Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
36 (2011) 239260
December
www.deswater.com
1944-3994/1944-3986 # 2011 Desalination Publications. All rights reserved
doi: 10.5004/dwt.2011.2534
ABSTRACT
Energy consumption is a key factor which influences the freshwater production cost in reverse
osmosis (RO) process. Energy recovery and reuse options have already been very well explored
in the current desalination industry. Achieving minimum theoretical specific energy consumption
for water recovery is not feasible due to effects of concentration polarization, membrane fouling
and hydraulic resistance to permeate flow. Due to these limitations, energy recovery along with
water recovery can be a better alternative to improve energy consumption and economics of the
RO process both in small and large scale applications. This paper reviews currently available
process configurations, operating strategies, and discusses potential pathways to recover and
recycle energy and water to improve the performance of the RO process.
Keywords: Desalination; Reverse osmosis; Energy consumption; Energy recovery; Specific energy
and water recovery
1. Introduction
Freshwater supply without any energy investment
is almost impossible [1]. Even if freshwater is readily
accessible under the ground level, energy is required
to pump the freshwater from its source. Freshwater
drawn from the groundwater source requires 0.14
0.24 kWh/m3 (0.50.9 kJ/kg) for a pumping head of
100200 ft. Conventional treatment of surface waters
to potable quality requires 0.36 kWh/m3 (1.3 kJ/kg)
[1,2]. The cost of freshwater supply through conventional treatment is around $0.25/m3 [1,3]. Conventional treatment of water sources is only applicable in
areas where adequate surface and ground water
resources are available. Recently, due to excess population growth and rapid industrialization, desalination
has been sought as an alternative to fill the gap between
Corresponding author
240
241
242
Fig. 3. (a) Major components of reverse osmosis process, (b) energy consumption and (c) production costs.
243
Table 1
(a) Energy consumption in RO process without energy recovery device (ERD)
Process
point
Description
Flow
rate
(m3/h)
Time
(h/d)
Energy
consumed
(kWh/d)
% of
Total
energy
1
2
3
4
2.22
2.22
2.22
4
2
80
80
80
92
95
96
0.34
0.16
0.10
0.32
24
24
24
24
8.0
3.9
2.4
7.7
5.35
2.59
1.60
5.13
2.22
64
4.64
24
111.4
74.16
0.10
24
2.4
1.60
1
1.22
10
2
85
80
80
96
92
96
0.34
0.09
2.00
24
24
2
Total
SEC
8.2
2.2
4
150.26
6.26
5.44
1.47
2.66
kWh/d
kWh/m3
4.64
1.60
24
24
111.4
38.43
73.71
26.02
5
6
7
8
9
Seawater intake
Pretreatment supply
Pretreatment chemicals dosing
Microfiltration HP pump
supply
High pressure pumping w/o
ERD
Posttreatment chemicals
dosing
Treated water pumping
Concentrate discharge
Filters backwashing/cleaning
1.22
63
Energy recovered by Pelton
turbine (h 89%); shaft
(h 85%)
4
Circulation pump (h 95%) PX 1.22
recovered energy from 55%
brine
1.93
0.16
Total 111.83
SEC 4.66
kWh/d
kWh/m3
24
24
31.40
2.59
46.38
3.83
Total 89.03
SEC 3.71
kWh/d
kWh/m3
244
Table 2
Comparison between three types of energy recovery devices
Characteristic
Pelton turbine
Turbocharger
Working
principle
Overall net
energy transfer efficiency
Effect of deviation from
design point
Discharge
Capital cost
Pumping
requirements
Centrifugal mode
Centrifugal mode
Positive displacement
Atmospheric
Low
Connected directly to SWRO
pump/motor, requires full sized
SWRO pump/motor
Metallic construction
Material of
construction
Specific energy 2.444.35 (kWh/m3)
consumption
Capacity
Multi MGD
Foot print
Compact
Pressurized
Moderate
pressurized
High (250% higher than Pelton turbine)
Small size SWRO/pump motor required to
pump permeate volume only, requires small
booster pump/motor
Metallic construction Available in non-metallic construction for corrosion resistance
2.424.29 (kWh/m3) 1.932.85 (kWh/m3)
< 2.5 MGD
Compact
<2.5 MGD
Large
245
Fig. 5. Different energy recovery equipment for Reverse osmosis: (a) Pelton turbine; (b) Hydraulic turbocharger; (c) Pressure
exchanger; and (4) Work exchanger.
246
Fig. 7. Reverse osmosis unit with pressure/work exchanger energy recovery device.
Pressure flowout
Qbo Pbo Qfo Pfo
100%
100%
Pressure flowin
Qbi Pbi Qfi Pfi
3
where Qbi and Pbi is the hydraulic pressure of the brine
stream entering the pressure exchanger, Qbo and Pbo is
the hydraulic pressure of the brine stream leaving the
pressure exchanger, Qfi and Pfi is the hydraulic pressure of the feed stream entering the pressure exchanger
after pre-treatment and Qfo and Pfo is the hydraulic
pressure of the feed stream entering the booster pump,
respectively. Any process equipped with pressure
exchanger device consumes 1530% less specific
energy to operate a comparable process with centrifugal
ERD [57].
Pressure exchangers increase salinity of the feed
due to mixing of brine and feed water, causing higher
osmotic pressures in the RO stage. Increase in salinity
of the feedwater is reported in the range 3-5% which
247
248
Table 3
Energy consumption and desalination costs in RO process
Location
Perth, Australia
Mexico
Jeddah
Vancouver,
Canada
Sadous, Saudi
Arabia
St.Lucie, Florida
Doha, Qatar
Suderoog,
North sea
Perth, Australia
Athens, Greece
Hammam-lif,
Tunisia
USA
Canada
USA & UAE
USA & UAE
Loughborough,
UK
Athens, Greece
Planier, France
Ithaki
Syros
Mykonos
Oia, Greece
Oia
Las Palmas,
Spain
Las Palmas,
Spain
Aqualectra,
Curacao
Anguilla
Las Palmas,
Spain
Capacity
(m3/d)
Salinity
(%)
RO
ERD type,
configuration Efficiency
0.50.7
0.71
3.2
0.51.0
0.3
4.28
Single
Single
Single
Single
stage
stage
stage
stage
w/o ERD
w/o ERD
w/o ERD
w/o ERD
5.7
0.57
Single stage
w/o ERD
0.64
5.7
4.8
3.2
3.5
2.8
Single stage
Single stage
Single stage
w/o ERD
Single stage
w/o ERD
w/o ERD
w/o ERD
0.50.7
1.72.2
0.1
Water
recovery (%)
SEC
kWh/m3
Cost
$/m3
Ref
4-5.8
6.9
13
10
[63]
[63]
[63]
[63]
21-35
18
[63]
10
13
10.6
36.3
[63]
[63]
[63]
37
25
45.8
710
2537
0.14
0.3
0.9252.25
0.932.25
4.32
[64]
[65]
[38]
[38]
[65]
0.21
0.16
BW
SW
4
Single stage
3540
2.6
12
9,275
17, 856
15,000
12, 000
9,000
33,000
3.5
Two-pass
20
25
3.75
Two-stage
55
3
7.8
9.38
6.16
8.36
4.6
5.28
4.44
80,300
3.83
Two-stage
Pelton turbine
52
4.44
[69]
Three-stage
Pelton Turbine
40
4.2
[71]
3.75
Single stage
Pelton Turbine
Francis Turbine
58
40
4.0
5.75
[71
[69]
3.83
Two-stage
Francis Turbine
Turbocharger
TurboCharger
(67%)
PX-60
Pressure exchanger
(95%)
Pressure exchanger
(97%)
Dyprex PX
Dyprex PX
DWEER (89%)
DWEER (92%)
DWEER
45
50
6.16
4.65
3.15
36
3.02
2.0
42
2.5
[29]
58
40
50
50
45
2.85
3
2.42
2.31
2.01
[29]
[29]
[70]
[70]
3,400
10,000
Oia
Grand Cayman
36,000
5,400
1,071
Ios
Port Hueneme
15,000
50
3.2
Perth Australia
160,000
3.5
WEB, Bonaire
Handsome Bay
Grand Cayman
Grand Cayman
1,630
568
1,027
1,699
150,000
Two-pass
1-pass
3.5
Single-stage
1.85
2.25
1.853.7
9.512.7
3.5
[63]
[4]
[4]
567
1,892
37,850
16,654
11
10,200
w/o ERD
w/o ERD
5.157.63
14
[67,68]
0.11
0.04
0.13
0.29
0.13
[46]
[46]
[46]
[46]
[46]
[69]
0.13
[46]
[70]
0.12
[46]
[29]
(continued)
249
Table 3 (continued)
Location
Las Palmas,
Spain
Larnaca, Cyprus
Tampa, Fl
Athens, Greece
Hammam-lif,
Tunisia
Small trains
Large
Coventional
Large
low-energy
Capacity
(m3/d)
40,000
94,600
1.7-2.2
0.1
Salinity
(%)
RO
ERD type,
configuration Efficiency
Single stage
15,000
Single stage
Pelton, 79%
HTC, 80%
Pelton, 79%
Single stage
HTC, 80%
ERD, >95%
Pelton, 79%
HTC, 80%
ERD, >95%
Kuwait
Kuwait
Kuwait
4,542
4,542
1,892
SEC
kWh/m3
50
60
710
2537
3.5
1000
15,000
Water
recovery (%)
SW
w/ERD
45
Cost
$/m3
Ref
0.83
0.55
5.157.63
14
[2]
[3]
[4]
[4]
45
4.35
4.29
3.19
[45]
[45]
[45]
40
3.19
2.79
2.44
[45]
[45]
[45]
2.42
1.93
12.5
9.25
[45]
[45]
[38]
[38]
[38]
2.3
2.11
1.321.74
250
Fig. 8. Reverse osmosis plant operating strategies; (a) control by feed throttling, recovery by Pelton turbine, (b) control by
permeate throttling, recovery by Pelton turbine, (c) control by variable frequency drive (VFD), recovery by Pelton turbine,
(d) control by throttling, recovery by hydraulic turbine charger (HTC).
251
252
4.1. Low pressure (low energy) and high recovery (high flow)
RO membranes
The energy costs of RO were significantly improved
with invention of low pressure membrane systems
(nanofiltration or loose RO membranes) [79]. High productivity or permeable membranes with high rejection
characteristics and low pressure operation have made
the membrane technology applications more practical.
Selecting appropriate membranes based on the feed
water quality or the desired permeate quality may
253
254
255
256
6. Summary
Energy consumption and recovery play vital role in
the economics of RO desalination process. Several
devices and process configurations for energy-efficient
RO desalination operation are discussed. Depending
on the type of feed water and freshwater capacity and
desired permeate quality, different options incorporating both energy and water recovery can be implemented. ERDs reduce both SEC and product costs in large
scale RO applications and water recovery options are
suitable for small scale applications. Utilizing low
257
258
[12] M.A. Darwish, F. Al Asfour and N. Al-Najem, Energy consumption in equivalent work by different desalting methods: case
study for Kuwait, Desalination, 152 (2002) 8392.
[13] S. Judd and B. Jefferson, Membranes for Industrial Wastewater
Recovery and Re-use, Elsevier, Oxford, UK, 2003.
[14] T.Y. Cath, A. Dean and A.E. Childress, Membrane contactor
processes for wastewater reclamation in space II. Combined
direct osmosis, osmotic distillation, and membrane distillation
for treatment of metabolic wastewater, J. Membr. Sci., 257
(2005) 111119.
[15] H. Mehdizadeh, Membrane desalination from an energy-exergy
view point, Deslination, 191 (2006) 200209.
[16] A.A. Bayod-Rujula and A. Martinez-Gracia, Photovoltaic
system for brackish water desalination by electrodialysis and
electricity generation, Desal. Water Treat. 7 (2009) 142151.
[17] K.S. Spiegler, Salt-water Purification, 2nd ed.,Plenum Press,
New York, 1977.
[18] A.M. Farooque, A.T.M. Jamaluddin, A.R. Al-Reweli, P.A.M.
Jamaluddin, S.M. Al-Marwani, A.A. Al-Mobayed and A.H.
Qasim, Parametric analyses of energy consumption and losses
in SWCC SWRO plants utilizing energy recovery devices,
Desalination, 219 (2008) 137159.
[19] U. Lachish, Optimizing the efficiency of reverse osmosis
seawater desalination. www.urila.tripod.com/ Seawater.htm,
2002. Accessed on 12/15/2010.
[20] S. Sethi, S. Walker, J. Drewes and P. Xu, Existing & emerging
concentrate minimization & disposal practices for membrane
systems, Florida Water Resour. J., 6 (2006) 3848.
[21] J.A. Ibanez-Mengual, J.A. Garca-Gamuz and R.P. ValerdiPerez, Basic equations for desalination by reverse osmosis:
a deduction based on the thermodynamics of irreversible processes, Desal. Water Treat., 2 (2009) 287294.
[22] L. Song, J.Y. Hu, S.L. Ong, W.J. Ng, M. Elimelech and M. Wilf,
Performance limitation of the full-scale reverse osmosis process,
J. Membr. Sci., 214 (2003) 239244.
[23] C. Fritzmann, J. Lowenberg, J. Wintgens and T. Melin, State-ofthe-art of reverse osmosis desalination, Desalination, 216 (2007)
176.
[24] M.A. Shannon, P.W. Bohn, M. Elimelech, J.G. Georgiadis, B.J.
Marinas and A.M. Mayes, Science and technology for water
purification in the coming decades, Nature, 452 (2008) 301310.
[25] J. Sun, Y. Wang, S. Xu and S. Wang, Energy recovery device with
a fluid switcher for seawater reverse osmosis system, Chin. J.
Chem. Eng., 16/2 (2008) 329332.
[26] A. Zhu, P.D. Christofides and Y. Cohen, Effect of thermodynamic
restriction on energy cost optimization of RO membrane water
desalination, Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 48 (13) (2009) 60106021.
[27] M. Wilf and C. Bartels, Optimization of seawater RO systems
design, Desalination, 173 (2005) 112.
[28] D. Akgul, M. Cakmakce, N. Kayaalp and I. Koyuncu, Cost analysis of seawater desalination with reverse osmosis in Turkey,
Desalination, 220 (2008) 123131.
[29] M. Shawn, A. von Gottberg and J.L. Talavera, Seawater reverse
osmosis plants in the Caribbean recover energy and brine and
reduce costs technical paper, GE Water Process Technol.,
TP1029EN 0601 (2005) 113.
[30] N.P. Isaias, Experience in reverse osmosis pretreatment, Desalination, 139 (2001) 5764.
[31] B. Durham and A. Walton, Membrane pretreatment of reverse
osmosis: long term experience on difficult waters, Desalination,
122 (1999) 157170.
[32] J.A. Redondo, Brackish-, sea- and wastewater desalination,
Desalination, 138 (2001) 2940.
[33] A.O. Sharif, A.A. Merdaw, H. Al-Bahadili, A. Al-Taee, S. Al-Aibi,
Z. Rahal and G.A.W. Derwish, A new theoretical approach to
estimate the specific energy consumption of reverse osmosis
and other pressure-driven liquid-phase membrane processes,
Desal. Water Treat., 3 (2009) 111119.
[34] B. Liberman, The importance of energy recovery devices in
reverse osmosis desalination, http://www.ildesal.org.il/pdf/
IDE_SWRO_concept.pdf, Accessed on 12/15/2010.
[87]
[88]
[89]
[90]
[91]
[92]
[93]
[94]
[95]
[96]
[97]
[98]
[99]
[100]
[101]
[102]
[103]
[104]
[105]
[106]
[107]
259
260