©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 1TRANSFORMING WATER. ENRICHING LIFE.
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
BETTER PRETREATMENT FOR
SEAWATER DESALINATION PLANTS
Presented by Vortisand® & Fortex
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 2
ALAIN SILVERWOOD - INTRODUCTION
• 35+ years experience in the water
treatment industry
• Technical Director at Vortisand® since
2012
• B.Sc. Bachelor in Science Degree
• In depth knowledge & experience in
various SWRO pretreatment
technologies
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 3
AGENDA
• A brief recap of the desalination industry
• The importance of pretreatment in SWRO applications
• Review of available technology for pretreatment
• Introduction to CMF technology
• Utilizing CMF technology at the Red Sea
- Review of the pilot study presented at the IDA Conference
by Jean Simard of Fortex
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 4
A RECAP OF THE DESAL INDUSTRY
• The future of desalination
• The water needs of today & tomorrow
• Geographic focus
• Industry challenges
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 5
DESALINATION: WHY?
About 25% of the world’s population encounters fresh water scarcity.
Source: United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Annual Report 2010
In 2030, 3.9 billon people (47% of the global population) will be
subject to water stress. To avoid this, more desalination plants will be
required
Source: OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030, OECD Publishing, 2008
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 6
DESALINATION WORLDWIDE CAPACITY
Global contracted and commissioned desalination capacity, 1965 - 2015
Source: GWI Desaldata / IDA, 2015
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 7
DESALINATION: GROWTH
Global Desalination Capacity (2015) : 90 M m3/d
RO Process : 80%
Annual Growth Rate : 8%
Capacity Growth : 5.8 M m3/d per year
RO Pretreatment Capacity Growth : 15 M m3/d per year
Pretreatment capacity is typically 2 to 3 times the desalination capacity.
80% of future desalination plants will use reverse osmosis.
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 8
REVIEW OF AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGIES
FOR PRETREATMENT
• DAF or Sedimentation
• MMF (1 or 2 stages, gravity or pressurized)
• Microfiltration, Ultrafiltration
• Vortisand® Crossflow Microsand Filter (CMF)
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 9
INTRODUCTION TO CROSS-FLOW
MICROSAND FILTRATION
• Conventional MMF Filtration vs Cross-Flow Microsand Filtration
(CMF)
• Operation of the CMF technology
• Key performance indicators of the CMF technology
– Laser Particle Analysis
– TSS
– SDI
• What is the ROI?
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 10
Valdelentisco Desalination Plant, Spain (200 000 m3/d)Dual-Media Filters (60 units x 40 m2 each x 7 m/h); Footprint : 70 m x 80 m = 5600 m2
MMF VS CMF: FOOTPRINT REDUCTION
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 11
Valdelentisco Desalination Plant, Spain (200 000 m3/d)Dual-Media Filters (60 units x 40 m2 each x 7 m/h); Footprint : 70 m x 80 m = 5600 m2
Dual-Media Filters5600 m2
MMF VS CMF: FOOTPRINT REDUCTION
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 12
Valdelentisco Desalination Plant, Spain (200 000 m3/d)Vortisand® (26 units x 16 m2 each); Footprint : 26 m x 70 m = 1800 m2
Vortisand Filters900 m2
MMF VS CMF: FOOTPRINT REDUCTION
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 13
Dead-End FiltrationCross-Flow High
Efficiency Filtration
MMF VS CMF
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 14
CMF TECHNOLOGY IN ACTION - DIAGRAM
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 15
Support Media
Microsand Media
Principles of Crossflow
Large particles stay in suspension
Prevents surface blinding
Reduces resistance through media
Small particles trapped in microsand
CMF TECHNOLOGY IN ACTION - PRINCIPLES
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 16
• Maintains larger
particles in
suspension
• Prevents blinding of
surface and
channeling
• Allows for depth
filtration of fine
particles
CMF TECHNOLOGY IN ACTION - VIDEO
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 17
KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION – CMF INLET
PSD of cooling tower (USA 2015)
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 18
KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION – CMF OUTLET
PSD of cooling tower (USA 2015)
>80%
REMOVAL
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 19
SHOW ME THE ROI
• Where does the technology fit?
• Technology benefits– Reduced fouling
– Reduced footprint
– Reduced maintenance costs
– Reduced operational costs
• Where does the technology fit?
PROTECT YOUR FACILITY, YOUR INVESTMENTS AND YOUR BOTTOM LINE
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 20
Fine Particle Filtration
1 - 10 Micron
SHOW ME THE ROI – WHERE DOES THE
TECHNOLOGY FIT
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 21
JEAN SIMARD - INTRODUCTION
• 30+ years experience in the water
treatment and membrane industry, in both
municipal and industrial applications.
• Technical Director at FORTex
• Designed & installed SWRO desalination
systems in South-East Asia.
• M.Sc., Master in Science Degree
• Process manager for large SWRO
desalination plants in UAE & France.
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 22
FORTex - INTRODUCTION
• Consulting firm
• Contribute in the area of storm water
management, potable water production,
process water conditioning and
wastewater treatment.
• The members of our team have
participated in many projects related to
water from the stages of water
characterisation and analysis, design,
construction, start-up and operation.
• Acting as third party superviser for the
Red Sea Vortisand® CMF pilot trial
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 23
RED SEA SWRO PILOT TESTING OBJECTIVES
• Crossflow Microsand Filter (CMF) vs Multi Media Filter (MMF)
• Determine CMF optimal operating conditions
• Estimate and compare operating cost related to
– Filtration run time
– Water recovery
– Cleaning frequency
– Chemical consumption
– Energy consumption
– Feed pressure
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 24
LOCATION AND WATER CHARACTERISTICS
PARAMETERS VALUE UNITS
PHYSICALPARAMETERS
Colour Colorless mg/lPtCo
Turbidity 1.0–2.5 NTU
Odour Odourless Odourless
Temperature 28-32 Deg.C
PHYSICOCHEMICALPARAMETERS:
pH 8.07
Conductivity 60370 S/cm
Totalhardnessas(CaC03) 7800 mg/l
Totaldissolvedsolids[TDS] 41655 mg/l
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 25
VORTISAND CMF PILOT INSTALLATION
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 26
MMF COMPARISON SKID
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 27
RO – 500 M3/D CONNECTED WITH THE MMF
AND 2 x 300 M3/D CONNECTED TO THE CMF
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 28
Seawater Open Intake
CartridgeFilters
Turbo
PumpSea Water Pumps
Recovery 35%
600 m3/d
41 000 mg/l
Cross-FlowMicrosand
Filters
Reject
Potable water
TreatedW.Pumps
Remineralization
R.O.Train No. 1
Treated Water Tank
Distribution
Tank
Chemical dosage 5 ppm Hydrex
BreakTank
TESTING SKID COMPARISON – TRAIN NO. 1
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 29
Seawater Open Intake
CartridgeFilters
TurboPumpSea Water
Pumps
Treated Water Tank
Recovery 35%
500 m3/d
41 000 mg/l
Multi MediaFilters
Reject
Distribution
Tank
Potable water
TreatedW.Pumps
Remineralization
R.O.Train No. 2
Chemical dosage 5 ppm Hydrex
TESTING SKID COMPARISON – TRAIN NO. 2
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 30
DESCRIPTION Unit MMF RO CMF RO
Number of Filter 2 1
Diameter m 1,50 0,90
Surface/ filter m2 1,77 1,32
Surface total m2 3,54 1,32
Flow /filter m3/h 21 53-72-80
Flow total m3/h 42 53-72-80
Velocity across filter m/h 12 40-50-60
RO # skid 1 2
RO permeate flow/skid m3/h 21 12,5
RO permeate flow total m3/h 21 25
RO feed flow/skid m3/h 59,5 71,5
TESTING SKID COMPARISON
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 31
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
Plu
gg
ing
Perc
en
tag
e
Plugging Time (min.)
Plugging Time Comparison - MMF vs CMF
CMF MMF FEED limit 75%
Delta tSlower fouling rate
for CMF filtered water
TYPICAL FOULING RATE HURGADA
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 32
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
NTU
Piloting days on site
Feed
MMF 12 m/h
CMF 50 m/h
MMF AVG = 0.93 NTU
FEED AVG = 2.51 NTU
CMF AVG = 0.07 NTU
NTU REDUCTION – MMF: 63% VS CMF 97%MMF 12 m/h vs CMF 50 m/h
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 33
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65
NTU
Piloting days on site
Feed
MMF 12 m/h
CMF 40 m/hFEED AVG = 1.41 NTU
MMF AVG = 0.45 NTU
CMF AVG = 0.11 NTU
NTU REDUCTION – MMF: 68% VS CMF 92%MMF: 12 m/h vs CMF 40 m/h
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 34
0
5
10
15
20
25
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40
SDI
Piloting days on site
Feed
MMF 12 m/h
CMF 50 m/h
SDI = 3
FEED SDI AVG = 8.8
MMF SDI AVG = 3.5
CMF SDI AVG = 2.3
SDI REDUCTION – MMF: 60% VS CMF 74%MMF 12 m/h vs CMF 50 m/h
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 35
0
5
10
15
20
25
40 45 50 55 60 65
SDI
Piloting days on site
Feed
MMF 12 m/h
CMF 40 m/h
SDI = 3
FEED SDI AVG = 14.1
MMF SDI AVG = 4.8
CMF SDI AVG = 2.4
SDI REDUCTION – MMF: 66% VS CMF 83%MMF 12 m/h vs CMF 40 m/h
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 36
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
TOC DOC O&G
3.9
1.2 1
2.1
0.6
1
1.5
0.5
0.8
mg
/L
Feed MMF CMF
TOC DOC O&G – REDUCTION AFTER FILTRATION
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 37
Filter TypeWater Recovery
(%)
Water Loss
(%)
Pressured MMF Back wash 95 - 98 2 - 5
Pressured CMF Back wash 98 2
WATER RECOVERY
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 38
Electric Power28-50 %
Capital Recovery 32-44 %
Membrane replacement 6-9 %
Chemicals 4-6 %
Maintenance and parts 5-8 %
Supervision and Labor3-5 %
Seawater Desalination Power ConsumptionTypical Range of SWRO Facility Cost Components
as a Percentage of Total.
Seagate Desalination Power ConsumptionWater Reuse Association -Desalination committeeWhite Paper – Nov 2011 Graphic provided by Dietrich Consulting Group, LLC
SEAWATER DESALINATION OPERATING COSTS
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 39
OperatingCost
Breakdow%
CrossflowMicrosandFilter
Potential-FutureStudies
ElectricPower
28-50%SlowerPluggingrate,smallerSDIandNTU
Reductionofenergyconsumption
CapitalRecovery
32-44%Higherfiltrationspeed
Smallerfootprint-CAPEXreduction
Membranereplacement
6-9%SlowerPluggingrate,smallerSDIandNTU
Reductioncleaningfrequency
Chemicals
4-6%SlowerPluggingrate,smallerSDIandNTU
Reductionofcleaningchemicals
Maintenaceandparts
5-8%SlowerPluggingrate,smallerSDIandNTU
cartridgefilter
Supervisionandlabor
3-5%Manpower
comparabletosandfilter
CMF – FUTURE STUDIES RELATED TO OPERATING COST
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 40
• Always better SDI and NTU
• 3 to 4 times faster
• Smaller footprint
• Reduce NTU by 95% vs MMF 65%
• Reduce SDI by 80 % vs MMF 64%
• Total water recovery up to 98% as the BEST Sand Filter
• We can anticipate that the CMF performance will reduce global RO
CAPEX & OPEX costs
STUDY CONCLUSION – CMF ADVANTAGES
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 41
• Reduction of RO membrane fouling
• Chemical consumption comparison
• Cartridge filter replacement frequency
• RO Energy consumption with CMF
• Organics removal as TOC, DOC with CMF pretreatment
• Other Organics like TEP, Humic substances, biopolymers, etc.
• RO Global performance with CMF pretreatment
FUTURE WORKS – LONG TERM ECONOMIC COMPARISON
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 42
CONCLUSION
• CMF performance will reduce global RO CAPEX
& OPEX costs
• Smaller footprint = smaller CAPEX
• Better water quality at all time = smaller OPEX
©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies
Confidential | Page 43
QUESTIONS
Thank you for attending this webinar. If you have any questions
concerning pretreatment or are currently working on a pretreatment
desalination project, you can email us at [email protected]
and we would be happy to help.
TRANSFORMING WATER. ENRICHING LIFE.