................................................................................ 28 Seawater Intake and Brine Discharge ............................................................ 29 Desalination Economics.................................................................................. 30
REVIEW OF MAIN DESALINATION PROCESSES .................................................................... 31 4.4.1 4.4.2 Distillation........................................................................................................ 31 Membrane Processes: Reverse Osmosis....................................................... 46
MDW0158RP0080F01
ii
F01
4.4.3 4.5
Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 54
Latest Developments in Distillation Processes ............................................... 57 Latest Developments in Reverse Osmosis Processes ................................... 57 Hybrid Configurations...................................................................................... 59 Other Desalination Processes ........................................................................ 61
SELECTION OF OPTIMUM TECHNOLOGY IRISH APPLICATION......................................... 68 5.1 METHODOLOGY.............................................................................................................. 68 5.1.1 5.1.2 5.2 5.3 Technology Selection Scoring System ........................................................... 68 Appropriate Processes for Dublin and Scoring System.................................. 70
RECOMMENDED TECHNOLOGY......................................................................................... 72
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
................................................................................................ 75
Costs ............................................................................................................... 75 Energy consumption ....................................................................................... 75 Environmental impact...................................................................................... 75 Robustness ..................................................................................................... 76 Operation ........................................................................................................ 76 Safety .............................................................................................................. 76
General ........................................................................................................... 77 Capacity .......................................................................................................... 77 Raw Water Quality .......................................................................................... 78 Treated Water Quality ..................................................................................... 80
DESALINATION WATER TREATMENT PLANT PRELIMINARY DESIGN ....................................... 80 6.3.1 6.3.2 6.3.3 6.3.4 6.3.5 6.3.6 6.3.7 6.3.8 6.3.9 General ........................................................................................................... 80 Main Assumptions........................................................................................... 81 Intakes and outfalls ......................................................................................... 82 Pre-treatment .................................................................................................. 83 Reverse Osmosis............................................................................................ 93 Post Treatment.............................................................................................. 102 Sludge Treatment.......................................................................................... 106 Chemicals ..................................................................................................... 112 Automation and Controls .............................................................................. 124
MDW0158RP0080F01
iii
F01
SITES CONSIDERED FOR DESALINATION OPTION.............................................................. 130 7.2.1 7.2.2 7.2.3 7.2.4 7.2.5 7.2.6 South Dublin.................................................................................................. 130 Ringsend ....................................................................................................... 130 Howth Headland............................................................................................ 131 Ardgillan ........................................................................................................ 131 Balbriggan & Gormanstown .......................................................................... 131 Loughshinny South & North .......................................................................... 132
7.3
CORRIDOR SELECTION FOR DESALINATION OPTION ....................................................... 132 7.3.1 7.3.2 Transmission Pipeline Route Selection ........................................................ 132 Route Selection Methodology ....................................................................... 133
MODELLING SYSTEM ..................................................................................................... 136 8.2.1 8.2.2 Tidal Model.................................................................................................... 136 Effluent Dispersion Model ............................................................................. 137
8.3
TIDAL MODELLING SIMULATIONS .................................................................................... 138 8.3.1 8.3.2 Irish Seas Model ........................................................................................... 138 The Desalination Discharge Model ............................................................... 139
8.4
DISPERSION MODEL SIMULATIONS ................................................................................. 141 8.4.1 8.4.2 8.4.3 8.4.4 Effluent Inputs ............................................................................................... 141 Dispersion Modelling..................................................................................... 142 Dispersion Characteristics ............................................................................ 142 Dispersion Model Simulations....................................................................... 142
8.5
DISPERSION MODELLING RESULTS ................................................................................. 142 8.5.1 8.5.2 Initial Dilution................................................................................................. 142 Medium and Far Field Brine Dispersion........................................................ 144
8.6
Initial Dilution................................................................................................. 161 Medium and Far Field Dispersion ................................................................. 161
ENERGY DEMAND OF DESALINATION TECHNOLOGIES ..................................................... 163 EXISTING ENERGY AND PRIMARY FUEL SOURCES .......................................................... 163
MDW0158RP0080F01
iv
F01
Natural Gas ................................................................................................... 164 Direct Supply from Local Grid ....................................................................... 164
POTENTIAL FOR ALTERNATIVE ENERGY SUPPLY OPTIONS .............................................. 164 9.4.1 9.4.2 9.4.3 9.4.4 Wind .............................................................................................................. 164 Wave, Tidal and Hydropower Technologies ................................................. 165 Solar Photovoltaic and Thermal/Steam Turbine Technologies .................... 165 Biomass and Biofuel Technologies............................................................... 165
9.5 9.6
SINGLE ENERGY MARKET ............................................................................................... 166 CARBON FOOTPRINT MODEL .......................................................................................... 167
Energy Consumption..................................................................................... 167 Carbon Footprint Model Development .......................................................... 168 Energy Supply Scenarios.............................................................................. 168 Summary....................................................................................................... 170 Anticipated Supply Scenarios ....................................................................... 171
10
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS................................................................................. 174 10.1 10.2 INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 174 ACTIVITIES ARISING FROM THE IMPLEMENTATION OF WATER TREATMENT BY
DESALINATION 174
10.3
10.3.1 Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna....................................................................... 174 10.3.2 Population and Human Health ..................................................................... 175 10.3.3 Water ............................................................................................................ 176 10.3.4 Air and Climate ............................................................................................. 177 10.3.5 Cultural Heritage (including Archaeology and Architecture) ........................ 178 10.3.6 Landscape .................................................................................................... 178 10.3.7 Material Assets (including Landuse) ............................................................ 178 10.3.8 Soil................................................................................................................ 178 10.4 CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................. 179
11
ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT .................................................................................................... 180 11.1 CAPITAL COSTS............................................................................................................ 180 11.1.1 Seawater Abstraction Intakes and Brine Discharge Outfalls ....................... 180 11.1.2 Desalination Treatment Plant ....................................................................... 181 11.1.3 Drinking Water Transmission ....................................................................... 182 11.1.4 One-off items ................................................................................................ 183 11.2 11.3
CAPITAL RENEWALS .................................................................................................. 183
MDW0158RP0080F01
F01
11.3.1 Maintenance ................................................................................................. 184 11.3.2 Energy .......................................................................................................... 184 11.3.3 Chemicals and Standing Charges................................................................ 185 11.3.4 Opex summary ............................................................................................. 186 11.4 12 WHOLE LIFE COST .................................................................................................. 187 CONCLUSIONS ....................................................................................................................... 188
MDW0158RP0080F01
vi
F01
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 Figure 1.2 Figure 1.3 Figure 2.1 Figure 2.2 Figure 3.1 Figure 3.2 Figure 3.3 Figure 4.1 Figure 4.2 Greater Dublin Area / Dublin Region (Water Supply Area) ............................................... 1 Key Milestones in Dublin Region Strategic Water Supply Planning.................................. 2 Water Supply Options Summary ....................................................................................... 3 New Source Supply Phases ............................................................................................ 14 High / Low Demand Growth Scenarios ........................................................................... 16 Water Supply Options Summary ..................................................................................... 18 Desalination Plant Principal Infrastructure....................................................................... 21 RO Plant with Conventional Pre-treatment...................................................................... 23 Desalination Concept....................................................................................................... 27 Simplified Flow-sheet of Desalination Process............................................................... 28
Figure 4.3 Schematic of multi-effect evaporator desalination process (horizontal tube parallel feed configuration).................................................................................................................................. 33 Figure 4.4 Schematic of a multi-effect evaporator desalination process with thermal vapour compression. .................................................................................................................................. 34 Figure 4.5 Schematic of a multi-effect evaporator desalination process with mechanical vapour compression. .................................................................................................................................. 35 Figure 4.6 Figure 4.7 Figure 4.8 Figure 4.9 Figure 4.10 Figure 4.11 Figure 4.12 Figure 4.13 Figure 4.14 Figure 4.15 Figure 4.16 Figure 4.17 Figure 4.18 Figure 4.19 Figure 4.20 Figure 4.21 Diagram of MSF plant...................................................................................................... 38 View of a typical MSF plant ............................................................................................. 39 Schematic of a multi-stage flash desalination process with brine recirculation............... 40 Outline of the typical costs for 20 year for an MED plant. ............................................... 45 View of a large capacity distillation facility ................................................................... 46 Principle of Reverse Osmosis ...................................................................................... 47 Schematic of hollow fibre membrane structure............................................................ 48 Typical schematic of a reverse osmosis system.......................................................... 49 Typical 20 year osmosis is desalination plant cost. ..................................................... 53 Treatment chain of Los Angeles water reclamation plant 17 MLD ........................... 54 Interior view of RO plant at Ashkelon, Southern Israel ................................................ 55 Exterior view of RO plant at Ashkelon, Southern Israel (320 Mld)............................... 56 schematic of a hybrid system....................................................................................... 60 Principle of solar distillation.......................................................................................... 61 Schematic of forward osmosis (FO) process ............................................................... 63 Schematic of Electro-dialysis (ED) process ................................................................. 64
Figure 5.1 Global distribution of installed desalination capacity by technology adapted from 1998 survey (International desalination association) .............................................................................. 76 Figure 6.1 Examples of sea water salinity ........................................................................................ 78
Figure 6.2 Temperature variations of sea water during the year according to the Irish Marine Institute: ......................................................................................................................................... 79 Figure 6.3 View of a Dissolved Air Flotation Unit (DAF) for the solid-liquid separation process ...... 88
MDW0158RP0080F01
vii
F01
Constituent parts of a spiral wound module used in Reverse Osmosis treatment process ......................................................................................................................................... 93 View of cartridge filters used to protect membranes from colloidal fouling ..................... 94
Figure 6.6 The water characteristics at the outlet of the RO plant and after post-treatment are as follows ....................................................................................................................................... 103 Figure 6.7 Summation of maximum production of sludge and the corresponding flow and TSS (Total Suspended Matter) concentration ................................................................................................ 108 Figure 8.1 Figure 8.2 Figure 8.3 Figure 8.4 Figure 8.5 Figure 8.6 Figure 8.7 Figure 8.8 Figure 8.9 Figure 8.10 Figure 8.11 Figure 8.12 Figure 8.13 Figure 8.14 Figure 8.15 Figure 8.16 Figure 8.17 Figure 8.18 Figure 8.19 Figure 8.20 Figure 8.21 Figure 8.22 Figure 8.23 Figure 8.24 Figure 8.25 Figure 8.26 Figure 8.27 Figure 8.28 Figure 8.29 Figure 8.30 Figure 8.31 Extent of 45m grid domain showing outfall location ...................................................... 134 Extent of Irish Sea Tidal Surge Model ........................................................................... 138 Base model and detailed 45m model bathymetries....................................................... 140 Typical current speed mid-ebb spring tide..................................................................... 140 Typical current speed mid-flood spring tide................................................................... 141 Brine plume dimensions per outlet ................................................................................ 143 Initial dilution prediction ................................................................................................. 143 Typical Suspended Sediment Plume Excursion over Tidal Cycle - Surface 5m layer .. 144 Maximum Plume Envelope Suspended SedimentSurface 5m layer (no settlement).. 145 Average Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Surface 5m layer (no settlement) .... ................................................................................................................................... 145 Maximum Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Central 15m layer (no settlement) . ................................................................................................................................... 146 Average Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Central 15m layer (no settlement) ... ................................................................................................................................... 146 Maximum Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Seabed 1m layer (no settlement) .. ................................................................................................................................... 147 Average Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Seabed 1m layer (no settlement) .... ................................................................................................................................... 147 Maximum Sediment Deposition ................................................................................. 148 Average Sediment Deposition.................................................................................... 148 Maximum Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Surface 5m layer (settlement) . 149 Average Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Surface 5m layer (settlement) ... 149 Maximum Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Central 15m layer (settlement) 150 Average Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Central 15m layer (settlement) .. 150 Maximum Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Seabed 1m layer (settlement) . 151 Average Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Seabed 1m layer (settlement) ... 151 Maximum Plume Envelope Iron Surface 5m layer.................................................. 152 Average Plume Envelope Iron Surface 5m layer .................................................... 152 Maximum Plume Envelope Iron Central 15m layer................................................. 153 Average Plume Envelope Iron Central 15m layer................................................... 153 Maximum Plume Envelope Iron Seabed 1m layer.................................................. 154 Average Plume Envelope Iron Seabed 1m layer .................................................... 154 Maximum Plume Envelope Phosphonate Surface 5m layer................................... 155 Average Plume Envelope Phosphonate Surface 5m layer ..................................... 155 Maximum Plume Envelope Phosphonate Central 15m layer ................................. 156
MDW0158RP0080F01
viii
F01
Figure 8.32 Figure 8.33 Figure 8.34 Figure 8.35 Figure 8.36 Figure 8.37 Figure 8.38 Figure 8.39 Figure 8.40 Figure 9.1 Figure 9.2 Figure 9.3 Figure 9.4 Figure 9.5 Figure 9.6 Figure 9.7 Figure 11.1 Figure 11.2 Figure 11.3
Average Plume Envelope Phosphonate Central 15m layer.................................... 156 Maximum Plume Envelope Phosphonate Seabed 1m layer................................... 157 Average Plume Envelope Phosphonate Seabed 1m layer ..................................... 157 Maximum Plume Envelope Salt (above background) Surface 5m layer ................ 158 Average Plume Envelope Salt (above background) Surface 5m layer................... 158 Maximum Plume Envelope Salt (above background) Central 15m layer ............... 159 Average Plume Envelope Salt (above background) Central 15m layer ................. 159 Maximum Plume Envelope Salt (above background) Seabed 1m layer ................ 160 Average Plume Envelope Salt (above background) Seabed 1m layer................... 160 Electricity market regulatory framework ........................................................................ 166 Annual Energy Consumptions ....................................................................................... 167 Annual Energy Consumptions per m delivered............................................................ 168 Annual Cost for Different Energy Sources..................................................................... 169 Annual CO2 Emissions for All Energy Supply Scenarios............................................... 169 Annual Carbon Tax for All Energy Supply Scenarios .................................................... 170 Desalination Summary Total Annual Cost of Energy Supply ..................................... 170 Annual Energy Cost for Grid Supply .......................................................................... 185 Chemicals Annual Cost.............................................................................................. 185 OPEX summary.......................................................................................................... 186
3
MDW0158RP0080F01
ix
F01
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1 Table 2.1 Table 2.2 Table 2.3 Table 2.4 Table 2.5 Table 2.6 Table 2.7 Table 2.8 Table 2.9 Table 2.10 Table 2.11 Table 2.12 Table 2.13 Table 2.14 Table 3.1 Supply Requirements from New Source ........................................................................... 4 Greater Dublin Water Supply Area Population 2007-2011-2031 ...................................... 7 Projected Domestic Demand 2005-2011-2031 ................................................................. 7 Industrial Demand / Hectare Wet & Dry Industries......................................................... 8 GDA Non-Domestic Growth 2007-2011-2031 ................................................................... 8 Customer Side Leakage Losses: 2007-2011-2031 ........................................................... 9 Distribution Leakage Losses: 2007-2011-2031 ................................................................. 9 Average/Peak Demand - GDA (2007-2011-2031)........................................................... 10 GDA Production Capacity Existing/Proposed............................................................... 11 GDA Sustainable Production Capacity 2007/2011/2015.............................................. 11 GDA Peak Production Capacity (Ml/d) (Excluding Kildare Wellfields/Barrow) ................ 12 Demand/Supply Balance (Ml/d) ....................................................................................... 12 Average Supply Requirements from the New Source ..................................................... 13 Peak Supply Requirements from New Source ................................................................ 13 New Source Installed Capacity........................................................................................ 14 Desalination Infrastructure Details:.................................................................................. 21
Table 3.2 Calculation of average cost of water delivered to the Dublin Region over the assumed 25 year operating period ..................................................................................................................... 24 Table 4.1 Table 4.2 Table 4.3 Energy consumption of different configuration of MED processes.................................. 36 Energy consumption of different configuration of MSF processes .................................. 41 Investment cost for distillation processes ........................................................................ 43
Table 4.4 Comparison of energy consumption of different distillation processes, when energy source is gas: ................................................................................................................................. 44 Table 4.5 Investment cost for membrane processes....................................................................... 52
Table 4.6 Comparison of energy consumption of different membrane processes, when energy source is fuel. ................................................................................................................................. 52 Table 4.7 Comparison of the energy needed by the membrane processes:................................... 66
Table 5.1 Comparison of all desalination processes, including lab-scale and bench-scale processes ....................................................................................................................................... 73 Table 5.2 Detailed comparison of the main desalination processes: distillation, reverse osmosis and hybrid configurations ............................................................................................................... 74 Table 6.1 Table 6.2 Table 6.3 Table 6.4 Table 6.5 Table 6.6 Table 6.7 Critical Raw Water Parameters for Desalination ............................................................. 80 Summary of the phasing of the Desalination Treatment Plant construction ................... 82 Limitations on raw water quality which permit direct filtration.......................................... 83 Sizing and phasing of the DAF tanks .............................................................................. 89 Sizing of the Dual Media Filtration Units.......................................................................... 91 Characteristics of the Backwash Equipment ................................................................... 92 Operation sequence for backwash of filters .................................................................... 92
MDW0158RP0080F01
F01
Table 6.8 Table 6.9 Table 6.10 Table 6.11 Table 6.12 Table 6.13 Table 6.14 Table 6.15 Table 6.16 Table 6.17 Table 6.18
Sizing and phasing of booster pump equipment ............................................................. 95 Sizing and phasing cartridge filter equipment.................................................................. 95 Sizing and phasing requirements for 1 pass through membranes ................................ 97 Sizing and phasing requirements for 2
st nd st
Sizing and phasing of HP pump for 1 pass.................................................................... 99 Sizing and phasing of Energy Recovery Device.............................................................. 99 Sizing and phasing of booster pump 1 pass (downstream of work exchanger) .......... 100 Sizing and phasing of HP pump for 2
nd st
pass................................................................. 100
Phasing requirements of flushing pump capacity and pump head................................ 101 CIP tank details for phases 1 and 2............................................................................... 102 Details of degassing towers for CO2 stripping phases 1 and 2 ..................................... 104
Table 6.19 Average and maximum concentration of parameters used in calculation of sludge production ................................................................................................................................... 107 Table 6.20 Table 6.21 Table 6.22 Table 6.23 Table 6.24 Table 6.25 Table 6.26 Table 6.27 Table 6.28 Table 6.29 Table 6.30 Table 6.31 Table 6.32 Table 8.1 Table 8.2 Table 8.3 Table 9.1 Table 10.1 Table 11.1 Table 11.2 Table 11.3 Table 11.4 Table 11.5 Table 11.6 Table 11.7 Table 11.8 Table 11.9 Assessment of sludge flows form each point of the treatment process ........................ 108 Sizing and phasing details for mixing tank equipment .................................................. 109 Sizing and phasing details for sludge thickeners........................................................... 110 Sizing and phasing details for sludge dewatering equipment (centrifuges) .................. 111 Sizing and phasing details for sulphuric acid dosing equipment ................................... 113 Sizing and phasing details for ferric chloride dosing equipment ................................... 114 Sizing and phasing details for polymer dosing equipment ............................................ 116 Sizing and phasing details for antiscalant dosing equipment........................................ 118 Sizing and phasing details for sodium bisulphite dosing equipment ............................. 119 Sizing and phasing details for caustic soda dosing equipment ..................................... 120 Sizing and phasing details for the lime process equipment .......................................... 122 Sizing and phasing details for sodium hypochlorite dosing equipment ......................... 123 Main control instrumentation to be installed at desalination plant ................................. 127 Brine discharge characteristics without sludge dispersion ............................................ 135 Brine discharge characteristics with sludge dispersion ................................................. 135 Dispersion modelling parameters used ......................................................................... 141 Quantities of fuel and storage requirements for various biomass and biofuel technologies ....................................................................................................................................... 166 Designated areas close to Loughshinny........................................................................ 175 Abstraction and Discharge Pipelines CAPEX................................................................ 181 Abstraction Pumping Station CAPEX Phase 1 and 2................................................. 181 Pre-Treatment CAPEX .................................................................................................. 182 Reverse Osmosis CAPEX ............................................................................................. 182 Transmission Pipelines Cost ......................................................................................... 182 Clear Water Pumping Station ........................................................................................ 183 One-off Items ................................................................................................................. 183 Asset lifetime and renewal annual provisions................................................................ 183 Maintenance Annual Costs............................................................................................ 184
MDW0158RP0080F01
xi
F01
Power Capacity Charge ............................................................................................. 184 Staff Cost.................................................................................................................... 186 Whole Life Costs of the Scheme at 3%, 5% and 7% Discount Rates ....................... 187
MDW0158RP0080F01
xii
F01
APPENDICES
1 6 1 23 2 3 1
Energy Consumption of Desalination Plants No. of Pages Carbon Footprint Model Economic Assessment Details Desalination Plant Layout No. of Pages No. of Pages No. of Pages
MDW0158RP0080F01
xiii
F01
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
Dublin City Council appointed RPS Consulting Engineers in conjunction with Veolia Water to undertake a Feasibility Study of the options available for providing a new major source of potable water for the Dublin Region (Water Supply Area). The forecast growth in population combined with the projected growth in the extent of the water supply area is such that existing sources, including planned enhancements, will be insufficient to meet future demands within the next ten years. A total requirement of 300 Ml/d is the agreed planning figure for 2031 to cater for average demand/supply shortfalls and provide sufficient headroom for peak supplies, security of supply, contingencies and potential impacts of climate change. Desalination was considered as a possible option to meet this future demand. In order to select the most appropriate technology a review of all existing desalination technologies was undertaken to identify the most suitable technology for the Dublin application.
The key issues addressed in this Report are: An appraisal of the existing desalination technologies available including operational, lab-scale and bench-scale processes; Recommendations for the most appropriate technology with a preliminary design outline having regard to the water quality assessment of the source water; Examination of options and recommendations on selection of the most appropriate site for locating the desalination plant; Modelling of brine dispersion at the general site location to simulate the dispersion of effluent discharges associated with the desalination process, including coagulants and anti-scalants along with the brine discharge; Examination of the anticipated operational energy demand of a desalination facility and the potential sources of energy available to fuel the technology. An assessment of the likely significant environmental effects of constructing a desalination facility has been carried out in order to identify key issues; Cost estimates for the works including capital costs, capital renewals and operating costs which have been assessed on an annual basis over 25 years (2016-2040);
In summary, a seawater reverse osmosis desalination plant could be constructed in the north Fingal Area to cater for the water demands of future population growth. Construction would be in two phases - an initial two stream plant with provision for a future third stream of equivalent size. The final production of the plant would be 300 Mld. The first phase would have a capacity of 200 Mld, to be built for 2016, with a possibility to produce only 50 Mld at the start of the plant operation. All future treatment works, land requirements and connections would be provided for in the Phase 1 plant, such that the additional streams would be more easily constructed when required.
MDW0158RP0080F01
ES1
F01
DEMAND PROJECTIONS
Section 2 assesses demand projections and phased supply requirements from a new major source for current and future development. Based on the production capability of the existing sources and projections on which the long term planning of the Dublin Regions water supplies should be based the final figures used in the design are summarised here. New Source Installed Capacity Dublin Region Peak Demand (2031) Sustainable Production from Existing Sources New Source Supply Requirement Allowance for Security of Supply = = = = 880 Ml/d 627 Ml/d 253 Ml/d 50 Ml/d 303 Ml/d TOTAL = (say 300 Ml/d)
The phasing of the works will provide flexibility in catering for gradually increasing demand growth as shown in the figure below which illustrates supply phases for the new major water source.
Ml/d
Average Demand
600 550
BME Stage 3
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
2015
2016
2017
2019
2021
2023
2025
2027
2026
2029
2031
2033
Year
MDW0158RP0080F01
ES2
F01
The leading factors considered when evaluating each of the technologies reviewed included cost, energy, environmental impact, robustness, operability and safety. In addition as part of this appraisal a full water quality assessment of the source water was conducted. Reverse Osmosis is the recommended option for a major water supply process for Dublin in terms of energy consumption, scale of adaptability and environmental impact when compared with both distillation and hybrid technologies.
PROPOSED DESIGN
It is proposed that twin 1800mm diameter pipelines are required to abstract seawater efficiently at maximum capacity (715Mld) and twin 1400mm diameter pipelines will enable the discharge of brine in an optimised manner at maximum flow rate (415Mld). The pipelines will be in the order of 3km and 2km in length respectively. Given the characteristics of the raw water, the following process stages shall be used for drinking water production:
MDW0158RP0080F01
ES3
F01
Chemical pre-treatment: intended to decrease the SDI before membrane filtration; Reverse osmosis for desalination; Post-treatment with setting at calco-carbonic equilibrium and final chlorination.
Arising out of the water quality assessment of the source waters, two key parameters which greatly influence the desalination plant design in North Dublin are the Silt Density Index (SDI) and the boron concentrations which were recorded during sampling. Analysis results for both SDI and boron were high when compared with typical values. As a consequence for this application the extent of the pretreatment processes required are considerable. The seawater intake and treated water tank constructed in Phase 1 would be adequate for 300 Mld plant removing the need for significant engineering works in Phase 2. Full details of the proposed treatment processes and analysis can be found in Chapter 6.
ENERGY REQUIREMENTS
Preliminary examination of the energy and carbon demand has identified that desalination would have a considerable overall energy demand and associated carbon footprint during the operational phase of the project. Desalination is a very energy intensive process and in an Irish context the cost of gas/oil for energy generation is a key issue for consideration. The construction of a dedicated gas or oil fired power station may have considerable impacts. In terms of alternative renewable energy, regulatory
MDW0158RP0080F01
ES4
F01
constraints require electricity produced from any wind energy project, which exceeds 5MW, be dispatched directly to the national grid. This is then subject to Single Energy Market cost drivers. Therefore the most practicable options for powering the desalination facility would be a direct electrical supply from the National Grid.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
The amount of energy that would be required for the desalination treatment process and the resultant emissions of green house gases when compared with conventional treatment methods are expected to have a significant negative impact on the environment. The proposed preliminary design contains a substantial pre-treatment facility and requires a second pass RO system to be incorporated to treat both the high SDI (silt density index) and boron levels present in the source water. These factors further contribute to the already anticipated high energy requirement for this treatment process. In terms of the impacts on population and health the vulnerability of the Irish Sea source to acute or chronic pollution events exposes the treatment process to risks in terms of security of supply and poor quality treated water.
ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
Cost estimates for the recommended works are set out below and detailed in Chapter 11 and Appendix F of this report. For a desalination plant the capital and operating costs have been based on the construction of pipelines initially for the long-term capacity (300Mld), while the RO treatment and pumping facilities are designed to match demand growth. Economic evaluation results are summarised below: Calculation of average cost of water delivered to the GDA over the assumed 25 year operating period Option H CAPEX OPEX Whole Life Cost WLC / Delivered Volume (/m )
3
MDW0158RP0080F01
ES5
F01
Dublin City Council have been carrying out long term planning studies over the past three years into how best to provide adequate supplies of drinking water for the estimated 2.2 million people expected to be living in the Dublin Region (Water Supply Area) by 2031. The Dublin Region (Water Supply Area) includes the administrative areas of Dublin City, Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown, Fingal and South Dublin, along with significant parts of County Wicklow, Co Meath and Co Kildare (see Figure 1.1 below). Figure 1.1 Greater Dublin Area / Dublin Region (Water Supply Area)
MDW0158RP0080F01
F01
1.2
The average water requirement, in 2007, for the Dublin Region (Water Supply Area) was approx 540 Mld (million litres per day). It is estimated that, as a result of forecast population growth, this figure will rise to approx 800 Mld day by 2031. Peak requirements at 2031 are estimated at 880 Mld. The Dublin Region (Water Supply Area) is currently supplied with water from the Rivers Liffey, Vartry and Dodder and a number of groundwater sources in Fingal and north Kildare. The environmentally sustainable production of water from existing Dublin Region sources will not be sufficient to meet the increased demand of the larger projected population as it continues to grow. Water supplies from a new source to augment supplies from all the existing water supply sources will be required by approx 2016. Otherwise, water shortages and curtailment of economic growth will be unavoidable.
1.3
Figure 1.2 below sets out the milestones in the new source studies from 1996 (Strategic Study) when the need was first identified, up to the present studies (Feasibility Study / Preliminary Report) Figure 1.2 Key Milestones in Dublin Region Strategic Water Supply Planning
1996 1996
DEHLG Greater Dublin Water Supply Strategic Study 1996 -2016 DEHLG Greater Dublin Water Supply Strategic Study 1996 -2016 New Source Requirement identified New Source Requirement identified
2000 2000
DEHLG Review of GDWSSS 1996 DEHLG Review of GDWSSS 1996 Major Source Options identified // shortlisted (3 No) Major Source Options identified shortlisted (3 No)
2005 2005
Feasibility Study of Short-listed Options Feasibility Study of Short-listed Options
2006 2006
Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Phase 1 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Phase 1 Public Consultation // Feedback June Oct. 2006 Public Consultation Feedback June Oct. 2006
The 1996 Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government (DEHLG) Strategic Study developed a range of demand/supply projections which first identified that the Dublin Region would require a new water supply source within a 20 year period to supplement the sustainable supply production of existing Dublin Region sources.
MDW0158RP0080F01
F01
In 2000, a review of the 1996 study re-confirmed its findings and shortlisted a number of water supply source options for further detailed study. These were; Shannon Lough Ree, Desalination (Irish Sea) and a conjunctive use option involving the Upper Liffey with the River Barrow. Over the 2002 to 2004 period, following public consultation, the need for a new water supply source was adopted by the Local Authorities in the Dublin Region. In 2005 DCC, through their consultants RPS-Veolia, carried out a Feasibility Study on the water supply source options shortlisted in the 2000 review. A Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the Feasibility Studys findings commenced in 2006.The initial SEA (Phase 1) involved extensive public consultation from June to Oct 2006. During this period (and subsequently) considerable feedback was received from impacted stakeholders and the general public. On foot of the feedback received, DCC decided to consider a wider range of water supply options during the Preliminary Report studies. An interim SEA Statement and Newsletter were published in July 2007 outlining the status of the work at that stage and setting out the plan for further studies and also plans for a follow up SEA (Phase 2) of the wider water supply options range.
1.4
The water supply options which are currently being investigated as part of the Preliminary Report studies are outlined schematically in Figure 1.3 below. Desalination is Option H. Figure 1.3 Water Supply Options Summary
A-Lough Ree B-Lough Derg C-Parteen Basin D-Lough Ree + Lough Derg E- Lough Ree + Storage F- Lough Derg + Storage Options G-Impoundment - Lough Ree [Derg] H-Desalination I-Fingal / Kildare Groundwater J-Liffey / Barrow
Lough Ree
MULLINGAR
Desalination Plant
H
Wells
G E D F1
Former Bogs
Ballycoolen
ATHLONE
Termination Point
River Shannon
TULLAMORE F 2
G
Ballymore Eustace
Impoundment
F B J
SLIEVE BLOOM MOUNTAINS
Poulaphuca Lake
Lough Derg
Athy
PORTLAOISE
River Barrow
Killaloe
Parteen Basin
Head Race
C
Water Treatment Plant River Shannon
MDW0158SK0036D13
ESB Ardnacrusha
MDW0158RP0080F01
F01
1.4.1
Demand projections for the Dublin Region (Section 2) indicate a requirement for water supplies from a new source to supplement supplies from existing sources by approx 2016. Table 1.1 below summarises the projected population growth to 2031 and the water demand increases associated with that growth. The sustainable production of existing Dublin Region sources (630Mld) can meet average demand up to approx 2016. After 2016, supplies from a new source will be increasingly needed to avoid regular water shortages and rationing.
Table 1.1
Dublin Region Water Supply Area Population (000s) Average Total Demand (MI/d) Sustainable Production of existing Sources (MI/d)
1996
1180 460 470
2006
1370 530 540
2016
1685 630 630
2031
2180 800 630
Average Supply Requirement at 2031 = 800 Ml/d 630Ml/d = 170Ml/d Additional Peak Requirement at 2031 (approx. 3 months / annum) = 80Ml/d Supply Allowance to Midlands Local Authorities = 50Ml/d Contingency Allowance = 50Ml/d Supply (new source) Total = 350Ml/d
Infrastructure development proposals and associated capital costs in Section 3 reflect a phased approach to provision of gradually increasing quantities of water supplies to match demand growth from 2016 onwards.
MDW0158RP0080F01
F01
2.1
The process for estimation of future potable water demand for the Greater Dublin Area involved : Review of all relevant reports Analysis of trends over the 1996 to 2007 period Local Authority Consultations
2.2
REPORTS REVIEW
The following key reports and studies were referenced: Greater Dublin Water Supply Strategic Study (GDWSSS) '96 Year 2000 Review of GDWSSS96 Greater Dublin Strategic Drainage Study (GDSDS) 2004 Population and Land use Study 2003 (incl. Strategic & Regional Guidelines/National Spatial Strategy / Local Authority Development Plans) Monthly "Water Balance" Report to Greater Dublin Water Supply Steering Group Yield of the River Liffey (ODwyer / Tobin) - Fingal County Council Kildare Water Strategy - Nov 2003 (Nicolas O'Dwyer) Wicklow / Meath (demand projection studies) Water Services Investment Programme - Assessment of Needs 2007 - 2012 Strategic Storage Study 2006 (Mc Carthy-Hyder) Planning
MDW0158RP0080F01
F01
2.3
The 1996 Strategic Supply Study and Year 2000 Review established the methodologies for best practice demand analysis and forecasting which in turn were based on UK Department of Environment recommendations (Sept. 1995). The demand projections in this report are based on this methodology. The total demand is arrived at by consideration of a number of sub-components and preparing projections for each to arrive at an overall total. The demand sub-components are as follows: Domestic Consumption Non Domestic Consumption Customer Side Leakage Distribution Network Leakage Headroom (peak/security of supply/contingency/climate change)
2.4
DOMESTIC DEMAND
2.4.1
Population
Population projections for the GDA were undertaken at a high level of detail during the Greater Dublin Strategic Drainage Study and reported on in the Population & Land Use Report of 2003. This 2003 report took cognisance of the Regional and Strategic Planning Guidelines and National Spatial Strategy long-term CSO and ESRI population projections. The GDA population projections for 2011 and 2031 contained in the 2003 Population & Land Use Report were used as the basis for forecasting the population projections for the Greater Dublin Water Supply Area which includes Dublin City Council, Fingal, South Dublin, Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown and substantial parts of Kildare, Wicklow and Meath The population projections for the Kildare, Meath and Wicklow sections of the Greater Dublin Water Supply Area include only for population in Kildare, Meath and Wicklow receiving their supplies from Dublin Sources, i.e. Population figures for Kildare are net of those who will receive future supplies from the River Barrow and Groundwater Sources. A similar approach has been adopted for Meath and Wicklow. GDA population forecasts in the National Spatial Strategy for 2031 range from 2.0m to 2.6m depending on levels of migration, fertility rates, various economic growth scenarios, etc. The Greater Dublin Strategic Drainage Study based its planning for future infrastructure development on a GDA population of 2.5m at 2031. This study has adopted a similar approach.
MDW0158RP0080F01
F01
Table 2.1 below outlines the population projections. Table 2.1 Greater Dublin Water Supply Area Population 2007-2011-2031 2007 Population 1,429,000 2011 1,594,000 2031 2,189,000
2.4.2
Per Capita Consumption has been increasing steadily over the past 10 years reflecting a growth in affluence and lifestyle changes. Demand analysis indicates that current (2007) PCC levels in the GDA range from 148 l/hd/d (litres per head per day) to 150 l/hd/d. The constant addition of new housing stock within the water supply area, including greater usage of water efficient appliances, should exert some downward influence on average PCC levels over time. On the other hand the impacts of climate change and continuing lifestyle changes may result in PCC increases. In discussion with Local Authority operations staff, a figure of 145 l/hd/d was agreed as an appropriate figure for planning purposes from 2011 to 2031, particularly when taken in conjunction with a population projection figure towards the top end of the range. Table 2.2 below outlines the projected domestic consumption for the 2007-2011-2031 period.
Table 2.2
Projected Domestic Demand 2005-2011-2031 2007 2011 1,594,000 145 l/hd/d 231 Ml/d 2031 2,189,000 145 l/hd/d 317 Ml/d
2.5
The estimation of future non-domestic demand was based on a "zoning approach". The Greater Dublin Strategic Drainage Study Report 2004 contained details of lands in each Local Authority area which had been identified for non-domestic zoning purposes. Having established the extent of potential future non-domestic development lands, average demand estimates per hectare were derived from Table 3.5 of Year 2000 Review of GDWSSS96. The average demand/hectare for wet/dry industry is outlined in Table 2.3.
MDW0158RP0080F01
F01
Table 2.3
Industrial Demand / Hectare Wet & Dry Industries Dry Industry 17 m /ha/day
3
A number of assumptions were made as follows: Development of Industrial & Commercial zoned land assumed to be 50% wet, 50% dry Scientific & Technology land development assumed to be 100% dry By 2031 all currently zoned lands will have been fully developed.
Table 2.4 below outlines the projected growth in non-domestic demand over the 2007-2011-2031 period. Table 2.4 GDA Non-Domestic Growth 2007-2011-2031 2007 Non Domestic Demand 131 Ml/d 2011 154 Ml/d 2031 267 Ml/d
These projections are inclusive of non-domestic demand associated with new residential development and expansion of serviced industry in existing developed areas. They also include all strategic industry provision.
2.6
Customer side leakage losses average approx 65.0 litres per property per day (l/prop/d) for the GDA (2007). In the short term, this level of customer side leakage is forecast to continue. In the medium term (post 2011) reductions of 1% per annum have been forecast to reflect the impact of greater consumer awareness through water conservation programmes, network rehabilitation and the effect of constant addition of new connections to the network. Total customer side leakage losses are a product of leakage per property and forecast property numbers. Forecast property numbers have been determined from population forecasts and projected household occupancy rates on an individual local authority basis. Customer Side Leakage Losses for the 2007-2011-2031 period are summarised in Table 2.5 below.
MDW0158RP0080F01
F01
Table 2.5
Customer Side Leakage Losses: 2007-2011-2031 2007 2011 65 litres 2.50 2031 53 litres 2.20
65 litres 2.50
GDA
570,840 37 Ml/d
637,000 42 Ml/d
995,000 53 Ml/d
2.7
GDA Local Authorities are in broad agreement on the network leakage level reductions which are likely to be achieved over the 2007-2011-2031 period as a result of active leakage control, water conservation measures and network rehabilitation programmes. Each GDA Local Authority is starting from a different base with higher leakage currently occurring in the older networks in Dublin City, parts of Fingal and Bray, Co. Wicklow. International best practice for equivalent networks would indicate leakage levels of 20% as being attainable with pro-active leakage detection supported by ongoing targeted network rehabilitation .The 2007 2010 network rehabilitation programme costing 118m is currently underway. The 2007 GDA average leakage was approximately 30%. This and future projections are summarized in Table 2.6 below.
Table 2.6
Leakage %
30%
Previous demand projections in GDWSSS96 and Year 2000 Review had forecast leakage levels reducing to 16% by 2021. Recent experience in the major leakage detection and repair programme over the last five years demonstrates that the 20% target at 2031 is more appropriate due to the established conditions in the network. The 20% figure is also in line with international best practice for networks of this nature.
2.8
HEADROOM
Water supplies from a new Major Source for the GDA will be required to have sufficient capacity to meet the following supply conditions: Average demand shortfalls (i.e. average projected demand minus the sustainable production of existing GDA sources)
MDW0158RP0080F01
F01
Peaks (@ 12.5% above average) estimated from historical patterns (average day/peak week) Security of supply (allowance of 50 Ml/d) for all other requirements (unexpected demand or loss of production) Contingencies (e.g. wet process industries) Climate change impacts New supply areas (Included in peak/security of supply allowances)
2.9
Based on the projections of the various demand components outlined in 2.4 to 2.8 above, Table 2.7 summarises the GDA average/peak water supply requirements for the 2007-2011-2031 period. Table 2.7 Average/Peak Demand - GDA (2007-2011-2031) 2007 Average Demand Ml/d Peak Demand Ml/d 540 588 2011 590 643 2031 800 880
The Feasibility Study (2005) recommended that long term planning of the GDA's water supplies should be based on these projections. Since any new water supply scheme will not be realised before 2015/16 at the earliest, it follows that such a scheme should have a 25 year design life as a minimum. Therefore, even if demand growth is lower than predicted to 2031, the effect will be the delaying of its realisation by a number of years. It follows that while phasing of the scheme might be adjusted for demand growth, the ultimate capacity requirement will be necessary for the GDA in the longterm.
Tables 2.8 and 2.9 below outline the current and projected sustainable production capabilities of the existing Dublin public water supply sources and also the anticipated production of Kildare Wellfields and the River Barrow. The projected production represents the upper sustainable production limit of the respective sources. No contribution has been assumed from the development of any new interim GDA sources as no significant volumes are anticipated.
MDW0158RP0080F01
10
F01
Table 2.8
GDA Production Capacity Existing/Proposed Sustainable Output 274 Ml/d 318 Ml/d 148 Ml/d 215 Ml/d 75 Ml/d 16 Ml/d 3 Ml/d Year 2007 2009 2007 2010 2007 2007 2007
Water Treatment Plant * Ballymore Eustace (BME) Stage 3 Development Leixlip Stage 5 Expansion Roundwood Ballyboden Bog of the Ring Kildare Groundwater Wellfield Phase 1 Wellfield Phase 2 Kildare River Barrow Phase 1 Phase 2
* Because of Network Restrictions, production from all sources cannot be fed to all distribution areas. This may result in localised shortages in areas of high growth post 2011. Table 2.9 Source BME Leixlip Roundwood Ballyboden Bog of the Ring TOTAL Kildare Wellfields Barrow Ml/d Ml/d Ml/d 3 3 3 3 3 3 8 20 28 8 41 49 GDA Sustainable Production Capacity 2007/2011/2015 Units Ml/d Ml/d Ml/d Ml/d Ml/d ML/d 2007 274 148 75 16 3 516 2008 274 148 75 16 3 516 2009 318 148 75 16 3 560 2010 318 215 75 16 3 627 2011 318 215 75 16 3 627 2015 318 215 75 16 3 627
Kildare Total
The demand projections for Kildare County which are included in GDA demand projections reflect Kildare's requirements from the GDA water supply system and are net of demand being met by production from Wellfields/Barrow. Meath & Wicklow demands supplied from GDA sources are treated in a similar manner.
MDW0158RP0080F01
11
F01
By 2010 the existing GDA Water Supply Sources will have reached their upper sustainable limits of production. There is a non-sustainable peak production capability of approximately 35 - 40 Ml/d available to supplement sustainable production for limited periods. This is illustrated in Table 2.10 below. Table 2.10 Production Sustainable Peak GDA Peak Production Capacity (Ml/d) (Excluding Kildare Wellfields/Barrow) 2007 516 553 2008 516 553 2009 560 597 2010 627 664
Additional supplies will be required from a new Major Source when the projected future average demand exceeds 627 Ml/d. The critical point will be reached when average demand exceeds peak production from existing sources. These capacities are based on existing capacity calculations using historical yield data. They make no allowance for climate change impacts which may be significant in the region in the longterm. Projected Demands are superimposed on projected supply in Section 2.13 to identify the timing and quantities of additional supply inputs from a new major source.
Year
Average GDA Demands 540 554 566 578 589 580 591 602 615 627 685 743 800
Peak GDA Demand 588 603 617 630 643 633 646 658 672 685 750 815 880
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Critical Period 2015 2016 2021 2026 2031
MDW0158RP0080F01
12
F01
The critical period, outlined in red above, is reached when sustainable production from existing sources equals average day demand and peak demand begins to exceed peak production capability. This situation occurs in 2015/16. Supplies from a new major source will be required at that stage if current levels of service are to be maintained. In addition to the above, localised supply shortages, from 2012 to 2016, are possible in certain areas experiencing high demand growth, since restrictions in the network prevent the outputs from the various production facilities being used in all distribution areas. NB. The average demand projection for 2021 in the Year 2000 Review (high scenario) was 672 Ml/d compared to a forecast of 685 Ml/d currently.
A new major source for the GDA will be operated in conjunction with the existing sources to provide overall supplies in the most cost effective and operationally efficient manner. Assuming a new source comes on stream in 2016, the minimum supply requirement profile to meet average demand shortfalls can be calculated from Table 2.11 above and are outlined in Table 2.12. Table 2.12 Average Supply Requirements from the New Source Sustainable Production Existing Sources 627 627 627 627 Average Demands 627 685 743 800 GDA Supply Requirements New Source 0 58 116 173
Similarly, if the new source is required to meet peak GDA demand (or if peak demand in the GDA is being met by the sustainable production of existing sources) then the supply requirements from the new source are as outlined in Table 2.13. This is the recommended operational scenario. Table 2.13 Peak Supply Requirements from New Source Sustainable Production Existing Sources 627 627 627 627 Peak Demands 685 750 815 880 GDA Supply Requirements New Source 58 123 188 253
MDW0158RP0080F01
13
F01
In addition to meeting average and peak supply requirements the New Source should also have sufficient reserve capacity to provide security of supply in the event of existing plant breakdown or other contingencies. A minimum allowance of 50 Ml/d is recommended. On the basis of the above projected average and peak demand requirements to be supplied by the New Major Source in addition to a reserve capacity for security of supply the recommended maximum installed capacity was determined as follows in Table 2.14.
Table 2.14
New Source Installed Capacity = = = = 880 Ml/d 627 Ml/d 253 Ml/d 50 Ml/d 303 Ml/d
GDA Peak Demand (2031) Sustainable Production from Existing Sources New Source Supply Requirement Allowance for Security of Supply
TOTAL
The total installed capacity of 300 Ml/d can be implemented over a number of phases to provide flexibility in catering for gradually increasing demand growth. Figure 2.1 below illustrates a two phased approach - 200 Ml/d in Phase 1 and 100 Ml/d in Phase 2 - approximately 10 years apart. Figure 2.1 also illustrates the average demand, headroom allowances catering for peak (12.5%) and security of supply (50 Ml/d) as well as the sustainable production from existing sources.
Ml/d
Average Demand
600 550
BME Stage 3
2005
2007
2009
2011
2013
2015
2016
2017
2019
2021
2023
2025
2027
2026
2029
2031
2033
Year
MDW0158RP0080F01
14
F01
MDW0158RP0080F01
15
F01
Figure 2.2
800
Demand Projections
750
Average Demand
Ml/d
650
600
SCENARIO
Population Growth Rate Leakage at 2031 Water Conservation Economic Growth Rate
2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019 2021 2023 2025
Medium to High 20% Low Low to Medium 16%
550
500
450 2003
2027
2029
2031
2033
Year
2.14 SUMMARY
MDW0158RP0080F01
16
F01
2.14.3 Leakage
Progress on leakage reduction has resulted in leakage levels in excess of 40% in the late 1990s being reduced to 30% today (2007) and the intent is to lower this further to a max 20% by 2031 which is in line with best international practice for similar type networks. Substantial investment is required, even to retain the current leakage levels, since without investment the networks will continue to deteriorate in a do-nothing scenario.
MDW0158RP0080F01
17
F01
The water supply options which are being investigated are outlined schematically in Fig 3.1 below. Desalination (Option H) is one of 10 options being investigated. The other nine options have been described in order to set the context in which the desalination studies are being undertaken.
Figure 3.1
Lough Ree
MULLINGAR
Desalination Plant
H
Wells
G E D F1
Former Bogs
Ballycoolen
ATHLONE
Termination Point
River Shannon
TULLAMORE F
G
Ballymore Eustace
Impoundment
F B J
SLIEVE BLOOM MOUNTAINS
Poulaphuca Lake
Lough Derg
Athy
PORTLAOISE
River Barrow
Killaloe
Parteen Basin
Head Race
C
Water Treatment Plant River Shannon
MDW0158SK0036D13
ESB Ardnacrusha
3.1.1
Option A
Option A involves water abstraction from Lough Ree, water treatment and pumping facilities near Lough Ree and pipelines approx 104km in length to convey treated water to the Dublin Region. This option also has the capability of supplying treated water to Midlands Local Authorities along the pipeline route.
3.1.2
Option B
Option B involves water abstraction from Lough Derg, water treatment and pumping facilities near Lough Derg and pipelines approx 122km in length to convey treated water to the Dublin Region.This
MDW0158RP0080F01
18
F01
option also has the capability of supplying treated water to Midlands Local Authorities along the pipeline route.
3.1.3
Option C
Option C involves water abstraction from Parteen Basin (near Parteen weir), water treatment and pumping facilities near Parteen Basin and pipelines approx 158km in length to convey treated water to the Dublin Region. This option also has the capability of supplying treated water to Midlands Local Authorities along the pipeline route.
3.1.4
Option D
Option D involves water abstraction initially (Phase 1) from Lough Ree, water treatment and pumping facilities near Lough Ree and pipelines approx 104km in length to convey treated water to the Dublin Region. A second phase (approx 10 years later) involves abstraction from Lough Derg, treatment near Lough Derg and pumping of treated water via pipelines 73km in length to a booster station located approx midway between Lough Ree and Dublin. This option also has the capability of supplying treated water to Midlands Local Authorities along the pipeline routes from Lough Ree to the Dublin Region and from Lough Derg to the booster station location.
3.1.5
Option E
Option E involves raw water abstraction from Lough Ree, pumping of raw water to a cutaway bog site near Rochfortbridge (owned by Bord na Mona),raw water storage facilities at the site ,water treatment and pumping facilities at the site and pipelines to convey treated water to the Dublin Region. Overall raw water and treated water pipelines are approx 104km in length. Storage facilites will accommodate up to 4 months average supply requirements. This option has the capability of supplying treated water to Midlands Local Authorities from Rochfortbridge.
3.1.6
Option F
Option F involves abstraction from Lough Derg in combination with bog storage. Two bogs have been identified as suitable for storage, one near Rochforbridge, Option F1, and the other near Portarlington, Option F2.
F1 involves raw water abstraction from Lough Derg, pumping of raw water to a cutaway bog site near Rochfortbridge (owned by Bord na Mona) raw water storage facilities at the site, water treatment and pumping facilities at the site and pipelines to convey treated water to the Dublin Region. Overall raw water and treated water pipelines are approx 127km in length. Storage facilities will accommodate up to 2 months average supply requirements. This option has the capability of supplying treated water to Midlands Local Authorities from Rochfortbridge. F2 involves raw water abstraction from Lough Derg, pumping of raw water to a cutaway bog site near Portarlington (owned by Bord na Mona) raw water storage facilities at the site, water treatment and pumping facilities at the site and pipelines to convey treated water to the Dublin Region. Overall raw water and treated water pipelines are approx 122km in length. Storage facilities will accommodate up to 2 months average supply requirements. This option has the capability of supplying treated water to Midlands Local Authorities from Portarlington.
3.1.7
Option G
Option G involves abstraction of raw water from Lough Ree during higher flow months, pumping of raw water to a treatment plant near Dublin, pumping of excess raw water to an impoundment in the Dublin/Wicklow mountains for usage during dry periods and delivery of treated water to a designated termination point near Dublin. Total pipeline lengths are approx 113km in length. This option has no capability for supplying treated water to locations en route between the Shannon and Dublin.(This option could also be supplied from Lough Derg )
MDW0158RP0080F01
19
F01
3.1.8
Option H
Option H involves abstraction of sea water from the Irish Sea in north Fingal, desalination of sea water through a Reverse Osmosis (RO) desalination plant, pumping of treated water to Ballycoolen reservoirs via 25 km pipelines and discharge of brine (from the treatment process) back into the Irish Sea.
3.1.9
Option I
Option I involves abstraction of water from groundwater sources, within 80km of Dublin, and piping of groundwater to suitable locations for treatment and introduction into public water supply systems.
3.1.10 Option J
Option J involves the conjunctive use of the River Barrow with the Upper Liffey. Approx 50% of the Dublin Regions water supply comes from Poulaphuca Lake on the Upper Liffey via Ballymore Eustace Water Treatment Plant. A continuous abstraction quantity of 318Ml/d from Poulaphuca for treatment in Ballymore Eustace has been licensed as the maximum sustainable abstraction level from the Liffey for this plant. The Liffey-Barrow conjunctive use option envisages abstractions of water from the Barrow when sustainable quantities may be available (Winter / Spring) and combining these abstractions with variable abstractions from Poulaphuca with a view to increasing the overall supply to Ballymore Eustace Water Treatment Plant over and above what is sustainably available from Poulaphuca on its own.
3.2
This report focuses solely on Option H which involves the evaluation of Desalination of Irish Sea water as a treatment process for the provision of a 300 Mld drinking water supply for the Dublin Region.
3.3
To provide a treated water supply sourced from the Irish Sea would involve the construction of a major desalination facility on the East Coast and a pipeline to take the desalinated water to a suitable reservoir where it would enter the supply network for the Dublin Region. Figure 3.2 and Table 3.1 below illustrate the principal infrastructure components required Desalination
MDW0158RP0080F01
20
F01
Desalination Plant: Desalination Plant: Phase 2 capacity: Phase 2 capacity: 300 Mld 300 Mld
Sea Water Pumping Station: Sea Water Pumping Station: Ph 2 :: 715 Mld Ph 2 715 Mld Reverse Osmosis Treatment Plant: Reverse Osmosis Treatment Plant: Ph 2 :: 300 Mld Ph 2 300 Mld Potable Water Pumping Station: Potable Water Pumping Station: Ph 2 :: 300 Mld Ph 2 300 Mld
24 km
2 De x 1 si 400 gn m ca m pa ci Pr ty es : 4 su 15 re M M ld ai ns
(2 km )
(3 km )
Table 3.1
Sea Water Pipelines Treated Water Sea Water Pumping Station Reverse Osmosis Treatment Plant Treated Water Pumping Station Termination at Ballycoolen Reservoir
The Desalination concept was initially developed during the Feasibility Study (2005) undertaken by RPS-Veolia. The design and costings were based on a state of the art Desalination Plant in Ashkelon, Israel where Veolia played a leading role in the design, construction and commissioning phases. A number of key issues in relation to desalination in an Irish context were identified by Veolia during the course of the feasibility study.
3.3.1
The technical evaluation of a desalinated water supply involved the following approach:
MDW0158RP0080F01
21
F01
2) Identification and development of infrastructure requirements to meet phased demand growth including:
Water intake and Raw Water Pumping facilities Sea water intake Pipelines Desalination Water Treatment Plant Treated Water Pipelines and Pumping facilities Storage facilities Integration and connection of new water supplies into Dublin Region water distribution network Routing and Site Selection
For desalination abstraction from the Irish Sea is technically feasible. The optimum abstraction point would be located 3 to 4 km from shore to avoid tidal effects and enhance water intake quality in terms of dissolved solids. Disposal and dispersal of brine would also occur 2 to 3 km from shore to ensure long term environmental sustainability. A number of technically suitable locations were examined along Dublin's east coast for locating a desalination plant. North Fingal was identified as the optimum location because of water quality considerations, suitability for construction of intake / outfall infrastructure, energy availability and the relative ease of bringing treated water supplies from this location into the water distribution system within the Dublin Region. A number of potential desalination processes were considered as follows:
MDW0158RP0080F01
22
F01
Post Treatment (mineralization) Reject Stream (Brine) Ancillary facilities - chemical dosing, energy recuperation devices.
Figure 3.3 below illustrates the principal features of a reverse osmosis (RO) desalination plant.
Figure 3.3
Sea
RO Plant
Air Degasifer Treated Water Tank Mineralisation & Neutralisation Disinfection
To Distribution
3.3.2
The pipeline route selection process for a desalination plant involved identification of the shortest length route corridors (2km width) between the off-take and termination points, which have least environmental impact and are the most economic route corridors for future construction and operation of a pipeline (or pipelines) consistent with the constraints of the overall design philosophy particularly with respect to elevation profile, operating pressures and optimisation of overall operational requirements.
MDW0158RP0080F01
23
F01
Avoidance of: Existing Developments Planned Developments Motorways, High Voltage Electricity Pylons & Gas Transmission Pipelines
Compliance with topography / elevation considerations consistent with the overall design philosophy of minimising pumping energy and optimisation of operational criteria.
3.3.3
The economic evaluation of a desalinated water supply involved the following approach:
1) Establishing the Net Present Value (NPV) of Capital Costs including infrastructure renewal over an assumed 25 year operating period using a range of discount values 2) Matching infrastructure development to demand growth on a phased basis where practical 3) Establishing the NPV of Operating Costs over an assumed operating period of 25 years using a range of discount values 4) Establishment of residual value after 25 years of operation 5) Calculation of water delivered over a 25 year lifetime
For a desalination plant the capital and operating costs have been based on the construction of pipelines initially for the long-term capacity (300Mld), while the RO treatment and pumping facilities are designed to match demand growth. Economic evaluation results are summarised in Table 3.2 below
Table 3.2 Calculation of average cost of water delivered to the Dublin Region over the assumed 25 year operating period Option H CAPEX OPEX Whole Life Cost WLC / Delivered Volume (/m )
3
Cost
611 m 336 m 947 m 0.64 /m
3
MDW0158RP0080F01
24
F01
3.3.4
Modelling of the brine dispersion was undertaken to assess the impact of the discharges from the facility on the receiving water. This exercise included the following: Simulation of the dispersion of the effluent discharges associated with the desalination process including coagulant, anti-scalant and brine Initial, medium and far dispersion models for brine discharge Impact of effluent discharges without sludge dispersion Impact of effluent discharges with sludge dispersion Estimate of costs
3.3.5
Environmental Assessments
The principal potential environmental impacts identified are as follows : High Energy Use - CO2 production / greenhouse effects Ecology of local estuarine / inshore habitats Sea angling impacts Sea bed disruption - construction methodologies Navigation Impacts - during construction / subsequent operation Disposal of Brine (effluent) from the Desalination Plant Transmission Pipeline - NHA's, SPA's, SAC's, Archaeology etc.
In addition to the above potential impacts, water supplies from the Desalination Source may be perceived by the general public as being aesthetically undesirable for drinking purposes on account of the Irish Sea being used for effluent disposal and potentially containing radioactive material, even though these issues are catered for within the treatment process. Further details on environmental aspects are included in Section 10.
MDW0158RP0080F01
25
F01
4
4.1
TECHNOLOGY REVIEW
INTRODUCTION HISTORY OF DESALINATION DEVELOPMENT
The history of desalination processes began primarily with thermal distillation processes. This technology was employed in the first major desalination plants of the 1970s which were required for rapidly developing cities in the Middle East region. The key factors influencing this technology development were the abundance of low cost energy, a total lack of freshwater resources and the fact that the cost of water was not a limiting factor. Many large scale independent water and power projects were constructed as a result for areas such as Taweelah, Dubai, Jubbail (SA) and Doha. Following the initial market for large scale distillation projects a second market emerged generating small to medium sized plants catering mainly for tourist zones in tropical and Mediterranean islands during the1980s for example in the West Indies and Scilly Islands. This period saw the emergence of small capacity Multiple-Effect Distillation and Reverse Osmosis plants. In contrast to the plants constructed in the Gulf area, there were both high costs and energy consumption associated with these smaller plants. However the technology benefited from the operating experience achieved with these smaller scale units that had been operated during the 1980s and previous decades. By the 1990s the use of desalination for municipal water supplies had become more commonplace. Its growing success as a water supply source is mainly as a result of improvements in technology, some decreases in cost and increased pressure on more conventional sources of freshwater. The greatest commercial growth in desalination has been seen in reverse osmosis (RO) technology which now accounts for approximately 60% of desalination plants worldwide. Improvements in membranes have increased the use of RO which in turn has led to greater efficiencies and reduced energy consumption. By contrast the distillation process is a high energy consumer which means that thermal plants are now less favoured due to higher capital and operating costs.
4.2
VEOLIA EXPERIENCE
Studies on desalination involve investigating the latest technologies and energy efficiencies in order that the merits of this option be fully evaluated for valid comparison to the alternative options. Desalination was primarily identified by Veolia Water, one of the consultants retained by Dublin City Council to assist in identifying solutions for the future water needs of the Dublin Region. Veolias expertise has been fundamental in reviewing the available desalination technologies and selecting the appropriate technology for the Dublin application. Paris-based Veolia Environment (VE) is a major desalination plant builder and membrane supplier, as well as a water utility operator, getting about 34% of its revenue from water-related businesses. SIDEM, a subsidiary of Veolia Water, is one of the world leaders in thermal seawater desalination. Present in Saudi Arabia since the 1970s, the company now boasts 73 desalination facilities in the 3 region. Its most recent contracts include Marafiq, Saudi Arabia (800,000 m /day), Al Hidd, Bahrain 3 3 (270,000 m /day), Al Khobar, Saudi Arabia (267,000 m /day), and Al Taweelah A1, UAE (240,000 3 m /day). Veolia Water (and its Israeli partners) have designed and built the world's largest desalination plant using reverse osmosis technology in Ashkelon, Israel. With a daily production capacity of 320,000 cubic meters of drinking water (analogous to the volume required for the Dublin option), the Ashkelon
MDW0158RP0080F01
26
F01
desalination plant is comprised of two parallel treatment units each of which has an annual production capacity of 54 million cubic meters.
4.3
4.3.1
Desalination is a separation process used to reduce the dissolved salt content of saline water to a usable level. All desalination processes involve three liquid streams: the saline feedwater (brackish water or seawater), low-salinity product water, and a highly concentrated saline stream (waste brine or reject water). The saline feed water is drawn from oceanic or underground sources. It is separated by the desalination process into the two output streams: the low-salinity product water and highly concentrated saline streams. The use of desalination overcomes the predicament faced by many coastal communities, having access to a practically inexhaustible supply of saline water but having no means of utilising the supply. Although some substances dissolved in water, such as calcium carbonate, can be removed by chemical treatment, other common constituents, like sodium chloride, require more technically sophisticated methods, collectively known as desalination. In the past, the difficulty and expense of removing various dissolved salts from water made saline waters an impractical source of potable water. However, starting in the 1950s, desalination began to appear to be economically practical for ordinary use, under certain circumstances.
A by-product of desalination is brine. Brine is a concentrated salt solution (with more than 35 000 mg/L dissolved solids) that must be disposed of, generally by discharge into deep saline aquifers or surface waters with a smaller salt content.
MDW0158RP0080F01
27
F01
A post-treatment chain is added at the end of a desalination plant in order to remineralise the water. Following post-treatment the water quality produced by desalination plants can practically have the same organoleptic features (taste, colour, odour) as the water produced from surface water (rivers, lakes).
4.3.2
Energy Source
A major characteristic of the desalination process is the requirement for thermal or electrical energy input. The form of energy available, the associated cost and the environmental constraints related to the energy source will play a major role in desalination process selection. The different forms of energy are presented below:
Electrical energy
Some desalination processes use electrical power exclusively which can be supplied from the grid or from sources such as wind farms.
Thermal energy
Most distillation process and solar distillation use thermal energy. This energy may originate from many different sources including: Steam Industrial waste heat (higher temperature gases, heated industrial coolant streams, heated brines, cooling water streams, gas turbine, solid waste incinerators)
MDW0158RP0080F01
28
F01
Solar energy
Solar energy collectors can provide heat or electrical energy, but are suitable only for small desalination plant.
Geothermal brines
Deep artesian bores can provide warm water (say 80C) and can be a source for a thermal desalination. The energy requirements for desalination plants depend on the salinity and the temperature of the feed water, the quality of the water to be produced and the desalination technology used. For large desalination facilities to be located in the Dublin area the energy sources available would be electrical energy from the grid and thermal energy (from steam or industrial waste heat). Depending on the availability of electrical energy from the grid a variety of desalination processes may be considered including membrane options or hybrid options (use of more than one desalination technologies) If sufficient energy is not available from the existing grid consideration may have to be given to the construction of a new power plant or other alternative sources (e.g. renewables).
4.3.3
4.3.3.1
Location: the location of the source / intake dictates the viability of a desalination project from a number of aspects. It is important that no discharges are located near the proposed seawater intake and that water quality is not affected by any specific activities resulting in impacts on the water quality stability. Quality of the feed water: this will dictate the desalination process to adopted. Feed water quality requiring extensive pre-treatment will influence the economic viability of the project. In addition the membranes have limitations on the range of salts concentration which can be treated. Space available for the intake: depending on the process, the quantity of seawater needed to produce a given fresh flow can vary considerably (requiring higher volumes for distillation processes, particularly for MED), which directly impacts on the size of the intake required. Physical local conditions: high cliffs can make the implementation of the intake much more difficult and expensive. Means of abstraction and supply: the quantity of feed water needed to produce a given amount of fresh water depends on the chosen process. Distillation for example, requires a feed water flow rate between 2 to 10 times the fresh water production rate, thereby necessitating a comparatively large structure to abstract the water. Pre-treatment design is crucial to the successful operation of desalination system. Pre-treatment equipment for large seawater desalination installations normally consists of trash-racks, band-screens and filtration units. For RO, the filtration required is a media type. Distillation plants require scale and bio-fouling prevention.
MDW0158RP0080F01
29
F01
4.3.3.2
Brine Discharge
The waste stream produced from the desalination process is referred to as brine discharge. The brine contains the removed salts and in some cases chemicals that may have been added during the process (nature and quantity depending on the process). The discharge volume varies depending on the selected process but there will almost always be a significant quantity of highly saline water. The disposal of the wastewater in an environmentally appropriate manner is an important part of the feasibility and operation of a desalination facility. The environmental impacts are due several factors: Salt concentration Temperature above the receiving water Higher turbidity level Lower oxygen levels Chemicals and salts from pre-treatment process Carbon dioxide release Generally, the brine can be discharged directly to the sea. Brine is denser than sea water and falls to the sea bed, depending on the outfall location. The discharge location must be selected to ensure an optimal mixing of the brine in the sea. Mixing with sewage treatment discharge may also be preferable. There are other possibilities to prevent adverse environmental consequences. But the means of properly disposing of the concentrate flow should be one of the principle items investigated early in any study of the feasibility of a desalination facility.
4.3.4
Desalination Economics
In recent years the capital and operating costs for desalination have tended to decrease. As desalinating costs have been decreasing there has been a tendency for the cost of obtaining and treating water from traditional sources to increase due to more stringent water quality standards being applied resulting in increased treatment levels. The cost of producing 1m of desalinated water varies considerably and is dependant on the following key factors: The sea water quality (which impacts on the pre-treatment requirements and on the desalination process design) Capacity and type of the plant Plant location - physical conditions of the area where the plant and the intake are to be located State of the market for the selected desalination processes: for example the price of membranes fluctuates and depends on the volume of demands
3
MDW0158RP0080F01
30
F01
Labour Energy cost Financing The cost of the different desalination process will be detailed in the next part of this document. Environmental mitigation issue
4.4
4.4.1
Distillation is the oldest and most commonly used method of desalination. The world's first land-based 3 desalination plant, a multiple-effect distillation (MED) process plant that had a capacity of 60 m /day, was installed on Curaao, Netherlands Antilles in 1928. Further commercial development of landbased seawater distillation units took place in the late 1950s, and initially relied on the technology developed for industrial evaporators. Since then the modernisation of their design has allowed them to achieve improved reliability. The principle of the distillation process is as follows: The distillation process mimics the natural water cycle. Saline water is vaporised and as salt does not enter the vapour phase the resultant condensate forms almost pure water The various distillation processes used to produce potable water all generally operate on the principle of reducing the vapour pressure of water within the process unit to permit boiling to occur at lower temperatures, thereby removing the requirement to use additional heat. To significantly reduce the amount of energy required for vaporisation the distillation process uses multiple boiling in successive vessels each operating at a lower temperature and pressure. These vessels are referred to as stages or effects depending on the desalination technique used. There are two kinds of distillation process, based on the simple effect distillation principle: Multiple-effect distillation (MED) Multiple-stage flash distillation (MSF)
The distillation process requires a considerable amount of energy. Depending on the energy costs in a country, distillation may be cost efficient or prove uneconomical. It is commonly used for desalination in the Middle Eastern countries for example where oil is readily available as an energy source. However distillation can also be considered an interesting process for cold seawater (for example in Ireland), because the process becomes more cost-effective with increasing numbers of effects or stages. The simplest arrangement for a distillation unit is the single effect evaporator as outlined in the following section.
MDW0158RP0080F01
31
F01
4.4.1.1
Simple-Effect Distillation
A horizontal tube is installed in a thermal insulated chamber and is fed by a heated fluid. Cold seawater is sprayed over the tubes and the internal heated fluid causes it to boil. A seawater cooled condenser is placed in the same chamber and the vapour produced is condensated on the condenser. Distillate flowing down the condenser is collected in a tray and extracted by a pump. The volume of seawater taken in (which is greater than the product volume required) is introduced at the upper part of the chamber in order to form a fluid film flowing down the heated bundle. Concentrated seawater, the brine, is then collected under this bundle and extracted by a pump. An ejector keeps the required vacuum level in the chamber. The energy consumed by this process is the sum of: The energy needed to heat the seawater The latent heat of evaporation of seawater
The latent heat of evaporation of water is rather important, resulting in high energy costs for simple distillation. Therefore simple distillation does not permit the production of large quantities of water at low cost. In order to reduce the specific heat consumption, the heat introduced in the life cycle must be used several times: this is the principle of multi-effect distillation.
4.4.1.2
Multiple-Effect Distillation
The multiple-effect distillation systems use more than one boiling chamber ("effect") in the distillation process to improve the energy consumption. MED is the oldest large-scale industrial distillation process used for seawater desalination. It presents the following advantages: Reliable design Technological maturity High distillate quality Good operating record High unit capacities
Today 3.5 % of the worlds desalted water is produced by MED units. However MED has lost ground to the MSF (Multi-stage flash distillation) process owing to advances in component and material design that have rendered the latter more popular. The heat transfer characteristics between the liquid-vapour phase can be improved using plates or horizontal tubes. The saline water is sprayed onto the evaporator surface in a thin film to promote rapid boiling and evaporation The steam used to heat the surfaces in the first effect is heated from a turbine or boiler. As shown in the Figure 4.3, the first effect exchanger tubes are heated by steam and the saline water is sprayed onto these where only a proportion evaporates. After passing through a demister, the vapour is introduced to the heating tubes of the second effect onto which the remaining saline water
MDW0158RP0080F01
32
F01
from the first effect is sprayed. A proportion of this vapour condenses into product water and in doing so, gives up its latent heat of vaporisation. This heat is then used to evaporate a proportion of the second effect saline feed. This process is repeated over several effects. Vapour from the final effect is condensed in the heat rejection stage, where the residual energy is transferred to the first effect feed water. As a result of evaporation in each effect the remaining saline feed becomes more concentrated and is discharged as brine. The ambient pressure in each effect in the MED process is maintained by a vacuum pump. Another important factor in this process is scale control. Some substances such as carbonates and o sulphates found in seawater begin to leave solution at temperatures approaching 115 C forming a hard scale that coats tubes and surfaces. A significant feature of this process is that the top brine temperature of the first effect can be limited to values below 70C, thereby reducing the potential for scale formation.
Figure 4.3 Schematic of multi-effect evaporator desalination process (horizontal tube parallel feed configuration)
As thermal efficiency of the process depends upon the number of effects the determination of the number of effects required is an important design criterion has the following constraints: Maximum top brine temperature - limited by scaling phenomenon The temperature of the last effect must remain slightly higher than the seawater temperature Optimisation between the investment cost and the running cost to produce the lowest price desalted water.
When the number of effect increases, the energy consumption decreases. Namely the energy consumed by a multiple effect is the sum of: Energy needed to heat the seawater entering the first effect
MDW0158RP0080F01
33
F01
MED plants are based on 2 designs: the horizontal tube multiple effect (HTME) system and the vertical tube falling film evaporator (VTE) system. The main differences are in the arrangement of the evaporation tubes, the side of the tube on which evaporation takes place, and the materials used in the evaporation tubes. Evaporation occurs on the surface of horizontally arranged tubes in the HTME process and inside vertically arranged tubes in the VTE plants. Low-cost materials are used in the construction of HTME plants. Thin film HTME technology is presently considered the most promising for the production of fresh water. The process has all the main features of MED process described above. The evaporator is the centre piece of the process. This is typically supplied by steam boilers in dual-purpose plants cogenerating electricity and steam. Then steam and seawater can either flow in the same direction (called parallel feed configuration as shown in Figure 4.3 or in the opposite direction. The parallel feed multiple effects technology is widely used in industrial-scale used desalination. When the heat for evaporation comes from compression of the vapour phase either mechanically or thermally using steam ejectors, rather than from a direct exchange of heat from steam produced in a boiler, performances can be improved significantly Therefore there are three types of MED available:
1/ MED without vapour compression 2/ MED with thermal vapour compression (VC):
Thermal vapour compression distillers can either be single purpose units, with package boilers or can be combined with power generation in dual purpose plants, taking steam from heat recovery boilers or extraction from steam turbines. The steam requirements generally are higher than those required for MSF distillers to enable the thermal vapour compressor to work effectively.
Figure 4.4 Schematic of a multi-effect evaporator desalination process with thermal vapour compression.
MDW0158RP0080F01
34
F01
Figure 4.5 Schematic of a multi-effect evaporator desalination process with mechanical vapour compression.
MED with vapour compression is generally used in small and medium scale units (20 to 2000m /d for 3 thermal compression and up to 5000m /d for mechanical compression).These technologies are currently limited in size because of technical difficulties in building large scale compressors. They appear to be particularly suitable for tourist resorts and industrial plants where fresh water is not readily available. Therefore only MED without vapour compression could be developed for a high capacity plant such as that being considered for Dublin (300MLD). Typical performances using MED technology produce water with a salinity of between 10 to 25 mg /L. Additional treatment would be required to further reduce the corrosivity of the water before entering the transmission and distribution system thereby increasing its potability.
4.4.1.2.1
Key Requirements
Quantity of water required: The seawater flow (input) needed is 8 to 10 times that of the fresh water flow (product output). Therefore a large intake area is required for the distillation process. Quality of water required: there is no limitation on the salt concentration of the feed water for MED. Footprint required: 1 ha for every 100 MLD
MDW0158RP0080F01
35
F01
Pre-treatment: MED does not require significant pre-treatment, classical filtration and chlorination are sufficient to avoid the development of marine/micro organisms. Energy consumption: Table 4.1 below compares the energy needed to produce 1 m of fresh water and is divided into two parts:
thermal energy (which can be steam or waste industrial heat) and electrical energy (which can be supplied from the grid).
3
Table 4.1
Energy consumption of different configuration of MED processes Thermal energy 3 needed for 1 m of fresh water (M Joules) Electrical energy 3 needed for 1 m of fresh water (kWh)
2
MED 7 effects
376
MED 10 effects
209
61
16
16
4.4.1.2.2
The operation and maintenance aspect can vary considerably depending on the process selected. The selected process may require a greater degree of technical expertise to operate, the use of atypical materials/chemicals or have particular safety conditions and hazards.
Operation:
MED is easy to operate, with built-in fail-safe controls. A limited number of instruments enable full control of the plant. If the feed water flow is interrupted, the low-water shutdown will stop the system operation until an sufficient volume of feed water becomes available. Electrical surge protection is part of the standard equipment provided. High flexibility is a key feature in the operation of the system: the production from a MED unit can vary from 15 to 100 % of the nominal flow without any difficulties: this is a significant advantage of this process. The process is easy to monitor, consisting of see-through panel for instantaneous checking of the system. Sight glasses and indicator lamps are incorporated for visual inspection of the operating system
MDW0158RP0080F01
36
F01
To monitor and maintain satisfactory water quality a Water Purity Monitor is included which is designed to divert all distilled water produced below a preset purity setpoint. This ensures that water for drinking, bottling or other applications (i.e. Water Store) is always at an acceptable purity level.
Maintenance:
Maintenance of the system generally includes the following: Removal of scale and marine growths which forms a hard scale which coats any tubes or surfaces present using high pressure "hydrolaser" sprayers. Inspection of all pumps and motors, replacing bearings and bushings, and renewal of the protective coatings on exposed parts (e.g. pumps which would have been primed and painted prior to installation). Compared to other desalination process, distillation processes require little maintenance, mostly consisting of the maintenance of the mechanical equipment and coatings.
4.4.1.2.3
Environmental Impact
For distillation process, the wastewater would be characterised by a slight increase in salinity and an elevated temperature. It is expected that the acceptable salinity and temperature increases would be identified in the Environmental requirements and limits for the site selected. In addition, there may be small quantities of added chemicals used in the process (such as antiscale (polyphosphate) and antifoam and biocides such as chlorine) which may be present at very low concentrations in the discharge but which would not pose a threat to environment. Chlorine concentrations would be limited to levels that would be allowed by other discharge consents and these concentrations would be determined on the basis of little or no environmental impact in the vicinity of the discharge.
4.4.1.2.4
Commercial Maturity
All early thermal desalination plants were of the Multiple Effect Distillation (MED) type where sea water is heated by steam circulated in submerged tubes. The latest MED plant to be installed is in Bahren with a capacity of 273 MLD (10 x MED units producing 27, 3 MLD per unit). The most recent improvements in MED technology deal with the scaling aspect: greater control has allowed an increase in the maximum temperature of seawater used. The high thermal efficiency of the MED process and its capability to operate at low steam pressures have attracted renewed interest in this process recently. However MED has lost ground to the multiple-stage flash distillation process (see section 4.1.3) owing to recent advances in component and material design which rendered the latter more popular.
MDW0158RP0080F01
37
F01
4.4.1.3
MSF plants are relatively simple to construct and operate. They have no moving parts, other than conventional pumps, and incorporate only a small amount of connection tubing. Product water, or distillate, is of a high level of purity (like MED): it is often sterile and requires little post-treatment. A lifespan of up to 40 years is now being predicted for large scale plants.
4.4.1.3.1
Description
In the MSF process the seawater is heated in a vessel called the brine heater. This is generally done by condensing steam on a bank of tubes that carry the seawater which passes through the vessel. The heated seawater passes through a series of condensation chambers called stages where the ambient pressure is lower causing the water to boil immediately. The sudden introduction of the heated water into the chamber causes it to boil rapidly, flashing into steam. The distilled water is cascaded from one stage to the next. A percentage of this water is converted to steam since boiling will continue only until the water cools (furnishing the heat of vaporisation) to the boiling point. Energy introduced at the brine heater is rejected at the low temperature end. The pressure gradient between each chamber allows the flow of seawater through each successive stage without pumping. Most MSF plants operate in a dual-purpose or cogeneration mode, incorporating both power generation and water desalination. Waste or extracted heat produced in electricity generation units can be used to preheat feed water resulting in high thermal efficiencies and improved process economics. Current cogeneration plant designs allow for flexible operation during peak load periods for power or water.
MDW0158RP0080F01
38
F01
MSF configurations applied on an industrial scale include once-through (MSF-OT) arrangements and brine recirculation (MSF-BR) systems. The use of the former is presently limited: most MSF plants rely on MSF-BR (brine recirculation) a method which is particularly suited to regions with large daily and seasonal temperature fluctuations. This simple configuration improves the thermal efficiency of the process because the recycled steam contains higher energy than the feed seawater. Generally, brine recirculation results in a higher conversion ratio, uses smaller amounts of chemical additives and allows for better control of feed seawater temperature. The advantages of the MSF-OT system over the MSF-BR system include cost savings and reduced risks. There are also a number of drawbacks. The introduction of cheaper and more effective corrosion-resistant materials and improved additives has played an important role in placing MSF-BR in a favourable position. Moreover, the use of the MSF-OT system is currently limited to small desalination plants, as the seawater flow required is much higher than with the MSF-BR: to produce 1 3 3 3 m of fresh water, 7 to 10 m of seawater are necessary with MSF-OT, whereas 2 to 3 m are required in direct MSF-BR. The MSF with brine recirculation is the most implemented process, despite needing large recycling pump as the recycle flow rate is very high (between 7 and 12 times the production flow).
MDW0158RP0080F01
39
F01
Figure 4.8 Schematic of a multi-stage flash desalination process with brine recirculation
The design specifications of a typical MSF plant generally address 3 essential aspects: Distillate production to fresh water flow required Top brine temperature (TBT) Thermal efficiency of the desalination plant
The top brine temperature (TBT) typically ranges from 90C to 120C. The actual temperature depends on the type of antiscale strategy being used. The most significant problems encountered with distillation are scaling and corrosion of materials, which increase as the brine temperature increases. Different measures can be applied to reduce or prevent corrosion and control scale. If scale inhibition is based on the use of organic polymers and sponge ball circulation for tube cleaning, a top brine temperature limit of approximately 110 C is imposed. When acid dosing is used for scale control, the top temperature may be increased to 120 C.
4.4.1.3.2
Requirements
Quantity of water required: for every m of fresh water to be produced by MSF (with recirculation) 3 2 to 3 m of seawater are required. Quality of water required: no limitation on salt concentration of sea water Footprint required: 0.5 ha for each 50 MLD Pre-treatment: distillation processes require minimal pre-treatment usually consisting of classical filtration and chlorination to avoid the development of marine organisms.
MDW0158RP0080F01
40
F01
Energy consumption: Table 4.2 shows the energy required to produce 1 m of fresh water is in divided in two parts: the thermal energy (which can be steam or waste industrial heat) and the electrical energy (which can be supplied from the grid).
Table 4.2
Distillation process
(MJoules)
(kWh)
(kWh)
293
85
230
69
4.4.1.3.3
The operation and maintenance aspect can vary considerably depending on the process selected. The selected process may require a greater degree of technical expertise to operate, the use of atypical materials/chemicals or have particular safety conditions and hazards.
Operation:
MED is easy to operate, with built-in fail-safe controls. If the feed water flow is interrupted, the lowwater shutdown will stop the system operation until a sufficient volume of feed water becomes available. Electrical surge protection is part of the standard equipment provided. If the unit is operated using water containing less than 1.0 mg/L of hardness and chlorine a selfcleaning system is implemented. A dual alternating tank water softener and commercial activated carbon prefilter will be required. The process is easy to monitor, consisting of see-through panel for instantaneous checking of the system. Sight glasses and indicator lamps are incorporated for visual inspection of the operating system. To monitor and maintain satisfactory water quality a Water Purity Monitor is included which is designed to divert all distilled water produced below a preset purity setpoint. This ensures that water for drinking, bottling or other applications (i.e. Water Store) is always at an acceptable purity level.
MDW0158RP0080F01
41
F01
Removal of scale and marine growths in the tubes in all stages using high pressure "hydrolaser" sprayers. Removal of the vacuum system ejectors for cleaning, inspection, and replacement as necessary; most parts have a lifetime of 3 to 4 years. Inspection of all pumps and motors, replacement of bearings and bushings, and renewal of protective coatings on exposed parts (e.g. pumps which would have been primed and painted prior to installation). Compared to other desalination process, distillation processes require little maintenance, mostly consisting of the maintenance of the mechanical equipment and coatings.
Safety/ hazards:
One of the main hazards associated with MSF is the risk of seawater flowing into fresh water (e.g from leaks or drilling of tubes). Online detectors provide protection allowing the location of any leakage and stopping the operation of the unit concerned. Redundancy is planned during the design step to anticipate this type of hazard.
4.4.1.3.4
Environmental Impact
For distillation process, the wastewater would be characterised by a slight increase in salinity and an elevated temperature. It is expected that the acceptable salinity and temperature increases would be identified in the Environmental requirements and limits for the site selected. In addition, there may be small quantities of added chemicals used in the process (such as antiscale (polyphosphate) and antifoam and biocides such as chlorine) which may be present at very low concentrations in the discharge but which would not pose a threat to environment. Chlorine concentrations would be limited to levels that would be allowed by other discharge consents and these concentrations would be determined on the basis of little or no environmental impact in the vicinity of the discharge.
4.4.1.3.5
Commercial Maturity
The Multi-stage flash plants was first introduced in 1928 but they were not built commercially until around 1960 when the first units were installed in Kuwait, soon followed by plants in Qatar, the Caribbean and Malta. Subsequently the MSF plant capacities began to increase. By 1970 large units 3 3 were installed in Abu Dhabi each rated at 9000 m /d and shortly afterwards the first 22 500 m /d unit entered service in Kuwait. There are now a significant number of plants with a unit size of 44 MLD in service in Middle East and a few with unit capacities of 78 MLD (2003 Shuweiat)). The basic technology of modern large MSF plants is similar to the early units but there have been major developments in scale control techniques, heat transfer and the use of corrosion resistant materials which has made the increase in unit capacity possible. Nowadays, several projects are underway in Libya. The technical and economical feasibility is examined for plants of different capacities: between 100 and 500 MLD. The technology to be selected is still to be decided but they are likely to be MSF or MED-based.
MDW0158RP0080F01
42
F01
4.4.1.4
Costs
The performance parameters of the distillation processes are the following: Thermal performance ratio: This is defined as the flow rate of fresh water produced relative to the heating steam. This parameter gives a measure of the specific process energy consumption. Specific electrical power consumption: is defined as the ratio of energy consumption, expressed in KWh, to product volume. The energy is consumed by pumping units, instrumentation and control device. Specific flow rate of cooling water: is the ratio of the flow rate of cooling water to the flow rate of desalinated water output. It constitutes another measure of process efficiency. A high value of this parameter implies higher energy consumption usually ranging from 3 to 10. Specific heat transfer area: is defined as the total heat transfer area per unit product flow rate. This value depends on the top brine temperature. Operation at high top brine temperatures (90-110 C) gives little heat transfer area (MSF processes). Lower top brine temperature (60-70 C) used in single or multiple effects induce larger heat transfer areas. In a broader sense, the first three parameters largely determine the process efficiency and therefore the running costs, while the fourth parameter plays a major role in specifying the capital costs involved. Moreover, the economics of a distillation plant is largely dependant on the materials chosen for construction. Structural strength and corrosion resistance are 2 of the main selection criteria. Ultimately, materials used should be suitable for the operating conditions that exist; the materials will be exposed to a specific range of operating temperatures and will come into contact with steam, aerated/de-aerated seawater, concentrated brine and a number of chemicals including the acids and polyphosphate additives used to reduce scaling. Materials used are uncommon and tend to be expensive impacting significantly on the capital costs. The costs of each distillation technology are detailed in Table 4.3.
Table 4.3
Process
$US for 1 m /d
MSF
1200 2500
1000 2000
1000 - 1600
To compare the energy consumed by the different distillation processes, the thermal and electrical energy needed have been converted into the gas quantity needed to supply these installations. The main natural energy source available in the region of Dublin is gas. In the case of distillation processes, two types of power plant can be used: the single and double purpose unit.
MDW0158RP0080F01
43
F01
A single purpose unit is composed of: A steam boiler with the desalination unit using the low pressure steam A double purpose unit is composed of: - A high-pressure steam boiler feeding a turbine - A turbo-generator producing electricity and low pressure steam with the desalination unit using the low-pressure steam. Single purpose plants have a lower overall thermal efficiency than dual purpose units. That is why the gas quantity required for double purpose units is lower. Table 4.4 shows an assessment of the amount of gas needed for each distillation process using single or double purpose units assuming that the steam boiler efficiency is 85% and the electricity generator efficiency is 40%. Table 4.4 Comparison of energy consumption of different distillation processes, when energy source is gas:
Thermal energy needed for 1 m3 of fresh water (MJoules)
Distillation process
293
230
376
209
4
5
2
3
85
69
106
61
9.6
8.1
10.9
6.5
16 0 16
4.2
4.9
The tables show that MED without vapour compression is the least expensive option. The mean cost 3 of producing water by largescale MED is 0.46 0.83 /m .
MDW0158RP0080F01
44
F01
Figure 4.9 Outline of the typical costs for 20 year for an MED plant.
Typical 20 year MED desalination plant cost Staff 15% Chemical 3% Maintenance 8%
Equipment 44%
Staff Chemical Maintenance Energy Equipment
Energy 30%
4.4.1.5
Summary
The following summarises the advantages and disadvantages of the thermal processes which have been reviewed in this section. In general the advantages of distillation are as follows: Performance and costs do not depend on feed water salinity The distillation process does not need sophisticated pre-treatment Distillation offers easy operation and maintenance when compared with other desalination technologies In most cases distillation does not require the addition of chemicals or water softening agents to pretreat the feedwater Distillation has minimal environmental impacts, although brine disposal must be considered in the plant design The technology produces high-quality water in some cases having less than 10 mg/l of total dissolved solids. Distillation can be combined with other processes such as using heat energy from an electricpower generation plant In the case of Dublin, this process may prove to be energy-efficient as many effects or stages can be used to produce the required volume of product water. As the ambient seawater
MDW0158RP0080F01
45
F01
temperature is low, the temperature difference between sea water and top brine temperature required is high. In general the disadvantages of distillation are as follows: Compared to other desalination processes, distillation buildings have a higher visual impact (high stacks, pipe racks etc.), which can be a significant drawback for the Dublin region which is densely inhabited.
Some distillation processes are energy-intensive, particularly the larger-capacity plants. The distillation process, particularly MSF distillation, is very costly in terms of capital costs The technology requires the use of chemical products, such as acids, that require special handling by O&M staff
In summary distillation processes constitute a somewhat mature group of technologies, with a number of technological variants often emerging from a given technology family. However it is an expensive technology which presents some drawbacks in the case of Dublin. These disadvantages mostly concern the environmental impact of the technology: poor integration with the landscape and a risk of noise pollution. There is another family of desalination processes which offers a more cost-effective solution for the production of freshwater: these are the membrane technologies which are presented in the next section.
4.4.2
Membranes are used in two commercially important desalting process namely electrodialysis (ED) and reverse/forward osmosis (RO). Each process uses the ability of membranes to differentiate and selectively separate salts and water.
MDW0158RP0080F01
46
F01
The various electrodialysis technologies are more suitable for brackish water applications or for small capacity plants. In comparison to distillation and electrodialysis, Reverse Osmosis is a relatively new and reliable membrane technology with successful commercialisation since the early 1970s. A description of reverse osmosis is presented below:
4.4.2.1
Description
When two solutions with different concentrations of a solute are mixed, the total amount of solutes in the two solutions will be equally distributed in the total amount of solvent from the two solutions. This is achieved by diffusion, in which solutes will move from areas of high concentration to areas of lower concentrations until the concentration throughout the resulting mixtures are the same, a state called equilibrium. Instead of mixing the two solutions together, they can be put in two compartments where they are separated from each other by a semi permeable membrane. The semi permeable membrane does not allow the solutes to move from one compartment to the other, but allows the solvent to move. Since equilibrium cannot be achieved by the movement of solutes from the compartment with high solute concentration to the one with low solute concentration, it is instead achieved by the movement of the solvent from areas of low solute concentration to areas of high solute concentration. When the solvent moves away from low concentration areas, it causes these areas to become more concentrated. On the other side, when the solvent moves into areas of high concentration, solute concentration will decrease. This process is termed osmosis. The tendency for solvent to flow through the membrane can be expressed as "osmotic pressure", since it is analogous to flow caused by a pressure differential.
In reverse osmosis pressure is applied to the compartment with high solute concentration. There are two forces influencing the movement of water namely the pressure caused by the difference in solute concentration between the two compartments (the osmotic pressure) and the externally applied pressure. In the same way as in conventional osmosis, the solute cannot move from areas of high pressure to areas of low pressure because the membrane is not permeable to it. Only the solvent can pass through the membrane. When the effect of the externally applied pressure is greater than that of the concentration difference net solvent movement will be from areas of high solute concentration to low solute concentration, and reverse osmosis occurs.
MDW0158RP0080F01
47
F01
In the RO process, water from a pressurized saline solution is separated from the dissolved salts by flowing through a water-permeable membrane. The permeate (the liquid flowing through the membrane) is encouraged to flow through the membrane by the pressure differential created between the pressurized feed water and the product water (higher than the osmotic pressure) which is at nearatmospheric pressure. The remaining feed water continues through the pressurized side of the reactor as brine. No heating or phase change takes place. The major energy requirement is for the initial pressurization of the feed water. In practice, the feed water is pumped into a closed container, against the membrane, to pressurize it. As the product water passes through the membrane, the remaining feed water and brine solution becomes more and more concentrated. To reduce the concentration of dissolved salts remaining, a portion of this concentrated feed water-brine solution is withdrawn from the container. Without this discharge, the concentration of dissolved salts in the feed water would continue to increase, requiring ever-increasing energy inputs to overcome the naturally increased osmotic pressure. A reverse osmosis system consists of four major components/processes: (1) pre-treatment (2) pressurisation (high pressure pump) (3) membrane separation and (4) post-treatment stabilization (5) energy recovery device. (1) Pre-treatment: The incoming feed water is pre-treated to be compatible with the membranes by removing suspended solids, adjusting the pH, and adding a threshold inhibitor to control scaling caused by seawater constituents such as calcium sulphate. The pre-treatment needed is important to protect the membranes and is generally more sophisticated than in distillations plants. (2) Pressurization: The high-pressure pump raises the pressure of the pre-treated feed water to an operating pressure appropriate for the membrane and the salinity of the feed water (in practice this pressure is higher than the osmotic pressure which is around 60 bar for a sea water salinity of 35g/L). (3) Separation: The permeable membranes inhibit the passage of dissolved salts while permitting the desalinated product water to pass through. Applying feed water to the membrane assembly results in a freshwater product stream and a concentrated brine reject stream. Because no membrane is perfect in its rejection of dissolved salts, a small percentage of salt passes through the membrane and remains in the product water. Important features of a membrane are its selectivity (salt retention rate of salt) and its permeability. Reverse osmosis membranes come in a variety of configurations. Two of the most popular are spiral wound and hollow fine fibre membranes. They are generally made of cellulose acetate, aromatic polyamides or nowadays thin film polymer composites. Both types are used for brackish water and seawater desalination, although the specific membrane and the construction of the pressure vessel vary according to the different operating pressures used for the two types of feed water.
(4) Post-treatment: The product water from the membrane assembly usually requires pH
MDW0158RP0080F01
48
F01
(4) Post-treatment: The product from the membrane assembly usually requires pH adjustment and degasification before being transferred to the distribution system for use as drinking water. The product passes through an aeration column in which the pH is elevated from a value of approximately 5 to a value close to 7. In many cases, this water is discharged to a storage cistern for later use.
4.4.2.2
The brine flows out of the membrane assembly at a very high pressure. So this water contains considerable energy which can be recovered. There are three technologies available which allow recovery of this energy namely turbo-pumps, pelton turbines and work-exchanger pumps. The efficiency of these pumps is approximately 90%.
The RO process is defined according to certain variables: Osmotic and operating pressure Salt rejection Permeate recovery
Criteria for RO plant design include the following: A high membrane surface to volume ratio Adequate structural support
MDW0158RP0080F01
49
F01
Low pressure drop on the concentrate side of the membrane to maintain the driving force for permeation Turbulence on the concentrate side to minimize fouling Ease of back-flushing and membrane replacement in case of fouling
Because of the close relationship between feed water composition and membrane performance, feed water analysis must be conducted to determine the pre-treatment chain and the membrane specification, including chemical stability over the operational pH range and temperature values. Membrane manufacturers provide system specifications in relation to feed water quality for variables such as salinity, temperature and organic loading. The membranes need to be regularly replaced. The useful life of commercial membranes ranges from 3 to 5 years. On average annual membrane replacement rates range between 5 and 15 %, depending on the feed water quality, pre-treatment condition and stability of operation. The product water in the RO process is a function of the seawater salinity level, the number of RO membrane stages (several RO passes can be connected in series) and other design parameters. Most RO membranes allow less than 1% salt passage in a single stage, resulting in TDS level of 300 to 400 mg/L in product water.
4.4.2.3
Requirements
Seawater quantity: this is characterised by the recovery rate of reverse osmosis which is between 40% and 80% of feed water depending on the seawater quality and the pre-treatment installed. Seawater quality: salt concentration up to 50 g/L Pre-treatment: this depends on the raw water quality (TSS, TOC, algae, pH), but generally it comprises a choc chlorination (using a fast acting chlorine to limit the bio-fouling of membranes), coagulation, flocculation, decantation and filtration, cartridge filters, de-chlorination. Footprint: usually between 1 -.3 ha for each 100 Mld (depending on the sea water quality and the pretreatment design) Energy consumption: RO system only requires electrical energy to operate typically in the range 3 4kWh/m . However at various optimised works through the use of energy recovery devices energy 3 consumption can be reduced to 3.5 3.8kWh/m of fresh water to be produced. 4.4.2.4 Operation and Maintenance
Operating experience with reverse osmosis technology has improved over the past 15 years with fewer plants having long-term operational problems. Assuming that a properly designed and constructed unit is installed, the major operational elements associated with the use of RO technology will be the day-to-day monitoring of the system and a systematic program of preventive maintenance. Preventive maintenance includes instrument calibration, pump adjustment, chemical feed inspection and adjustment, leak detection and repair, and structural repair of the system on a planned basis. The main operational concern related to the use of reverse osmosis units is fouling and membrane sensitivity. Fouling is caused when membrane pores are clogged by salts or obstructed by suspended particulates. It limits the amount of water that can be treated before cleaning is required. Membrane fouling can be corrected by cleaning (about every 4 months), and by replacement of the cartridge filter elements (about every 8 weeks). Operation, maintenance, and monitoring of RO plants require trained engineering staff.
MDW0158RP0080F01
50
F01
4.4.2.5
Environmental Impact
The waste water arising from the RO process may be variable depending on the extent of pretreatment necessary to condition the water before it is allowed to contact the membranes. As a minimum, the pre-treatment system would comprise of media filters possibly supplemented by coagulation and flocculation using chemicals such as coagulants and polymers. In the case of the media filter alone, the wastewater arises from backwashing them at regular intervals, thereby removing the suspended matter originally removed from the seawater by the filters. Where coagulation and flocculation is carried out, the backwash from the filters would contain the flocculated chemicals and it would be normal practice to pass this to a sludge treatment process to remove the solids prior to disposal of the wastewater stream. The recovered sludge would require separate disposal to land under controlled conditions. The reject stream from the RO plant would be characterised by high salinity and possibly a reduction in oxygen content although the latter issue would be addressed in the design of the system to ensure re-oxygenation before entering the main watercourse. The membranes require chemical cleaning at intervals, the intervals being dictated by the effectiveness of the pre-treatment system. A variety of chemicals is used depending on the nature of the membrane foulants and could include detergents, acid or alkali. Waste from cleaning system should be diverted to a treatment plant (or join the sludge treatment process) for neutralisation prior to disposal. The design of the wastewater system would need to be tailored to the specific requirements at the sites; where possible it has been common practice for wastewater to be discharged into the cooling water flow of an associated power station.
4.4.2.6
Commercial Maturity
The majority of the desalination plant constructed around the world are mostly distillation or reverse osmosis. Around the 1980s Reverse Osmosis was mostly used for brackish water but today it has become a major competitor of distillation particularly for high capacity plants and salty seawater. The desalination plant at Ashkelon (Southern Israel) is currently the largest operating reverse osmosis plant producing 320 Mld. Over the past 10 years significant improvements have been made for the RO process. Steady and continuous improvements in the efficiency of membranes, energy recovery, energy reduction, membrane life, control of operations and operational experience have all contributed to lowering the costs associated with this technology. Currently a number of RO plants are being constructed to produce various volumes of product water: Algeria - 500 MLD Australia - 5 RO planned projects: 55 Mld; 123 Mld; 125 Mld; 125 Mld India 100 ldD Israel 100 Mld Barcelona - 200 Mld in operation in 2009.
MDW0158RP0080F01
51
F01
4.4.2.7
Costs
The costs (investment, operation and maintenance) and energy consumption of reverse osmosis are 3 presented in the next tables (4.5, 4.6) and in Figure 4.14. The cost of 1 m of water produced by the most economical process is also presented and explained (different origins of this cost and distribution).
Table 4.5
$US for 1 m /d
200-500
To compare the energy consumed by the various membrane processes, the thermal and electrical energy needed have been converted in Table 6 into the Gas quantity required to feed these installations.
Table 4.6 Comparison of energy consumption of different membrane processes, when energy source is fuel. Energy needed for 1 m of fresh water kWh
Reverse osmosis on sea water and without energy recovery Reverse osmosis on sea water and with energy recovery (isobaric pressure) Reverse osmosis on brackish water
3
Membrane process
12
2.8
2.5
0.9
0.7
The table above illustrates that the energy efficiency of the reverse osmosis process is dependant upon the salt concentration in the feed water and the presence/absence of an energy recovery device. The mean cost of produced water by large scale reverse osmosis is 0.3 0.91 /m . Figure outlines the typical costs for 20 year for an RO plant.
3
MDW0158RP0080F01
52
F01
T ypical 20 year reverse osmosis desalination plant cost Staff / other 19% Chemical 2% Membrane replacement 15%
Equipment 45%
Energy 19%
4.4.2.8
Wastewater Recycling
Reverse Osmosis is being used increasingly for the treatment of municipal and industrial wastewaters due to the growing demand for high quality water in large urban areas. As the osmostic pressure of waste water is much lower than sea water (with a salinity of approx 30-40 g/L NaCl). The growing success of membranes in this application is related to improved process designs and improved membrane products. Factors which play a key role in the use of RO membranes include ultra or microfiltration (UF or MF) pretreatment, low fouling membranes, flux rate, recovery and control of fouling and scaling. In particular, high flux rates can be used when UF or MF pretreatment is used. These technologies remove most of the suspended particles that would normally cause heavy fouling of lead elements. Typically, fluxes in the range of 17-21 lmh lead to cleaning frequencies in the range of 3-4 months. By combining the use of membrane pretreatment and chloramination of the feed water through chlorine addition, two of the primary sources of RO membrane fouling can be controlled. The use of chloramine has become a proven means to control biofouling in a membrane for wastewater applications as it is a weaker oxidant allowing greater tolerance of the membranes to exposure. A number of plants in Singapore which have already been constructed have collected long-term operational data: in Bedok (10 Mld plant) and Kranji (40 Mld plant). From the information gathered it has been demonstrated that the RO membranes operate reliably on wastewater. These large plants began operation in autumn 2002 and have demonstrated an effective means of reclaiming high quality water from difficult source waters, such as municipal wastewaters. Most water produced is not used for direct potable use. This recovery from wastewater increases the possibilities concerning the type of water resources which can be utilised and allows consideration of waste water recycling as an alternative to surface water treatment or seawater desalination. Wastewater recycling may be suitable to conserve water and to avoid extracting too much water from the environment by pumping. Using this process the environmental impacts are considerably reduced as it minimizes waste water release into the environment and requires less pumping of surface water. Many water reclamation plants have been built worldwide using reverse osmosis, mainly in United States and Australia.
MDW0158RP0080F01
53
F01
Figure 4.15 Treatment chain of Los Angeles water reclamation plant 17 MLD
Costs considerations:
Costs for both construction and operation of RO membrane processes depend on many site-specific factors. A recent estimate of capital costs for a 20 Mld wastewater reuse treatment facility utilizing RO 3 membrane technology at King County, Washington was about 0.5 0.6 for 1m /day. At present despite the good water quality produced by RO the general public remains slow to embrace the concept of using reclaimed water directly as potable water. Groundwater Recharge In the meantime, one of the most common applications for high-pressure membrane technology is for groundwater recharge to replenish an aquifer or to prevent salt-water intrusion. This process is referred to as indirect potable reuse. Some plants in United States have been producing high-quality recycled water treated by advanced technologies for seawater intrusion barrier injection, with the majority of the injected water entering the groundwater and eventually becoming part of the water supplyhence the term indirect potable reuse. As advanced treatment technologies become more cost-effective and as public acceptance increases, recycled water may be used to augment surface water supplies. Presently the public may not be prepared to consume reclaimed water, and recycling of wastewater for drinking water production is not permitted in many European countries. However other options for RO reclaimed water are available it can be supplied through a separate distribution system for a wide range of applications including agricultural and landscape irrigation (as in St. Petersburg), wildlife habitat enhancement (as in Orlando Wetlands Park), a recreational impoundment and groundwater recharge (as in Gainesville) and a surface water augmentation.
4.4.3
Conclusion
RO technology is currently the main competitor to the distillation processes in the field of desalination given its compactness and the relative ease with which it may be packaged and managed, as well as its compatibility with a number of energy sources and its superior environmental profile.
MDW0158RP0080F01
54
F01
Advantages
The processing system is simple; the only complicating factor is finding or producing a clean supply of feed water to minimize the need for frequent cleaning of the membrane. Installation costs are lower by comparison with thermal equivalents Systems may be assembled from pre-packaged modules and are compact This process is compatible with many energy sources. RO technologies can be used to remove both organic and inorganic contaminants. RO has low environmental impact apart from carbon dioxide release. RO has low visual impact - It can be easily integrated into the surrounding country side
MDW0158RP0080F01
55
F01
Figure 4.17 Exterior view of RO plant at Ashkelon, Southern Israel (320 Mld)
Disadvantages
The membranes are sensitive RO process is not adapted to high variability of salt concentration in seawater The feed water usually needs to be pre-treated to remove particulates (in order to prolong membrane life). Operation of a RO plant is more difficult compared with other desalination processes and requires a high quality standard of materials and equipment. Using RO technology with multistage flash (MSF) is a more reliable alternative: Power requirements are much higher in the case of RO plants because of their high pressure operation Though RO plants have lower initial investment and fixed costs than thermal equivalents, they have higher maintenance costs
MDW0158RP0080F01
56
F01
4.5
4.5.1
FUTURE DEVELOPMENT
Latest Developments in Distillation Processes
For both MSF and MED thermal distillation systems there are many areas in need of attention such as research & development, engineering, including the high levels of investment needed for plant construction and commissioning, total energy requirements and material corrosion. Research on new low-cost construction materials is in progress. Aluminium for heat exchangers and carbon steel material are presently used while high-grade stainless steel and titanium are proposed for future usage. In addition, polymeric materials are being considered for the tube bundles, a promising possibility given the very low pressure difference between the inside and outside of the tubes. There is some marginal evolution concerning these topics, but recent research projects have also focused on combining distillation with reverse osmosis to constitute optimum hybrid configuration and on membrane distillation (see in the section 0). With regard to vapour compression distillation systems, larger units are not considered a viable option in the near future.
4.5.2
Prospects for RO development are more promising. However this process also has certain areas requiring attention particularly feed water pre-treatment and membrane fouling. Several improvements to pre-treatment systems are currently being developed. There have been significant improvements in the membrane materials available and utilised during the past few years and further significant advances are expected. The main objectives of the current research in this area are longer membrane lifetimes, lower energy consumption, greater cost-effectiveness and, consequently, wider dissemination of RO technology. With regard to energy consumption in particular, some savings are expected, but no major breakthroughs are foreseen. These matters are further developed in the next section.
4.5.2.1
Fouling of membranes is one of the main operational and maintenance difficulties of reverse osmosis plants. Chemicals are used to regularly clean membranes, but pre-treatment of seawater is also very important before entering the membrane units. Pre-treatment reduces the silt density index of the feed water. This index is used to determine the fouling potential of particulate and fine colloidal materials that may be present in the feed water. Improper pre-treatment can result in premature aging of RO membranes or fouling, leading to a total plant shutdown. To control membrane fouling two principal options are available: Optimisation of pre-treatment: encompassing two new pre-treatment processes namely: Macromolecular adsorption Micro filtration
Optimisation of anti-scalant:: minimizing the fouling of membranes will have an impact on: Chemical costs
MDW0158RP0080F01
57
F01
4.5.2.2
Membranes The selection of the most suitable membrane for a particular application depends on the feed water quality and the product water requirements. Recently membranes have been enhanced to handle the incoming feed water characteristics. The design of a novel polyamide TFC membrane for seawater desalination with reduced fouling ability is being researched in terms of the effect of surface charge, hydrophobicity/philicity and surface roughness of the TFC membrane. The development of an antifouling membrane may involve the following: Preparation of a TFC polyamide reverse osmosis membranes for seawater desalination based on the conventional interfacial polymerisation of two monomers namely diamine and polyfunctional acid chloride (PAC) on a porous support membrane. Changing the surface charge density, hydrophobicity/hydrophilicity and surface roughness of the membrane by adding an organic solvent, surfactant or an electrolyte into the aqueous diamine solution. Alter the characteristics of the membrane surface by processes such as streaming potential measurement, contact angle measurement, atomic force microscope (AFM), X-ray photoelectron microscope (XPS) and scanning electron microscope (SEM). Conducting reverse osmosis trials with an aqueous 3.5 % sodium chloride solution including potential foulants. The purpose of the trial is to measure the rate of flux reduction across the membrane. Once established the rate of flux reduction is correlated with the surface properties of the membrane by regression analysis to allow optimisation of the characterisitics of the membrane to develop a membrane more resistant to anti-fouling.
Modules Similarly, enhancements in module design are also being developed. The methodology includes computational fluid dynamics analyse which are undertaken to enhance the performance of the modules by modifying the fluid flow behaviour. On the basis of the results of the theoretical and experimental studies, the advantages and disadvantages of currently employed configurations are assessed and potential modifications or new designs are proposed. Regarding the latter, the mechanical characteristics of the modules need to be considered in order to prevent extensive fatigue and deterioration during operation as well as membrane embossing. The results of current theoretical studies will assist in this direction providing the capability to calculate stresses and forces on solid surfaces in addition to impacting the recovery rate and on the fouling of the membranes.
4.5.2.3
The feasibility of using energy recovery devices for desalination will depend on the quantity of energy in the concentrate available for recovery. In the case of RO it is common now to use energy recovery
MDW0158RP0080F01
58
F01
devices connected to the concentrate stream as it leaves the pressure vessel at about 1 to 4 bar (15 to 60 psi) less than the applied pressure from the high-pressure pump. These energy recovery devices are mechanical and generally consist of work or pressure exchangers, turbines, or pumps that can convert the pressure difference to rotating or other types of energy that can be used to reduce the energy needs in the overall process. These can have a significant impact on the economics of operating large plants. They increase in value as the cost of energy increases. Now, energy usage in 3 the range of 3 kWh/m (11.4 kWh/1000 gal) for seawater RO (with energy recovery) plants has been nd reported (Buros, O.K. 2000 2 Ed.). Energy recovery in the main membrane desalination processes is based on the conversion of pressure into shaft work and then back to fluid pressure a process which is less efficient than using fluid pressure directly. The se energy recovery devices include turbines, pelton wheels and reverse running pumps. Work exchanger pumps which are generally attached to membranes arrays require the inclusion of high-pressure pump and booster pump in the system. A work exchanger reduces the pumping pressure and electric power consumption by a ratio equal to that of system recovery. The use of energy recovery equipment becomes more cost-effective in larger scale systems. It is important to select suitable energy recovery equipment which has efficiency relatively constant in the range of the anticipated flow rates.
4.5.2.4
Much work has been done to determine the level of plant automation and control optimization required in desalination plants to minimise the cost of water produced. Information has been gathered from reviewing the literature from operating plants in addition to obtaining expert opinions from automation system manufacturers etc. to determine how automation has been and can be best applied in desalination plants (with emphasis on Reverse Osmosis) to meet the project objectives. These reviews also establish which parameters in the Reverse Osmosis desalination processes need to be measured and the conditions under which they need to be measured. A cost-benefit analysis of automation applications, including performance optimizing controls, will determine a well-justified recommendation and definition of automation needed for the Reverse Osmosis process.
4.5.3
Hybrid Configurations
Hybrid system can be used to reduce the overall costs of desalting. Such hybrid systems are not applicable to most desalination installation, but could prove to be an economic benefit in some cases. A hybrid system is a treatment configuration made up of two or more desalination processes. An example is using both distillation and RO processes to desalt seawater at one facility (Buro, O.K. 2000 nd 2 Ed.).
MDW0158RP0080F01
59
F01
Brine
Degaso
The advantages of a hybrid system can be numerous. Take for example the RO/distillation hybrid: The RO system can be fed with a seawater pre-heated to 40C by a distillation unit which would allow an increase in production of approx 3% fresh water for every 1C The common intake is significantly reduced in size The fresh water obtained by distillation (around 25 mg/L) can be mixed with the water produced by reverse osmosis (around 400 mg/L) to obtain an improved water quality which would be more compliant with drinking water regulations and for industrial uses (some industries require very low salt concentration e.g electronics industry) In addition the low salinity of the product water obtained with distillation can remove the need for a second stream of RO.
A plant constructed at Fujairah (United Arab Emirates) produces 454 MLD distilled water from 5 MSF units which is mixed with 170.5 MLD of permeate from 17 RO streams is currently the largest hybrid plant in operation. Another example of a hybrid system could be the use of steam in a dual-purpose plant (electricity and water). The steam is used in a distillation plant to desalt seawater. Alongside the distillation plant could be a seawater RO plant that would be run only in off-peak power period. This would help to stabilize the load on the generator and therefore use lower cost electricity. The RO plant could be designed to produce water with a higher level of total dissolved solids and, thus, also lower production cost. Thermal and membrane processes can be linked in more complex manners to increase both efficiency nd and improve operations (Buros, O.K. 2000 2 Ed.).
MDW0158RP0080F01
60
F01
4.5.4
Other desalination processes have been developed and tested but subsequently abandoned As they proved to be economically and technically unfeasible for large scale plants. A brief summary of these technologies is presented below for evaluation in terms of the Dublin scenario
4.5.4.1
Solar distillation In brief, solar distillation uses the suns energy to evaporate water from a shallow basin; water vapour is condensed on a cool surface and the condensate is collected as a fresh water product usually along a sloping glass roof (see Figure 4.19).
This process is typically used only for very small capacity installations and would prove inefficient and expensive on a larger particularly in countries where light intensity is very low as in Ireland. Variations of solar still designs have been made in an effort to increase efficiency, but they all share the following difficulties, which restrict the use of this technique for large-scale production: Large solar collection area requirements High capital cost Vulnerability to weather-related damage
A general rule of thumb for solar stills is that a solar collection area of about one square meter is needed to produce 4 L of water per day. Thus, for a 4,000-m /d facility, a minimum land area of 100 hectares would be needed (250 acres/mgd). This operation would take up a tremendous area and could thus create difficulties if located near a city where land is scarce and expensive. The stills themselves are expensive to construct, and although the thermal energy may be free, additional energy is needed to pump the nd water to and from the facility (Buros, O.K. 2000 2 Ed.).
3
MDW0158RP0080F01
61
F01
Membrane distillation Membrane distillation was introduced commercially on a small scale during the 1980s, but it has had demonstrated no commercial success. However recent developments (see below) have warranted consideration of membrane distillation as an option. In membrane distillation, salt water is warmed to enhance vapour production, and the vapour is exposed to a membrane that can pass water vapour but not liquid water. Memstill is a newly developed membrane-based distillation concept. The technology uses hydrophobic membranes to separate warm sea water from pure distillate, and combines both a high transport of water vapour and a high transfer of evaporation heat into one membrane module. Because the Memstill module houses a continuum of evaporation stages in a countercurrent flow process, a good recovery of evaporation heat is possible. The process promises to decrease desalination costs to well below 0.50 /m, using low grade waste steam or heat as driving force. Memstill technology presents important advantages in comparison with desalination techniques like MSF, MED and RO, for example: Low consumption of heat and electricity Very high salt separation factor Limited corrosion and fouling Small footprint No additives
However, this process is at present being tested at both bench and pilot scales. Eight years of development has produced a module concept which is leak-free, resistant to hot sea water and foulants, has a salt reduction factor more than 10,000mg/L, and holds sufficient mass and heat 2 transfer to yield an economical flux performance in scaled-up modules of 300 m of membrane area. The first pilot plant has now operating for a year in Singapore and is still showing good separation quality at moderate (but expected) flux performance. A second pilot has operated for 4 months in Benelux with positive results and will now be further improved for a third pilot test in the Netherlands. Due to the current status of Memstill development an industrial unit may not be available for many years. Freezing This technology is based on the principle that water excludes salt when it crystallises in ice and is independent of the salt concentration of the raw water. The procedure consists of cooling saline water to a temperature where ice crystals form under controlled condition and then in collecting the ice. The ice is then melted and yielding fresh water. Theoretically, freezing has some advantages over distillation, which was the predominant reason why the freezing process was developed. These advantages include a lower theoretical energy requirement for a single stage operation, a reduced potential for corrosion and fewer scaling or
MDW0158RP0080F01
62
F01
precipitation problems. The disadvantages are that it involves handling ice and water mixtures that are mechanically complex to move and process. There are several different processes that use freezing to desalt seawater, and a number of plants have been built over the past 50 years. However the process has not been a commercial success in the production of fresh water for municipal purposes. At this stage, freeze-desalting technology probably has better application in the treatment of industrial wastes than in the production of municipal drinking water. Because this process requires complex mechanical equipment, in particular to remove ice from seawater it is no longer employed industrially.
4.5.4.2
Forward Osmosis (FO) In Forward Osmosis (FO), like in reverse osmosis, water transports across a semi-permeable membrane that is impermeable to salt. However, instead of using hydraulic pressure to create the driving force for water transport trough the membrane, FO process utilizes a draw solution having a significantly higher osmotic pressure than the saline feed water. This draw solution flows along the permeate side of the membrane, and water naturally transports across the membrane by osmosis. Osmotic driving force in FO can be significantly greater than in RO, potentially leading to higher water flux rates and recoveries. The significant issue with this new process is to find the most appropriate draw solution.
Many various draw solution and membranes have been tested but many of the bench-scale studies have proved inconclusive. The process is not currently employed as a viable solution on industrial scales.
MDW0158RP0080F01
63
F01
Electrodialysis (ED) Electrodialysis (ED) was commercially introduced in the early 1960s, about 10 years before RO. The development of electrodialysis provided a cost-effective way to desalt brackish water and attracted considerable interest in this area. Electrodialysis depends on the following general principles: most salts dissolved in water are composed of positively (cationic) or negatively (anionic) charged ions. These ions are attracted to electrodes with an opposite electric charge. Membranes can be constructed to permit selective passage of either anions or cations. The dissolved ionic constituents in a saline solution such as sodium (+), calcium (++), and carbonate (--) are dispersed in water, effectively neutralizing their individual charges. When electrodes connected to an outside source of direct current like a battery are placed in a container of saline water, electrical current is carried through the solution, with the ions tending to migrate to the electrode with the opposite charge. For these phenomena to desalinate water, membranes that will allow either cations or anions (but not both) to pass are placed between a pair of electrodes. These membranes are arranged alternately with an anion-selective membrane followed by a cation-selective membrane. A spacer sheet that permits water to flow along the face of the membrane is placed between each pair of membranes. One spacer provides a channel that carries feed (and product) water, while the next carries brine. As the electrodes are charged and saline feed water flows along the product water spacer at right angles to the electrodes, the anions in the water are attracted and diverted towards the positive electrode. This dilutes the salt content of the water in the product water channel. The anions pass through the anion-selective membrane, but cannot pass any farther than the cation-selective membrane, which blocks its path and traps the anion in the brine. Similarly, cations under the influence of the negative electrode move in the opposite direction through the cation-selective membrane to the concentrate channel on the other side. Here, the cations are trapped because the next membrane is anionselective and prevents further movement towards the electrode.
MDW0158RP0080F01
64
F01
By this arrangement, concentrated and diluted solutions are created in the spaces between the alternating membranes. These spaces, bounded by two membranes (one anionic and the other cationic) are called cells. The cell pair consists of two cells, one from which the ions migrated (the dilute cell for the product water) and the other in which the ions concentrate (the concentrate cell for the brine stream). The basic electrodialysis unit consists of several hundred cell pairs bound together with electrodes on the outside and is referred to as a membrane stack. Feed water passes simultaneously in parallel paths through all of the cells to provide a continuous flow of desalted water and brine to emerge from the stack. Depending on the design of the system, chemicals may be added to the streams in the stack to reduce the potential for scaling. An electrodialysis unit is made up of the following basic components: pretreatment train; membrane stack; low-pressure circulating pump; power supply for direct current ; post-treatment. The raw feed water must be pre-treated to prevent materials that could harm the membranes or clog the narrow channels in the cells from entering the membrane stack. The feed water is circulated through the stack with a low-pressure pump with enough power to overcome the resistance of the water as it passes through the narrow passages. A rectifier is generally used to transform alternating current to the direct current supplied to the electrodes on the outside of the membrane stacks (Buros, nd O.K. 2000 2 Ed). Electrodialysis has not succeeded to further develop in the desalination market as it tends to be more suitable for the treatment of feed water with low salt concentration (e.g. brackish water). Reverse osmosis has been the main rival to ED because electrodialysis has only been adapted to low salinity of seawater: between 1 and 2.5 mg/L NaCl. This technology is not applicable to the Dublin region as the seawater salinity is much higher. Reversal electrodialysis (EDR) Pre-treatment requirements for ED systems may be minimized through the implementation of electrodialysis reversal (EDR), which operates on the same basic principle as the standard ED process. The main difference between the ED and EDR techniques is that the electrode polarity in the latter is reversed three to four times per hour and the flow streams are simultaneously switched using automatic valves. The net result is that the product and brine cells periodically exchange functions, with salts being transferred in opposite directions across the membranes in consecutive cycles. This reversal aids breaking up and flushing out scale, slime and other deposit in the cells, eliminating the need for additives (generally acids and complexing agents). The membrane stacks still require some cleaning, though much less frequently than would otherwise be necessary. EDR is a variation of ED. Reversal of electrode polarity increases the useful life of the cells electrode and helps clean the membranes. The only difference between the two processes concerns the maintenance and the chemicals costs which translates to minor cost savings compared to ED. Moreover, as EDR is currently only adapted to the treatment of brackish water this technology is not applicable in the case of Dublin. High efficiency electrodialysis(HEED) Like traditional electrodialysis, HEED is an electro-membrane process in which the ions are transported through a membrane from one compartment to another under the influence of an electrical potential. In effect, ions are driven from a region of low concentration to one of high concentration.
MDW0158RP0080F01
65
F01
The main differences between ED and HEED are as follows: HEED requires less membrane area HEED is more energy efficient Improved gasket designs have resulted in higher separation efficiencies
3
HEED is available in capacities ranging from 2,000 to 5,000 m /d with maximum feedwater salinity of 20 g/L and product water purity of 2 mg/L total dissolved solids (TDS). Hybrid processes consisting of HEED, RO, and/or distillation also offer solutions to an increasingly important issue. For some applications, combined HEED and RO hybrid systems would result in more efficient operation since electrodialysis efficiency decreases with decreasing dilute (product) concentration. The only energy required is electrical energy; approx 24 kWh are needed to produce 3 1m fresh water from sea water which is significantly higher than other desalination technologies available. Conclusion for Electrodialysis Options RO is the most widely used membrane technology at the present time. However as presented in this section various other membrane processes have been researched and developed in recent years. These processes however are typically used for desalination of brackish water (e.g. ED and EDR), are only available at laboratory/pilot scales (e.g. forward osmosis) or are considerably more expensive than RO in terms of energy consumption.
Table 4.7
Membrane process
Reverse osmosis on sea water and without energy recovery Reverse osmosis on sea water and with energy recovery Reverse osmosis on brackish water Electrodialysis on sea water Electrodialysis on brackish water Reversal Electrodialysis on sea water High Efficiency Electrodialysis on sea water
4 3 30 3 30
24
6.3
MDW0158RP0080F01
66
F01
4.5.4.3
The thermal osmosis process consists of a special counter-current heat exchanger. It comprises of 2 membranes, the first which is permeable to vapour and impermeable to salts and the second which is impermeable to vapour and permeable to salts. No industrial application of this technology is presently known.
4.5.4.4
Ion exchange resins can also be used for desalination. These are insoluble synthetic organic compounds that have the ability to exchange some of their ions with those of mineral salts dissolved in the solution (feed water). Two types of resins can be distinguished: Anionic resins that replace the anions of the treated liquid with OH anions Cationic resins with which cations are replaced by H or Na ions.
+ +
The resins have to be regenerated regularly with chemical reagents. Moreover, the resins have to be replaced periodically and as a result the incurred costs are increased when compared to other technologies for the desalination of seawater. The critical factor in terms of the performance of ion exchange resins is that they can produce very pure water only if salt content of the raw water does not exceed 1g/L. Therefore since this process is effective only for a very low salt content in the feed water this process is not worth considering for the Dublin region.
4.5.4.5
Capacitive Deionisation
In brief this process involves saline water flowing between two porous carbon electrodes. Anions are attracted to the anode and the cations to the cathode. When the electrodes gradually become saturated regeneration is required. This technology has been tested only at laboratory scale in the United States and no industrial developments have followed the laboratory tests.
MDW0158RP0080F01
67
F01
METHODOLOGY
Technology Selection Scoring System
All desalination technologies developed to date have been presented in the previous section, including operational, lab-scale and bench-scale processes. The initial aim of this technology review process was to determine the most beneficial desalination technology for the Dublin Water Supply project. To compare each of the technologies listed in this document, a screening matrix has been devised for technology selection using a scoring system which has been developed for comparison of each process based on the following criteria: Maturity of the technology Scale adaptability (300 Mld) Scale adaptability - 50 Mld Development prospects State of the market
Each process will be scored from 0 to 100 with regard to relevance in relation to the criteria listed as outlined below: Between 0 and 35: low score Between 35 and 65: medium score Between 65 and 100: high score
Maturity of the technology: Each process has been scored on this criterion based on the number of existing plants using this technology and the number of desalination projects worldwide which intend to implement it.
Therefore a process will get: A high score if many plants using this process are operated worldwide, if these plants have been implemented many years ago without any major operational problems since this date and if many projects are planned for future desalination plants using this technology. A medium score if some plants using this process are operated worldwide or only recent implementation of the plant exists worldwide, if some little operation problems have been observed on these plants and if some projects are planed for future desalination units using this technology
MDW0158RP0080F01
68
F01
A low score if few plants using this process are operated worldwide (recent implementation or implemented but no longer operated), or if no industrial reference exist for this process (only lab-scale prototype) and if few or no projects are planned using this technology.
Scale adaptability (300 Mld): This criterion has been assessed for each process according to the number of existing plants worldwide using the technology at present with a capacity of approx 200 300 Mld and also considering the possibility of scaling-up when no high capacity examples exist. .
Therefore a process will get: A high score if many of the plants using this process are operated at a capacity of 300 Mld A medium score if few plants are operated at a capacity of 300 Mld or if scaling-up possibilities exist for the process. A low score if no industrial reference exists for this process (only lab-scale prototype) and no scaling-up perspectives are expected for it.
Scale adaptability (50 Mld): This criterion has been assessed for each process according to the number of existing plants worldwide using the technology at present with a capacity of approx 50 MLD with the possibility of scaling-up when no relevant example exist.
Therefore a process will get: A high score if many plants using this process are operated at a capacity of 50 Mld A medium score if few plants are operated at a capacity of 50 Mld or if scaling-up possibilities exist for this process. A low score if no industrial reference exists for this process (only lab-scale prototype) and no scaling-up perspectives are expected for it.
Development prospects: This criterion has been assessed for each process according to the publication of research papers, and the number of process elements being addressed by these papers.
Therefore a process will get: A high score if many papers exist on recent enhancements of the process and if these enhancements can lead to significant cost-saving, increasing the reliability of the process and simplicity of operation. A medium score if papers (recent or old) exist on enhancements of the process but these enhancements do not mean significant cost-saving, increasing the reliability of the process and simplicity of operation. A low score if no paper can be found on possible enhancement of the process.
State of the market: This point has been assessed for each process according to the number of suppliers offering this technology.
MDW0158RP0080F01
69
F01
Therefore a process will get: A high score if many suppliers offer this technology for high capacity facilities (> 50 Mld) A medium score if some suppliers offer this technology for medium and high capacity facilities (>50 Mld) A low score if few suppliers offer this technology.
5.1.2
Using the above criteria and scoring system Table 5.1 shows the most appropriate processes for the Dublin project which in summary are: Distillation: MED and MSF Reverse osmosis (RO) Hybrid configurations: RO and distillation
In order to compare these selected processes in further detail, a second selection and scoring system has been established based on the following additional criteria: Cost Energy Consumption Environmental Impact Development prospects Robustness Operation Safety
Costs: This criterion has been assessed for each process according to the CAPEX, OPEX, the cost of 3 the system to produce 1 m of fresh water and the stability of these costs (which can depend on water quality, energy source availability in the country, and local physical conditions)
Therefore a process will get: A high score if CAPEX, OPEX, cost of the system to produce 1 m of fresh water are low and the cost are very stable (not too dependent on water quality, energy source available in the country, local physical conditions)
3
MDW0158RP0080F01
70
F01
A medium score if some of the costs (CAPEX, OPEX, ratios) are high but stable (not too dependent on water quality, energy source available in the country, local physical conditions) A low score if costs are high and very variable (greatly dependent on water quality
Energy: This criterion has been assessed for each process according to the amount of energy needed 3 to produce 1 m of fresh water and the variability of possible energy sources to feed this process.
Therefore a process will get: A high score if it consumes little energy: less than 4 kWh/ m of fresh water A medium score if the energy consumption is more than 4 kWh and less than 10 KWh/ m of fresh water A low score if it needs a lot of energy: more than 10 KWh/ m of fresh water
3 3 3
Environmental impact: This criterion has been assessed for each process according to the environmental footprint of the entire system in terms of its integration into the landscape, noise emissions, brine disposal issue and its carbon dioxide emissions.
Therefore a process will get: A high score if the footprint of the whole system is small, its integration into the landscape is not problematic, low noise emissions and presents little threat to the environment (little impact of the brine disposal and low carbon dioxide release). A medium score if footprint of the whole system is higher, it is more difficult to integrate into the surrounding landscape, higher noise emissions and it releases a significant quantities of CO2 A low score if footprint of the whole system is high, very difficult to integrate into the surrounding landscape, its noisy and presents a considerable impact on the environment (due to the brine disposal and the carbon dioxide release)
Development prospects This criterion has been assessed for each process according to the publication of research papers, and the number of process elements addressed by these papers.
Therefore a process will get: A high score if many papers exist on recent enhancements of the process and if these enhancements can lead to significant cost-saving, increase of the reliability of the process and improve ease of operations. A medium score if papers (recent or old) exist on enhancements of the process but these enhancements do not mean significant cost-saving, increase of the reliability of the process and improve ease of operations. A low score if few papers or old papers only exist on possible enhancements of the process.
MDW0158RP0080F01
71
F01
Robustness: This criterion has been assessed for each process according to the average lifetime of the existing plants which use this technology, to the working order of these plants (normal, operation incidents, fresh water feeding setback, sensitivity to raw water pollution).
Therefore a process will get: A high score if plants using this process have been operated for a long time without significant operation problems (lifetime around 30 years) A medium score if plants using this process have been operated for a few years (around 10 years) and if some plants have met with little operation problems (like sensitivity to raw water pollution, medium level of maintenance) A low score if plants using this process have a short lifetime and if many operational problems are experienced, sensitivity to pollution (leading to stopping of the plant operation for example), considerable maintenance needed to replace the elements of the system.
Operation: This criterion has been assessed for each process according the easiness of operation, the flexibility in the treated flow and the possibility to easily start up / shut down the process if required.
Therefore a process will get: A high score if it is easy to operate, flexible with regard to the flow to be treated and allow no problems with start up/shut down if required. A medium score if the operation of this process needs specific know how and specialised training of staff A low score if it is very difficult to operate and not flexible at all (concerning the flow to be treated and the possibility to stop then start the plant when required)
Safety: This criterion has been assessed for each process according hazards posed to the staff working at the plant and to people living in the surrounding area.
Therefore a process will get: A high score if it poses little or no hazards A medium score if it poses some hazards to the staff working on the plant and to people living in the surrounding area A low score if it poses many hazards to the staff and to people living in the surrounding area.
5.2
RECOMMENDED TECHNOLOGY
Using the above criteria and scoring system Tables 5.1 and 5.2 show the most appropriate process for the Dublin project namely Reverse Osmosis.
MDW0158RP0080F01
72
F01
Table 5.1
Distillation
Reverse Osmosis
Other
Electrodialysis
Reversal electrodialysis
Solar distillation
Capacitive deionisation
configuration
100
80
40
20
20
30
20
90
100
50
50
20
100
60
50
20
90
90
60
30
20
20
20
100
80
30
10
50
30
10
market Total
400
470
320
210
100
110
80
40
19
24
19
19
19
MDW0158RP0080F01
73
F01
Table 5.2
Detailed comparison of the main desalination processes: distillation, reverse osmosis and hybrid configurations Distillation MSF
cost 60
energy
60
50
50
60
environmental impact
70
70
90
80
development prospects
40
40
100
90
robustness
80
70
60
60
operation
80
30
90
20
safety
80
80
90
80
TOTAL
470
390
560
460
MDW0158RP0080F01
74
F01
5.3
DISCUSSION OF RESULTS
The following section discusses the leading factors considered when evaluating each of the technologies reviewed in order to select the most appropriate application for the Dublin Region i.e. Reverse Osmosis (RO):
5.3.1
Costs
The capital costs of MSF and MED are generally higher than RO due to the high cost of uncommon / rare materials which may be required for the construction of certain plant elements. Though RO plants have lower initial investment and fixed costs, they can have higher maintenance costs. Power requirements are much higher in the case of RO plants because of their high pressure operation which may entail higher operational costs. The overall energy consumption however is much higher for distillation processes (especially for MED) when compared to RO plants. At high capacities the seawater intake volume required in MSF plants is higher and efficiency is therefore lower. MSF and MED plants also require a greater land area, which can increase the cost due to high land prices. As shown in Appendix A Tracking Desalination Costs, RO presents a considerable cost variability (investment and operation) depending on the feed water salinity and quality whereas the distillation process design does not really depend on these factors.
5.3.2
Energy consumption
The scoring system for this particular criterion relates more to the quantity of energy consumed and availability of energy sources for each process type rather than focusing on the cost of the required energy. Distillation processes can be an attractive option where low-cost thermal energy is readily available. In the case of Dublin, gas would be available to produce steam however the technology may not be attractive considering the high energy consumption rates for distillation processes. Waste heat could also perhaps be used (depending on industrial waste heat available). RO requires electrical energy only. If the electrical energy cannot be taken from the grid a new power plant would be required increasing as a result the investment costs of this option. If electrical energy is available from the grid RO could be awarded a higher score than is currently presented in the table 5.2 thereby making it more suitable as an option for the Dublin region. Hybrid configurations present more flexibility concerning the energy source required.
5.3.3
Environmental impact
In terms of impact on the marine environment brine disposal does not constitute an environmental problem for any of the technologies reviewed (refer section 8).
MDW0158RP0080F01
75
F01
In terms of landscape integration and noise emissions the distillation processes tend to emit higher noise and do not easily integrate into the landscape. RO is a more compact system than distillation and requires a smaller footprint with lower noise levels.
5.3.4
Robustness
High life times have been reported for distillation systems (up to 40 years) as RO is a relatively newer technology the full extent of plant life times has not been fully experienced.
5.3.5
Operation
The main processes implemented worldwide are MSF and RO. RO is the main process proposed for the majority of new installations in the near future
Figure 5.1 Global distribution of installed desalination capacity by technology adapted from 1998 survey (International desalination association)
5.3.6
Safety
Safety does not constitute a real problem for any of the technologies reviewed. The only significant hazard is steam and heat tubes in the distillation process which potentially affects only the staff working on the plant.
MDW0158RP0080F01
76
F01
6 PRELIMINARY DESIGN
6.1
INTRODUCTION
A desalination plant would involve the construction of a major Reverse Osmosis desalination facility on the East Coast and a pipeline to take the desalinated water to a suitable reservoir where it would enter the supply network for the Dublin Region. Site selection methodology is available in Section 7. The total installed capacity of 300 Ml/d can be implemented over a number of phases to provide flexibility in catering for gradually increasing demand growth. A two phased approach to achieve the ultimate demand would see a 200Ml/d plant constructed in Phase 1 (to be operational by 2016) and a further 100 Ml/d in Phase 2 (operational by 2026) - approximately 10 years apart. The seawater intake and treated water tank constructed in Phase 1 would be adequate for 300 Mld plant removing the need for significant engineering works in Phase 2. Drawings of the desalination plant preliminary design are shown in Appendix G.
6.2
6.2.1
DESIGN CRITERIA
General
This preliminary design of the proposed plant is based on the following principles. It is assumed that the quality of the raw water (the sea water) will not change significantly in the next decades and that, results from 2 sampling exercises in August and October obtained data which are representative for the usual water quality of the Irish Sea (see Appendix B Water Quality Analysis). It is proposed that a sustainable solution will be defined for the final storage of the dewatered sludge. The option of disposal at sea will be considered as no adverse impacts on the marine environment resulted from the discharge dispersion modelling exercise undertaken (see section 8.6.2). Provision will be taken in the design of the plant in order to allow safe and easy access to the facility to the public for visits/tours e.g. from schools. The plant is designed on the basis of 24 hours a day operation. The plant shall be fully automated and have the highest level of safety, reliability and flexibility.
6.2.2
Capacity
The final production of the plant will be 300 Mld. It will be built in two phases: the first phase will have a capacity of 200 Mld, to be built for 2016, with a possibility to produce only 50 Mld at the start of the plant operation, and a second phase of 100 Mld to be added later. The total first phase will be composed of two parallel stream of 100 Mld each.
MDW0158RP0080F01
77
F01
6.2.3
2 sets of sea water samples were organised in August and October 2007, giving water quality results representative for the summer and autumn months. The first Round sampling investigated sea water quality at several points: Different distances from the shore: 500 m (point A), 1 km (point B) and 3 km (point C) see Appendix B. Different depths: surface, middle, bottom.
The preliminary design presented in this report is based on these water quality sampling results. The Irish Sea water quality was compared to sea water from other regions where desalinated water is produced. The salinity was found to be quite significant and comparable to that of the Mediterranean Sea. The following table shows the variations in salinity between seawater samples tested in various locations worldwide:
39
36
40
40
36 20 13 7
an -p er sa n
ba l
bl a Iir i sh
Seasonal variations of temperature and salinity have been assessed using the survey performed by the Irish marine institute and are illustrated in Figure 6.2.
MDW0158RP0080F01
ar ab i
78
se a
ed i
F01
Figure 6.2 Temperature variations of sea water during the year according to the Irish Marine Institute:
20 Temprature 15 10 5 0
1
max
min
An important parameter to consider in case of reverse osmosis desalination is the Silt Density Index (SDI), which is representative for the fouling potential of the sea water. This analysis consisted of filtering 500 ml of sea water through a membrane (5 m) twice: The first time through a new membrane. The second time after x minutes (5, 10 or 15 depending on the sea water quality) of sea filtration through the same membrane.
The lengths of time needed to filter the water during both filtering trials are then compared and the difference is expressed in % per minute. Natural water contains organic and inorganic particles likely to clog the reverse osmosis membranes. The SDI 5 minutes measured in the Irish Sea is 20 (according to data obtained from several regions SDI often varies between 5-30 and occasionally 40). Turbidity, faecal coliforms, organic matter, and algae analysis helped understanding the origin of this quite significant SDI: Turbidity suggests that the water is quite charged with particles for a sea water (turbidity is usually less than 1 NTU) Organic matter results show usual values (often present at a concentration less than 1 mg/L organic matter quite good settles in sea water) Faecal coliforms and algae are numerous and may be responsible for the significant clogging potential of the Irish Sea water.
During the raw water sampling exercises chlorophyll A was found in high quantities; this suggests that algal cells may be numerous in the sea off north Fingal. No significant pollution risk is estimated to occur in the future since no dangerous discharge is present in the sea at north Fingal.
MDW0158RP0080F01
79
F01
6.2.4
At the outlet of the plant, the treated water quality shall be compliant with the EC (Drinking Water) Regulations, 2000 S.I. 439 of 2000. Table 6.1 shows the critical parameters of the desalination.
Table 6.1
The final water alkalinity has been set at 100 mgCaCO3 /L.
6.3
6.3.1
General
Given the characteristics of the raw water, the following process stages shall be used for drinking water production: Chemical pre-treatment: intended to decrease the SDI before membrane filtration; Reverse osmosis for desalination; Post-treatment with setting at calco-carbonic equilibrium and final chlorination. The purpose of setting at the calco-carbonic equilibrium is to reduce scaling and hence protect against corrosion.
A raw water balancing tank will not be provided; a safety buffer capacity will be given by the treated water reservoir. Moreover, the implementation of a raw water balancing tank on such a large scale plant would generate significant constraints on the hydraulic section and lay out which are not justified by the advantages of such a tank.
MDW0158RP0080F01
80
F01
Therefore, the recommended treatment stream will be composed of the following stages:
Shock chlorination Coagulation with ferric chloride Acidification with sulphuric acid Flocculation with anionic polymer Dissolved air floatation Dual media filtration (anthracite and sand) Reverse osmosis desalination with de-chlorination and antiscalant injection Setting to calco-carbonic equilibrium and mineralization Final disinfection with sodium hypochlorite solution
6.3.2
6.3.2.1
Main Assumptions
Design Flows
3
The required flow of produced water is 300,000 m /d (year 2031). The estimation of the raw water flow to be treated is based on the required treated flow, the conversion rate of the reverse osmosis step and on an estimation of the sludge production volumes. The water losses in the pre-treatment are around 3.5% of the pre-treated water production, which corresponds to the water losses observed on a well operated surface water treatment plant. The sludge production estimation is based on the following data: Removal of suspended solids: 85 % of the suspended solids are removed during the floatation step 15 % of the suspended solids are removed during the filtration step
Concentration of the sludge Floatation sludge concentration: 10-15 g/L Backwash water concentration: 0.5 to 0.75 g/L
The water losses in the RO plant are around 43.5 % of the final output: 55 % in the 1 RO pass: conversion rate is set at 45 % 3.33 % in the 2 RO pass: conversion rate of 2 nd pass permeate will be treated by the 2 pass.
nd nd st
st
MDW0158RP0080F01
81
F01
Thus 476,430 m /d should be abstracted from the sea to convey 200,000 m /d of treated water to 3 Dublin for phase 1 and 714,640 m /d for phase 2. The sludge production estimation is detailed in section 6.3.7.1 of this report. Below it is proposed that the works are divided into 2 phases: one phase to produce 200,000 m /d of 3 treated water and a second one for an additional 100,000 m /d. Thus three streams can be 3 3 constructed, two streams sized to produce 100,000 m /d of treated water (238 215 m /d of raw water with 58% water loss in the pre-treatment and RO steps). If required, with the exception of the intake structure, treated water tank and outlet pipe, the product water treatment systems can be installed on a stream by stream (modular) basis providing 100,000 3 m /d with each additional module. The arrangement of high pressure pumps, energy recovery devices and membrane banks can be designed to allow operational independence and flexibility.
3
Table 6.2
Summary of the phasing of the Desalination Treatment Plant construction PHASE 1 PHASE 2
2026 2025
3
Target year (start operation) Start construction Additional production capacity Design raw water flow Number of treatment streams Flow of one treatment stream
6.3.3
Twin 1800mm diameter pipelines are needed to abstract seawater efficiently at maximum capacity (715Mld). The required pipeline length is 3km in order to provide a sufficient water depth 20m for the intake structures. A minimum elevation above seabed is needed for water quality purpose as well as a minimum depth below water level for navigation safety. Similarly, twin 1400mm diameter pipelines will enable the discharge of brine in an optimised manner at maximum flow rate (415Mld). In this case the pipeline length will only be 2km since brine dispersion modelling demonstrated that this would provide suitable dilution patterns for avoidance of sensitive coastal areas (see modelling results Section 8) The engineering works involved in the construction of these pipelines are complex and expensive. The construction methodology will be: tunnelling from the desalination plant sand dredging between tunnel exit and pipeline extremities (seawater intakes / brine outfalls)
MDW0158RP0080F01
82
F01
Hydraulic calculations indicate that pipelines will have to remain at least 7m below the spring low tide level in order to provide a suitable hydraulic profile for head losses. Therefore, from the desalination plant sump the pipelines will be tunnelled to a point at least 7m below the minimum sea level. The anticipated length of such a tunnel is about 800m. Land intake pit must be lower than spring low tide level plus 7m. With the site elevation of 13mOD that means a sump depth of approx 20m. Excavation assessed for the intake would be 20 m deep and 18mX10m for the area of the sump. The intakes and outfalls will be laid through a single tunnel from the plant site. From the tunnels exit, pipelines will be dredged into sand with a minimum cover of 1.6m. Abstraction and discharge pipelines will be dredged in separate trenches from the tunnel in Easterly and South-Easterly directions for the outfalls and intakes, respectively.
6.3.4
Pre-treatment
The aim of the pre-treatment is to reduce the SDI of the water to a value less than 3.0, in order to control the life span of the membrane and the operation costs of the reverse osmosis step. Moreover, most of the membranes found on the market are under guarantee for a SDI less than 3.0 or 3.5. Good performance of the pre-treatment stage is essential in a RO desalination plant to ensure the correct operation of the desalination stage. The RO pre-treatment performance is driven by four main parameters: Total Suspended Solids (TSS), Turbidity, SDI, oil and grease content. Several pre-treatment technologies have been proven to be high-performance (from pilot tests on different types of water to full scale operational experience) in reducing SDI, depending on the initial value and the general content of the water: Direct dual media filtration (one or two stages of filtration) Clarification followed by dual media filtration (one or two stages) for high TSS and algae contents. Direct micro/ultra filtration Clarification followed by micro/ultra filtration for high TSS contents.
The direct dual media filtration is much cheaper in terms of investment and simpler to operate; but is possible only when the quality of the raw water is very good: low SDI; low turbidity and low algae content. Table 6.3 shows the raw water quality limitations for direct dual media filtration.
Table 6.3
Limitations on raw water quality which permit direct filtration Turbidity (NTU) Colour (Pt/Co)
< 40
Algae (nb/ml)
< 2000
SS (mg/L)
<100
SDI
< 25
<15
<0.2
<5
Absence
Absence
<3
MDW0158RP0080F01
83
F01
The algae content and the SDI of Irish water may exceed these limits, according to raw water samplings performed, and direct media filtration will not be sufficient to reduce SDI to the required value upstream membranes. Water quality tests carried out in August and October 2007 recorded SDIs ranging from 16.8 to 30.0 (average 20) which exceeds limitation figures according to data in table 6.3. Moreover, algae events can lead to high operation costs (increase of filters backwash) and operation difficulties. As the source water is therefore deemed to have a high fouling potential in relation to the membranes a clarification step will be necessary. For the same reason, direct micro/ultra filtration is not advised on this raw water quality (algae content can result in operation difficulties because of high clogging potential). A clarification step would also be necessary making this pre-treatment option quite expensive compared to the others. In the case of north Fingal, the raw water has high levels of particles and algae which requires clarification followed by dual media filtration for SDI control and satisfactory operation of the plant. Contrary to conventional sedimentation, dissolved air floatation (DAF) has shown very good performances on sea water with high algal content. In addition, it allows compact installation. Hence, this technology will be selected as the clarification process. Open gravity filters will be implemented for the dual media filtration step, as pressure filters are limited in size. Hence: TSS and turbidity will be removed by coagulation/flocculation/floatation (expected efficiency is 85 % with raw water TSS content) and the residual will be treated by dual media filtration. Algae will be removed by the DAF (expected efficiency is 99%). SDI (indicative for the fouling potential of the water) is the most important parameter, pilot plant trials have shown that coagulation/ flocculation / floatation / Dual Media Filtration were satisfactory with substantial high raw water SDI values (20 to 40 % per minute). The coagulation step is an important step of the pre-treatment, especially the type of chemical used. Three types of chemical are widely used as coagulant: aluminium sulphate, poly-aluminium-chloride (PAC) and iron salts (ferric chloride and ferrous sulphate). Aluminium based coagulant are not advised in case of reverse osmosis downstream coagulation. This type of chemical can damage membranes and lead to irreversible fouling. Iron salts are preferable in case of reverse osmosis desalination. The use of ferric salt presents also the advantage of producing sludge less harmful for the environment than the aluminium salt. Iron is a very common element in the nature, without any health hazard or environmental effect. For this reason ferric chloride will be used for coagulation.
6.3.4.1
Shock Chlorination
Chlorine is injected upstream the seawater pumps in order to control sea shell growth and sea flora. Shock chlorination is performed at the intake. The chlorine is injected as a sodium hypochlorite solution. The sodium hypochlorite is delivered on site in liquid form. The design criteria of the shock chlorination step are as follows: Chlorine dose: 7 mg/l (as Cl pure) Frequency: 2 h / day
MDW0158RP0080F01
84
F01
6.3.4.2
pH Adjustment
The pH is adjusted in order to improve the coagulation. The optimum coagulation pH range with ferric chloride is around 7. Depending on the sea water pH, addition of coagulant alone can be sufficient to drop the coagulation pH in the proper pH range. However, at certain times it is necessary to use acid. Sulphuric acid (a 96 % solution) is injected in an in line static mixer to reach the pH set value. Based on the sea water analysis, the dosing rate varies between 20 mg/L and 30 mg/L of 96 % sulphuric acid liquid.
6.3.4.3
Coagulation Flocculation
The chemical shall be injected directly in the sea water pipe or in the coagulation tank. A pH-meter is installed in the coagulation tank to measure the pH of the water thus the operator is able to adjust it according to the results of the Jar test. At that level of the treatment chain, a flash mixing is required to quickly scatter the coagulant in the bulk of water. This mixing can be achieve in line with a static mixer, or in a specific tank; this latter solution being more efficient. The design criteria of the flash mixing step are as follows: contact time coagulant dosing rate type of mixer Velocity gradient : 1 minute : FeCl3 (ferric chloride) : from 20 mg/L to 35 mg/L, : vertical mixer, with blades specially designed for coagulation : 300 s-1 (G =(W/( V)) ) G is the velocity gradient W is the dissipated energy in the fluid is the dynamic viscosity V is the volume of the fluid, that is, the volume of the tank. Provision must be taken in the design of the coagulation tank to avoid bulk rotation of the water, and insure that all the mixing energy is dissipated under low scale turbulences. This criterion is achieved by square shaped tank. Dimensions of the coagulation units of one treatment stream of phase 1: Number of coagulation tanks 5
0,5
MDW0158RP0080F01
85
F01
1 minute 165.5 m
3
Unit volume: Length: Width: Water depth: Dissipated power: Velocity gradient:
33,1 m 3m 3m 3,7 m
1 950 W 309 s
-1
After coagulation, which creates the seeds of the aggregates, the aim of flocculation is to increase the probability of contact between the particles. Anionic polymers may be injected in the flocculation tank in order to increase the size and the density of the floc which will consequently settle faster and better. Slow mixing will help this physical reaction to succeed. The design criteria are as follows: contact time flocculant type of mixer : 10 to 15 minutes : anionic polymers : propeller agitator
Velocity gradient: 30 s-1 The flocs are fragile; it is very important to avoid any turbulent area between the flocculation tank and the settlers, which would break them and reduce the efficiency of the gravity settling.
Sizing of the flocculation units of one treatment stream: Number of flocculation tanks: Contact time: Total volume: 10 10 minutes 1654,5 m
3
MDW0158RP0080F01
86
F01
Dimension of one tank Unit volume: Length: Width: Water depth: Type of mixer: Dissipated power: Velocity gradient: 165,5 m 6m 6m 4,5 m propeller agitator 580 W 41 s
-1 3
The bottom of the flocculation tank shall have a 7 % slope for easier sludge evacuation.
6.3.4.4
Floatation
Dissolved Air Floatation (DAF) is a solid-liquid separation process that transfers solids to the liquid surface through attachment of fine air bubbles to solid particles. The phenomenon of DAF consists of three processes: Bubble generation; Attachment of solids to the bubbles, Solids separation.
Indirect floatation will be implemented after coagulation-flocculation. It means that a part of floated water will be recycled and air will be dissolved in this water prior to be suddenly depressurized, and blended with the inlet water.
MDW0158RP0080F01
87
F01
Figure 6.3 View of a Dissolved Air Flotation Unit (DAF) for the solid-liquid separation process
The floatation step will then consists of the following items: Mixing tank: mixing of water containing the dissolved air and raw water to be treated Floatation tank: separation tank Recirculation pumps: for recirculation of 10 % of floated water Pressurisation vessel: one for each floatation tank Diffuser Pipelines for recirculation and air injection
Ten (10) parallel flotation systems will be implemented for each treatment stream.
Sizing of the mixing tanks: Number of the mixing tanks: 10 Contact time: 1.3 minutes
MDW0158RP0080F01
88
F01
Dimension of one tank Unit volume: Length: Width: Water depth: 37.8 m 6m 1.4 m 4.5 m
3
Sizing of the floatation tanks: Number of mixing tanks: Contact time: Dimension of one tank Unit volume: Length: Width: Water depth: 162 m 6m 6m 4.5 m
3
10 10 minutes
Table 6.4
Value phase 2
9925.1 27
Total feed water flow rate Mirror speed Number of flotation system per stream Recirculation pumps Number Unit capacity Pressure
m /h m/h
10
10
U m /h bar
3
22 (2 on stand-by) 107 6
11 (1 on stand-by) 107 6
MDW0158RP0080F01
89
F01
Pressurisation vessels Number Unit capacity Diameter Height Unit flow Diffusers Number Unit flow rate U m /h
3
U m
3
m m m /h
3
1200 1.77
600 1.77
The final floated water will then be collected in a first channel (each floatation tank having its own channel) and the total floated water of one stream will be collected in a second channel leading to filters.
6.3.4.5
Filtration is performed in open gravity dual media (pumice and sand) filters supplied with a constant flow of floated water and constant water level above the filter: it is an upstream control system with a downstream compensation. Such a filtration control is provided by a valve fitted with an electro-pneumatic activator with pressure sensor on the upstream water level. A butterfly valve opens and closes depending on the water levels upstream and downstream. Relative level sensors (pressure sensor type) modulate the opening and the closing of the valve: the downstream sensor is only active when the upstream water level is between the upper and the lower thresholds. The total head loss between the inlet of the filter and its outlet is always equal to 2.4 m WC. It is the sum of the head loss in the filter and the head loss of the water level monitoring valve.
MDW0158RP0080F01
90
F01
Table 6.5
Sizing of the Dual Media Filtration Units Item Value phase 1 (2 streams)
10 (operating 24hours a day) Vertical gravity dual media filters 16 m 5.8 m 11.9 m/h when 9 filters are operated 10.7 m/h when 10 filters operate 927.7 m 92.8 m
2
Number of filters (n) per stream Type of filters Length of the filter Width of the filter Filtration rate Total filtration area Unit filtration area Filtration media
Media height Pumice : 600 mm Sand : effective size : 0.55 0.65 mm Grain size distribution Pumice : effective size : 1.2 2 mm Gravel height (gravel layer under the sand layer) Nozzles 100 mm Around 40 nozzles / m
2
The settled water is collected in a channel and flows into the filters through penstocks. Backwash of the filters: The backwash is performed with air and water. The characteristics of backwash equipments are given in table 6.6 below.
MDW0158RP0080F01
91
F01
Table 6.6
Number of compressors per stream of 100 MLD Unit Flow Manometric delivery head Air pipe diameter
WATER BACKWASH
Number of pumps stream of 100 MLD per
Unit flow
A daily air and water cleaning of the filters will be carried out and the filters will be equipped with a slow start device. Backwash of the filters will be operated as follows as shown in the following table.
Table 6.7
Flow (m/h)
50 50
Duration (minute)
1
1) Air
10 10 35
3
Water
10
Note: 6 m of water per m of filter is required (557 m for one filter backwash)
MDW0158RP0080F01
92
F01
The filtered water will be stored in a tank built under the filters. The volume of the tank is designed for 3 a storage capacity of 3 filter back wash (for each filter): 16,710 m .
6.3.5
Reverse Osmosis
The membrane to be used in the RO treatment process shall have high water permeability and a high degree of semi-permeability, that is, the rate of water transport shall be higher than the rate of transport of dissolved ions. The material shall be resistant to a wide range of pH and temperature and have good mechanical integrity (to stand up the high operating pressures). The membrane performances shall also be stable over the time concerning the permeability, the salt and boron rejection. Permeability is an important parameter because it highly impacts the energy consumption of the whole process. Lots of advances have been made on commercial membrane concerning this parameter, leading to important energy saving. Optimum value has been reached by the suppliers now. However, changes in stability of permeability and other performances can be noticed between the membranes proposed on the market. Despite good performances of some membranes at the beginning of their life, it can decrease significantly over the time, leading to higher energy consumption at the end of the membrane life. Two major materials are used for reverse osmosis: cellulose acetate and polyamide. Cellulose acetate is not used for potable water application, because the operating pH range of this type of membrane which is quite narrow (6-8) and leads to cleaning difficulties. That is why the desalination market is dominated by the composite polyamide membranes. The membrane can be set into different configurations: plate and frame, hollow fibre and spiral wounded configuration. Plate and frame have been abandoned in favour of higher packing density spiral wound and hollow fibre configuration. Hollow fibre required good feed water quality (low TDS content) and is often used for the treatment of brackish water. As the seawater at Loughshinny is highly charged with TDS composite polyamide membranes in a spiral wound configuration shall be required for the Dublin desalination plant.
Figure 6.4 Constituent parts of a spiral wound module used in Reverse Osmosis treatment process
The construction of a spiral wound module consists of winding several flat sheets around a perforated product tube. The sheets consist of the membrane, the permeate spacer and the feed channel spacer. The permeate spacer is placed between two membrane sheets and drains permeate to the perforated product tube. The feed channel spacer is place between the membranes and the permeate spacer
MDW0158RP0080F01
93
F01
sheet and is used to enhance mixing of the feed solution. Typical industrial modules are 203 mm in diameter and 1,016 mm long. The modules are placed in pressure vessel, one pressure vessel containing 8 membrane modules in series.
6.3.5.1
Cartridge filters
The pre-treated water shall be filtered through cartridge filters as last security before RO, to protect membrane from colloidal fouling. Each filter contains a number of polypropylene wound cartridges, with a nominal cut-off of 5 m.
Figure 6.5 View of cartridge filters used to protect membranes from colloidal fouling
The cartridge filters are located in the RO building. A hoist and monorail will enable the removal of the cartridge basket (which holds the cartridges) from the vessels for replacement. Booster pumps will transfer the floated water to the cartridge filters. Antiscalant and sodium bisulphite will be injected in the pipe upstream pumps. This chemical treatment is aimed at: controlling scaling agents removing the chlorine residual for membrane protection
MDW0158RP0080F01
94
F01
Booster pumps features Table 6.8 Sizing and phasing of booster pump equipment Units
Total filtered water flow rate Number of pumps Type Unit flow rate HP discharge pressure High pressure pump operation Hydraulic efficiency m /h bar
3
Value phase 1
18 341 8+2 on stand-by Centrifugal 1 stage 2357 3 to 10
Value phase 2
9171 4+1 on stand-by Centrifugal 1 stage 2357 3 to 10
m /h u
Then the cartridge can be isolated by valves located upstream and downstream.
Table 6.9
Value phase 2
9,171 10 (9 on duty, 1 on stand-by) 1019 Polypropylene 5 230 1.5
Total floated water flow rate Number of filter trains Nominal feed flow / filter train Cartridge filter type Cartridge filter cut-off Number of cartridge per train Pressure drop
m /h u m /h
3
6.3.5.2
RO Characteristics
The RO plant will have to be composed of 2 passes in order to meet the European Standard for Boron (concentration in treated water shall be less than 1mg/l). Removal of Boron requires 2 steps: Boron and TDS cannot be removed by the RO in the same chemical conditions: TDS rejection is optimised at low pH (around 7) whereas boron rejection is maximum at pH around 9-10 depending on the type of membrane.
MDW0158RP0080F01
95
F01
The RO system will be composed of 14 trains (1 train on stand-by per stream) for phase 1 and 7 trains (1 train on stand-by) for phase 2. A train is composed of a skid mounted on a steel frame rack and is arranged with headers for feed water, brine and permeate. The RO plant will consist of: A first pass: one stage of pressure vessels in parallel with an average conversion rate of 45%. 6 trains are needed to produce the required permeate flow, and one train will be installed as stand by for each stream of 100 MLD (to keep the nominal capacity of the plant during membrane cleaning). A second pass: three stages of pressure vessels in parallel with an average conversion rate of 90%. 3 trains are necessary to meet the boron standard and one train will be implemented as stand-by for each stream
The number of trains results from an optimisation between investment costs and operational flexibility of the RO system (considering among other factors membrane replacement, cleaning etc). Each 3 stream shall be easily operated to produce half of its capacity (i.e 50,000 m /d). The energy contained in the brine of the first RO pass will be recovered by a work exchanger. This type of energy recovery device is the most efficient today, with efficiency up to 96%. The pressurization system and the energy recovery device will be composed of High pressure pumps: nominal flow equal to permeate flow (45% of the inlet flow) Work exchanger: a flow equal to the brine flow of the first pass will directly go through work exchangers then through booster pumps to be set at the required pressure.
The RO system is designed using calculation software supplied by membrane manufacturers to simulate the performances of a chosen configuration. Both major membrane suppliers Dow and Hydranautics supply this kind of software. Both were used to test several configurations. The following tables present an optimum configuration with membranes currently available on the market. The calculations have been made considering the average age of membranes. This average is a function of the chosen replacement rate (each membrane is replaced every 5 to 7 years). Ageing of the membrane is introduced in the simulation data on the membrane calculation software. The membrane module will be spiral wound polyamide membrane element type, designed not only for tolerance against high operating pressure but also for the best combination of salt and boron rejection capacity.
MDW0158RP0080F01
96
F01
1st pass Table 6.10 Sizing and phasing requirements for 1 pass through membranes Units
Total filtered water flow rate Number of trains m /h u
3
st
Value phase 1
18,858.6 14 (1 train on standby per stream) 160
Value phase 2
9,429.3 7 (1 train en stand-by per stream) 160
Number of RO pressures vessels per train Number of RO membranes per train Type of membrane
1536 (8 per pressure vessel) Low energy Surface water membrane (like SWC5 from hydranautics)
1536 (8 per pressure vessel) Low energy Surface water membrane (like SWC5 from hydranautics) 606 to 707
Nominal permeate flow per train Feed pressure Min/max at average membrane age (3 years) Expected backpressure Flux Permeate recovery Maximum permeate TDS Permeate boron (min-max) permeate
m /h
606 to 707
bar
54.5-70
54.5-70
bar
2
2nd pass: One third of the 1 pass permeate flow will be sent to a flushing tank and then further treated by the second pass. The other part of the permeate will be directly routed to the post treatment nd blending tank. The fraction of flow transferred from the 1st pass to the 2 pass has been set to meet the boron standard in a worst case scenario (highest temperature), and to allow operating flexibility. The configuration of each treatment stream then permits the operation of each stream at the nominal capacity (i.e. 100 MLD) or half of the nominal capacity (i.e. 50 MLD).
A 1 pass permeate tank will collect the water before transfer to the 2 pass and will also be used for membrane flushing (in case of stopping of a RO train). The volume of this tank will be equal to 400 m3 nd (feed of 1 train of 2 pass for half an hour). The pH of the second pass shall be set around 10 for Boron removal. Caustic soda will be injected at nd the suction head of the HP pumps for 2 pass to reach this pH. Antiscalant will also be necessary for this pass.
st nd
st
MDW0158RP0080F01
97
F01
nd
Table 6.11
nd
Value phase 1
nd
m /h
2828.8
1414.4
Number of trains
70
70
616 (8 per pressure vessel) Low energy brackish water membrane (like ESPA2+ from hydranautics)
616 (8 per pressure vessel) Low energy brackish water membrane (like ESPA2+ from hydranautics)
Type of membrane
Feed pressure Min/max at average membrane age (3 years) Expected permeate backpressure
bar
13-18
13-18
bar
Flux
l/m /h
Permeate recovery
The feed required pressure for each pass will be reached thanks to high pressure pumps and work exchangers.
6.3.5.3
Six (6) HP pumps will be provided for phase 1 (1 for 3 trains and 1 on stand-by per stream). They are fixed speed dry mounted horizontal pumps. The equivalent of the permeate flow will be pumped. The remainder will be routed to the energy recovery devices and then the booster pumps. Total feed flow st for the 1 RO pass will be set at the required feed pressure (between 64 and 70 bars).
MDW0158RP0080F01
98
F01
HP pumps 1 pass Table 6.12 Sizing and phasing of HP pump for 1 pass Units
Total feed flow Number of High pressure pump type Unit flow rate HP discharge pressure High pressure pump operation Hydraulic efficiency m /h bar
3
st
st
Value phase 1
8,488
Value phase 2
4,244
m /h
4+2
2+1
The expected pressure drop in membrane vessels is around 1 bar, the pressure of the brine will be high and will therefore be recovered. The most efficient devices currently available are work exchangers capable of achieving up to 96% hydraulic efficiency.
Energy recovery devices: Table 6.13 Sizing and phasing of Energy Recovery Device Units
Total brine flow Number of devices Type Unit capacity Efficiency Outlet pressure m /h % bar
3
Value phase 1
10,372 42 Work exchanger 250 96 52.3 to 67.2
Value phase 2
5,186 21 Work exchanger 250 96 52.3 to 67.2
m /h u
MDW0158RP0080F01
99
F01
The energy recovery devices shall be assisted by booster pump to reach the required pressure for the st 1 RO pass.
Booster pump 1 pass (downstream work exchanger) Table 6.14 Sizing and phasing of booster pump 1 pass (downstream of work exchanger) Units
Total filtered water flow rate Number of booster pump Type Unit flow rate HP discharge pressure High pressure pump operation Hydraulic efficiency % m /h bar
3
st
st
Value phase 1
10,372 6 (2 on stand-by per stream) centrifugal 1,300 2.8
Value phase 2
5,186 3 (1 on stand-by centrifugal 1,300 2.8
m /h u
Fixed speed 86
The first pass intermediate tank will collect 33% of the 1st pass permeate flow prior to be pumped by nd the HP pumps of the 2 RO pass and then be routed to the RO trains (for Boron removal). This tank will also be used for membrane flushing (see section 6.3.5.4).
nd
pass:
nd
Value phase 2
1,415 3 (1 on stand-by) centrifugal 708 12-18
Total filtered water flow rate Number of High pressure pump Type Unit flow rate HP discharge pressure High pressure pump operation Hydraulic efficiency
m /h u
6 (2 on stand-by) centrifugal
m /h bar
708 12-18
MDW0158RP0080F01
100
F01
6.3.5.4
Each time a RO train shuts down, it will be necessary to flush the seawater out of the membranes with st low TDS water (permeate of 1 pass will be used). A flushing system will be provided for this purpose: st pumps will be connected to the 1 pass intermediate permeate tank to feed the RO train when necessary.
Table 6.16
Phasing requirements of flushing pump capacity and pump head Units Value phase 1
780 4
Value phase 2
780 4
m /h bar
During normal operation the membranes can accumulate minerals over time as well as organic or biological matter and colloidal particles on their surface. This causes a loss of efficiency manifesting as an increase of feed pressure or a decrease of permeate flow or an increase of salt passage (decline of permeate quality). Thus it is necessary to undertake cleaning of the membrane periodically (average of 3-4 times a year) to return to the basic functioning parameters. The cleaning system includes pumps, permanent pipelines and valves and consists of: One CIP (Cleaning In Place) tank with heater and mixer. It is used for the mixing of chemicals for membrane cleaning and receipt of the return flows during the membrane cleaning. A 5 m cartridge filter system to remove any solid contaminants or scale, which is removed from the vessels. 1 cleaning pump (+ 1 on stand-by) to recirculate the cleaning chemicals through the reverse osmosis membranes the cleaning cartridge filters Cleaning network and cleaning recirculation loop. The chemicals used for the cleaning are Citric acid 30 minutes - 20 g/L Caustic soda 30 minutes - 1g/L
MDW0158RP0080F01
101
F01
Table 6.17
CIP tank details for phases 1 and 2 Units Value phase 1 Value phase 2
CIP tank Number Capacity Cleaning flow per pressure vessel Cleaning flow per train Number of cleaning pump Unit capacity of cleaning pump u m
3 3
m /h m /h u m /h
3 3
After any cleaning cycle, the membranes are flushed and the CIP chemicals are sent to the dirty backwash tank of dual media filters, to be neutralised by dilution prior to be routed to the sludge treatment plant. Each skid will also have its individual storage tank at adequate elevation to provide gravity feed to st membranes. During normal operation, the tank will be filled by permeate of the 1 pass and will be covered to prevent contamination.
6.3.6
Post Treatment
The water filtered through reverse osmosis membranes will then need post-treatment: this entails setting at calco-carbonic equilibrium and disinfection to insure a stable, good water quality in the network.
A degassing tower is the more efficient process for aeration and does not need a separate installation for air injection. Due to high CO2 concentrations anticipated in the permeate following reverse osmosis, degassing tower will be used for the post-treatment on this desalination plant.
MDW0158RP0080F01
102
F01
For final neutralisation after degassing, the following methods can be used: Addition of lime Filtration through calcite Addition of sodium carbonate
The action of Calcite filters is quite slow and its use requires large filters, which shall be implemented downstream of the chlorine contact tank and upstream of the final treated water tank to insure a good efficiency of chlorination (requiring low pH). This leads to larger tanks and more complicated construction. Lime is more suitable than sodium carbonate for water having low alkalinity (which will be the case at the outlet of this reverse osmosis plant), because it requires smaller dosage for the same results. That is why lime addition is proposed for this plant.
Figure 6.6 The water characteristics at the outlet of the RO plant and after post-treatment are as follows
10
9,5
8,5 FINAL WATER After lime neutralisation TAC = 11.2 pH = 8.42 pHs=8,4
pH
7,5
7
After CO2 degassing TAC = 4.5 pH = 6.30 pHs=10.3
lime injection
6,5
6
Water after RO treatment TAC = 4.5 pH = 5.30 pHs=10.3
0,1 1 TAC [F]
aeration
5,5
5
10 100
MDW0158RP0080F01
103
F01
Table 6.18
Details of degassing towers for CO2 stripping phases 1 and 2 Units Value phase 1
12 58 3.5 6
Value phase 2
6 58 3.5 6
U m /h m m
3
Lime water will be prepared from solid lime in a saturator and injected in the final treated water tank. A final disinfection will also be performed in the final storage tank. Disinfection is necessary to maintain disinfection residual in the network and control the water quality until its distribution to the consumer. The chlorine dose shall be controlled by the measure of residual chlorine downstream stream of the contact tank. This residual free chlorine concentration shall not be less than 0.5 mg/L. Baffles will enable optimise the hydrodynamic of the reservoir and maximise the disinfection efficiency and chlorine dosage. Baffled rectangular tanks are the most effective disinfection tank. A weir will be installed at the end of the tank in order to insure a constant height in the tank and thereby control the contact time with chlorine. Sizing of the post treatment blending tank (1 for each process stream): Contact time: Chlorine dose: Sizing of each tank Unit volume: Length: Width: Water depth: Sizing of the final storage tank (3 compartments) Residence time: Unit volume: 1h30 6252 m
3
2,084 m 30 m 17 m 4m
MDW0158RP0080F01
104
F01
53 m 90 m 4m
Disinfection
Although the RO stage will totally remove the microorganism still present in the water, a final disinfection stage is necessary in order to insure the bacteriological quality of the water until the final consumer. UV or ozone disinfection does not provide any residual downstream of the reactors, and therefore no persistent effect. Chlorine is the most suitable chemical disinfection for the Dublin water production plant, because it provides a good persistent effect and shows very good disinfection performances. Chlorination can be performed with: Pure chlorine: gaseous chlorine Chlorine dioxide Hypochlorite solution (sodium hypochlorite, calcium hypochlorite). I. Commercial solution II. On-site generation of the solution Chlorine dioxide often leads to by-product formation in large quantities and generators of chlorine dioxide have a quite low efficiency and reliability. Gaseous chlorine allows high disinfection efficiency, good persistence effect in the network and requires a smaller footprint when compared to sodium Hypochlorite disinfection. But due to the hazards related to its use, this technology is Moreno longer utilised in Ireland. Therefore the use of Hypochlorite solution shall be selected. On-site generation of this solution is a complicated process. It requires a specific facility for the generation of hypochlorite solution from salt. Commercial Hypochlorite sodium will be used to simplify the overall operation of the plant. Remark: the electrolysis of the brine resulting from the desalination, in order to produced sodium hypochlorite is not possible, as it generates bromates, and results in bromate concentrations in the treated water higher then the standards.
MDW0158RP0080F01
105
F01
6.3.7
Sludge Treatment
The sludge produced by the plant will not be chemically harmful to the environment. It is intended to treat the sludge produced by a sludge treatment process on site with ultimate disposal to a landfill site. It is not intended to dispose of the sludge directly to the sea. However, no particular landfill facility has been nominated to accept the treated sludge at this stage. If adequate facilities cannot be found then disposal directly to the sea will be considered. In Section 8.0 as part of the brine dispersion modelling exercise the impact of discharging the waste solids on the marine environment has been assessed. The treatment of the sludge produced by the clarification step will be implemented; it will comprise the following elements: Equalizing tank: to receive the different rejections to treat (air floatation, filters cleaning) Sludge thickener: settling of the liquid sludge is performed in a tank and sludge is extracted at a higher concentration. Sludge dewatering: in order to reduce the sludge volume, another process is used to reach a minimal sludge dryness of 18%.
The excepted dryness of the sludge after dewatering is 18 % of dry solid, depending on the selected process. Sludge from the DAF and backwash water from the filters will be processed as follows: Mixing tank, collecting the DAF sludge and filter backwash water Thickening Dewatering
Each process will be designed for the highest volume of produced sludge.
6.3.7.1
It is calculated following this general equation. W/V = SS rw + 0.07*Co + K*Rp + Rs + 1.92*Fe + 2.96*Mn + Ca W V sludge weight (g of dry solids / d) Daily volume of raw water treated (m /d)
3
MDW0158RP0080F01
106
F01
Rp Rs Fe Mn Ca
Main reagent dose (g/m ) with a precipitation coefficient (K) supplementary reagent dose (anionic polymer, PAC) iron concentration in raw water (g Fe / m ) manganese concentration in raw water (g Mn / m ) weight of precipitated calcium carbonate if decarbonation occurs
3 3
Abbreviations
Average Concentration
5 mg / L 50 g PtCo / m
3
Maximal Concentration
15 mg / L 80 g PtCo / m
3
Suspended Solids in raw water Raw water colour Ferric chloride (FeCl3) = coagulant Other chemicals (Polymer dose) Coefficient
SS rw Co
Rp
20 mg / L
35 mg / L
Rs K
Moreover, no treatment is used to remove iron and manganese, so the corresponding terms mentioned in the last equation are not taken into account. Thus the daily amount of sludge produced can be estimated at: Average of 16.4 g of dry solid per cubic meter of sea water, corresponding to 7.8 TDS/d phase 1 and 11.7 TDS/day in phase 1&2 Maximum of 34.35 g/m (2.1 times more) for one stream of 100 Mld, corresponding to 16.4 TDS/d phase 1 and 24.5 TDS/d phase 1&2
3
The sludge flow can be estimated at each point of the treatment stream. The following table sums up the design hypothesis used to assess these flows.
MDW0158RP0080F01
107
F01
Table 6.20
Assessment of sludge flows form each point of the treatment process Parameter Unit
% % kg/m kg/m
3
Concentration
85 15 10 0.18
Proportion of the sludge coming from DAF Proportion of the sludge coming from filters Concentration of liquid sludge coming from DAF Concentration of liquid sludge coming from filters
The maximum sludge flow coming from the DAF will be 695.5 m /d for each treatment stream. And the 3 maximum backwash water from the filters will be 6,819 m /d. The maximum production of sludge and the corresponding flow and TSS (Total Suspended Matter) concentration are summed up in the figure 6.7. Values are given for one stream of phase 1 and represent design values.
Figure 6.7 Summation of maximum production of sludge and the corresponding flow and TSS (Total Suspended Matter) concentration
DAF
DAF Sludge
Filters
Backwash Water
Sludge thickeners
8 045 T SS/d 268,2 m3/d
Centrifuge
MDW0158RP0080F01
108
F01
6.3.7.2
Mixing tank
It is not recommended to feed the sludge thickeners with flow variations. The role of the mixing tank is therefore to absorb the peak flows and to smooth the feed flow of the thickeners. This tank will be mixed via submersible mixers to avoid sedimentation and homogenize the flow. Raw sludge is removed by submersible pumps to feed the thickeners.
Table 6.21
Sizing and phasing details for mixing tank equipment Mixing tank Unit
U m /d m
3 3
Phase 1
2 (1 per stream) 7 514.5 100
Phase 2
1 7 514.5 100
Number of units Maximum sludge flow entering one mixing tank Mixing tank unit volume Mixing tank dimensions: Length Width Water level Number of pumps Capacity of pumps
m m m U m /h
3
8 3 4.2 1 313
6.3.7.3
Sludge thickeners
A static thickener allows reaching a concentration of sludge of 30 g/L. The design has been carried out considering the maximal sludge flow produced by one treatment stream. The extraction of the sludge will be automatic.
MDW0158RP0080F01
109
F01
Table 6.22
Unit
U
3
Phase 1
2 (1 per train) 7,514.5 m /d for each stream 8183 per stream 50 4 20
3
Phase 2
1
3
Nominal flow
m /d
7,514.5 m /d
Nominal pass loading Maximum mass loading Height Diameter Hazen speed (maxi 1 m/h)
kg DS/d kg TSS/m/d m m
m/h
The concentration of the thickened sludge will be approximately 30 g/l corresponding to a maximum 3 flow of 268.2 m /d per stream. Thickened sludge will then go through a dewatering process after the addition of polymer. Each dewatering unit will be fed by one pump (total of 3 pumps on duty + 2 on stand by). The unit flow 3 of the pumps will be 22.2 m /h. Supernatant (maximum 7246.3 m /d per stream) water will be rejected to the dirty water tank. The TSS concentration in the supernatant will be less than 30 mg/L. The slope and the space available on the selected site will allow routing of the supernatant water by gravity to the dirty water tank.
3
6.3.7.4
Sludge dewatering
One centrifuge for each stream will be installed and one on stand-by. Polymer shall be added in order to improve the dewatering efficiency of centrifuges.
MDW0158RP0080F01
110
F01
Table 6.23
Sizing and phasing details for sludge dewatering equipment (centrifuges) Centrifugation
Number of units Sludge concentration entering the unit Amount of sludge to be dewatered by each unit: Average production Maximum production Nominal capacity of one unit Time of running: Average sludge production Hours/days Days/week 8 5 8 5 kg SS/day kg SS/day kg/h 3,802.9 8,045.4 665 3,802.9 8,045.4 665
Unit
u g/l
Phase 1
3 (2+1) 30
Phase 2
1 30
Hours/days Days/week
17 5 180 300 54
Concentration of dewatered sludge Max volume of produced sludge Max weekly quantity of dewatered sludge
3
A screw conveyor will be installed in order to transport the dewatered sludge into a sludge storage tank. Each stream will be fitted with one storage tank, and dewatered sludge will be stored in this tank before its final disposal. The capacity of the tank corresponds to the volume to be stored during 2 days (during one week-end 3 at the maximum sludge production), which equates to 120 m .
6.3.7.5
A tank will be used to collect the waste water produced on the plant: Thickeners supernatant,
MDW0158RP0080F01
111
F01
Centrate from the centrifuges, and Waste water from membrane cleaning. The brine will be routed directly to the sea. The daily volume of the sludge thickeners supernatant will be 7,247 m for each stream (total volume 3 of 21,741 m /day). The daily volume of centrate from the centrifuges will be 316 m (total volume of 948 m ). The maximum daily volume of waste water from membrane cleaning will be 2400 m but only 6 to 8 cleaning cycles a month are expected to be necessary. Then the dirty wash water tank will have the following size: Volume: Length: Width: Height of water: 3820 m 40 m 24 m 4m
3 3 3 3 3
The pH of the water will be measured in the outlet of the tank; then, depending on the pH, the water will be neutralised by injection of sulphuric acid or caustic soda before transfer to the discharge shaft. Membrane cleaning consists in a chemical cleaning using acid and soda, which may lead to a significant change of pH in the dirty water tank. The water disposed in the sea will then be charged with particles removed by the chemical cleaning which are all kind of particles initially present in the sea water, plus a little concentration of phosphates due to injection of antiscaling (around 300 g/L).
6.3.8
6.3.8.1
Chemicals
Sulfuric Acid (H2SO4)
It is highly recommended to control the pH in order to improve the coagulation of organic matter. The optimum coagulation pH range for coagulation with ferric chloride is 6-7. Moreover conducting coagulation in the pH window allows an optimisation of the dosage. Depending on the raw water pH, addition of coagulant alone can be sufficient to drop the coagulation pH into the correct window. However, the sea water quality needs a pH adjustment to reach this window. Sulphuric acid will be dosed directly into the coagulation tank. The dosage will depend on the sea water pH, the total alkalinity and the ferric chloride dose; it will be required to reach a pH of 7.
MDW0158RP0080F01
112
F01
Table 6.24
Sizing and phasing details for sulphuric acid dosing equipment Units Value for phase 1
H2SO4 Adjustment of sea water pH Static mixer upstream the coagulant tanks Liquid @96% H2SO4 W/W Specific gravity 1.83
Delivery
Mean dosing rate Max dosing rate Average Chemical flow for ONE stream As 96% liquid for one coagulation tank Max chemical flow for ONE stream As liquid 96% for one coagulation tank During high raw water pH Number of dosing pump Capacity Type Variable Speed Drive Number of storage tank Storage capacity At average dosage At maximal dosage u m
3
l/h
31.2
31.2
u l/h
10(on duty) + 3(stand by) Between 20 and 32 Volumetric, diaphragm YES 2 (1 by stream) 100 20 13.3
5(on duty) + 1(stand by) Between 20 and 32 Volumetric, diaphragm YES 1 50 20 13.3
days days
MDW0158RP0080F01
113
F01
Dosing plant: The storage tank must be made of ordinary or stainless steel. It will be ventilated and protected against heat and sun. The acid building will house: A shower: in case of accidental leakage and contact with the skin An eye-rinser in case of contact with eyes Specific breathing device to protect people from inhalation of the product in case of accident Caustic soda installed on the plant for another use will also be used to neutralise the product in case of leakage or spilling. All the dosing pumps will be fitted with Variable Speed Drive.
6.3.8.2
Ferric chloride (FeCl3) will be used as coagulant. It will be injected into the pipe upstream the static mixers. The dosage will be determined in accordance with the sea water quality and adjusted by daily laboratory tests (jar tests) Ferric chloride is not sold pure (FeCl3-6H2O) and only 41% of the commercial product is ferric chloride. Its physical and chemical characteristics are detailed in the table below:
Table 6.25
Sizing and phasing details for ferric chloride dosing equipment Units Value for phase 1
FeCl3-6H2O Coagulation of sea water pH Unit 6-7 in line upstream the static mixers Liquid @41% FeCl3 W/W
Dosing location
Delivery Specific gravity 1.41 Mean dosing rate Max dosing rate mg/l mg/l 20 35
MDW0158RP0080F01
114
F01
Average chemical flow for ONE tank l/h As 41% liquid for one coagulation tank Max chemical flow for ONE tank l/h As liquid 41% for one coagulation tank Number of dosing pumps (for one stream) Capacity Type Variable Speed Drive TOTAL Number of storage tank Unit capacity Storage capacity At average dosage At maximal dosage m
3
68.7
68.7
120.2
120.2
l/h
u m
3
The storage tank must be made of ordinary or stainless steel. It will be ventilated and protected against heat and sun. Dosing plant: each pump will be connected to one dosing point by a specific pipe. The pumps will be fitted with pulse dampeners and safety valves. The ferric chloride storage room will house: A shower: in case of accidental leakage and contact with the skin An eye-rinser in case of contact with eyes ARI to protect people from inhalation of the product in case of accident
MDW0158RP0080F01
115
F01
A retention area will be installed adjacent to the plant. In the event of an incident (leak or accident during the discharge of the chemical from the truck to the tank), the chemicals shall not be delivered in the environment.
6.3.8.3
Polymer
Anionic polymer should be injected in the flocculation tank to favour contact between particles. (Sulfonate polystyrene could be used: AN910 from FLOEGER for example). The dosing rates will be set between 0.05 and 0.1 mg/L. Polymer will above all be used during cold temperatures. Excess doses of polymer may result in a poor floatation and rapid clogging of the filters. The concentration of the polymer solution will be set at 2 g/L. It is prepared in a packaged skid unit, comprising a dosing hopper and three successive stirred tanks for the proper maturation of the solution. The maturation time will be 1 hour. The polymer solution is prepared with non chlorinated filtrated water. Polymer will also be used for the sludge treatment. Another stream will be installed to feed the sludge treatment plant.
Table 6.26
Sizing and phasing details for polymer dosing equipment Units Value phase 1
Sulfonate polystryren
Value phase 2
Sulfonate polystryren AN 910 PWG Flocculation of sea water Flocculation chamber Powder solution@2g/L of active product
Chemical AN 910 PWG Role Dosing location Delivery Dosing form Flocculation of sea water Flocculation chamber Powder solution@2g/L of active product
MDW0158RP0080F01
116
F01
SLUDGE DEWATERING
Dose rate as active product Solution flow @ 3g/L for one work Number of dosing pump u Capacity l/h Type Variable Speed Drive Progressive Cavity Pump YES Progressive Cavity Pump YES 1,331 1,331 kg/t MS l/h 6 1,331 2+1 (stand-by) 6 1,331 1
PREPARATION
Preparation type u Fully automatic preparation unit (polypac type) with 3 compartments 4 (2 by line) Fully automatic preparation unit (polypac type) with 3 compartments 2
l/h
500 4 (2 by line)
500 2
Average consumption of product (for process and sludge treatment) Maximum consumption of product (for process and sludge treatment) Capacity of the commercial product bag Number of stored bags Storage capacity At average dosage At maximal dosage
kg / week kg / week kg u
168
168
356
356
112 10
112 5
days days
23 11
23 11
Dosing plant: The polymer solution will be injected by Progressive Cavity Pump dosing pumps. At the outlet of the pump, the solution will be diluted with non chlorinated water, in order to decrease its viscosity. The dosing pipes will be fitted with flushing points.
MDW0158RP0080F01
117
F01
Each pump will be connected to one dosing point by a specific pipe. All the dosing pumps will be fitted with Variable Speed Drive.
6.3.8.4
Antiscalant
The addition of antiscalant into the RO feed stream is typical for RO treatment system in order to control precipitation of soluble salts such as calcium carbonate (CaCO3), calcium sulphate (CaSO4), barium sulphate (BaSO4), strontium sulphate (SrCO4), calcium fluoride (CaF2) and Silica. Anstisaclant will be injected at the following points: Inlet of the 1 RO pass : upstream cartridge filters Inlet of 2 RO pass: at the suction head of the HP pumps for the 2 pass. Antiscalant consists of synthetic polymer chain macromolecules that attach to the scaling crystals and prevent then from developing. It complies with environmental and potable water standards. The use of antiscalant is anticipated and shall be used if and when required depending on the operational considerations of the plant.
nd nd st
Table 6.27
Sizing and phasing details for antiscalant dosing equipment Units Value phase 1
Proprietary antiscalant Control of scaling At the suction head of booster pumps (upstream cartridge filters) and of the nd HP pumps for 2 RO pass. Liquid@100% W/W
Value phase 2
Proprietary antiscalant Control of scaling At the suction head of booster pumps (upstream cartridge filters) and of the nd HP pumps for 2 RO pass. Liquid@100% W/W Specific gravity 1.16
Chemical Role
Dosing location
1st RO pass
Mean dosing rate Max dosing rate Average Chemical flow Max chemical flow mg/l mg/l l/h l/h 1.5 2 34 45 1.5 2 34 45
u l/h
MDW0158RP0080F01
118
F01
nd
RO pass
mg/l mg/l l/h l/h 2 3 3.5 5 2 3 3.5 5
Mean dosing rate Max dosing rate Average Chemical flow Max chemical flow Number of dosing pumps Capacity Type
u l/h
u m
3
2 80 20
days
6.3.8.5
Sodium Bisulphite
Due to shock chlorination performed at the inlet of the plant, water post-DAF treatment may contain a chlorine residual. RO membranes are not compatible with such chemicals as they are strong oxidizing agents. Sodium bisulphite shall then be injected upstream RO system during shock chlorination, for dechlorination.
Table 6.28
Sizing and phasing details for sodium bisulphite dosing equipment Units Value phase 1
NaHSO3 Chlorine residual elimination Upstream cartridge filters. Liquid@30% W/W
Value phase 2
NaHSO3 Chlorine residual elimination Upstream cartridge filters. Liquid@30% W/W Specific gravity 1.32 4.5 9 100 210
Specific gravity 1.32 Mean dosing rate Max dosing rate Average Chemical flow Max chemical flow mg/l mg/l l/h l/h 4.5 9 100 210
MDW0158RP0080F01
119
F01
u l/h
1 +1 (on stand-by) 100 to 210 Volumetric, diaphragm Variable Speed Drive 1 100 20
u m
3
2 100 20
days
Dosing plant: The containers will be made of plastic and will not be located close to acid storage (hazards concerning sulphur dioxide) All the dosing pumps will be fitted with Variable Speed Drive.
6.3.8.6
Caustic Soda
nd
Caustic soda is added to increase the pH at the inlet of the 2 RO pass and optimise the boron removal by the membrane. Membrane rejections are quite small at usual pH (around 7) and are nd optimum at pH 9-10. Caustic soda will be injected at the suction head of the RO pumps for 2 pass. One dosing pump will be installed per HP pump.
Table 6.29
Sizing and phasing details for caustic soda dosing equipment Units Value phase 1
NaOH Optimisation of boron removal At the suction head of HP nd pumps for 2 RO pass. Liquid@50% NaOH W/W
Value phase 2
NaOH Optimisation of boron removal At the suction head of HP nd pumps for 2 RO pass. Liquid@50% NaOH W/W Specific gravity 1.52 15 20
Delivery Specific gravity 1.52 Mean dosing rate Max dosing rate Average Chemical flow As 50% liquid for 1 RO train l/h 14 14 mg/l mg/l 15 20
MDW0158RP0080F01
120
F01
Max chemical flow As 50% liquid for 1 RO train Number of dosing pump Capacity Type Variable Speed Drive Number of storage tank Capacity Autonomy u m
3
l/h
19
19
u l/h
days
The containers must be made of ordinary or stainless steel with an internal ebonite or epoxy covering. The dosing plant will contain: A shower: in case of accidental leakage and contact with the skin An eye-rinser in case of contact with eyes Water will be used to neutralise the product in case of leakage before to wash the floor and drain off the waste water in the network. All the dosing pumps will be fitted with Variable Speed Drive.
6.3.8.7
Lime
A lime water system will be developed as a part of the post treatment process. It will be injected after CO2 degassing for neutralisation. To avoid an increase of turbidity in the potable water, lime is injected as lime water rather than lime slurry. The lime water will be prepared by means of a saturator. The lime preparation system includes 4 lines, each capable of 33% duty, containing the following major item of plant: Lime storage silo Lime mixing tanks Lime pumps Saturators and circulation pumps
MDW0158RP0080F01
121
F01
Lime water tank Lime water dosing pump A lamella saturator will be used, which is better for operation (classical saturators have proven to be labour intensive in their operation). A lamella saturator consists of: A mixing tank to dilute and dissolve the lime slurry in the water A lamella tank to allow the separation of the un-dissolved lime impurities from the lime water, with a maximum up flow velocity of 8 m/h A sludge collecting and recycling system (scrappers). The excess sludge will be routed to the dirty water tank were it will be diluted before discharge to the sea. Pumps will transfer the lime slurry to the mixing tank of the saturator where it will be mixed with water and the recycled lime sludge prior to entering the settling tanks. The mixing is carried out by rapid mixers. Lime process requirement
Table 6.30
Sizing and phasing details for the lime process equipment Units Value phase 1
Ca(OH)2 Demineralisation of RO permeates mg/l % kg/ m kg/h T/year
3
Value phase 2
Ca(OH)2 Demineralisation of RO permeates 40 to 50 95 500 660 240
Chemical Role Mean dosing rate Concentration Bulk density of lime Quantity (max) Tonnage (max) Lime silo Number Capacity Autonomy u m
3
2 100 12
3 100 12
days
MDW0158RP0080F01
122
F01
Saturators
Units
Number of saturator Unit surface Diameter of saturator Up flow velocity Concentration of the lime water Lime water flow Average Max Mixing tank Number Volume Residence time u m
3
Value phase 1
2 20
Value phase 2
3 20 5 8 1.4
m m/h g/l
5 8 1.4
m /h m /h
3
125 160
125 160
(number of saturator) 50 10
(number of saturator) 50 10
min
6.3.8.8
Shock chlorination and final treated water disinfection will be performed with sodium hypochlorite. Shock chlorination will be performed each day during two hours at a treatment rate of 7 mg/L and final chlorination continuously at a treatment rate of 2 mg/L.
Table 6.31
Sizing and phasing details for sodium hypochlorite dosing equipment Units Value phase 1
Sodium Hypochlorite
Value phase 2
Sodium Hypochlorite 12%
Chemical 12% Chock chlorination Dosing location Dose rate as active product Frequency mg/l h/day On line (upstream sea water On line (upstream sea water pumps) pumps) 7 2 7 2
MDW0158RP0080F01
123
F01
Pumps Number Capacity Type Variable Speed Drive Final chlorination Dosing location Dose rate as active product Frequency Pumps Number Capacity Type Variable Speed Drive Storage Chlorine solution storage Number Storage volume Concentration of chlorine U m
3
u l/h
u l/h
2 2 x 80 m3 160
1 80 m3 160
g/l
Safety system: each room will be fitted with gas chlorine detectors and hydrogen detectors. In case of high hydrogen concentration in the air an alarm will be triggered and the ventilation system will start.
6.3.9
This section describes the plant process automation and the supervisory, control and data acquisition (SCADA) system.
6.3.9.1
General Principles
For safety and cost reasons, modern water treatment plants are generally fully automated. Thus, for the desalination plant, the level of automation will be defined by the following principles: The operation of the plant will not need to be manned 24 h per day; routine operation procedure (filters and membrane washing, settler desludging,) and all chemical dosing will be automatic.
MDW0158RP0080F01
124
F01
In automatic mode, the plant will be run at fixed raw water flow, and start and stop according to level switches in the treated water reservoir. The change of nominal production will be set manually. The selection of the duty / stand by facilities will be manual. The main safety interlocks will trigger a remote alarm (via the INTERNET, or mobile phone); the plant will stop automatically in the case of a major trip or alarm; it will require operator intervention and resetting before starting again.
6.3.9.2
Chemical dosing: The frequency of the dosing pumps motor for each ferric chloride pump and polymer pump will be controlled by the raw water flow, according to a rate set by the operator, and corresponding to the expected dosing rate. The frequency of the sulphuric acid pumps motors will be controlled by the measure of pH in the coagulation tanks. The frequency of the sodium bisulphite pump motors will be controlled by the measure of chlorine in the floated water (post DAF). The frequency of caustic soda pumps motors will be controlled by the pH of the 1 pass permeate water. The flow of lime water will be controlled by the pH and pHs at the outlet of the degassing towers The frequency of the sodium hypochlorite pumps motors will be controlled by the residual free chlorine measure, at the outlet of the contact tank.
st
Filter control: The upstream level on each filter will be controlled by a level gauge and an automatic control valve. The set point of the level will be chosen by the operators from the central control unit. Local control panels will not be required. Filter backwashing: the backwashing sequence (opening and closing of the valves, start and stop of the pumps and blowers) will be preset. The backwashing of each filter will be triggered by temporization of high loss of pressure through the filter.
MDW0158RP0080F01
125
F01
Desludging of the settlers: The desludging of each settler will be controlled by temporisation. The desludging sequence (opening and closing of the valves, duration of each phase) will be preset by the operator. Main components of the whole automation system: The plant automation system comprises: Data acquisition and treatment units (local control panel containing programmable logic controllers - PLC) for locally controlling plant processes. The main PLC (raw water station, coagulation, filtration, chemical station and chlorine plant) shall have redundant control panel units, human/machine interface (HMI) and power supply module. Process instrument are fed from this local control panels An interconnection with the various PLC and communication with the SCADA work station.
Plant supervision will be implemented. The plant supervision and the control system (SCADA) will comprise: A work station for monitoring, controlling and supervising plant operation 2 data servers running in redundant configuration One data archive for data storage and retrieval PCs connected to the supervision work in order to access data and control manually some elements.
In addition each centrifuge will be controlled by a dedicated PLC. The plant equipment can be operated from each of the three levels described above: Automatic control mode: operations are controlled at the local level independently and autonomously the dedicated section of the plant not requiring any input from the plant supervisory System. The supervisory level only stores performances data of this section. Manual control mode: Selected discrete sections of the plant will be operated manually in a local control or remote control mode (commands are entered locally or in the supervisory system).
Each pump will be controlled by motor starters or regulators (automatic) and the opening/closing of valves will be controlled manually. The automatic control mode will rely on instruments located at many places of the plant. The next table 6.32 resumes the main instruments control to be placed on the plant.
MDW0158RP0080F01
126
F01
Table 6.32
Instrument
Flow meters
Electromagnetic
Between contact tank and treated water pumping Between sludge equalizing tank and thickeners (on each train) Downstream chlorine booster pumps Upstream filters Downstream filters
Pressure sensors
HP pumps Booster pumps Pressure exchangers Coagulation tank Floatation tank and floated water channels Upstream level in each filter
Level detectors
Ultrasonic
Backwash water tank Chlorine contact tank Treated water tank Chemical storage tank (for each chemical)
Ultrasonic
Temperature
Analyser
Downstream dual media filtration Downstream final storage tank Raw water In each coagulation tank Downstream dual media filtration CIP flushing system
pH
Analyser
Inlet of 1 RO pass Inlet of 2 RO pass Downstream degassing tower In chlorine contact tank
nd
st
MDW0158RP0080F01
127
F01
Raw water Downstream settlers Turbidity Analyser Downstream each filter Downstream final storage tank Raw water Downstream settlers TOC Analyser Downstream filters Downstream final storage tank Inlet / Outlet of the 1 RO pass Conductivity Redox potential Analyser Inlet / Outlet of the 2 Analyser
nd st
RO pass
SDI
Analyser
Downstream cartridge filters Downstream dual media filtration Downstream cartridge filters
Free chlorine
Other parameters will be manually controlled, by water sampling and analysis by the staff. Then any regulated parameters can be controlled downstream the final storage tank.
MDW0158RP0080F01
128
F01
7 SITE SELECTION
7.1 INTRODUCTION
The general site location for the desalination plant was selected following the evaluation of each proposed site locations in relation to a number of selection criteria: Land availability Suitable sites for location of Desalination Treatment Works including an area of 10-15 hectares required at a coastal location with adequate access to the site. Water Quality requirements a consistent water supply with little or no fluctuations in sediment and/or salinity capable of supplying 300Mld treated water. Suitable SDI also required. Suitable location for abstraction and raw water pumping station. The intake would necessitate the construction of a submerged sea intake 3km in length of RC buried pipeline 1800mm diameter. A land intake structure is required at a level lower than spring low tide level. Bathymetry to be assessed as the intake point to be at a depth of 20m. Suitable location for outfall pipework to take into consideration the requirement to disperse the effluent discharges associated with the desalination process, including coagulants, antiscalants and brine. The outfall discharge point to be located in a water depth of 15m at the site. Energy availability - Assuming the operation at the plant will be on an uninterrupted 24hr per day basis then the normal operating electrical demand would be in the region of 47.5 MW Feasibility of connection to the electrical supply grid: the estimated installed power capacity is 76.6MW this is including treated water pumping and stand-by equipments Feasibility of connection to the water supply grid Compliance with topography / elevation considerations consistent with the overall design philosophy of minimising pumping energy and optimisation of operational criteria. Agriculture number of landowners affected Residential properties and the approximate distance to nearest populated area Environmental considerations Avoidance of Major Natural Constraints Mountains / Lakes / Forests / Bogs / Mineral Extraction Areas / Rock Avoidance or minimisation of impacts on: National Heritage Areas (NHA) Special Protection Areas (SPA) Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) Known Archaeological Sites Cultural Heritage Sites
MDW0158RP0080F01
129
F01
Avoidance of: Existing Developments Planned Developments Motorways, High Voltage Electricity Pylons & Gas Transmission Pipelines
7.2
8 sites were considered for the location of a Desalination Plant: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. South Dublin Ringsend Howth Headland Ardgillan Balbriggan Gormanstown Loughshinny South Loughshinny North
See Appendix C for a map of the eight potential sites for desalination plant considered.
7.2.1
South Dublin
The South Dublin site being considered lies between Dalkey and the town of Bray. This area was deemed unsuitable due the following factors: The availability of land in the area north of Bray is extremely limited. Water quality analyses of the Irish Sea were conducted and the results indicated that an extensive pre-treatment facility would be required at the desalination plant in order to treat both high levels of Boron (3-4mg/l B recorded, recommended concentration for RO membranes 1 mg/l B) and a high Silt Density Index (see Appendix B). The footprint of the required facility would therefore be in the region of 15 hectares. In addition treated water from a desalination plant constructed at this location would require pumping to a storage reservoir accessible to the Dublin Region network. A transmission pipeline from the desalination plant to a termination point (yet to be constructed) would have to be routed over the Wicklow Mountains which would be technically complex, costly and would result in an unfavourable elevation profile.
7.2.2
Ringsend
A key requirement for the location of a desalination plant is the availability of a consistent water supply to avoid excessive replacement of the membranes and subsequently the production of poor quality potable water. The intake should be located in an area where the water supply is not subject to fluctuations in salinity and sediment. Due to the tidal nature of the waters in Dublin Bay a consistent water supply is by no means guaranteed. The intake should also be located in an area where there is little chance of pollution from land-based industries and ocean-going vessels. Considering the
MDW0158RP0080F01
130
F01
proximity of Ringsend to the busy shipping lanes accessing Dublin port the significant marine engineering involved in the construction of intake and discharge pipework from a facility in this area would be technically complex and costly. As with other sites, this site would also prove extremely complex from the viewpoint of integrating supplies into the existing network.
7.2.3
Howth Headland
The availability of land in the area of Howth headland is extremely limited. Because a site of 15 hectares would be required to facilitate the proposed treatment plant, this location does not compare favourably with the north Fingal site.
7.2.4
Ardgillan
The proposed site for Ardgillan is located between the towns of Balbriggan and Skerries north of the existing beach. Ardgillan was deemed an unsuitable location in terms of cultural heritage as any potential facility would be visible from Ardgillan Castle which is a site of historical significance situated on an area of elevated coastline.
7.2.5
The proposed site at Balbriggan lies on the headland immediately north of Balbriggan town and immediately south of a prehistoric complex (DU002-001) identified by the Record of Monuments and places, consisting of five passage tombs and a fulacht fiadh situated on Bremore Head. The proposed site at Gormanstown is located directly north of the Delvin River and lies north of the same prehistoric complex (DU002-001). The National Monuments Section and the Underwater Archaeological Unit of the Department of Environment, Heritage and Local Government have been conducting additional archaeological surveys to assess the complex, with a view to increasing its protection level. The complex is of considerable importance as the possible precursor to the Boyne Valley passage grave cemetery. The Delvin river enters the sea c.500m to the north of the tombs and beyond the mouth of the river is the passage tomb cemetery of Knocknagin in County Meath. The Bremore and Knocknagin cemeteries stand either side of this narrow route inland to the passage tomb at Fourknocks and the monuments on the Hill of Tara, Co.Meath. The area continued to be the focus of th human activity and settlement in later periods. Bremore Head is the site of the 16 century Newhavan Harbour and the Cardy Rock Wrecks, while the ruins of a medieval tower house (DU002-00201) and St Molagas church (DU002-00202) and graveyard (DU002-00203) are located in the general vicinity of the proposed site. As with rivers, the coastal landscape has always been a focus for human activity, with the sea providing a source of food and raw materials as well as a means of travel and communication and a place to build communities. In addition to the important burial sites at Bremore and Knocknagin / Gormanston, various archaeological investigations in Gormanston townland on the north side of the river have yielded further evidence of prehistoric activity. The remains of a prehistoric log boat were discovered off Gormanston Beach in 2002 during monitoring of the Irish Sub-Sea Interconnector Pipeline. This is the first such vessel to be identified and recovered from an active marine context in Ireland. A prehistoric pit burial is identified by the Record of Monuments and Places further north on Gormanston Beach (ME028-018). Monitoring for the AGI and Pipeline to the West for Brd Gis ireann in Gormanston townland revealed a Bronze Age habitation site and a hearth site with struck flints. In terms of archaeological heritage this area is considered to be highly unsuitable as the proposed location of an abstraction and desalination plant. Given the significance and proximity of the
MDW0158RP0080F01
131
F01
archaeological complex on Bremore Head, it is recommended that this location be removed as a desalination plant alternative. In terms of water quality the location of the selected site at Gormanstown, directly north of the Delvin River is furthermore considered an unsuitable location due to its proximity to the beach and therefore the movement of sediment.
7.2.6
Two sites at Loughshinny (South & North) were identified as being suitable potential locations for the desalination plant (see Appendix C). South Loughshinny The potential site at South Loughshinny is in close proximity to Drumanagh headland which is an area associated with archaeological significance. The site is also in close proximity to the UK gas interconnectors. Pressure reducing regulator skids are present North of Balbriggan and at Loughshinny with a major above Ground Installation present in Ballough to the South-west of this location. South Loughshinny was therefore deemed less suitable as there may be possible construction difficulties as a result of the gas infrastructure present. North Loughshinny This general area has a number of suitable sites for locating a desalination plant. Access is reasonably good and construction of intakes and outfalls are technically feasible. Energy is available either in the form of natural gas or a direct supply of electricity from the local grid to the facility could be made available. The proximity of Huntstown Power Station in Meath, currently under expansion, could provide alternative solutions.
7.3
A GIS based desktop study was carried out to delineate the proposed transmission route from desalination plant location at site C to termination point at Ballycoolin reservoir. In-house GIS datasets were used for constraint identification and all route options were mapped at 1:50,000 scale using the Ordnance Survey Ireland Discovery Series raster map.
7.3.1
Transmission pipeline corridor was determined mainly by environmental and archaeological constraints and hydraulic requirement. The following is a list of constraints and considerations used in this study: Natural Heritage Area (NHAs) Special Protection Areas (SPAs) Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) Archaeological Sites. These were archaeological site locations enclosed by a buffer of 250m
MDW0158RP0080F01
132
F01
Areas classified as Lakes, Forests, Bogs, Mineral Extraction Areas and Populated Areas. These were extracted from Corine Land Cover classification, with the minimum land unit of 25Ha. Areas designated for future development based on Fingal County Council Development plans, 2005 -2011 Hydraulic profile - optimum vertical profile with a smooth vertical gradient minimising depressions/elevations. A 50m Digital Terrain Model (DTM) was used to create long sections and to refine vertical profile.
7.3.2
For the route process initiation and orientation purposes a straight line was selected and digitised between the proposed desalination plant and termination point. The length of this line was 24.0km. This route was neither environmentally nor technically feasible, as it passed through the identified constraints and resulted in an unfavourable vertical profile. A refinement to the straight line involved: Avoiding the town of Swords by following its western perimeter Avoiding the village of Loughshinny, especially along the L1320 and L5405 Reducing the maximum elevation from 45mOD to 40mOD at 200m chainage from the desalination plant which is maximum height allowed at such short distance from the desalination plant.
The above changes resulted in a 24.3km route representing the shortest distance between the proposed desalination plant location and termination point whilst avoiding the above constraints. The transmission pipeline will consist of twin 1100mm diameter pipelines laid in Phase 1. An alternative route was also considered following the existing M1/M50 roads. This option was 29.6km in length. However this option was subsequently rejected due to: Potential conflict with existing utilities along the M1/M50 Lack of space to accommodate Wayleaves Potential conflict with Fingal County Development plans Engineering issues crossing at major junctions, traffic disruption during construction phase Increased length (this option is 5 km longer that Greenfiled options)
MDW0158RP0080F01
133
F01
As part of The Water Supply Project Dublin Region RPS Consulting Engineers were commissioned to undertake the modelling of brine dispersion for Desalination Plant Study The modelling was undertaken using numerical modelling techniques to simulate the dispersion of effluent discharges associated with the desalination process, including coagulants and antiscalants along with the brine discharge. The outfall discharge point was located in a water depth of 15m at the site shown in Figure 8.1 below.
As the desalination process is to take place by the method of reverse osmosis the characteristics of the brine discharges are given in Table 8.1and Table 8.2 for the discharge without and with sludge dispersion respectively. For the purposes of the dispersion study the worst case scenario was modelled using the greatest pollutant concentrations at the highest discharge levels. An estimate of the cost was also made for the scheme.
MDW0158RP0080F01
134
F01
Table 8.1
Brine discharge characteristics without sludge dispersion Volumetric Flow Rates Phase 1
200 476,430 276,430
Phase 2
300 714,640 414,640
Production capacity (Mld) Intake : raw water flow (m3/d) Outfall : reject stream flow (m3/d)
Lower
<1 0 200 62
Upper
<1 0 300 69
Table 8.2
Brine discharge characteristics with sludge dispersion Volumetric Flow Rates Phase 1
200 476,430 276,430
Phase 2
300 714,640 414,640
Production capacity MLD Intake : raw water flow m3/d Outfall : reject stream flow m3/d
Lower
27 33 200 62
Upper
56 57 300 69
MDW0158RP0080F01
135
F01
8.2
8.2.1
MODELLING SYSTEM
Tidal Model
The tidal flow simulations which formed the basis for the effluent dispersion simulations were undertaken using the MIKE21 HD and NHD flow model. The HD Module (MIKE21 HD) is the principal module in the MIKE21 package. It provides the hydrodynamic basis for the computations performed in the modules for Effluent Dispersion and Environmental Hydraulics. The HD Module is a 2-dimensional, depth averaged hydrodynamic model which simulates the water level variations and flows in response to a variety of forcing functions in lakes, estuaries and coastal areas. The water levels and flows are resolved on a rectangular grid covering the area of interest when provided with the bathymetry, bed resistance coefficient, wind field, hydrodynamic boundary conditions, etc. The system solves the full time-dependent non-linear equations of continuity and conservation of momentum. The solution is obtained using an implicit ADI finite difference scheme of second-order accuracy. The effects and facilities include: Convective and cross momentum; Bottom shear stress; Wind shear stress at the surface; Barometric pressure gradients; Coriolis forces; Momentum dispersion (e.g. through the Smagorinsky formulation); Wave-induced currents; Sources and sinks (mass and momentum); Evaporation; Flooding and drying.
Facilities for focussing on specific areas within the computational domain through the use of transfer boundary data are included within MIKE21 HD. The NHD Module is an extension to the standard HD Module, which has the capability to simulate consecutively finer nested grids which are dynamically linked together. The use of nested grids allows computationally efficient modelling to take place with the dynamic linking ensuring that there is the correct transfer of momentum across the patch boundaries and allows a larger region to be modelled using fewer cells.
MDW0158RP0080F01
136
F01
8.2.2
The modelling of brine dispersion was undertaken with a two stage process 1 2 Initial dilution simulations Medium and far field dispersion simulations
The initial dilution studies examine the dispersion of the outfall outlet jets in the immediate area of the outfall diffuser. These simulations have been undertaken using the US EPA Visual Plumes programme which examines the flow of the outlet jets under the influence of density, temperature and velocity. The program ignores the eddy mixing within the water column and is therefore conservative. The outfall was assumed to have 10 ports of 0.4m diameter at 10m centres and designed to jet the brine up into the water column. The brine will be denser than the surrounding seawater. Thus there will be a tendency for the brine plume to initially sink. However the eddying in the water column will mix the brine and seawater as the tidal currents flow across the outfall area. The second stage in the dispersion modelling was to examine the dispersion in the medium and far field following initial dilution. This was carried out using the MIKE 321 NPA model. Both modelling approaches are described in more detail in the following sections.
8.2.2.1
The initial dilution of the brine at the proposed outfall was modelled using the US EPA Plumes software. The UM3 routine in the software was used for this study. UM3 is an acronym for the three-dimensional Updated Merge (UM) model. UM3 simulates single and multi-port submerged discharges. UM3 is a Lagrangian model that assumes that the plume is in steady state. However, ambient and discharge conditions can change as long as they do so over time scales which are long compared to the time in which a discharged element reaches the end of the initial dilution phase. To make UM three-dimensional, the model includes an entrainment term corresponding to the thirddimension: a cross-current term. As a result, single-port plumes are simulated as truly threedimensional entities. Merged plumes are simulated by distributing the cross-current entrainment over all plumes. Dilution from diffusers oriented parallel to the current is estimated by limiting the effective spacing to correspond to a cross-diffuser flow angle of 20 degrees.
8.2.2.2
For the effluent dispersion simulations RPS Consulting Engineers used the MIKE321 PA model which describes the transport and fate of solutes or suspended matter and uses data from the hydrodynamic model to provide information on the general movement of the water body. Within MIKE 321 PA the pollutant is considered as particles being advected with the surrounding water body and dispersed as a result of random processes in a 2-Dimensional or 3-Dimensional regime using the Lagrangian approach. Hence, the resolution of the plume is not restricted by the grid size of the current field. The model can be used to determine the fate of suspended or dissolved matter that is discharged or accidentally spilled in lakes, estuaries, coastal areas or the open sea. The model simulates the effects
MDW0158RP0080F01
137
F01
of wind driven currents, including a mechanism for dealing with the overturning currents at the shoreline. The loss of active material from the water column through either settling or decay can also be included within the model simulations Although the model uses data from 2-Dimensional depth averaged hydrodynamic flow models; the MIKE321 PA model can apply a logarithmic vertical velocity profile to provide a more accurate assessment of the displacement of particles located at different depths in the water column. This facility was employed in the dispersion simulations to provide a more realistic representation of the situation at full scale. The effluent dispersal was simulated over a period of one month, to include both spring and neap tidal conditions, using the logarithmic vertical velocity profile for the worst case discharge parameters.
8.3
8.3.1
The tidal flow in the vicinity of the proposed outfall was simulated via a series of sub-models driven by RPS Consulting Engineers Irish Sea Surge model, which was used to derive boundary data. The Irish Sea model itself stretches from the Northwestern end of France including the English Channel to Dover to 16 West into the Atlantic, including the Porcupine Bank and Rockall. In the south it reaches from the Northern part of the Bay of Biscay to just south of the Faroes Banks in the North. Overall the model covers the Northern Atlantic Ocean up to a distance of 600km from the Irish Coast as illustrated in Figure 8.2.
MDW0158RP0080F01
138
F01
The model was constructed using flexible mesh technology allowing the size of the computational cells to vary depending on user requirements. Along the Atlantic boundary the model features a mesh size of 13.125 (24km). The Irish Atlantic coast has been discretised using cells of on average 3km size. In the Irish Sea, which is the area of greatest interest to this study, the maximum cell size is limited to 3.5 km decreasing to 200m along most of the Irish coastline. The bathymetry was generated using a number of different sources. Large parts of the bathymetry information were obtained from digital charts supplied by C-MAP of Norway. Surveys of several banks and coastal areas have also been included covering in parts or all of Wexford and approaches Blackwater bank Arklow bank Codling bank Carlingford Lough Dublin Bay Malahide Rogerstown Greystones
Both survey data commissioned by RPS Consulting Engineers and the digital charts were quality checked by RPS engineers and compared with Admiralty data and known benchmarks. The datum of the bathymetry data was reduced to mean sea level using over 350 reference levels. A custom made routine interpolated mean sea level corrections for the relevant area and adjusted the bathymetry accordingly. The simulation of the astronomic tides in the model area is mainly driven by the oscillation of water levels along the open boundaries. The Irish Sea tidal surge model has 6 open boundaries, 5 in the Atlantic and one in the English Channel. The time series of tidal elevation along these boundaries were generated using a global tidal model designed by a team at the Danish National Survey and Cadastre Department (KMS). The KMS global tidal model is based on the prediction of tidal elevations using 8 semidiurnal and diurnal tidal constants (as opposed to UKHO which uses 4-6 constants). These constants were derived through the simulation of the effect of astronomic forces due to the sun and moon on the water surfaces. The model output was further refined with the use of satellite derived altimetry data. The Irish Seas model which was used to drive the desalination discharge model was verified using tidal diamond data, published on Admiralty Charts, at a number of locations across the domain.
8.3.2
The extent of the base model for the desalination discharge study included the Irish Sea and Saint Georges Channel, as illustrated in Figure 8.3, with a resolution of 405m. The boundary conditions at the northern and southern sides of the model were defined using the Irish Sea surge model. The bathymetry for the base and subsequent models was taken from the same sources as the Irish Sea surge model, as detailed in Section 3.1. A series of sub-models were developed from the base model in order to focus and refine the modelling area. The desalination modelling was undertaken on a 45m grid shown in Figure 8.3 by the black outline.
MDW0158RP0080F01
139
F01
The model was used to simulate tidal flow patterns for a period of one month, to include both neap and spring tides. Typical tide patterns are presented in Figure 8.4 for the mid-ebb tide and Figure 8.5 for the mid-flood tide both during a spring tide.
MDW0158RP0080F01
140
F01
8.4
8.4.1
The model was run for a period of one month with a constant discharge to ensure the full range of tidal conditions were experienced. Spring tides will give the largest extent of any plume while a neap tide produces a reduced plume area but it will be of a higher concentration. The modelling took place for the worst case scenario. The discharge of brine with sludge dispersion took place at the highest (Phase 2) discharge level. The upper limits of the salt and pollutant concentrations were used. Table 8.3 below details volumetric flow rates and concentrations used during the brine dispersion modelling.
Table 8.3
Magnitude
414,640 56 57 300 69 (34)
MDW0158RP0080F01
141
F01
8.4.2
Dispersion Modelling
The hydrodynamics of the area were simulated using a two-dimensional model which produced a depth averaged velocity field at a resolution on 45m. However, the medium and far field dispersion modelling applied a logarithmic velocity profile to the hydrodynamic data to produce a dispersion field which varied across the water column, as it would in reality. Therefore three datasets were produced for each parameter modelled to illustrate the variation in dispersion through the water column and the impact on each of these zones. These layers were: Surface layer of 5m thickness Central layer extending from 5m below the surface to a depth of 20m Seabed layer of thickness 1m
8.4.3
Dispersion Characteristics
Previous RPS Consulting Engineers experience of modelling and dye release studies in the Irish Sea showed that discharges become rapidly mixed through the water column and the primary source of horizontal advection is due to tidal currents. Therefore standard dispersion coefficients were derived for use within the model. The dispersion coefficients used in the numerical model are a function of grid spacing, model timestep and flow conditions. In addition, the amount of dispersion is varied according to orientation with regards to the flow direction. A series of dye test within the Irish Sea indicate that the dispersion in the longitudinal flow direction is typically around three to four times that of the traverse direction. The vertical dispersion through the water column was found to be one tenth of the traverse direction dispersion. The coefficient relating to flow conditions was derived from a series of calibration tests documented by DHI. These flow conditions being a function of water depth, mean current speed, grid spacing and model time-step.
8.4.4
The dispersion modelling was carried out for four parameters namely suspended sediment, coagulant, antiscalant and the brine itself. In the case of the suspended sediment two models were used; firstly applying the assumption that the sediment remains in suspension and secondly modelling discharge with the inclusion of settlement. The results are presented in the form of maximum and average plume envelopes. The maximum plume envelope displays (for each 45m cell) the largest concentration which is experienced during the simulation period in that cell. These plots therefore show the greatest impact that the discharge will have on the domain. However, these concentrations will not be experienced simultaneously and may only occur at that particular location for a short period of time. In order to asses the duration of the elevated concentration levels average plume envelopes are presented. These show the average concentrations in each cell over the course of the simulation. To aid visualisation typical plume excursion plots have been included for the suspended sediment results.
8.5
8.5.1
The initial dilution modelling has been undertaken using a diffuser with 10 ports of 0.4m diameter and the flow characteristics given in Section 8.1. The diffuser ports were at 10m centres with the port exits discharging vertically. The UM3 model was run for the rms value of spring and neap flow conditions to simulate the initial dilution over the tidal cycle.
MDW0158RP0080F01
142
F01
The brine will initially sink down to the seabed due to the density of the brine solution. The initial trajectory will depend on the tidal velocity. The resulting trajectories for rms spring and rms neap tidal velocities are presented in Figure 8.6. The plume in red relates to the rms spring velocity of 0.368 m/s while the plume in blue relates to the rms neap tidal velocity of 0.2 m/s.
The brine will be diluted as the outlet jets spread out with distance from the outfall. Figure 8.7 shows the corresponding initial dilution for the two tidal velocities outlined previously. At 0.2 m/s tidal velocity the initial dilution will be x46 at about 10 m from the outfall which corresponds to a salinity of 35.8 g/l at the point where the plume reaches the seabed. At 0.386 m/s tidal velocity the initial dilution will be x115 at about 20 m from the outfall with a salinity of 35.3 g/l.
MDW0158RP0080F01
143
F01
8.5.2
8.5.2.1
Figure 8.8 Typical Suspended Sediment Plume Excursion over Tidal Cycle - Surface 5m layer
MDW0158RP0080F01
144
F01
Figure 8.9 Maximum Plume Envelope Suspended SedimentSurface 5m layer (no settlement)
Figure 8.10 Average Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Surface 5m layer (no settlement)
MDW0158RP0080F01
145
F01
Figure 8.11 Maximum Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Central 15m layer (no settlement)
Figure 8.12 Average Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Central 15m layer (no settlement)
MDW0158RP0080F01
146
F01
Figure 8.13 Maximum Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Seabed 1m layer (no settlement)
Figure 8.14 Average Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Seabed 1m layer (no settlement)
MDW0158RP0080F01
147
F01
8.5.2.2
MDW0158RP0080F01
148
F01
Figure 8.17 Maximum Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Surface 5m layer (settlement)
Figure 8.18 Average Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Surface 5m layer (settlement)
MDW0158RP0080F01
149
F01
Figure 8.19 Maximum Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Central 15m layer (settlement)
Figure 8.20 Average Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Central 15m layer (settlement)
MDW0158RP0080F01
150
F01
Figure 8.21 Maximum Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Seabed 1m layer (settlement)
Figure 8.22 Average Plume Envelope Suspended Sediment Seabed 1m layer (settlement)
MDW0158RP0080F01
151
F01
8.5.2.3
Coagulant Dispersion
MDW0158RP0080F01
152
F01
MDW0158RP0080F01
153
F01
MDW0158RP0080F01
154
F01
8.5.2.4
Antiscalant dispersion
MDW0158RP0080F01
155
F01
MDW0158RP0080F01
156
F01
MDW0158RP0080F01
157
F01
8.5.2.5
Brine Dispersion
Figure 8.35 Maximum Plume Envelope Salt (above background) Surface 5m layer
Figure 8.36 Average Plume Envelope Salt (above background) Surface 5m layer
MDW0158RP0080F01
158
F01
Figure 8.37 Maximum Plume Envelope Salt (above background) Central 15m layer
Figure 8.38 Average Plume Envelope Salt (above background) Central 15m layer
MDW0158RP0080F01
159
F01
Figure 8.39 Maximum Plume Envelope Salt (above background) Seabed 1m layer
Figure 8.40 Average Plume Envelope Salt (above background) Seabed 1m layer
MDW0158RP0080F01
160
F01
8.6
8.6.1
The initial dilution results show that with a the brine jetted up into the water column using the 10 port diffuser design outlined in this study, there will generally be sufficiently dilution of the brine before it sinks to the seabed to avoid a significant increase in salinity at the seabed around the outfall. Only for very short periods around slack water will the salinity increase locally above 37 g/l at the seabed.
8.6.2
Generally the plume excursion characteristics showed that dispersion levels in the region of the outfall were high due to the high current speeds in the vicinity; specifically around the Skerries to the north and to the south at Rogerstown Inlet. The plume excursion is shown in Figure 8.8.
Suspended sediment assuming no sedimentation shown in Figure 8.9 to Figure 8.14 illustrates that levels of sediment within the water column fall below a maximum of 1mg/l away from the immediate vicinity of the outfall. The EPA prescribes that the maximum allowable impact is a 30% rise in background levels. Although no specific sampling was undertaken for this study these limits are unlikely to have been exceeded in this case.
Sedimentation is included in the next series of results presented. Figure 8.15 and Figure 8.16 show the sedimentation levels experienced during the discharge cycle which in are in general very low. Sedimentation occurs to a depth of 1mm in the vicinity of the outfall during slack water. This material is re-suspended and dispersed as current speeds increase through the tidal cycle. This is demonstrated in the suspended sediment plots, Figure 8.17 to Figure 8.22, which show the greatest levels at the bed with a reduction towards the surface with the material being dispersed as it progresses through the water column.
The dispersion modelling of the coagulant (Figure 8.23 to Figure 8.28), the antiscalant (Figure 8.29 to Figure 8.34) and the brine discharge (Figure 8.35 to Figure 8.40) show the same discharge patterns. Smaller extents are exhibited at the bed as the pollutant is dispersed through the water column due to the logarithmic nature of the velocity profile. The maximum coagulant level is 3 mg/l outside the immediate vicinity of the discharge. This level is only experienced for a small part of the tidal cycle as the average value demonstrates this is less than one sixth of the maximum value. The EPA limit on iron is 1 mg/l. A specific allowable level for the phosphonate used as an antiscalant is not prescribed by the EPA but the peak maximum values outside of the immediate area of the outfall are below 12 g/l.
For brine discharge the allowable increase is limited to a 10% increase in background levels. With maximum values less than 1.5 g/l and a background of 35g/l, discharges are well within the acceptable levels.
8.7
COSTING
An estimate of costs for an intake and outfall to serve the possible desalination plant was made based on discussions with specialist marine contractors regarding present market factors. Given that detailed design parameters and site conditions were not known at this time the following assumptions were made. The intake would be twin 1800mm diameter pipelines of the order of 3km length constructed in a single tunnel which will also house the brine discharge pipework. The offshore end will be placed in 20m water depth (Lowest Astronomical Tide LAT) with all construction except the intake structure to be buried below the seabed. The outfall would be approximately 2km in length constructed of twin
MDW0158RP0080F01
161
F01
1400mm diameter HPPE pipeline. The diffuser end would be located in a water depth of 15m at LAT with the outfall buried throughout its length. Scour/anchoring protection would be required around the diffusers. Seawater abstraction would be facilitated by the construction of a seawater pumping station to be installed in two phases to supply the desalination plant efficiently for the maximum demand of each phase 477Mld (phase 1) and 715 Mld (phase 2). The construction cost was estimated around 73.6M for abstraction and discharge pipelines. The civil engineering costs include mobilisation and demobilisation, temporary works, surveys, butt fusion and testing, intakes, diffusers etc. These costs are outlined in greater detail in Section 11 Economic Assessment.
8.8
The discharge of brine and pollutants associated with the operation of a desalination plant were modelled using numerical modelling techniques. The dispersion levels were high due to the tidal regime and high current speeds in the vicinity of the proposed discharge site. The levels of suspended solids, iron and salt were found to be within acceptable levels outside of the immediate vicinity of the discharge site. Sedimentation levels resulting from the sludge dispersal were found to be very low. With very limited settlement occurring during slack water, which is subsequently re-suspended and dispersed as current speeds increase as the tidal cycle progresses. An estimation of the cost of such a scheme was made (section 8.7). This cost assumes that ground conditions are reasonably favourable.
MDW0158RP0080F01
162
F01
9 ENERGY REQUIREMENTS
9.1 INTRODUCTION
Preliminary examination of the energy requirements and associated production of greenhouse gases has identified that desalination would have a considerable overall energy demand and high footprint during the operational phase of the project. The following is an outline of the anticipated operational energy demand of a desalination facility and the potential sources of energy available to fuel the technology.
9.2
A report titled Energy Consumption of Reverse Osmosis (RO) Plants (see Appendix D) was produced by Veolia as a part of the overall examination of the desalination technology options. Previous study has identified Reverse Osmosis as the most practicable option for desalination in Ireland. This was arrived at following a review of the various desalination technologies available (including those only at pilot stage) across a range of criteria including:
Energy Demand Plant Availability Health and Safety Environmental Impact Maturity of technology
The two most relevant examples of RO technology in operation today are the Ashkelon Plant in Israel and the Perth Desalination plant in Australia. Both are among the largest currently in operation (Ashkelon at 320 Mld and Perth at 250Mld). The electrical demand of these plants ranges from 4.0 to 3 3.8 kWh per 1000 Litre (or m ) of treated water produced, with Ashkelon ranging from 4.0 to 3.9 3 dependent on salinity and Perth largely maintaining a 3.8kWh per 1000 Litre (or m ) demand. Extrapolated directly to the Dublin project this would see 300Mld per day produced at an average electrical demand of approximately 3.9 kWh per 1000 litres treated water, or 1,170MWh per day. An initial examination of local conditions with regard to salinity and turbidity (along with a trade-off between capital and operational costs in plant design) has been conducted and as a result a more defined estimate for the Dublin plant has been calculated as 3.77 kWh per 1000 litres treated water, accounting for seawater abstraction and reverse osmosis treatment (see Appendix D). 300 Mld at 3.8kWh per 1000 litres would see an overall daily demand of approximately 1140MWh per day. If an assumption is made that the operation at the plant will be on an uninterrupted 24hr per day basis then the normal operating electrical demand would be in the region of 47.5 MW. This would be comparable to the quantity of electricity supplied by a small power generation station.
9.3
As detailed in Section 7, the preferred location for the desalination plant and abstraction point is in North County Dublin. This was arrived at following an initial review of onshore topography, tidal regime and bathymetry of locations both North and South of Dublin City. Also investigated were energy availability, access and the ease of integrating water supplies into the Dublin Region network.
MDW0158RP0080F01
163
F01
9.3.1
Natural Gas
The north Fingal preferred location is straddled by the Ireland to UK gas interconnectors. Pressure reducing regulator skids are present North of Balbriggan and at Loughshinny with a major Above Ground Installation (AGI) present in Ballough to the South-west of the location. Generally speaking, there is a significant quantity of gas available in the area and the supply is robust, considering the proximity of both the interconnectors and the Ballough AGI connecting to the Gas Pipeline to the West, which in turn will connect to the Corrib Gas Field. With such a quantity of gas in the area it is likely that there would be sufficient Natural Gas available should on-site generation be considered for the desalination process. For a generation plant of this size however the connection cost would likely be significant.
9.3.2
Another possibility would be the direct supply of electricity from the local grid to the facility. Both HV and MV networks extend close to the sites with the potential for connection to 10/20 kV power lines and also 38kV power lines. However, considering the magnitude of demand at the site it is possible that this infrastructure would not be able to support the facility. The proximity of Huntstown Power Station in Meath, currently under expansion, may provide a solution. It is situated approximately 40km from the site of the power station and is supported by the 220kV network. It is likely that connection to Huntstown or another point along the 220kV network in the area would entail a significant cost and reflecting on recent opposition to HV line expansion, would more than likely be subject to a protracted planning and connection process. In addition to this, ongoing operational costs associated with purchase of electricity from the grid might establish this option as being prohibitively expensive. The need for this connection will be particularly relevant should any form of renewable energy be considered for the site, where frequent back-up and peak demand power (supplemented from the National Grid) may be required up to full plant demand.
9.4
There are many alternative electricity generation technologies in use and in development worldwide. These can broadly be separated into a number of categories such as Wind, Wave, Tidal, Hydro, Solar and Biofuel.
9.4.1
Wind
Electricity generation from wind is a mature technology both in terms of on-shore and off-shore generation. Two major considerations in the utilisation of wind energy to supply the desalination option would be the scale of windfarm (and consequent cost) necessary to support the facility and the intermittent nature of wind generation which would require a back-up supply either directly from the grid or by on-site generation. This back-up would more than likely be an expensive and largely redundant piece of equipment. The scale of wind-farm necessary to supply a constant 47.5 MW of power would be (taking an onshore turbine size of 1MW) in the region of 47 Turbines. This is assuming that they all produce electricity to their installed capacity, 24 hours per day, 365 days per year. In general it is assumed that wind turbines will produce approximately 30-35% of their installed capacity once generation efficiency and wind regime are taken into consideration. Taking this best case (100%) scenario of 47 Turbines the likely cost would be 75 million including grid connection and the turbines would be spread across an area of approximately 429 Hectares (assuming a spacing grid of 350m). Should an offshore facility be considered, then the closest suitable area currently identified as a potential site for development (by Airtricity) is 40km distant to the South-east of Dundalk.
MDW0158RP0080F01
164
F01
Assuming a turbine size of 3.6MW (similar to the Arklow Development), this would see an offshore development of 14 Turbines spread over 312 hectares. There would also be a significant development and connection cost associated with this, possibly in the region of 150 million. Should the empirical and evidence-based estimate of 32.5% electricity production compared to installed capacity be used then onshore a windfarm to support the desalination plant could require 145 turbines spread over 1320 Hectares with a potential cost of 230 million; while an offshore installation could require 43 turbines spread over an area of 1000 hectares with a cost of 461 million.
9.4.2
Both wave and tidal technologies are not considered to be mature at this point in time. They do however represent good potential for energy generation in Ireland for the longer term. While both technologies have a number of pilot projects in existence utilising a variety of proprietary mechanisms for generation (OpenHydro tidal turbine, Wavebob, Pelamis inter alia), it is unlikely that any of these will be proven at the scale required for the desalination plant in the short to medium term. In the case of Hydro-electricity, there are insufficient resources available in the area to provide a reliable and significant power supply to the desalination option. In general terms, it is highly unlikely that any largescale hydro-electricity generation facility will be developed in Ireland due to the significant environmental impact caused by same.
9.4.3
Solar technologies are applied in a number of different scenarios in Ireland. By far the most prevalent is that of Solar Thermal technology where daylight only is needed for the efficient harnessing of solar energy. Far less common is the utilization of Solar Photovoltaic technologies which produce electricity from direct sunlight, with most of these installations being in isolated areas for small demand such as emergency phones and low-level emergency lighting. Newer configurations of solar technology also utilise mirror arrays to concentrate solar energy to a point, superheating water into steam, which is then used to produce electricity. While these electricity production technologies are and will be successful elsewhere it is highly unlikely considering the quantity of direct insulation experienced in the Irish climate that it would ever be economically feasible to support an installation with a demand of 47.5 MW.
9.4.4
Biomass and liquid biofuel energy technologies are considered to be relatively mature in the current energy market. The weakness in their development and utilisation is normally due to country specific barriers and often relates to taxation, level of incentivisation and most importantly, level of fuel availability and the supply chain for same. In the case of a proposed desalination plant at the scale mentioned above, calculations on the quantities of fuel and storage required have yielded the following results refer table 9.1.
MDW0158RP0080F01
165
F01
Table 9.1 Quantities of fuel and storage requirements for various biomass and biofuel technologies kWh/tonne Tonnes/yr Tonnes/day Storage 3 (m /yr) Monthly Storage Requirement (m ) Chips Pellets Biodiesel
1,250 1,563 10,347 (9.105kWh/l) 332,880 266,304 40,215 (45,700,165 l/yr) 912 729.6 110 (125,206 l/day) 1,331,520 1,065,216 45,700 110,960 88,768 3808.3
3
The physical storage of these quantities, the logistics associated with delivery and movement of raw materials and storage & disposal of waste ash could have a significant impact on the operation of the facility. It is also important to put these quantities into the context of the current Irish Biomass and Biofuel Markets. The utilisation of either woodchip or wood-pellet would necessitate a growth in the wood-fuel market of in excess of 100% (going by Irelands published 2006 Energy Balance figures Sustainable Energy Ireland). The utilisation of biodiesel as the primary fuel would necessitate in excess of a tenfold increase in the current Irish biofuel market to satisfy the demand of the desalination plant.
9.5
The Irish regulatory framework for the electricity market is dependent on the power required by the consumer, as shown on Figure 9.1. When the power required is < 5 Megawatts, consumers can buy energy directly from an energy supplier located anywhere in Ireland. The Irish National Grid can be used to deliver this energy. On the contrary, when the power requirements are > 5 MW, no direct contract is allowed between the consumer and the independent generator. Eirgrid deals with energy supply to the consumer, using a mix of different sources of energy. The price fixed by Eirgrid will integrate production costs, delivery cost and also an Eirgrid mark-up for risk.
< 5 MW
Energy Consumer
Direct Contract
Independent Generator
(oil, gas, wind, biofuels etc.)
> 5 MW
Energy Consumer
Eirgrid
Contract
Independent Generators
(oil, gas, wind, biofuels etc.)
MDW0158RP0080F01
166
F01
In the case of wind generated power there are regulatory constraints under which all electricity produced at a site of >5MW capacity will have to be dispatched to the national grid. The energy requirements for a desalination facility of this scale are 47.5MW as outlined in the previous section. This electricity would then be subject to the Single Energy Market and cost drivers, instead of allowing the desalination plant to avail of direct supply from independent generators.
9.6
9.6.1
The energy consumption of desalination was assessed taking into account the annual growth of water supplies. The minimum operational production of the plant has been established at 50Mld. Desalination requires energy principally for the reverse osmosis process (high pressure pumps). Figure 9.2 illustrates the annual energy consumption to 2040 for the proposed desalination plant. The trend shows energy consumption increasing in direct proportion to the water supply.
Figure 9.2
450,000,000
400,000,000
350,000,000
300,000,000 E (kWh/year)
250,000,000
200,000,000
150,000,000
100,000,000
50,000,000
0 2010
2015
2020
2025 Year
2030
2035
2040
2045
Figure 9.3 illustrates the energy requirements per cubic metre of water delivered until the year 2040. The total energy requirement is sub-divided into energy required for abstraction and reverse osmosis and energy required for transmission of treated water.
MDW0158RP0080F01
167
F01
Figure 9.3
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0 E (kWh/year/m3)
TOTAL
2.5
Abstraction+RO Transmission
2.0
RO
1.5
Abstraction
1.0
0.5
0.0 2010
2015
2020
2025 Year
2030
2035
2040
2045
9.6.2
The Carbon Footprint Model enables the assessment and comparison of different energy supply scenarios, including: energy supply from the national grid, oil and gas independent power generation, energy generation from biofuels (wood chips, pellets and biodiesel) and wind power. For each scenario, the model calculates the energy cost (excluding carbon tax), carbon emissions and carbon tax based upon current market prices and technologies. The current primary fuel (oil, gas, biofuels) prices and company retail prices (grid and wind power suppliers) have been used (/kWh), with the former weighted by their respective process efficiency factors (%). For each of the energy sources, the CO2 emission factors (kgCO2/kWh) have also been included in the model to calculate the annual carbon emissions for any scenario. Finally, the annual CO2 emissions are converted into anticipated future carbon taxes using dedicated website information (pointcarbon). A detailed example of Carbon Footprint Model simulation is given in Appendix E.
9.6.3
In order to assess the energy supply possibilities for desalination, the different available energy sources have been compared in terms of cost, carbon emissions and associated carbon tax. For simplicity and consistency with the economic assessment detailed in Section 11, no inflation was taken into account in the results shown in Figures 9.4, 9.5 and 9.6.
MDW0158RP0080F01
168
F01
Figure 9.4
140,000,000
120,000,000
100,000,000
80,000,000 /year
60,000,000
40,000,000
20,000,000
0 2010
2015
2020
2025 Year
2030
2035
2040
2045
Figure 9.5
350,000
300,000
250,000
CO2 tonnes/year
200,000
150,000
100,000
50,000
0 2010
2015
2020
2025 Year
2030
2035
2040
2045
MDW0158RP0080F01
169
F01
Figure 9.6
10,000,000 9,000,000 8,000,000 7,000,000 6,000,000 /year 5,000,000 4,000,000 3,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 0 2010
100% oil 100% biofuels 100% wind 100% gas 100% grid
2015
2020
2025 Year
2030
2035
2040
2045
9.6.4
Summary
Figure 9.7 gives a summary of the total annual cost of the energy supply predicted for the year 2040, including both the energy production cost and the carbon tax without inflation projection.
Figure 9.7
140,000,000
120,000,000
100,000,000
Cost ()
80,000,000
40,000,000
20,000,000
100% biofuels
100% oil
MDW0158RP0080F01
170
F01
9.6.5
Two costing tables (Table 9.2 and 9.3) were designed with regard to the type of fuel that would be used to power the desalination plant including the origins of that fuel and carbon footprint. These tables were compiled using the Carbon Footprint Model simulation that is given in Appendix E.
9.6.5.1
The fuel used for Option 1 is the expected fuel mix between fossil fuels and renewables from now until 2040. At present, the mix includes 7% renewables. While there was a target set in the White Paper for Energy of 33% renewables by 2020, an achievable target is said to be 20%. With the reduction in fossil fuels expected to heighten over the coming decades an increase in the percentage of renewables is expected, with 40% renewables by 2040 being a reasonable estimate. The cost of the fuel is based on the current prices being quoted with a 4% inflation rate for every year. The amount of carbon produced is based on the electricity fuel mix only and not from the renewable source. The carbon tax quoted is based on the European market price in /tonne. Future predictions were based on detailed surveys of users of a dedicated carbon market website, pointcarbon.com. When the price of carbon reaches 40/tonne it is expected to level off.
Table 9.2: Option 1 Off-site Fossil Fuel and Renewable Fuel Mix Energy Cost Projections
2008 Mix of Fuel Type (%Fossil / %Renewable) Cost of Power from Fuel Carbon Production (Tonnes of CO2) Carbon (/Tonne CO2) Total () Carbon Tax 25 93/7 2016 85/15 2021 80/20 2026 75/25 2031 70/30 2036 65/35 2040 60/40
7.7m
11.0m
26.6m
46.4m
70.9m
94.7m
47,778
52,189
99,245
138,895
171,547
190,725
30
35
40
40
40
40
Cost
1.4m
2.2m
5.6m
8.9m
12.3m
14.9m
Cost
9.1m
13.2m
32.2m
55.3m
83.2m
109.6m
9.6.5.2
The fuel used for Option 2 comes directly from a gas fired station and is converted to electricity on site. This cuts out the need for supplying Eirgrid and then receiving it from an electricity supplier. There will be no extra charges added to the fuel as there is no middle man, i.e. Eirgrid and suppliers. However, there would be the added capital cost of building a gas fired station and O&M costs which arent included in this table.
MDW0158RP0080F01
171
F01
While gas isnt as efficient as electricity, 100% (grid) versus 58% (gas), it is cheaper. The carbon produced from burning the gas is significantly less than that of the electricity mix, however by 2041 there is less of a difference between the amounts of carbon being produced between the two options as the amount of renewables used increases over time in Option 1. The cost of the fuel is based on the current prices being quoted with a 4% inflation rate for every year. The amount of carbon produced is based on the electricity fuel mix only and not from the renewable source. The carbon tax quoted is based on the European market price in /tonne. Future predictions were based on detailed surveys of users of a dedicated carbon market website, pointcarbon.com. When the price of carbon reaches 40/tonne it is expected to level off.
Table 9.3: Option 2 On-site gas fired power station Energy Cost Projections
2008 Mix (%) of Fuel Type 100 2016 100 2021 100 2026 100 2031 100 2036 100 2040 100
Cost of Power from Fuel Carbon Production (Tonnes of CO2) Carbon (/Tonne CO2) Total () Carbon Tax 25
3.5m
4.9m
11.5m
19.8m
29.6m
38.8m
24,728
28,699
58,213
87,290
116,103
139,840
30
35
40
40
40
40
Cost
742k
1.2m
3.3m
5.6m
8.4
11.0m
Cost
4.2m
6.1m
14.8m
25.4m
38.0m
49.8m
9.7
RECOMMENDATIONS
Desalination is a very energy intensive process and in an Irish context the cost of oil/gas for energy generation is a key issue for consideration. Due to the import requirements there were long term security of supply considerations to be evaluated as part of the assessments of a desalination facility. To reduce risks associated with supply security a dedicated power station may provide some solutions. However the impacts of construction of such a station (sized to guarantee supply of 47.5 MW and located in close proximity to the plant) may be considerable. In terms of alternative energy as outlined in section 9.4.1.1 for any wind energy project there are regulatory constraints under which all electricity produced at a site of >5MW capacity will have to be dispatched to the national grid. This electricity would then be subject to the Single Energy Market and cost drivers, instead of allowing the desalination plant to avail of direct supplies from independent generators. Since the plant requires 47.5 MW this option becomes less desirable in terms of lower energy costs associated with using alternative energy sources.
MDW0158RP0080F01
172
F01
From the review above it is apparent that the most practicable options for powering the desalination facility would be Natural Gas (as a primary fuel for electricity production on-site) or direct electrical supply from the National Grid. This is considered to be the case from a number of perspectives including: The scale of investment required; Area required for on-shore and off-shore wind technologies and regulatory controls regarding electricity supply for same; On-site storage, fuel management and ash disposal and management for solid and liquid biofuels; Quantity of primary fuel required with regard to solid and liquid biofuels and the current market size and consequent sensitivity. Maturity of technologies in the case of wave and tidal.
MDW0158RP0080F01
173
F01
10 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
10.1 INTRODUCTION
A qualitative and quantitative assessment of the likely significant effects of constructing a desalination facility on each aspect of the environment has been carried out in order to identity key issues. These assessments were based on the likely magnitude of the impact and the sensitivity of the environmental aspect, national and international legislation and other relevant plans and programmes. (Tables 11.16 and 11.18 of the Environmental Report, tabled for public consultation under the Strategic Environmental Assessment Phase 2 (SEA Ph 2) process provides a summary of the qualitative and quantitative assessments respectively).
IMPLEMENTATION
OF
WATER
In brief the water abstracted from the Irish Sea will need to be conveyed to a facility on land where it will be treated prior to transmission to the distribution network in the Dublin Region. A facility to store the treated water will be required prior to release to the distribution network. For the Irish Sea/Desalination, the existing reservoir at Ballycoolin may be suitable to act as the storage reservoir. A preliminary abstraction point, treatment facility location and transmission route has been identified in order to assess the feasibility of desalination and to identify the likely key environmental issues which relate to this treatment process. Primary data sources such as OSI mapping, the Heritage Service and NPWS data bases of (Record of Monuments and Places (RMP) and National and European (natural heritage) sites were used to select these preliminary locations and transmission routes so as to avoid major known sensitive receptors.
10.3.1
The primary habitat covered by the Desalination Plant is the marine environment and the proposed site is located on or in proximity to sites with the following designations: Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) (Designated under the Habitats Directive 92/43/EC) Special Protection Areas (SPA) (Designated under the Birds Directive 79/409/EEC) Natural Heritage Areas (NHA) (Designated under the Wildlife Act 1976)
The proposed area of abstraction to the north of Dublin has no national or European natural heritage designation and the volume of water to be abstracted will have no impact in terms of available water resources in the Irish Sea and was not seen as a key issue.
MDW0158RP0080F01
174
F01
Similarly, there are no national or European sites in the general vicinity of the proposed treatment works. Given the proximity of the treatment works to the sea, an option for the removal of wastewater from the works which was considered was discharge to the sea after treatment. Given the potential dilution available this is not seen as a key issue. The brine dispersion model examined the impact of the option of returning the sludge to the sea via the plant outfall. No significant impact was anticipated. However, as part of the design of the treatment works the sludge produced by the treatment process would be collected and thickened at the works and would be removed from site for disposal. The transmission route will only be approximately 24km long but given the existing development along the route, the location of the route is not entirely flexible. However, it is likely that the route would be able to avoid any site of National or European Importance and is therefore not seen as a key issue. An existing reservoir at Ballycoolen is likely to be used for storing treated water which an as such is not anticipated to have any adverse impact. As shown in Table 10.1, there are a number of designated sites within a 5km radius of the proposed site but the desalination study area itself does not fall within the boundaries of any designated area.
Table 10.1
Designated area
Loughshinny Coast Skerries Islands Shenick Island, St. Patricks Island, Colt Island Lambay Island Rogerstown Estuary
It was deemed that overall no significant adverse impact would be anticipated from the construction of a desalination facility at north Fingal on biodiversity, flora and fauna.
10.3.2
The approximate number of people that the treatment plant can provide water for was used here as a gauge of positive impact on communities. The population of Ireland was over 4.2 million in 2006. Though the population growth has been accelerating, the population density in Ireland is still low from a European perspective and the population still remains below that of the island in the early 19th century. Population projections for the GDA as a whole were undertaken in great detail in the Greater Dublin Strategic Drainage Study and reported on in population and land use Report 2003. The Dublin Region (Water Supply Area) population projections are outlined in Table 2.1 of this report. The largest population centres are located south of the M50 in the Dublin City area and along the east coast. Northern Fingal County is sparsely populated by comparison.
MDW0158RP0080F01
175
F01
An adequate secure water supply is a basic need of society; it is essential to ensure public health and sustain social, environmental and economic conditions appropriate in a modern European City. Currently there is an adequate drinking water supply in the Dublin Region but it is forecast that as early as 2014 the demand in the area could exceed supply. The Strategic Planning Guidelines in 2002 recognised that a secure water supply for the GDA would be the most significant factor determining its long-term capacity to accommodate growth. The National Spatial Strategy promotes higher housing densities in the Dublin Region to promote vibrant sustainable communities and to make the best use of infrastructure. Here there are concerns over the security of a desalinated water supply as a result of its energy requirements. As desalination is highly energy intensive and would most likely rely on offshore gas supplies for energy there are concerns over the security of the supply. Should there be a reduction or loss in supply for any reason this process could struggle to maintain a water supply. The cost of energy is also likely to be a factor here. Desalination is economically unfavourable due to the high energy costs which is considerably more expensive than costs for conventional treatment processes. Finally, there is also a perceived and potential lack of security of the quality of the source due to its vulnerability in terms of exposure to gross and chronic pollution in the Irish Sea. The security of providing an adequate and good quality supply would be at risk as a result of poor source water quality. It must therefore be recognised that desalination may have a negative impact on population and human health.
10.3.3
Water
The Irish Sea stretches between Ireland and the UK and is connected to the Atlantic Ocean through St. George's Channel and the Celtic Sea to the south, and by the North Channel between Northern Ireland and Scotland to the north. The stretch of coastline along North County Dublin, in the vicinity of the proposed desalination plant site is a combination of rocky and sedimentary habitats. The phytoplankton population dynamics in the Irish Sea varies depending on whether the water column stratifies or not. Where it does stratify the pattern is one with major productivity peak in spring/early summer, and a smaller peak in the autumn, while in areas of constant mixing there is only one peak in productivity in early summer (Marine Institute, 1999). The zooplankton of the Irish Sea is dominated by copepods, which mainly feed on the phytoplankton (Marine Institute, 1999) and, in-line with the phytoplankton, are also most abundant during the spring and summer. The Irish Sea falls within ICES (International Council for the Exploration of the Sea) area VIIa for the purposes of fisheries management, and it is an important area for fish in terms of fisheries and conservation. Many inshore areas of the Irish Sea are regarded as notable spawning and/or nursery systems for several commercially important fish species including cod (Gadus morhua), whiting (Merlangius merlangus), plaice (Pleuronectes platessa), lemon sole (Microstomus kitt), herring (Clupea harengus) and sprat (Sprattus sprattus), with the most important areas being in the Western Irish Sea between Strangford and Dublin (Coull et al., 1998, Marine Institute, 1999). The large estuaries bounding the western Irish Sea also support velvet crab, lobster, whelk, razor fish and scallop fisheries. As such, the Fingal coastal area is highly important in terms of fishery (both commercial and non-commercial) spawning, nursery and feeding functions. In terms of marine mammals, both cetaceans (whales and dolphins) and seals have been recorded in the inshore waters of North Dublin.
MDW0158RP0080F01
176
F01
As there was insufficient suitable and recent water quality data available for the Irish Sea at north Fingal a water sampling survey was carried out (refer to Appendix B for results of water sampling survey). This included a wide range of physical and chemical parameters and also silt density index measurements (SDI). The data collected from the water quality analysis was used as a baseline for water quality in the Irish Sea at this location. In conjunction with the results of the brine dispersion modelling study (refer section 8.0 of this report) which examined the currents along the north Fingal coast no significant potential changes to water quality as a result of brine dispersion were anticipated. In relation to assessing any impacts on achieving the objectives of the Water Framework Directive the only adverse impact may be the dispersion of sludge which could potentially lead to enhanced phytoplankton growth in turn leading to algal blooms occurring at certain times of the years. As outlined in section 10.2.1 no significant impact is anticipated.
10.3.4
In 2006, measured sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, carbon monoxide, lead and benzene concentrations in Ireland were all below their individual limits, as designated under the 2002 Air Quality Standards Regulations. In addition, particulate matter (PM10) concentrations in 2006 were similar to those measured in 2005, with all stations compliant with the standard introduced from 2005. However, ozone concentrations measured in Ireland in 2006 were higher than recent years. Met Eireann measure various climatological parameters on a rolling 30 year period. Over a 30 year period data recorded from Dublin Airport showed a mean temperature of 9.6C, mean relative humidity of 82%, mean daily sunshine duration of 3.9 hours, mean monthly rainfall of 732.7 mm and mean wind speeds of 9.9 knots. Greenhouse gases contribute to global warming/climate change and the most important greenhouse gases are carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. The sources of emissions can be divided up into two broad categories, energy related and non-energy related. Carbon dioxide makes up a very large percentage of greenhouse gas emissions and the estimation of carbon dioxide is one of the best methods there is of calculating impacts on climate change. Desalination is a highly energy intensive process due to the pumping requirements for reverse osmosis and would have an adverse effect on greenhouse gases and climate change. In the assessment of energy consumption of a reverse osmosis plant several parameters are taken into account including sea water characteristics which determine the extent of the pre-treatment required and the number of RO passes required. In the case of Loughshinny an extensive pretreatment facility is required in addition to a 2nd pass RO process to remove the high SDI and boron levels respectively. These factors in addition to the energy requirements for both sea water and treated water pumping and feed pumping for the RO unit are considerable (255.7 millions kWh per year for the year 2031). The anticipated CO2 emissions using energy from the grid at the current emission rate of 0.000776 tons CO2 per kWh would produce 198,422 tons CO2 per annum (taking the figure for the year 2031). The carbon emission figures up to the year 2040 are included in the carbon model in Appendix E. Desalination would therefore be anticipated to have a very negative impact on air and climate.
MDW0158RP0080F01
177
F01
10.3.5
There is a potential negative indirect impact on cultural heritage for the location selected for the desalination plant. The northern Fingal (Loughshinny) location was selected over a site in Balbriggan another technically feasible location - on the grounds that the Balbriggan location was considered highly unsuitable due to the presence of an important prehistoric complex. A southern Loughshinny site was also considered, but was deemed highly unsuitable due to its proximity to a promontory fort of National Monument status. The northern Loughshinny location may impact indirectly on the setting of the promontory fort. Baseline work was completed for the Irish Sea / Desalination plant as part of (SEA Phase l). Full details of this work are provided in the Environmental Report. Coastal landscapes are considered to have an intrinsically significant archaeological potential unless proved otherwise by archaeological investigation. As with rivers, the coast has always been a focus for human activity, with the sea providing a source of food and raw materials as well as a means of travel and communication and a place to build communities. Flint and stone artefactual evidence found along the shoreline from Loughshinny to Rogerstown (the latter being a particularly rich source) have indicated that this part of Dublin has witnessed human activity as early as the Mesolithic period. National monuments within the study area include a prehistoric promontory fort, Drumanagh which is a recorded monument and is also subject to a preservation order. This is located within an area to the south of Loughshinny village. The fort has not been taken into State Care as a National Monument but the DoEHLG require that any site covered by a preservation order must be described as a National Monument.
10.3.6
Landscape
The area selected is characterised by beaches, islands and headlands that together create a sensitive and important landscape of high amenity and landscape value. The most significant impact on the landscape will occur during the construction phase and will be temporary. While the treatment plants, pump stations and storage reservoirs will have some potential impact on landscape this was considered to be a secondary key issue and is not expected to have a significantly adverse impact on landscape.
10.3.7
The main issues in relation to material assets are the temporary impacts on land and services during the construction phase, the permanent impact on land due to the sanitation of lands in the immediate vicinity of the transmission line from certain landuse/development activities and the energy used to treat the abstracted water and transmit it to the distribution system. Landuse to be affected at north Fingal is horticulture and mixed agriculture as the footprint of the infrastructure will require the necessary land acquisition (see Appendix G for proposed site layout) with the plant covering an area of approximately 15 hectares at its ultimate capacity. This will constitute a minor negative impact.
10.3.8
Soil
In order to assess the impact on soils details of material quantities would need to be specified. As these details are determined at project level they cannot be used as a quantitative comparison at this stage. Therefore no significant adverse impact is expected.
MDW0158RP0080F01
178
F01
10.4 CONCLUSIONS
Due to the high amount of energy that would be required for the desalination process and the resultant emissions of green house gases when compared with conventional treatment methods it is anticipated that desalination would have a considerable negative impact in the environment. The proposed preliminary design contains a substantial pre-treatment facility and requires a second pass RO system to be incorporated. This is required to treat both the high SDI (silt density index) and boron levels present in the source water. In the case of boron a reduction to 1mg/l is required in order to comply with current legislation while SDIs >5 have a high potential to cause fouling of the RO membrane (levels in source water were recorded as >30 SDI). These factors contribute to the already anticipated high energy requirement for this treatment process. In terms of the impacts on population and health the vulnerability of the Irish Sea source to acute or chronic pollution events exposes the treatment process to risks in terms of security of supply and poor quality treated water.
MDW0158RP0080F01
179
F01
11 ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
This section contains summary details of economic assessments. Full details of economic assessments are available in Appendix F.
Twin 1800mm diameter pipelines are needed to abstract seawater efficiently at maximum capacity (715Mld). The required pipeline length is 3km in order to provide a sufficient water depth 20m for the intake structures. A minimum elevation above seabed is needed for water quality purpose as well as a minimum depth below water level for navigation safety. Similarly, twin 1400mm diameter pipelines will enable the discharge of brine in an optimised manner at maximum flow rate (415Mld). In this case the pipeline length will only be 2km since brine dispersion modelling demonstrated that this would provide suitable dilution patterns for avoidance of sensitive coastal areas (see modelling results Section 8) The engineering works involved in the construction of these pipelines are complex and expensive. It is difficult to assess accurately the construction costs without extensive seabed site investigations. The construction methodology will be: tunnelling from the desalination plant sand dredging between tunnel exit and pipeline extremities (seawater intakes / brine outfalls)
Hydraulic calculations show that pipelines will have to remain at least 7m below the minimum sea level in order to provide a suitable hydraulic profile. Therefore, from the desalination plant shafts the pipelines will be tunnelled to a point which must be at least 7m below the minimum sea level. The anticipated length of such a tunnel is about 800m, subject to site conditions. For cost reduction purpose, intakes and outfalls will be laid through a single tunnel, which will be the most expensive part of the construction works (22k/m to 28k/m). From the tunnels exit to the intakes/outfalls, pipelines will be dredged into sand with a minimum cover of 1.6m. Abstraction and discharge pipelines will be dredged in separate trenches from the tunnel in Easterly and SouthEasterly directions for the outfalls and intakes, respectively. The construction costs are summed up in the following Table 11.1
MDW0158RP0080F01
180
F01
Table 11.1
Cost
6 m 6 m 22 m 16 m 14 m 9.6 m
pipelines pipelines
1800mm 1400mm 6m -
3.4km 4.7 (1.2km + 2.2km) Mob/demob contractors, temporary works, surveys, butt fusion and testing, intakes, diffusers, mechanical joints, anchorweights, pipestrings, connections, etc. Contingencies for 15% of total Site Conditions Total
73.6 m
Table 11.2
Civil Works
7.1 m 3.6 m 10.7 m
ESB
1.9 m 1.2 m 3.1 m
11.1.2.2 Pre-Treatment
Due to the fouling capacity of Irish Sea water, significant pre-treatment is needed for satisfactory membrane filtration operation. This pre-treatment will consist of the following steps: Shock chlorination Coagulation with ferric chloride Acidification with sulphuric acid Flocculation with anionic polymer Dissolved air floatation Dual media filtration (anthracite and sand)
MDW0158RP0080F01
181
F01
The produced sludge will be dewatered on site before disposal. The overall capital cost of the seawater pre-treatment and sludge treatment processes is shown in the following table:
Table 11.3
Table 11.4
M&E
42.4 m 21.2 m 63.6 m
Civil Works
48.6 m 24.3 m 72.9 m
Membranes
20.6 m 10.3 m 30.9 m
11.1.3
The transmission pipeline and associated facilities are designed for a termination point at Ballycoolen Reservoirs, in North Dublin. These will consist of twin 1100mm diameter pipelines laid in Phase 1.
Table 11.5
Cost
51.8 m
Transmission pipelines
1100
Roads
Crossings Total 1.5 m
Rivers
2.8 m
Railways
0.3 m
Cost
4.6 m
56.4 m
MDW0158RP0080F01
182
F01
In terms of pumping, the drinking water transmission capital costs are as follows:
Table 11.6
Civil Works
3.0 m 1.5 m 4.5 m
ESB
1.9 m 1.8 m 3.7 m
Storage Tank
5.4 m 2.7 m 8.1 m
Table 11.7
Land Purchase
1.5 m 0 m 1.5 m
M&E
15 years 5.6 m 8.4 m
Membranes
7 years 2.9 m 4.4 m
MDW0158RP0080F01
183
F01
11.3.1
Maintenance
The maintenance costs are assessed as a percentage of the CAPEX. This percentage and the annual maintenance expenses during each phase are indicated in the table below. Due to the highly corrosive environment created by seawater and brine, the maintenance percentage allocated for mechanical and electrical investments is higher than that used for fresh water treatment plants.
Table 11.9
Capital class Type
M&E
Pumping Stations PreTreatment RO
CAPEX
1% 1,158 k 1,158 k
1% 156 k 234 k
1% 219 k 329 k
1% 489 k 733 k
3% 352 k 539 k
3% 886 k 1,328 k
3% 1,274 k 1,912 k
Phase 1 Phase 2
11.3.2 Energy
11.3.2.1 Installed Power Capacity Demand Charge
The installed capacity demand charges for each phase are summed up in the following table
Charging Rate
Total
223 k/annum
MDW0158RP0080F01
184
F01
/ year
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040
Year
11.3.3
11.3.3.1 Chemicals
Again, the estimated chemicals annual cost is reflecting the water demand projections, as illustrated in the following graph-:
5,000,000
4,000,000
/ year
3,000,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
0 2015
2020
2025
2030
2035
2040
Year
MDW0158RP0080F01
185
F01
11.3.3.2 Staff
The staff costs for each phase are summarized in the following table:
Rate
Total
360 k/annum
11.3.3.3 Overheads
Overheads and contingencies have been accounted for as 5% of the total OPEX
70,000,000
60,000,000
57,332,095
50,000,000
/ year
40,000,000
30,000,000
28,310,891
20,000,000
14,232,870
10,000,000
0 2010
2015
2020
2025 Year
2030
2035
2040
2045
MDW0158RP0080F01
186
F01
Table 11.12 Whole Life Costs of the Scheme at 3%, 5% and 7% Discount Rates
Discount rate NPV CAPEX (k) Investment Renewals One off items NPV RESIDUAL VALUE (k) NPV OPEX (k) Maintenance Energy Capacity charge Energy Consumption Chemicals Sludge disposal Personnel Overheads Volume delivered (Ml) NPV Capex + Opex (k) NPV Capex + Opex - Residual Value (k) 3% 706,560 394,127 228,253 84,180 192,933 469,496 86,029 4,544 300,553 41,460 7,353 7,200 22,357 1,311,080 1,176,057 983,124 5% 611,287 362,067 170,755 78,465 110,458 336,024 64,529 3,386 212,219 29,316 5,199 5,374 16,001 1,311,080 947,312 836,854 7% 539,281 334,946 130,736 73,600 63,908 246,329 49,535 2,582 153,394 21,220 3,763 4,105 11,730 1,311,080 785,610 721,702
NPV Capex + Opex - Residual Value / Volume (/m3) NPV Capex - Residual Value / Volume (/m3) NPV Opex / Volume (/m3)
MDW0158RP0080F01
187
F01
12 CONCLUSIONS
The principal conclusion which has arisen from this Study is that Desalination is technically feasible as a major water supply option which has the capacity to deliver a high quality, sustainable product capable of secure operation with the necessary flexibility to meet changes in demand and water quality standards during the life of the project. Due to significant commercial growth in desalination technology reverse osmosis is now used as a viable water supply option in many water stressed parts of the world including many tourist zones in Europe. In the Irish context desalination has to be evaluated with more commonly employed water treatment processes. Although great improvements have been made in recent years in membrane performances which have in turn led to greater efficiencies and reduced energy consumption, desalination remains an intensive energy process by comparison with more traditional water supply sources and technologies. High energy consumption entails high installed power capacity demand charges. As a consequence the anticipated CO2 emissions from a plant powered by the national grid would have a considerable negative impact on the environment compared to non-desalination technologies. In addition there are risks associated with security of power supply, quality of source water and impacts to the marine environment from possible poor brine dispersion management. Economically, the Whole Life Cost of the scheme at a 5% discount rate over the assumed 25 year 3 operating period is calculated at 947M which translates as 0.64/m of water delivered over the 25 year operational lifetime.
MDW0158RP0080F01
188
F01
APPENDIX A
Appendix A
Inauguration
Capacity
Energy consumption
RO system Energy Consumption (kWh/m)
Operational parameters
Technology
Year
Capacity (m/d)
Recycling (y/n)
Membrane
High-pressure pumps
Operation
Tuas
Singapure
2005
136380
200
4.1 - 4,35
Up to 35000
< 500
58
Calder DWEER SWRO - High 45% in the first model 1100 ( 97% Boron Rejection stage, 90% in of efficiency Membrane (up to the second stage according to 95%) Calder)
Operation
Ghalilah
UAE
2005
13650
< 4.0
35% - 41%
SWRO
Operation
Tampa Bay
USA
2005
150
0.497 0.659
18000 - 32000
43 to 72,4
57%
Operation
Ashkelon
Israel
2005
320000
250
0.52
< 4.0
40750
< 40
62
Operation
Kwinana Perth 1
Australia
2006
287
0,75 - 1
2,6 for the first stage ONLY around 3.5 for ALL stages
< 30
> 58
Yes
SWRO - Film 43% - 45% first Tech Membrane stage Technology total 80% - 90% spiral-wound RO module
First pass: 2,5 MW High Pressure Pumps, ERI PX - 220 Second Pass: (96,8% efficiency) Weir variable high speed drive high pressure pumps
Final Construction
Perth II
Australia
November 2007
123300
SWRO
MDW0158RP0080F01
A1
F01
APPENDIX B
LEGEND
67 67 67 67 67 32 32 3 21 2 2 2 2 2 1
4 54 5
14 1 14 1
Project
13 13 13 13 13 13 13 13 2 2 2 12 12 1 1 1 11 11 0 0 10 0 10 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
T F E W
Issue Details
Drawn: A.A/SK Project No. File Ref. MDW0158
MDW0158Mi0133A02
Drawing No. Rev. A02
Mi0133
Notes 1. This drawing is the property of RPS Group Ltd. It is a confidential document and must not be copied, used, or its contents divulged without prior written consent. 2. All levels are referred to Ordnance Datum, Malin Head. 3. Ordnance Survey Ireland Licence No. EN 0005008 Copyright Government of Ireland.
Appendix B
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23
High Water Parameter TDS pH Conductivity Turbidity Alkalinity as HCO3 COD Ammonia as N Ammonia as NH4 Phosphorus Nitrate as N03 Hardness Faecal Coliforms Calcium Magnesium, Total Sodium Potassium Strontium Barium, Total as Ba Boron, Total Total Chlorine Sulphate Flouride Silica (Molybdate Reactive)
Units PV Value mg/l pH Units 6.5 - 9.5 s/cm at 20C 2500 s/cm at 20C NTU NAC & ATC mg/l mg/l mg/l 0.23 mg/l mg/l 0.30 mg/l mg/l mg/l 50 mg/l mg/l cfu/100ml mg/l mg/l mg/l 200mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l 1000 s/l mg/l mg/l 250 mg/l mg/l 0.8 mg/l mg/l Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
Surface 31400 8.14 60800 3.50 154 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5479.00 31 280.0 1150.0 9160.000 466.00 8.400 0.007 3.50 0.06 1512.5 0.9 <3
A Mid 28000 8.13 57700 1.35 144 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5372.00 35 271.0 1130.0 8900.000 473.00 8.200 0.007 3.40 0.05 1532.2 0.9 <3 28.70 24.40 28.50
Bottom 32700 8.13 61300 5.00 146 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5554.00 40 280.0 1170.0 9440.000 467.00 8.500 0.007 3.40 0.06 1782.7 0.09 <3
Surface 31400 8.12 60900 2.20 143 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 6016.00 52 298.0 1270.0 10300.000 563.00 9.500 0.007 3.80 0.04 1249.4 0.9 <3
B Mid 30400 8.07 60800 3.20 143 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5763.00 48 292.0 1210.0 9780.000 487.00 8.900 0.007 3.70 0.05 1583.9 0.9 <3
Bottom 30600 8.16 61000 1.48 152 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5596.00 24 282.0 1180.0 9370.000 522.00 8.600 0.007 3.50 0.04 1411.1 0.9 <3
Surface 30900 8.08 67000 1.43 144 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5802.00 5 290.0 1220.0 9780.000 492.00 9.000 0.007 3.60 0.04 1401.3 0.8 <3
C Mid 30000 8.70 61100 1.45 145 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5912.00 2 297.0 1250.0 10100.000 508.00 9.200 0.007 3.70 0.04 1627.2 0.9 <3
Bottom 37900 8.07 61100 2.30 134 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5908.00 2 297.0 1240.0 10000.000 505.00 9.200 0.007 3.70 0.04 1367.3 0.9 <3
MDW0158RP0080F01
B2
F01
Appendix B
1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Low Water Parameter TDS pH Conductivity Turbidity Alkalinity as HCO3 Alkalinity as CaCO3 COD Ammonia as N Ammonia as NH4 Phosphorus Nitrate as N03 Hardness Faecal Coliforms Calcium Magnesium, Total Sodium Potassium Strontium Barium, Total as Ba Boron, Total Total Chlorine Sulphate Flouride Silica (Molybdate Reactive)
Units PV Value mg/l pH Units 6.5 - 9.5 s/cm at 20C 2500 s/cm at 20C NTU NAC & ATC mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l 0.23 mg/l mg/l 0.30 mg/l mg/l mg/l 50 mg/l mg/l cfu/100ml mg/l mg/l mg/l 200mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l 1000 s/l mg/l mg/l 250 mg/l mg/l 0.8 mg/l mg/l Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3
SURFACE 39000 8.08 61200 1.30 152 125 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5565 56 292.0 1160.0 <5 457.00 8.400 0.008 3.70 0.07 1288.7 0.7 <3
A MID 35000 8.07 61400 1.22 146 120 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5675.00 61 287.0 1190.0 9610.000 474.00 8.700 0.008 3.60 0.09 1541.2 0.9 <3 31.30 70.00 30.60
BOTTOM 29400 8.18 61500 6.40 146 120 <5 0.12 0.15 <0.1 <8.77 5811.00 79 300.0 1220.0 9.000 503.00 9.000 0.008 3.80 0.08 1352.6 0.9 <3
SURFACE 34200 8.10 61000 4.50 137 112 <5 0.1 0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5908.00 23 294.0 1250.0 9760.000 519.00 9.300 0.008 3.80 0.07 1775.3 0.9 <3
B MID 35000 8.11 61000 1.01 145 119 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5551.00 34 281.0 1170.0 9120.000 478.00 8.600 0.007 3.60 0.09 1371.3 0.8 <3
BOTTOM 31100 7.93 61300 6.50 150 123 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5455.00 29 272.0 1150.0 9020.000 475.00 8.600 0.007 3.50 0.09 1208.0 0.9 <3
SURFACE 37200 8.07 60900 6.3 146 120 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5562.00 52 274.0 1180.0 9230.000 489.00 8.800 3.600 3.60 0.08 1481.6 0.9 <3
C MID 33000 8.09 60900 6.00 148 121 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5268.00 62 265.0 1110.0 8560.000 451.00 8.200 0.007 3.40 0.08 1597.0 0.8 <3
BOTTOM 30100 8.01 60800 5.60 156 128 <5 <0.1 <0.13 <0.1 <8.77 5473.00 50 270.0 1160.0 9200.000 486.00 8.800 0.007 3.50 0.07 1105.4 0.8 <3
MDW0158RP0080F01
B3
F01
Appendix B
A Conductivity Salinity 60400 138.9 60600 139.3 61000 140.3 60800 139.8 60900 140 61000 140.3
C Conductivity 61100 61000 61100 61200 61100 61200 61300 61000 61000 62100 61200 61200
Salinity 140.5 140.3 140.5 140.7 140.5 140.7 140.9 140.3 140.3 142.8 140.7 140.7
C Conductivity 61100 61000 60900 60800 61200 60900 61000 60600 61200
Salinity 140.5 140.3 140.0 139.8 140.7 140.0 140.0 139.3 140.7
MDW0158RP0080F01
B4
F01
Appendix B
Site A (200m) B (500m) C (1km) ID HWA-S1 HWA-S2 HWA-S3 HWA-S4 HWA-S5 HWA-S6
HWB -S1 HWB -S2 HWB -S3 HWB -S4 HWB -S5 HWB -S6 HWB -S7 HWB -S8 HWC -S1 HWC -S2 HWC -S3 HWC -S4 HWC -S5 HWC -S6 HWC -S7 HWC -S8 HWC -S9 HWC -S10 HWC -S11 HWC -S12
HW max depth HW Mid depth LW Max depth 6.8 3.4 (3.5) 3.5-3.6 9 4.5 5.8 13 6 9.8 Tide HW HW HW HW HW HW
HW HW HW HW HW HW HW HW HW HW HW HW HW HW HW HW HW HW HW HW
LW Mid Depth 1.8 (2) Bracketed figure indicates depth 2.9 (3) that mid water sample was taken at 4.9 (5) Depth 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Site A A A A A A
B B B B B B B B C C C C C C C C C C C C
Temp F 58 58 58 58 58 58
59 59 59 58 58 58 58 58 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60
Tide LW LW LW
LW LW LW LW LW LW LW LW LW LW LW LW LW LW
Site A A A
B B B B B C C C C C C C C C
Depth (m) 1 2 3
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Temp F 59 59 58
59 59 58 58 58 59 58 58 58 58 58 58 58 58
Temp C 15 15 14.5
15 15 14.5 14.5 14.5 15 14.5 14.5 14.5 14.5 14.5 14.5 14.5 14.5
MDW0158RP0080F01
B5
F01
Appendix B
1 2 3 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 31 32 33 34 35 36 37
Low Water Parameter TDS pH Conductivity Turbidity Alkalinity as HCO3 Alkalinity as CaCO3 COD Ammonia as NH3 Ammonia as NH4 Phosphorus Nitrate as N03 Hardness Faecal Coliforms Calcium Magnesium, Total Sodium Potassium Strontium Barium, Total as Ba Boron, Total Total Chlorine Sulphate Flouride Silica (Molybdate Reactive) Chloride TSS Kjeldahl Nitrogen Total Nitrogen as N Total Organic Carbon Iron, Total Chlorophyll A Ortho-phosphate Salinity Pheophytine A
Units mg/l pH Units s/cm at 20C NTU mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l cfu/100ml mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l g/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l g/l mg/l mg/l g/l
PV Value 6.5 - 9.5 2500 s/cm at 20C NAC & ATC 0.23 mg/l 0.30 mg/l 50 mg/l 200mg/l 1000 s/l 250 mg/l 0.8 mg/l <0.5 1.08
Site C (1000m) MID 39000 8.16 55700 1.60 150 124 0.69 0.74 <0.1 9.17 6049.00 320.0 1270.0 11100.000 476.00 6.500 <0.1 4.20 2480.9 0.7 <0.3 15034.00 161.00 <5 <7 0.70 <0.05 7.57
35200.00 17.70 17.70 17.10 16.80 16.90
MDW0158RP0080F01
B6
F01
6 5
8
7
Project
Figure
XX.X
Issue Details
Title
Drawn: Checked:
E. Laurinaviciute C. Cole
G. Geoghegan
Project No.
File Ref.
MDW0158
Approved:
MDW0158Mi0136A01
Drawing No.
Scale: Date:
1:150,000 @ A3 20/08/2008
Rev. A01
Mi0136
APPENDIX D
Appendix D
MDW0158RP0080F01
D1
F01
Appendix D
1. 2.
INTRODUCTION.......................................................................................................................................3 ENERGY CONSUMPTION OF RO PLANTS: MAIN FACTORS..............................................................4 2.1. REPARTITION OF THE ENERGY CONSUMPTION FOR THE WHOLE PLANT.............................................................4 2.2. RO SYSTEM: FACTORS INFUENCING THE ENERGY CONSUMPTION .................................................................5 2.3. LOCAL CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................................................6 2.3.1. Impact of salinity ............................................................................................................................. 6 2.3.2. Temperature ................................................................................................................................... 7 2.4. RO CONFIGURATION/DESIGN........................................................................................................................7 2.4.1. Conversion rate (Y)......................................................................................................................... 8 2.4.2. required feed pressure and membrane permeability ...................................................................... 8 2.4.3. conlcusion..................................................................................................................................... 10 2.5. PUMPING UNITS .........................................................................................................................................11 2.5.1. high pressure pumps (hp pumps) ................................................................................................. 11 2.5.2. Energy recovery device ................................................................................................................ 11
ASHKELON PLANT ......................................................................................................................................16 PERTH PLANT ............................................................................................................................................17 CONCLUSION.............................................................................................................................................18 APPLICATION TO THE DUBLIN PROJECT .........................................................................................19 CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................................22
MDW0158RP0080F01
D2
F01
Appendix D
1.
INTRODUCTION
Energy costs impact for about 50% of overall operational costs of a desalination plant using reverse osmosis technology. Assessment and optimization of power consumption is then a key issue in the feasibility and the financial and environmental evaluation of a new project. This document aims at assessing the future electrical consumption of a possible desalination plant in the area of Dublin, taking into account the local conditions, the state of the art and the expected technical development. In each particular case, assessment of energy consumption of a RO plant should be as exhaustive as possible and take into account several parameters: sea water characteristics, values taken for RO sizing, electromechanical components efficiency (high pressure pumps and energy recovery device) to end up in a realistic result. Values published are often partial results corresponding only to a specific step (first pass) of the RO system and must be cautiously analysed and should not be taken as representative of the whole electrical consumption in the plant. Then, it is important to firstly list any parameters playing a part in the energy consumption of a RO plant in order to understand how it changes and how it can be assessed in the case of Dublin. These parameters will be listed in the first part of this document. Three case studies will be then presented before the last chapter addresses the question of a possible desalination plant in the area of Dublin.
MDW0158RP0080F01
D3
F01
Appendix D
2.
The energy consumption of a desalination plant using Reverse Osmosis (RO) is the sum of the energy used in all segments of the plant with this following typical distribution: Sea water pumping Pre and post treatment unit + auxiliary equipment RO unit : feed pumping unit Treated water pumping 6-10 % 1-2 % 76-86 % 7-12%
pre/post treatment
RO system
The RO system accounts for the largest part of electrical consumption in a RO plant. Pre and post treatment and auxiliary equipments (chemicals plant) play a minor part in the energy consumption. The next section focuses on the parameters influencing the electrical consumption of the RO system in order to understand where this consumption comes from and how it can be assessed and optimised.
MDW0158RP0080F01
D4
F01
Appendix D
AS a result of the above, the electrical consumption depends on: Local condition : raw water quality - temperature and salinity. Feed pressure RO system design : head loss through RO units, number of passes, type of membrane (membrane permeability), configuration of the system. Feed pressure, conversion rate Characteristic of the pumping units: efficiency of high pressure pumps, efficiency of energy recovery device. Energy needed to reach the feed pressure
MDW0158RP0080F01
D5
F01
Appendix D
In the above figure, the application of an external pressure to the salt solution side (High TDS ) which is equal to the osmotic pressure will cause the equilibrium. This pressure is a solution property independent on the membrane. Additional pressure (to reach the feed pressure) will raise the chemical potential of the water in the salt solution and cause a solvent flow to the pure water side. As shown on next figure, osmotic and feed pressures increase with salinity.
1
Figure 2 : Impact of sea water salinity on osmotic pressure and feed pressure (on brackish water) source: The guidebook of membrane desalination technologyBalaban collection
TDS is the total dissolved solids, most of then being dissolved salts.
MDW0158RP0080F01
D6
F01
Appendix D
Salinity and temperature impact the required feed pressure. Most of the energy required for the RO system is used to pump water up to this pressure.
2.3.2.
TEMPERATURE
Water temperature influences the osmotic pressure and the required feed pressure. An increase of water temperature leads to a decrease of required feed pressure (see Figure 3). It actually increases the difference between the osmotic pressure and the required feed pressure.
Figure 3 : Impact of sea water temperature on required feed pressure source: The guidebook of membrane desalination technology-Balaban collection Temperature and salinity are the two main sea water characteristics which impact the power consumption. Then it is important to know the range of temperature and salinity of the sea water to be processed in order to estimate correctly the electrical consumption of the plant. Most of the time, these values are given in the literature for the existing plants.
2.4. RO CONFIGURATION/DESIGN
When designing RO systems, several parameters shall be combined to reach the best balance between the performance of the system and its costs (CAPEX, OPEX): Conversion rate of one membrane module for each pass Feed pressure Number of passes
MDW0158RP0080F01
D7
F01
Appendix D
2.4.1.
The conversion rate of a membrane is the part of the sea water entering a membrane module which flow through the membrane. This is the permeate flow. The overall conversion rate of the RO system depends on the configuration and results from an economic optimization. The reverse osmosis step can be composed of several passes, 2 or more can be necessary when: The sea water salinity is too high to be reduced with 1 pass in the local conditions The sea water contains Boron exceeding the standard (1mg/L in Europe). The conversion rate of the second pass is usually between 70% and 90 %, whereas the first one is between 35 % and 50 %. A 2 pass configuration will modify the conversion rate of the RO system.
2.4.2.
Whereas the osmotic pressure depends only on the seawater characteristics, the required feed pressure depends on many parameters, including: The conversion rate of the RO system (Figure 4) The membrane permeability (Figure 5), which characterizes the membrane ability to transmit water and depends on temperature, salinity and fouling of the membrane.
Figure 4 : Relation between conversion rate in RO unit and required feed pressure Source: The guidebook of membrane desalination technology-Balaban collection
MDW0158RP0080F01
D8
F01
Appendix D
The required feed pressure increases with the conversion rate and decreases with the membrane permeability. The type of membrane chosen for a RO unit and the current research on membrane are important factors which will influence the electrical consumption, as well as the conversion rate chosen during RO sizing.
75
70
possible future development
65
60
55
Figure 5 : Relation between membrane permeability and required feed pressure For each particular case, these parameters are set at values resulting from an optimization between CAPEX and OPEX which is performed for each case. High feed pressure leads to higher energy consumption (OPEX) but smaller membrane area (CAPEX). Low feed pressure leads to low energy consumption (OPEX) but high membrane area (CAPEX). Another optimization must be found between the permeability and the salt rejection of the membrane (part of salts which are retained by the membrane). The higher the permeability is, the lower the feed pressure ( OPEX). But in the same time, membrane salt rejection is often lower (see Table 1) and the design needed to reach the same final permeate salinity can lead to higher CAPEX.
MDW0158RP0080F01
D9
F01
Appendix D
PermeabilityL/m2/h/bar Acetate cellulose membrane High salt rejection Low salt rejection Composite membrane High salt rejection Low salt rejection 1,2 1,4 0,5 1
2.4.3.
CONLCUSION
The type of membrane chosen for a RO unit and the current researches on membrane are important factors which will influence the electrical consumption, as well as the conversion rate chosen during RO sizing. However these parameters are not often published and are hold only by the membrane suppliers or plant operators. On the other hand, to decrease the costs, following parameters shall be optimized: membrane permeability (increase is needed) couple feed required pressure / conversion rate couple permeability / permeate water quality
During the last years, membranes permeability has increased, but the membranes having such permeability have lowest salt rejection ( decline of permeate quality). In the next years, new membrane may appear with higher permeability, perhaps also with a good salt rejection. Anyway, decreasing electrical cost might be at the expense of treated water quality.
MDW0158RP0080F01
D10
F01
Appendix D
Feed pump used in commercial RO systems are either centrifugal or positive displacement type. In large capacity RO systems, centrifugal type pumps are used almost exclusively. The hydraulic efficiency of high pressure pumps used in large plants are then around 84%-88% and do not exceed 88,5 % (high pressure pump of SULZER)
Output capacity
maintenance
High
output
capacity:
correct
practically unlimited (up to 2500 m3/h) used in large plants Positive displacement type 95 % Limited output capacity More frequent than
Pumps and motors have reach efficiencies which cannot significantly increase now. The final Power consumption will also depend on the efficiency of the drive motor (9496%)
2.5.2.
There are several pressure recovery device types being used currently in RO applications: Reverse running pump (not implemented any more) Pelton wheel Turbocharger Pressure exchanger (isobaric device)
MDW0158RP0080F01
D11
F01
Appendix D
Output capacity
principle
10 to 900 m3/h
Hydraulic power of the brine is used to drive the HP pump (common shaft with electric motor and HP pump)
Turbocharger
Up to 60%
Hydraulic power of the brine is used to drive a second pump (downstream HP pump)
95-97%
100 m3/h
to
250
Hydraulic pressure of the brine is used to pressurize (1-Y)Q and YQ is pressurized by the HP pump decrease HP pumps capacity
2
The energy recovery devices which are gaining increased acceptance recently in RO sea water system are pressures exchanger (also called isobaric devices) of various configurations. The most famous types are DWEER (Calder Corporation, see Figure 6) and PX (Energy Recovery Device Inc.). As an example, DWEER are used in the plant of Ashkelon and PX in the plant of Perth.
Y is the conversion rate of the RO system in % and Q is the seawater feeding flow / sea water pumped flow in m3/h
MDW0158RP0080F01
D12
F01
Appendix D
Great advances have been made on High pressure and energy recovery devices for the last years. But now, the efficiencies of theses components are close to the maximum limit and are unlikely to evolve much. High efficiency devices are now available and should be used in large plants where energy recovery make really sense, as concentrate flow is very high (much hydraulic energy available on the plant).
MDW0158RP0080F01
D13
F01
Appendix D
3.
CASE STUDY
Different configurations of pumping units have been considered and compared: First configuration (Figure 7): Pump and power recovery Turbine. Hydraulic power of the brine is used to drive the HP pump (common shaft with electric motor and HP pump).
Figure 7 : First configuration Second configuration (Figure 8): High efficiency pump+ Pelton Wheel. The hydraulic power of the brine is used to drive a second pump added downstream the HP pump.
MDW0158RP0080F01
D14
F01
Appendix D
Third configuration (Figure 9): High efficiency pump + work exchanger. Hydraulic pressure of the brine is used to pressurize (1-Y)Q and YQ is pressurized by the HP pump. This configuration allows to decrease HP pumps capacity.
3
The energy consumptions (kWh per m of produced water) of these 3 configurations are presented in the following table. These values result from theoretical calculations which are comparable to electrical consumption of the first pass ONLY (in RO system) in existing plants. These data clearly show the influence of the pumping unit on the total electric consumption in a one-pass RO plant.
Y is the conversion rate of the RO system in % and Q is the seawater feeding flow / sea water pumped flow in m3/h
MDW0158RP0080F01
D15
F01
Appendix D
nd
rd
recovery Turbine Pump efficiency % Electric motor efficiency Energy recovery device efficiency Feed pressure Pre and post treatment + auxiliary equipment Sea water pumping HP pumps Power recovery RO system Treated water pumping Total 0,30 4,34 -1,37 2,97 (= 4,34-1,37) 0,36 3,68 64 0,05 82 94 82
64 0,05
64 0,05
Table 3 : Impact of different pumping units configuration on electrical energy of a RO plant (in kWh)
In this case study, 0,5 kWh can be saved with the high efficiency pumping unit: high pressure pumps : 88,5% efficiency energy recovery devices : 96 %
MDW0158RP0080F01
D16
F01
Appendix D
Salinity g/L Water temperature Overall conversion rate of the RO system Number of passes membrane pumps Energy device recovery
41 15-30 C 40%
DWEER (96%)
The corresponding electrical consumption of each step of the plant is as follows: Sea water pumping RO system HP pumps Power recovery Electrical consumption in kWh per m of produced water The total electrical cost of the plant includes raw water and treated water pumping costs and is often less than 4 kWh per m of produced water (it can be as low as 3,9 kWh)
3 3
Total
0,45
6,8
-3,6
0,33
3,2 (=6,8-3,6)
MDW0158RP0080F01
D17
F01
Appendix D
Conversion rate of the RO system Number of passes membrane pumps Energy device recovery
41%
The salinity is lower than in the sea water processed by Ashkelon. The overall conversion rate can be higher than the one for Ashkelon. The electrical cost in Perth is then a bit lower than in Ashkelon. It is mostly due to better local condition in Perth. The corresponding electrical consumption of each step of the plant are the following one: Sea water pumping RO system HP pumps Power recovery Electrical consumption in kWh 3,33 =(5,25-2) The total electrical cost of the plant includes raw water and treated water pumping costs and is 3,8 kWh per m3 of produced water. 0,33 5,25 -2 0,32 3,8 Treated water pumping Total
3.4. CONCLUSION
In the 2 last case studies, the electrical consumptions are close: For the RO system : 3,2 3,3 kWh For the whole plant : 3,9-4 kWh Both plants use high efficiency pumps and energy recovery devices of the same type. They use the best technology available on the market today. Exact membrane characteristics are unpublished data (like permeability).
MDW0158RP0080F01
D18
F01
Appendix D
4.
The salinity is around 40 g/L according to the first sea water analysis (performed in August 2007), which is close to the salinity of water processed in Perth and Ashkelon. On the other hand, the temperature is lower than in Australia or Israel. The first value measured in Irish sea is 15C, but it might reach 10 C or less during the winter.
Design hypothesis: membrane Number of passes pumps Energy device recovery SWRO 2 for boron removal High efficiency : 88,5% Work exchanger : 96%
An estimation of electrical costs can be made, using the following hypothesis: Minimum temperature during the year : 10C RO Conversion rate of 1rst pass: 50% RO Conversion rate of 1rst pass: 90%: with the current membrane technologies, 2 pass will be needed for boron removal. Membrane permeability between 1,2 and 1,5 L/m2/h
MDW0158RP0080F01
D19
F01
Appendix D
1 (ashkelon membrane)
Estimated Required feed pressure Estimated electrical consumption For a ONE-pass configuration
68 10C
2,93 - RO system 3,7 - Whole plant Estimated electrical consumption For a TWO-pass configuration - RO system - Whole plant 3,3 4,07 10C
2,63 3,4
10C
3 3,77
The whole electrical consumption of a desalination plant located in the area of Dublin can be estimated at 3,77 kWh per cubic meter of produced water, with the technologies available on the market for now (membrane and pumping units). In spite of low temperature in Irish sea, the electrical consumption is similar to those of Ashkelon and Perth, mostly thanks to new membranes recently made available (with higher permeability and good salt rejection) Further membrane development could enable a one pass RO system (with high boron rejection) and then bring down this cost to 3,4 kWh/m or less (Figure 10).
3
MDW0158RP0080F01
D20
F01
Appendix D
Perth and 4 Ashkelon 3,5 3 couts en kWh 2,5 2 1,5 1 0,8 1 1,2 1,4 1,6 1,8 2 permabilit membranaire en LMH/bar 1 pass - 5C 1 pass -10C 2 passes - 5C 2 passes - 10C ashkelon membrane today
Figure 10 : Evolution of electrical costs depending on the minimum water temperature, the number of RO passes and the membrane permeability (including possible development)
However, in order to asses a realistic value (representative of what the plant would really be) the calculation should be performed again after the final design of the plant. The feed pressure and the overall conversion rate will depend on the RO system design, as explained in the section 2.4.
MDW0158RP0080F01
D21
F01
Appendix D
5.
CONCLUSION
Various parameters are involved in the electrical consumption of a RO plant. Hence, any assessment of power consumption of a RO plant should be performed independently, taking into account the local conditions, the RO sizing of the plant and the electromechanical components efficiency. Most of the time, values published are not representative of the whole electrical consumption of the plant, and are partial results corresponding only to the first pass of the RO system. It is then crucial to list any parameters impacting the power consumption in order to assess a realistic value for the existing largest plants (Ashkelon and Perth) and a plant in the area of Dublin. Efficiency of electromechanical equipment has been greatly improved in the past years mainly at the energy recovery stage.. This helped saving electricity for the desalination plants built during the last three years. These equipments efficiency are close to a maximum limit (88,5% for HP pumps and 96% for energy recovery devices) and are unlikely to improve during the next years. Concerning the RO design, it mostly depends on the local conditions, the targeted treated water quality and the available membrane on the market to reach this water quality. The electrical consumption of RO system is lower when high membrane permeability is used. Much advance has been made concerning the membrane characteristics. The permeability has increased and may still increase during the next years. But for now this evolution has been performed at the expense of the membrane salt rejection (then of the permeate quality). As a result of the above, the overall electrical consumption of a desalination plant located in the area of Dublin can be estimated at 3.77 kWh per cubic meter of produced water, with the technologies available on the market for now (membrane and pumping units). In spite of low temperature in Irish sea, the electrical consumption is similar to those of Ashkelon and Perth, mostly thanks to new membranes recently made available (with higher permeability and good salt rejection) Further membrane development could enable a one pass RO system (with high boron rejection) and then bring this cost down to around 3.4 kWh/m or less.
3
MDW0158RP0080F01
D22
F01
Appendix D
Provider Hydranautics
Provider CALDER
2002
136000
0,71
4.0
15000-35000
Toray
2006
200000
Toray
2003
170000
0.70-0.90
4,5
38500
22 to 35 C
Hydranautics
CALDER
1998
128000
43764
Toyobo work exchanger DWEER up to 97% of efficiency Work exchanger ERI PX-220 95% efficiency Pelton Turbine 45% efficiency
Tuas - Singapure
2005
136380
4.1 - 4,35
29000 35000
Toray
CALDER
Ghalilah - UAE
2005
13650
< 4.0
SWRO SWC4 (obs: operation problemes clogging) SWRO - Three center design
ERI
2005
0.497 - 0.67
18000 32000
Hydranautics
CALDER
Ashkelon - Israel
2005
320000
0,52
< 4.0
40750
1994
113600
43300
Toyobo
2006
Hydranautics SWRO - Film Tech Membrane Dow Chemical ERI PX - 220 Technology Company (96,8% efficiency) spiral-wound RO module
2006
0,75 - 1
35000 37000
16 to 24 C
ERI
MDW0158RP0080F01
D23
F01
APPENDIX E
Appendix E
Last Updated
Treatment/Route
01/07/2008
H-Desalination
Energy Source Electricity(grid) Gas Wind Wood Chips Pellets Biodiesel Oil
Cost per unit 0.10 0.03 0.15 0.02 0.12 0.35 0.06
100
Annual Inflation Rate (%) Carbon Intensity C02 Tonnes per kWh
28.70
www.pointcarbon.com Total Energy from Primary Fuel (kWh) 72,434,478 72,434,478 72,434,478 72,434,478 72,434,478 84,067,069 101,549,130 119,076,979 135,190,141 152,824,545 170,524,350 186,812,366 204,656,316 221,087,788 239,100,586 255,698,157 272,383,171 289,160,808 306,036,246 323,014,667 340,101,248 357,301,169 374,619,611 392,061,751 409,632,769 5,297,071,255
Date: 01/07/2008
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 Totals
Water Demand 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 58.00 70.00 82.00 93.00 105.00 117.00 128.00 140.00 151.00 163.00 174.00 185.00 196.00 207.00 218.00 229.00 240.00 251.00 262.00 273.00 3592.00
Energy Demand (kWh) 72,434,478 72,434,478 72,434,478 72,434,478 72,434,478 84,067,069 101,549,130 119,076,979 135,190,141 152,824,545 170,524,350 186,812,366 204,656,316 221,087,788 239,100,586 255,698,157 272,383,171 289,160,808 306,036,246 323,014,667 340,101,248 357,301,169 374,619,611 392,061,751 409,632,769 5,297,071,255
Energy Cost 7,243,448 7,243,448 7,243,448 7,243,448 7,243,448 8,406,707 10,154,913 11,907,698 13,519,014 15,282,455 17,052,435 18,681,237 20,465,632 22,108,779 23,910,059 25,569,816 27,238,317 28,916,081 30,603,625 32,301,467 34,010,125 35,730,117 37,461,961 39,206,175 40,963,277 529,707,125
Carbon Intensity 56209.15 56209.15 56209.15 56209.15 56209.15 65236.05 78802.12 92403.74 104907.55 118591.85 132326.90 144966.40 158813.30 171564.12 185542.05 198421.77 211369.34 224388.79 237484.13 250659.38 263918.57 277265.71 290704.82 304239.92 317875.03 4110527.29
Total Cost
Carbon Cost 1,613,203 1,613,203 1,613,203 1,613,203 1,613,203 1,872,274 2,261,621 2,651,987 3,010,847 3,403,586 3,797,782 4,160,536 4,557,942 4,923,890 5,325,057 5,694,705 6,066,300 6,439,958 6,815,794 7,193,924 7,574,463 7,957,526 8,343,228 8,731,686 9,123,013 117,972,133
647,679,259
MDW0158RP0080F01
E1
F01
Appendix E
Last Updated
Treatment/Route
01/07/2008
H-Desalination
Energy Source Electricity(grid) Gas Wind Wood Chips Pellets Biodiesel Oil
Cost per unit 0.10 0.03 0.15 0.02 0.12 0.35 0.06
100
Annual Inflation Rate (%) Carbon Intensity C02 Tonnes per kWh
40.00
www.pointcarbon.com Total Energy from Primary Fuel (kWh) 124,887,031 124,887,031 124,887,031 124,887,031 124,887,031 144,943,222 175,084,707 205,305,137 233,086,450 263,490,595 294,007,499 322,090,286 352,855,717 381,185,841 412,242,389 440,858,891 469,626,157 498,553,116 527,648,701 556,921,839 586,381,462 616,036,499 645,895,880 675,968,536 706,263,396 9,132,881,474
Date: 01/01/2040
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 Totals
Water Demand 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 58.00 70.00 82.00 93.00 105.00 117.00 128.00 140.00 151.00 163.00 174.00 185.00 196.00 207.00 218.00 229.00 240.00 251.00 262.00 273.00 3592.00
Energy Demand (kWh) 72,434,478 72,434,478 72,434,478 72,434,478 72,434,478 84,067,069 101,549,130 119,076,979 135,190,141 152,824,545 170,524,350 186,812,366 204,656,316 221,087,788 239,100,586 255,698,157 272,383,171 289,160,808 306,036,246 323,014,667 340,101,248 357,301,169 374,619,611 392,061,751 409,632,769 5,297,071,255
Energy Cost 3,496,837 3,636,710 3,776,584 3,916,457 4,056,331 4,870,092 6,078,941 7,358,136 8,614,875 10,033,722 11,525,094 12,986,680 14,622,341 16,223,269 18,006,748 19,750,478 21,565,233 23,451,939 25,411,561 27,445,108 29,553,626 31,738,200 33,999,959 36,340,068 38,759,735 417,218,726
Carbon Intensity 24727.63 24727.63 24727.63 24727.63 24727.63 28698.76 34666.77 40650.42 46151.12 52171.14 58213.48 63773.88 69865.43 75474.80 81623.99 87290.06 92985.98 98713.52 104474.44 110270.52 116103.53 121975.23 127887.38 133841.77 139840.15 1808310.53
Total Cost
Carbon Cost 989,105 1,028,669 1,068,234 1,107,798 1,147,362 1,377,540 1,719,472 2,081,301 2,436,779 2,838,110 3,259,955 3,673,375 4,136,034 4,588,868 5,093,337 5,586,564 6,099,880 6,633,548 7,187,842 7,763,045 8,359,454 8,977,377 9,617,131 10,279,048 10,963,468 118,013,297
535,232,023
MDW0158RP0080F01
E2
F01
APPENDIX F
Appendix F
Capital cost Pipelines Intakes Outfalls Contingency (surveys) Transmission pipelines Transmission Crossings Roads Railways Rivers Canals Water Treatment Plant
Raw PS
Reverse Osmosis
Clear PS
Water Storage Tanks Sub-Total Design&Supervision Land Purchase Wayleaves&legal Preliminaries and Overheads Total (k)
Phase 1 Phase 2 Upgrading Cost Capacity 200 Abstract. 476.4 Capacity 300 Abstract. 714.6 Capacity 100 Abstract. 238.2 Cost Diameter Length unit cost Cost Diameter Length Unit cost Diameter Length Unit cost Cost (k) (mm) (km) (k/m) (mm) (km) (k/m) (k) (mm) (km) (k/m) (k) 1800 6 7.2 43200 1800 6 7.2 43200 1800 0 7.2 0 1400 4 5.2 20800 1400 4 5.2 20800 1400 0 5.2 0 15% 9600 15% 9600 15% 0 1100 48.68 1.1 51796 1100 48.68 1.1 51796 1100 0 1.1 0 Unit cost Cost Unit cost Cost Unit cost Cost Type no Type no Type no (k/cros.) (k) (k/cros.) (k) (k/cros.) (k) National 2 275 550 National 2 275 550 National 0 275 0 Regional 8 50 400 Regional 8 50 400 Regional 0 50 0 Secondary 16 35 560 Secondary 16 35 560 Secondary 0 35 0 1 275 275 1 275 275 0 275 0 Major 2 275 550 Major 2 275 550 Major 0 275 0 Medium 7 200 1400 Medium 7 200 1400 Medium 0 200 0 Minor 12 75 900 Minor 12 75 900 Minor 0 75 0 0 200 0 0 200 0 200 0 Power Capacity Cost Power Capacity Cost Power Capacity Cost Type Type Type (k/MW) (k/Mld) (k) (k/MW) (k/Mld) (k) (k/MW) (k/Mld) (k) Power 3,700 kW Power 6,100 kW Power 2,400 kW M&E 120 16 8067 M&E 120 16 12166 M&E 120 16 4099 Civil 15 7146 Civil 15 10720 Civil 15 3573 ESB 500 1850 ESB 500 3050 ESB 500 1200 Power 42,100 kW Power 63,100 kW Power 21,000 kW M&E 360 72000 M&E 360 108000 M&E 360 36000 Civil 354 70800 Civil 354 106200 Civil 354 35400 Memb 103 20600 Memb 103 30900 Memb 103 10300 ESB 500 21050 ESB 500 31550 ESB 500 10500 Power 3,800 kW Power 7,400 kW Power 3,600 kW M&E 120 16 3656 M&E 120 16 5688 M&E 120 16 2032 Civil 15 3000 Civil 15 4500 Civil 15 1500 ESB 500 1900 ESB 500 3700 ESB 500 1800 Volume Unit cost Volume Unit cost Volume Unit cost (Ml) (k/Ml) (Ml) (k/Ml) (Ml) (k/Ml) 18.12 300 5436 27.18 300 8154 9.06 300 2718 345536 454658 109123 5% of total 17277 5% of total 22733 5% of total 5456 100 k/ha 15 1500 100 k/ha 15 1500 100 k/ha 0 0 100 k/km 24.34 2434 100 k/km 24.34 2434 100 k/km 0.0 0 15% of total 51830 15% of total 68199 15% of total 16368 418577 549524 130947
MDW0158Rp0080F01
F1
F01
Appendix F
coef VOLUME Average annual flow Dublin Average annual flow Local Instantaneous average raw water flow Instantaneous average clear water flow
2.382
Unit Price
2013
2014
2015
TOTAL
CAPEX Pipelines Intake and Sump Pipe ND 1800 Pipe ND 1400 Transmission Pipe ND 1100 TOTAL Total Cost Crossings Contingency for Marine Site Results
ml
115,796 4,635
15%
Pumping Stations & RO Raw Water Pumping Station M&E Civil ESB RO M&E Civil Memb ESB Clear Water Pumpin Station M&E Civil ESB Total Cost Tanks M&E ? Civil Total Cost Total investment Other Costs Design&supervision Land purchase Wayleaves&legal Preliminaries&overheads Renewal Pipelines M&E Civil Membranes Total Cost TOTAL CAPEX
OPEX Network Maintenance
kW 3 10 Euros 3 10 Euros 3 10 Euros kW 3 10 Euros 3 10 Euros 3 10 Euros 3 10 Euros kW 3 10 Euros 3 10 Euros 3 10 Euros 3 10 Euros
3,700 8,067 7,146 1,850 42,100 72,000 70,800 20,600 21,050 3,800 3,656 3,000 1,900 210,069
6,100 4,099 3,573 1,200 63,100 36,000 35,400 10,300 10,500 7,400 2,032 1,500 1,800 106,405
12,166 10,720 3,050 108,000 106,200 31,550 5,688 4,500 3,700 316,474
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 7,275 1,819
0 0 0 7,275 1,819
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
5%
15%
5,456
5,456
5,456
80 15 50 7
0 67,691
0 67,691
0 283,196
1%
10 Euros
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
1,158
28,949
Pumping Stations Maintenance M&E Civil RO Maintenance M&E Civil Total Maintenance Power Capacity Cost Electrical consumption Desalination (RO process including RW pumping) Flow Electric consumption Transmission ( 2 pipes 1100 mm) Flow Head Electric consumption WTP Chemicals Sludge disposal Standing charges Staff Overheads TOTAL OPEX
3.0% 1%
10 Euros 3 10 Euros
0 0
0 0
0 0
352 156
352 156
352 156
352 156
352 156
352 156
352 156
352 156
352 156
352 156
536 234
536 234
536 234
536 234
536 234
536 234
536 234
536 234
536 234
536 234
536 234
536 234
536 234
536 234
536 234
11,551 5,064
3.0% 1%
0 0 0 4.5 0.1 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0
2,160 708 4,533 223 7,243 18,250,000 68,238,725 18,250,000 63.3 4,195,753
2,160 708 4,533 223 7,243 18,250,000 68,238,725 18,250,000 63.3 4,195,753
2,160 708 4,533 223 8,407 21,170,000 79,156,921 21,170,000 63.8 4,910,148
2,160 708 4,533 223 10,155 25,550,000 95,534,215 25,550,000 64.8 6,014,915
3.74
18,250,000 18,250,000 18,250,000 68,238,725 68,238,725 68,238,725 18,250,000 18,250,000 18,250,000 63.3 63.3 63.3 4,195,753 4,195,753 4,195,753
29,930,000 33,945,000 38,325,000 42,705,000 46,720,000 51,100,000 55,115,000 59,495,000 63,510,000 67,525,000 71,540,000 75,555,000 79,570,000 83,585,000 87,600,000 91,615,000 95,630,000 99,645,000 111,911,509 126,924,028 143,301,322 159,678,616 174,691,136 191,068,430 206,080,949 222,458,243 237,470,763 252,483,282 267,495,802 282,508,321 297,520,841 312,533,360 327,545,880 342,558,399 357,570,919 372,583,438 29,930,000 65.9 7,165,470 33,945,000 67.0 8,266,112 38,325,000 68.4 9,523,223 42,705,000 69.9 10,845,733 46,720,000 71.4 12,121,230 51,100,000 73.2 13,587,886 55,115,000 74.9 15,006,838 59,495,000 77.0 16,642,342 63,510,000 79.0 18,227,394 67,525,000 81.1 19,899,888 71,540,000 83.4 21,665,006 75,555,000 85.7 23,527,925 79,570,000 88.2 25,493,826 83,585,000 90.8 27,567,888 87,600,000 93.5 29,755,290 91,615,000 96.3 32,061,211 95,630,000 99.3 34,490,832 99,645,000 102.3 37,049,331 1,311,080,000
24.3 km 3.63
62.0
10 Euros 3 10 Euros
20.3 3.6
0 0
0 0
0 0
1,015 180
1,015 180
1,015 180
1,015 180
1,015 180
1,177 209
1,421 252
1,665 295
1,888 335
2,132 378
2,375 421
2,598 461
2,842 504
3,065 544
3,309 587
3,532 626
3,756 666
3,979 706
4,202 745
4,425 785
4,649 824
4,872 864
5,095 904
5,319 943
5,542 983
72,918 12,931
5%
10 Euros 3 10 Euros
45
0 0 0
0 0 0
0 0 0
SALES
10 Euros
1.59
28,974
28,974
28,974
28,974
28,974
33,610
40,564
47,518
53,892
60,846
67,799
74,174
81,128
87,502
94,456
100,830
107,204
113,579
119,953
126,327
132,701
139,076
145,450
151,824
158,199
NPV
5%
10 Euros
67,691
67,691
283,196
-3,042
-3,042
-3,042
-3,042
-3,042
-6,255
-11,072
-8,610
-13,016
91,305
-22,645
-27,033
-31,812
-36,185
-40,946
-45,302
-49,648
-53,985
-58,311
-62,627
-66,931
-71,223
-75,503
-79,770
-84,023
-454,658
MDW0158Rp0080F01
F2
F01
Appendix F
Discount rate NPV CAPEX (k) Investment Renewals One off items NPV RESIDUAL VALUE (k) NPV OPEX (k) Maintenance Energy Capacity charge Energy Consumption Chemicals Sludge disposal Personnel Overheads Volume delivered (Ml) NPV Capex + Opex (k) NPV Capex + Opex - Residual Value (k) NPV Capex + Opex - Residual Value / Volume (/m ) NPV Capex - Residual Value / Volume (/m3) NPV Opex / Volume (/m3)
3
3% 706,560 394,127 228,253 84,180 192,933 469,496 86,029 4,544 300,553 41,460 7,353 7,200 22,357 1,311,080 1,176,057 983,124 0.75 0.39 0.36
5% 611,287 362,067 170,755 78,465 110,458 336,024 64,529 3,386 212,219 29,316 5,199 5,374 16,001 1,311,080 947,312 836,854 0.64 0.38 0.26
7% 539,281 334,946 130,736 73,600 63,908 246,329 49,535 2,582 153,394 21,220 3,763 4,105 11,730 1,311,080 785,610 721,702 0.55 0.36 0.19
MDW0158RP0080F01
F3
F01
APPENDIX G