You are on page 1of 83

To Do List

This is a list of items we have identified as needing work:

WaTER
NaOH
Stabilization
Concentrate disposal (evap. Ponds)
pipelines
intakes
outfalls
Energy cost for Concentrate outfall
Dechlorination / Ozonation mods.
Cost formulas, where did they come from, are they estimated from graphs or from qasim
Evap Ponds
Deep Well injection
set lower limits
set upper limits
heating & lighting is not based on day light or outside air temp.
"H2O analysis" - Valence changes with pH
"References" Section

WT Cost Software Comments


have check marks for including/not including certain costs (e.g. building heating)

Introduction to this model (WaTER)


WaTER or "Water Treatment Estimation Routine" is a model for estimating the cost of drinking water
treatment. WaTER is the MS Excel program that is the basis for the Visual Basic program called
"WTCost". WaTER was developed by the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation (USBR) "Water Treatment
Engineering and Research Group". WaTER is updated on a semi continuous basis (adding new treatment
techniques, modifying costs, etc.). WaTER can be downloaded at:
http://www.usbr.gov/pmts/water/awtr.html
WaTER uses the 1979 USEPA water treatment cost estimates (1978 dollars) and the 1992 Quasim
updates to the 1979 costs as the basis. Costs are updated to todays costs. Processes not included in the
1979 or 1992 updates are estimated from USBR experience and manufacturere estimates. The majoirty of
the program is based on applicable flows between 1 and 200 MGD. There has been some recent work
incorporating smaller flows of 2,500 gpd to 1 MGD.
Information on treatment techniques included in WaTER for all USEPA regulated contaminants can be
found in the USBR publication "Water Treatment Primer for Communities in Need"
WTcost is a Visual Basic version of this program (with some edits and additions) developed by Irvine Moch.
This program is for sale through Irvine Moch & Associates.
I. Moch & Assoc., Inc.
PMB 161, Suite 6, 1812 Marsh Road, Wilmington, DE 19910-4528
(302) 477-0420, Fax: (302) 477-0242, E- Mail:imoch@aol.com
This version last updated on:

12/18/06

Comments
This model is updated on a continuous basis when funding and time permits. Work on this model is not
currently funded and has not been funded since FY04. Although this is labeled as a "Non Functional
Version" there are many components that work. The non functional status comes from the fact that not
everything has been fully checked and there are some components that do not funciton or do not function
correctly.
We welcome any comments (especially corrections).
Comments on this model should be addressed to Michelle Chapman at the USBR in Denver
MCHAPMAN@do.usbr.gov

11/4/2005

Key for WaTER program

###

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

usually contain formulas or data that do change


requires entry of data, and may or may not change
entered data that usually do not change
reference
goal seek cells
limit error
unknown use of data
future work and problems that need to be fixed

Major Notes

Capital costs are computed using the peak day flow and an operation time factor (OTF) to account for down time which increas
O&M costs are computed using the average daily flow which accounts for daily usage of chemicals, power, etc.

Design Notes

account for down time which increases the hourly flow rate, but not the daily flow rate
hemicals, power, etc.

Com ponents of the WaTER program


Intake

Pre-Treatment

Disinfection

Desalination

Primary Treatment
Chemicals
-Cl2
-Ozone
-Potassium Permanganate
-Acid
-Lime
-Antiscalant

Concentrate Outfall

Dechlorination
-Sodium Bisulfite
-Sodium Sulfite
-Sulfer Dioxide

Concentrate Disposal
- Outfall
- Evap. Ponds

MF
FLOW

NF/RO

Pre Desal Primary


Treatment Feed Flow

NF/RO
Feed Flow

UF

Air Stripping

PreDesal Primary

Rapid Mix Tank


Chemicals
-Cl2
-Ozone
-Potassium Permanganate
-Acid
-Lime

UFSCC

Desal
Feed Flow

NF/RO
Product Flow

Plant Production Flow

ED
Desal
Product Flow

Gravity Filter
IX

Coagulant
-Ferric Chloride
-Ferric Sulfate
-Alum (dru)
-Alum (liquid)
Intake Pipe

Disinfection
-Cl2
-Ozone
-Chlorine Dioxide
-Chloramines

Blending

Blending
Flow

Stabilization

Coagulant Aid
-PolyElectrolyte
-PACl

Plant Production Flow


Clearwell

FLOW

Plant Feed
Concentrate Outfall

Drawing Not Completely Accurate


MF

Primary Treatment
Feed Flow

UF

Air Stripping

Plant Production Flow


Primary Treatment
Rapid Mix Tank

Chemicals
-Cl2
-Ozone
-Potassium Permanganate
-Acid
-Lime

UFSCC

Gravity Filter
Disinfection
-Cl2
-Ozone
-Chlorine Dioxide
-Chloramines

FLOW

Coagulant
-Ferric Chloride
-Ferric Sulfate
-Alum (dry)
-Alum (liquid)
-PACl
-Lime

Coagulant Aid
-PolyElectrolyte

Warnings
Note: If Warnings are present, they are higlighted with red fill
Worksheet
b
e
i
j

Worksheet
Capacity
H20 Analysis
Acid
IronFeed

AlumFeed

L
m
n

PolyAC
De-Cl2&O4
CL2

NHCL

Ozone

LimeFeed

r
s

Antiscalent Polymer
PolyElectrolyte

KMnO4

GravityFilt

IX

z
f

MF-P input
RO&NF Input

e.g.

Paremeter
units
Value
Feed Flow
MGD
Ion Product for Concentrate
0
Acid addition H2SO4
Dose Rate by volume
0
Basis dose rate
kg/day
1212
Calculated dose rate
kg/hr.
64
Liquid Alum dose rate
kg/hr.
128
Calculated dose rate
kg/hr.
16
Basis dose rate kg/day:
kg/hr.
401
Basis
kg/day
946
Calculated Cl2 Dose
kg/day
1568
Calculated Aqua Ammonia
kg/day
376
Ozone Requirements:
kg/day
379
Basis Lime:
kg/hr
118
Basis Soda:
kg/hr
0
Basis Polymer Feed
kg/day
223
Basis Polymer Feed
kg/day
223
Basis KMnO4
kg/day
891
Feed/Product Flow
gpd
81699
Filter area (m2):
m2
2120
Filter area (m2):
m2
2120
Service Flow Rate :
L/(hr*L resin)
20
Filter area (m2):
m2
50
Design MF product flow rate
MGD
100
Primary Treatment Product Flow L/s
4796
Size
hp
528
Size
hp
163
Size
hp
139

Lower limit

Upper Limit
0.00019
20
72000
2300
2500
2300
100
4500
4500
2300
1800
4500
4500
100
100
220
200,000,000
2600
2600
40
2600
0
0
error
3
350
3
350

0.04
144
4
4
4
0.5
4
4
110
4
4
4
0.4
0.5
0.4
2500
13
13
16
13
0.01
0
error

assumptions

assuming H2SO4 limits and not HCL


assuming ferrics sulfate and not ferrous chloride limits

b/w pump
gravity filter

high pressure pump


transfer pump
product water pump

Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 39-41)


Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 39-41)
Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 16-18)
Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 16-18)
not in epa
not in epa
Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 1-3)
Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 1-3)
Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 42-44)
Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 11-13)
Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 24-26)
not in epa
Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 21-23)
not in epa
Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 27-29)
Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, and EPA-600/3-79-162b
wrong calculation/referece in table
Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 67-69)

EPA-600/2-79-162c
Estimating Water Treatment Costs. Volume 3. Cost Curves Applicable to 2,500 gpd to 1 MGD Treatment Plants
Hansen, Sigurd, Robert Gumerman, and Ressell Culp.
August 1979.Concract # 68-03-2516
196 pages

MGD Treatment Plants

Project Info
Project Name

Model Development

Date

06/07/04

Membrane Stage

A1

W orksheets included in this program:


#
a
b
c
d
e
f
g
h
i
j
k
L
m
n
o
p
q
r
s
t
u
v
w
x
y
z
aa
bb
cc
dd
ee
ff
gg
hh
ii
jj

Worksheet
Project & Stage Info
Capacity
Report
Cost Index
H2O Analysis
RO & NF Input
RO & NF Output
CO2
Acid
IronFeed
Alum Feed
PACl
De-Cl2
Cl2
NHCl
Ozone
Lime Feed
Antiscalant
PolyElectrolyte
KMnO4
GAC
Clearwell
Gravity Filter
UFSCC
IX
MF Input
MF Output
Rejection
ConcOutfall
IonicsED
ED2
Pumps
StandardAnalyses
S&DSI
LSI
Stiff & Davis

Description
Project title, date, list of worksheets in W aTER
Production Capacity and water data report
Process information input and cost output
Cost indices, interest rates, amortization
W ater quality input
Input of membrane and system parameters
Cost and energy output
Recarbonation basin
Sulfuric & Hydorchloric acid

Dechlorination with sodium sulfite, sodium bisulfite, and sulfer dioxide

NF & RO Conditioning

(if applicable)

{b}Capacity

Project Name

Model Development

Date

Stage

06/07/04

A1

Flow Rate Input Page & Water Data Report


Plant Operations Schedule
Plant availability due to down time
Planned operation time per day
Combined operation time factor (OTF)

%
95
100

decimal
0.95 (used to estimate production/year)
1.00 (used to calculate energy & chemical costs)
0.950

Note: Peak daily flow should be used for capital costs and average daily flow should be used for O&M costs
Most flow rates are limited to 1 to 200 MGD

1,292,630,400
897,660
2000

1000 cfs and 300 cfs.


646,315,200
448,830
1000

193,894,560
134,649
300

Average Daily Flow


Plant Production Flow
Flowrate (Enter in ONE of these cells, set rest cells to "0")
O&M: Flowrate
Flowrate (with OTF)
System Capacity (with OTF)

L/Sec.
0.00
4,380.79
4,611.35

L/Min.
0.0
262,847.2
276,681.3

L/day
0
378,500,000

gpm
0
69436.9
73,091.5

gph
0
4,166,215
4,385,490

gpd

MGD

0
99,989,169
105,251,757

398,421,053

gal/year

m3/day

m3/year

100.00
99.99

36,520,244,042

0
378,500

138,244,097

105.3

38,442,362,150

398,421.1

145,520,102

Peak Day Flow


Plant Production Flow
Flowrate (Enter in ONE of these cells, set rest cells to "0")
Flowrate
Capital: Flowrate (with OTF)
System Capacity (with OTF)

L/Sec.
0.00
43.81
46.11

L/Min.

NF/RO Feed Flow Rate


O&M: NF/RO Feed Flow Rate:*
Capital: NF/RO Feed Flow Rate (with OTF):

L/Sec.
5,153.87
54.25

L/Min.
309,232.03
3,255.07

L/day
445,294,118

gpm
gph
81,690.50 4,901,429.85
859.90
51,594.00

gpd
117,634,316
1,238,256

MGD

L/Sec.
5,153.87
54.25

L/Min.
309,232.03
3,255.07

L/day
445,294,118

gpm
gph
81,690.50 4,901,429.85
859.90
51,594.00

gpd
117,634,316
1,238,256

MGD

0.0
2,628.5
2,766.8

L/day
0
3,785,000

gpm
0.0
694.4
730.9

gph
0
41,662
43,855

gpd

MGD

0
999,892
1,052,518

3,984,211

gal/year

m3/day

m3/year

1.00
1.00

365,202,440

0
3,785

1,382,441

1.1

384,423,621

3,984.2

1,455,201.0

m3/day

117.63

gal/year
42,964,992,991

445,294.12

162,640,114.12

117.63

gal/year
42,964,992,991

m3/day
445,294.12

m3/year
162,640,114.12

m3/year

Note: NF/RO Feed Flow = (Plant Production Flow) / (NF/RO Recovery)

Rapid Mix Feed Flow Rate


O&M: Rapid Mix Feed Flow Rate:*
Capital: Rapid Mix Feed Flow Rate (with OTF):
Note Rapid Mix Feed Flow = (Plant Production Flow) / (NF/RO Recovery)

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{u}GAC

Granular Activated Carbon Filtration


Units
Desired Flow Rate:

Bed Life (months)


1978 Capital Cost:

Alternative Units

4611 L/s

73,099

12
28,273,633

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

6
59,763,158

{u}GAC

Alternative Units

3
398,421 m /day

gpm

Alternative Units

3
79,684,211

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

Project Name

Model Development

Date

Stage

06/07/04

A1

Cost reports for water treatment processes


Production Capacity
Average Daily Flow (for O&M)

Peak Daily Flow (for capital)

378,500
138,244,097
99,989
36,520,244

m /day
3
m /year
kgal/day
kgal/year

Cost Parameter

Units

Alternative
Units

Construction Cost
3
$/m

$/kgal

$/yr

Operating Cost
3
$/m
$/kgal

Intake

Process

3,785
1,382,441
1,000
365,202

Pre-Treatment

Ozone
Dose Rate (~5mg/L):
Contact Time (~2 min):

1.0
2.0

mg/L
min

Chlorination
Residual;
Calculated Dose Rate:
Alternative Dose Rate:

2.5
2.5

mg/L
mg/L
mg/L

Air Stripping
Residual;
Calculated Dose Rate:
Alternative Dose Rate:

2.5
2.5

mg/L
mg/L
mg/L

Microfiltration
Microfilter system equipment
Number of microfilter
Recovery

Primary Treatment

Gravity Filtration
Calculated Surface Area:
Alternative Surface Area:
Structure:
Backwashing:
Media
Rapid Sand
Coal/Sand
Coal/Sand/Garnet
Coal/GreenSand/Coal

Memcor, 90M10C
103
0.98

5153.9

Desalination
Stabilization

Desalination

773.38

2,927.56

233,064

0.18

0.67

371,544

98.16

371.58

77,792

0.06

0.22

2,120.45

1
180
9857

#REF!

#REF!

#REF!

#REF!

#REF!

62,355,748

164.74

0.05

$ 2,670,491

0.02

0.07

$
$
$

74,243,293
156,931,146
209,241,528

$
$
$

196.15
414.61
552.82

$
$
$

742.51
1,569.48
2,092.64

$17,655,788
$23,668,969
$26,132,532

$
$
$

0.13
0.17
0.19

$
$
$

0.48
0.65
0.72

$
$

11,921,849
5,647,058

$
$

31.50
14.92

$
$

119.23
56.48

$
$

670,324
59,945

$
$

0.00
0.00

$
$

0.02
0.00

$
$
$
$

1,797,258
1,797,258
2,546,115
2,995,430

8,059,211

21.29

80.60

$
$
$

150,352
234,071
319,042

$
$
$

0.00
0.00
0.00

$
$
$

0.00
0.01
0.01

(decimal)

L/sec
L/sec

81699 gal/min
gal/min

Bed Life
12
6
3

Upflow Solids Contact Clarifier


How Many?
Retention Time (min)
Calculated Surface Area:
Alternative Surface Area:
G Rating %
G Rating %
G Rating %
Reverse Osmosis/Nanofiltration
Membrane Type
Number of elements
Operating Pressure
NaCl Rejection
Recovery
Target Product TDS
Blending? (Y or N)
Ratio (Blend:Product)

2,927,245

#REF!

Granular Activated Carbon


Flow rate
Alternative Flow Rate:
Months
Months
Months

m2
m2

m
m2

2
22825 ft

106101 ft
ft2

70
110
150
$

93,010,050

245.73

930.20

$23,847,981

0.17

0.65

2,208,278

5.83

22.09

$ 3,081,756

0.02

0.08

37,892,808

100.11

378.97

$ 66,640,633

0.48

1.82

150,865

0.00

0.00

2,499,500

6.60

25.00

$ 2,462,340

0.02

0.07

FilmTec
20139
1542
0.995
0.85
50
Y
9.5

elements
kPa
(decimal)
(decimal)
mg/L

224 lb/in

Ion Exchange
Cation Equivalents/L Resin
$/m3 Cation Exchange Resin
Cation Resin Volume:
To Remove Cation Equivalents/L:
Anion Equivalents /L Resin
$/m3 Anion Exchange Resin
Anion Resin Volume
To Remove Anion Equivalents /L:
Run Cycle

20
$1,607
1,577
1.05E-04
11
$6,250
1,577
7.21E-03
1

Ionics Electrodialysis Reversal


Staff Days/day
TDS

3
1000

mg/L

Electrodialysis
Membrane Area:
Product TDS
Number of Stages (1 or 2)
Recovery per Stage
Recovery

0
500
2
0.5
0.75

m2
mg/L
stages
(decimal)
(decimal)

Free Chlorine Level


Sodium Bisulfite: Cost
Calculated Dose
Alternative Dose

1.0
300
1.5

mg/L as Cl2
$/
mg/L
mg/L

Sodium Sulfite: Cost


Calculated Dose
Alternative Dose

300
0.9

$/
mg/L
mg/L

480,299

1.27

4.80

504,695

0.00

0.01

Sulfur Dioxide: Cost


Calculated Dose
Alternative Dose

300
0.9

$/
mg/L
mg/L

480,299

1.27

4.80

504,695

0.00

0.01

m3

3
45 ft
3
56,324 ft

m3

3
175 ft
3
56,324 ft

days

2
0 ft

CO2

Outfall

De-Chlorination

Concentrate Disposal

Cost reports for water treatment processes


Production Capacity
Average Daily Flow (for O&M)
378,500
138,244,097
99,989
36,520,244

Disinfection

Intake

Process
Chlorine
Residual;
Calculated Dose Rate:
Alternative Dose Rate:

Chemical Feed Systems (Main Process)

m /day
3
m /year
kgal/day
kgal/year

Cost Parameter

Units

Alternative
Units

$
$

mg/L
mg/L
mg/L

Chloramines
Residual:
Calculated Chlorine Dose:
Calculated Ammonia Dose:
Alternative Chlorine Dose
Alternative Ammonia Dose

3
4.1
1.0
6.0
2.0

mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L

Ozone
Dose Rate (~5mg/L):
Contact Time (~2 min):

1.0
2.0

mg/L
min

2.5
%

mg/L
mg/L
mg/L

Construction Cost
3
$/m
371,544

#VALUE!

0.98

$/kgal
$

#VALUE!

2,927,245

7.73

3.72

#VALUE!

$/yr

Operating Cost
3
$/m
$/kgal

77,792

0.00

0.00

57,885

0.00

0.00

0.00

0.01

29.28

233,064

Acidification
Feed LSI (for TDS>5000)

-1.77

Conc LSI

0.62

Calc Dose 96% H2SO4 (mg/L)


Alternative:

99.0
7

Conc LSI
mg/L

0.32

w/Acid

#NUM!

#NUM!

#NUM!

151,276

0.00

0.00

Calc Dose 37% HCl (mg/L)


Alternative:

73.4

Conc LSI
mg/L

-1.43

w/Acid

#NUM!

#NUM!

#NUM!

$ 2,708,709

0.02

0.07

328

mg/L
mg/L
kg/hr

Alum (dry feed)


Calculated Dose:
Alternative Dose:
Based on:

Misc. Equipment

3,785
1,382,441
1,000
365,202

2.5
2.5

Chlorine Dioxide
Residual;
Calculated Dose Rate:
Alternative Dose Rate:

Distrib.

Peak Daily Flow (for capital)

64

Alum (liquid feed)


Calculated:
Alternative:
Based on:

Dose Rate
655

Poly Aluminum Chloride


Calculated:
Alternative:
Based on:

Dose Rate
98

Ferric Sulfate
Calculated:
Alternative:
Based on:

Dose Rate
259

Ferric Chloride
Calculated Dose
Alternative Dose
Based on:

128

16

mg/L
mg/L
kg/hr

mg/L
mg/L
kg/hr

1212

mg/L
mg/L
kg/day

266

mg/L

1245

kg/day

Lime & Soda Ash


Leave out Soda Ash "Y" or "N"?
Calculated Lime:
Calculated Soda Ash:
Alternative Lime
Alternative Soda Ash:
Based on Lime dose:
Based on Soda Ash:

Dose Rate
Y
6
0

AntiScalant
Suggested:
Alternative:
Based on:
Cost of Chemical

Dose Rate
0.5

Polyelectrolyte
Suggested:
Alternative:
Based on:
Cost of Chemical

Dose Rate
0.5
222.6
990

mg/L
mg/L
kg/day
$/500 lb

Potassium Permanganate
Calculated:
Alternative:
Based on:

Dose Rate
0
2
891

mg/L
mg/L
kg/day

Pumps
Single Stage Tubine
Variable Speed Turbine
Centrifugal, Singe Stage
Number of pumps:
Height differential:
Discharge pressure:
Full flow rate:
Basis flow rate
Pump Efficiency:
Pipe Diameter:
Motor Efficiency:
HP
Power consumption:
Clearwell
Below Ground Capacity:
Ground Level Capacity:
Daily Production:

118
0

222.6
990

1
1
1750
5.154
5.154
75
0.1
87

mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
kg/hr
kg/hr

mg/L
mg/L
kg/day
$/500 lb

pump(s)
m
kPa
m3/s
m3/s
%
m
%

141

282

36

2667

118,587

0.31

1.19

198,162

0.00

0.01

163,393

0.43

1.63

371,823

0.00

0.01

74,547

0.20

0.75

260,653

0.00

0.01

445,537

1.18

4.46

140,350

0.00

0.00

455,307

1.20

4.55

780,776

0.01

0.02

240,456

0.64

2.40

106,016

0.00

0.00

164,315

0.43

1.64

182,717

0.00

0.01

164,315

0.43

1.64

182,717

0.00

0.01

94,662

0.25

0.95

$ 1,309,257

0.01

0.04

$
$
$

9,003,237
4,748,362
1,728,164

$
$
$

23.79
12.55
4.57

$
$
$

90.04
47.49
17.28

$ 22,789,633

0.16

0.62

lb/hr

lb/hr

lb/hr

lb/day

5 - 150
2740

lb/day

259 lb/hr
0 lb/hr

490

490

1959

3.3
254
81699
81699

lb/day

lb/day

lb/day

ft
psi
gal/min
gal/min

Operating Cost Depend on Number and Horsepower only.

3.94 in

111482
128140 kWhr

60,000
55,000

m3
m3
3
3,785 m

15852 kgal
14531 kgal
1000 kgal

$
$

8,118,781
4,317,924

$
$

21.45
11.41

$
$

81.20
43.18

{d}Cost Index

Project Name

Model Development

Date

06/07/04

Cost Indices Data


Date of Cost Indices Values

Cost Indices Categories:


ENR Construction Cost Index
Construction Cost
Wage ($/hr)
ENR Building Cost Index
Building Cost
Skilled Labor
ENR Materials Cost Index
Materials
Materials
Cement ($/ton)
Steel ($/CWT)
Other
Electricity Cost ($/kWHr) 3
Rates and Lifecycles
Interest Rate (%)
Amortization time (yr)
Water Rate ($/kgal)

Month
November

Year
2006

November 2006

Used For

Desalination Costs
Ratio for October 1978 Ratio for 1995
(1913 basis)
(1913 basis)

7910.81 Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


29.05 Labor (for operating the plant - approximation)

2.78
2.81

1.46
0.91

4462.38 Housing
7449.82 Excavation and Sitework, Labor

2.59
3.02

1.44
1.30

2637.27
2637.27
94.42
40.40

2.08
2.08
1.96
2.57

1.19
1.19
1.17
1.43

2.33

1.00

Piping & Valves


Maintanace Materials
Concrete
Steel

0.0700 Power

6.00 On Construction & Bond Money


30.00 For Bond Period
0.00 Cost of Feed Source Water

Notes

References
ENR - Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index published monthly by McGraw Hill in New York City (212-512-2000)
See http://www.enr.com
http://www.enr.com/features/conEco/costIndexes/mostRecentIndexes.asp
2 EPA-600/2-79-162 "Estimating Water Treatment Costs"
3 DOE - Department of Energy "Electric Power Monthly"
Source of DOE data: Energy Information Administration, Form EIA-826, "Monthly Electric Sales and Revenue Report with State Distributions Report."
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/table5_6_a.html
http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epm/epm_sum.html

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{e}H20 Analysis

Feed Water Analysis


Last check for accuracy of the MCL values

Component

1/1/2000

Secondary Eff

Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium, total
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Strontium
Zinc
Alkalinity-Bicarbonate
Alkalinity-Carbonate
Carbon Dioxide (aq)
Chloride
Cyanide, free
Fluoride
Nitrate (as N)
o-Phosphate
Sulfate
Silica
pH
pOH
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS)
Total Suspended Solids (TSS)
Conductivity
Temperature

W ater Treatment Cost Estimation Program

2.1000

40.0000

140.0000

180.00
0.75
7.91
150.00

7.60
7.54
6.46
500
22.00
23.00
11.75

Units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
pH
pOH
mg/L
mg/L
uS/cm
C

Implement eH-pH diagrams to automatically change valence with pH


Amount
MCL (mg/L) Over MCL
0.05
0.006
0.010
2
0.004
0.5
0.005
--0.1
1
0.3
0.015
--0.05
0.002
----0.05
0.1
----5
------250
0.2
4
10
--250
6.5-8.5

Valence
Charges

Molecular
Wt.
3
3
3
2
2

26.98
121.75
74.92
137.34
9.01

2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
4
1
1
2
2
-1
-2
0
-1

112.41
40.08
52
63.54
55.85
207.19
24.31
54.94
200.59
58.71
39.1
78.96
107.87
22.99
87.62
65.37
61
60
44
35.45

-1
-1
-3
-2

19
14
94
96

1
-1

1
1

Equivalent
Weight

Moles/
Liter

Equiv./
Liter

Ionic
Strength

mg/L as
CaCO3

20.04

5.24E-05 1.05E-04 2.10E-04

5.24

39.10

1.02E-03 1.02E-03 1.02E-03

102.30

22.99

6.09E-03 6.09E-03 6.09E-03

608.96

61.00
30.00
35.45

2.95E-03 2.95E-03 2.95E-03


1.25E-05 2.50E-05 5.00E-05
1.80E-04
4.23E-03 4.23E-03 4.23E-03

295.08
1.25
17.98
423.13

1.00
1.00

2.88E-08 2.88E-11 2.88E-08


3.47E-07 3.47E-10 3.47E-07

0.00
0.03

500
-------

Page 18

{f}RO&NF Input

Project Name

Model Development

Date

Stage

06/07/04

A1

RO & NF INPUT

95.9

574 35.08536585

7570
Process Input

Construction Cost Input

Operations & Maintenance Cost Input

Applicable Range
Lower Limit Upper Limit
Flow & Water Quality
Primary Treatment Product Flow
Plant Production Flow
Feed TDS

4795.5 L/s
4380.8 L/s
500 mg/L

Production TDS (target)


50 mg/L
Percent of Mono-valent ions
1.00 Decimal
Percent of Multi-valent ions
0.00 Decimal
Average Molecular Weight
35.82 g/mol
Allow Blending
Y
Yes (Y) or No (N)
Recovery Rate
0.85 Decimal
Product TDS
3 mg/L
Product Flow
3966.0 L/s
NF/RO Feed Flow
4665.9 L/s
Concentrate TDS
3317 mg/L
Concentrate Flow
699.9 L/s
Bypass flow for blending
414.75 L/s
% blending
9.5 %
Membrane Manufacturer Specifications
Membrane Manufacturer
FilmTec
Model #
BW30-400
Membrane Diameter
20.32 (10.16 or 20.32 cm)
Productivity
23 m3/day
Area per module
37 m2
Operating pressure, Papp
1550 kPa
Test solution TDS
1500 mg/L
Avg. MW of TDS,
58 mg/mmole NaCl
Chloride Rejection
99.5 %
Sulfate Rejection
99.8 %
Recovery Rate
10 %
o
Temperature
25 C
NaCl dissociation constant
0.99
Cf, conc. of salt in feed water
Cp, conc. of salt in product water
Cr, conc. of salt in reject
Cm, bulk conc.
Osmotic pressure
Net driving pressure, NDPo
A, water transport coefficient
Operating pressure
Net driving pressure , NDPi

26 mole/m3
0.13 mole/m3
29 mole/m3
27 mole/m3
146 kpa
1404 kpa
3 -2
-1
-1
4.64E-12 m m Pa sec
1404 kPa

Cr, conc. of salt in reject


Cm, conc. of

14 mole/m3
3
0.062 mole/m
3
93 mole/m
3
53 mole/m

Temperature
Temperature Coefficient =1.023^(-25+T)
Osmotic pressure, Posm
Applied pressure, Papp

o
12 C
0.740
138 kpa
1542 kPa

Cf, conc. of salt in feed water


Cp, conc. of salt in product water

76019 gpm
69444 gpm

62870 gpm
73964 gpm
11095 gpm
6575 gpm

8.0
6.1
398
225

in
kgal/day
ft2
psi

0.995 decimal
0.998 decimal
o

77 F

21 psi
203.8 psi

203.8 psi

Applicable Range
Lower Limit Upper Limit
Membrane & Unit Configuration
Membrane Capacity
Bypass
Total Capacity
Element Productivity
Flux
Number of Elements
Number of elements per vessel
Number of Elements
Number of Pressure Vessels
Max Vessels per Skid
Number of Skids (manual input)
Number of Skids (automatic calc)
Recovery Rate
Building Area
Administrative Area
Odor Control?
Emergency Generatore Size
High Pressure Feed Pump
Pump Style
Height DIfference
Motor Efficiency
Pump Efficiency
Coupling Efficiency
Number of Pumps
Differential Pressure
Capacity per pump
Pipe X-Sectional Area
Size
Energy Recovery for Seawater
Efficiency
Efficiency
Transfer Pumps (to HPP)
Pump Style
Height DIfference

20 psi

0.46
20,137.0
7
20139
2877
60

m3/(m2 * day)
elements
elements / vessel
elements
for 2:1 array
vessels / skid
skids
skids
Decimal
m2
2
m
Yes (Y) or No (N)
MW
Yes (Y) or No (N)

48
0.85
10934
100
N
0.7
Y
PD

Y
css

Length of Pipe
Motor Efficiency
Pump Efficiency
Coupling Efficiency
Number Pumps
Pressure Differential
Capacity per Pump
Pipe X-Sectional Area
Size

90,532,544
9,467,456
100,000,000
4,496

gpd
gpd
gpd
gpd

Electricity Rate
Chemical Costs
Citric Acid
H2PO4

11.29 gfd

NaOH
Membrane Life
Ave Intrinsic Rejection
Ave Observed Rejection
Apparent Rejection
Productivity
Cleaning Rate
Staff Days/day
Labor Rate
Lifetime
Interest Rate

117692 ft2
2
1076 ft

0.07 $/kWh
0.14 $/kg
23.7 $/kg
18
3
0.996
0.996
0.996
23
6
30
29.05
30
6

*PD, VST or CSS

4
0.95
0.90
1.00
21
1542
0.245
0.098
528.3

kPa
m3/s
m2

$/kg 50%
Years
Test Solution
Site Concentrate
m3/module
per Year
$/hr
Years
%

Some Example Membrane Specifications


Date last checked:
Type
Membrane Manufacturer
FilmTec
Model #
BW30-400
Membrane Diameter (cm)
Productivity (m3/day)
Area per module (m2)
Operating pressure, Papp (kPa)
Test solution TDS
Avg. MW of TDS,
Chloride Rejection
Sulfate Rejection
Recovery Rate
Temperature (oC)

Sufuric acid
Sodium Hydroxide
Antiscalant
Disinfectant
H2PO4

224 psi
3890 gpm
2
152.2 in

hp
Yes (Y) or No (N)

error
error
0.60
0.00 This number is the efficiency of the energy recovery device - it reduces the size of the High Pressure pump
Yes (Y) or No (N)

HCl 37%

VST or CSS

2 m

310 kPa
3
0.258 m /s
2
0.103 m
Y
CSS

6.56 ft

45.0 psi
4085.0 gpm
2
1.11 ft

163 hp
Yes (Y) or No (N)
VST or CSS

2 m

6.56 ft

10 m
0.94
0.75

32.81 ft

1.00
20
310 kPa
0.219 m3/s
0.088 m2
139 hp

Hydranautics
8040LHYCPA2

FilmTec
SW30-8040
20.32
40
37
1550
2000
58.44
99.5
99.8
15
25

20.32
41.6
37.2
1550
1500
58.4
99
99.8
15
25

20.32
23
27.7
5500
35000
58.44
99.1
99.8
10
25

9/24/2004
9/24/2004
NF
NF
DuPont
Koch/Fluid Systems
Koch/Fluid Systems
Koch/Fluid Systems
6880T B-10 Twin
FS8822HR400 Prem
TFC-S4 (4920 S)
TFC-SR2 8" (8723 SR2-400)
20.32
10.16
20.32
32.2
7.6
45.4
30.7
7.2
37.2
1550
552
380
2000
850
2000
58.4
58.4
58.4
99.7
85
20
99.9
98.5
97
10
15
15
25
25
25

13.12 ft

0.94
0.75
1.00
20

Pressure Differential
Capacity per Pump
Pipe X-Sectional Area

Pump Style
Height DIfference

224 psi

m /day
3
m /day
m3/day
m3/day

Motor Efficiency
Pump Efficiency
Coupling Efficiency
Number Transfer Pumps

Size
Product Water Pump

342,666
35,834
378,500
17

350

350

45.0 psi
3472.2 gpm
0.29 ft

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

Densities
1.84
2.13
1.3
1
1.7

g/mL
g/mL
g/mL
g/mL
g/mL

Cost
0.11

$/kg

0.14

$/kg

20.32
60.5
1810
6890
35000
58.44
99.1
99.8
35
25

Rowpu SW30M-6040 8040 HSY SWC


Rowpu SW30M-6040 8040 HSY SWC
15.24
20.2
8
23.5
4389.0
29.26
5500
5500
19000
32000
58.44
58.44
99
99.2
99
99.8
8
10
25
25

NF 90

BW30

90
95

8" size

99
99.5

8" size

{g}RO&NF Output

Project Name

Model Development

Date

Stage

06/07/04

A1

RO & NF OUTPUT
Estimating Construction Costs for NF90 Membrane Treatment Plant

Estimating O&M Costs

Membranes
RO Skids
Building
Electrical
Insturmentation & Controls

$
$
$
$
$

10,069,500
20,542,736
17,124,107
5,634,062
4,843,764

Steel
Housing
Manf & Elect
Manf & Elect

High Pressure Pumps


Energy Recovery for Seawater
Transfer Pumps
Product Water Pumps

$
$
$
$

3,955,456
1,518,818
1,212,889

Piping
Manf & Elect
Piping
Piping

Odor Control
Process Piping
Yard Piping
Cartridge Filters
Membrane Cleaning Equip
Contractor Engineering & Training
Concentrate Treatment & Piping
Generators

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

76,888
67,117
20,465
97,574
91,266
806,912
73,271

Sitework
Total Direct Capital Costs

$
$

7,144,179
73,279,004

Indirect Capital Costs


Interest During Construction
Contingencies
A&E Fees, Proj. Management
Working Capital
Total Indirect Captial Cost

$
$
$
$
$

3,663,950
4,379,095
8,756,841
2,931,160
19,731,046

Total Construction Cost

$ 93,010,050

Cost per m3/day capacity


Cost per gpd capacity

$
$

@
@
@
With Base of

$
500
$
5,000
$
1,076
$
977
add $300,000 for top of the
$ line 65,000
DAC

$/module
$/Vessel
2
$/m
$100/ft2
3
$/m
base cost

68,878,199 kWhr
20,243,395 kWhr
17,206,886 kWhr

Piping
Piping
Piping
Maint Materials
Manf & Elect
Labor
Piping
Electrical

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

Electrical

50,000
55,000
50,000
15,000
67,000
100,000
3
13 $/m
0.7 MW

base cost
base cost
base cost
base cost
From Reference
base cost
Concentrate
RO & Building

3
14.53 $/m

5
6
12
4
27

% of Total
% of Total
% of Total
% of Total

246
0.93

References
Based on "Estimating the Cost of Membrane (RO or NF) Water Treatment Plants" By William B. Suratt, P.E., Camp Dresser & McKee Inc. Vero Beach Florida
Presented at the AWWA Membrane Technology Conference, Reno, NV, 1995. also published as "Estimating the cost of membrane water treatment plants."

W ater Treatment Cost Estimation Program

Electricity
Labor
Membrane Replacement
Cleaning Chemicals
Cartridge Filters
Repairs and Replacement
Insurance
Lab fees
Total O&M Cost

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

7,442,994
2,544,780
3,988,841
261,376
1,695,709
435,421
174,169
547,612
17,090,902

Capital Recovery
O&M

$
$

6,757,079
17,090,902

Annual cost
$/m3 Product
$/1000 gal Product
$/acre foot Product

$
$
$
$

23,847,981
0.18
0.69
224.12

Total Costs

Project Name

Model Development

Date

Stage

06/07/04

A1

Recarbonation Basins

Not currently being used

Cost Category (ft )


Cost Category (m3)
Excavation & Sitework
Concrete
Steel
Labor
Pipe & Valves
Subtotal
Miscellaneous & contingency
Total

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

770
22
520
1,380
2,250
2,830
90
7,070
1,060
8,130

Excavation & Sitework


Concrete
Steel
Labor
Pipe & Valves
Subtotal
Miscellaneous & contingency
Total

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

1375
39
620
1,860
3,010
3,800
130
9,420
1,410
10,830

0.07
0.20
0.32
0.40
0.01
1.00
0.15
1.15

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

0.07
0.20
0.32
0.40
0.01
1.00
0.15
1.15

Single Basin Volume


2750
5630
78
159
980 $ 1,390 $
2,820 $ 4,050 $
4,670 $ 6,560 $
5,730 $ 8,090 $
250 $
480 $
14,450 $ 20,570 $
2,170 $ 3,090 $
16,620 $ 23,660 $
Percent of Subtotal
0.07
0.07
0.20
0.20
0.32
0.32
0.40
0.39
0.02
0.02
1.00
1.00
0.15
0.15
1.15
1.15

8800
249
1,790
5,190
8,320
10,240
680
26,220
3,930
30,150

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

0.07
0.20
0.32
0.39
0.03
1.00
0.15
1.15

17600
498
3,050
8,570
13,960
16,740
1,360
43,680
6,550
50,230

0.07
0.20
0.32
0.38
0.03
1.00
0.15
1.15

1979 $

Construction Cost of Recarbonation Basins 1979 $


$ = -6E-06x2 + 2.5753x + 7900.2
R2 = 0.9981

$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$-

Total
Poly. ( Total)

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Volume - Cubic Meters

Construction Cost for Liquid CO2 as CO2 Source


Cost Category (Installed - lb/day)
Cost Category (Installed - kg/day)

380
173

750
341

1500
682

3750
1705

7500
3409

15000
6818

Manufactured Equipment
Labor
Pipe & Valves
Housing
Subtotal
Micsellaneous & Contingency
Total

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

27,000
7,650
1,530
7,360
43,540
6,530
50,070

Manufactured Equipment
Labor
Pipe & Valves
Housing
Subtotal
Micsellaneous & Contingency
Total

$ 31,000
$ 8,780
$ 2,340
$ 7,360
$ 49,480
$ 7,420
$ 56,900

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

35,250
12,170
4,620
7,360
59,400
8,910
68,310

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

49,250
17,330
8,710
7,360
82,650
12,400
95,050

$ 73,000
$ 28,990
$ 16,940
$
8,450
$ 127,380
$ 19,110
$ 146,490

$ 141,000
$ 58,010
$ 37,540
$
8,900
$ 245,450
$ 36,820
$ 282,270

0.62
0.18
0.04
0.17

0.63
0.18
0.05
0.15

Percent of Subtotal
0.59
0.60
0.20
0.21
0.08
0.11
0.12
0.09

0.57
0.23
0.13
0.07

0.57
0.24
0.15
0.04

0.15
1.15

0.15
1.15

0.15
1.15

0.15
1.15

0.15
1.15

7500
3409
4,428
7,700
1,820
13,948

15000
6818
8,549
10,000
2,730
21,279

0.15
1.15

Construction Cost 1978$

Construction Cost of Recarbonation - Liquid CO2 as a CO2 source


y = 55053e0.0003x
R = 0.9727
$350,000
$300,000
$250,000
$200,000
$150,000
$100,000
$50,000
$0

2000

4000

6000

8000

Installed Capacity (kg/day)

O&M Summary for Recarbonation - Liquid CO2 as CO2 source


Cost Category (Installed - lb/day)
Cost Category (Installed - kg/day)
Energy kWhr/yr * $/kWhr
Maintenance Material $/yr
Labor Hr/yr * $/Hr
Total Cost

$
$
$
$

380
173
520
2,860
910
4,290

$/kWhr
$/hr Labor

0.03
10

Energy kWhr/yr * $/kWhr


Maintenance Material $/yr
Labor Hr/yr * $/Hr
Total Cost

0.12
0.67
0.21
1

$
$
$
$

750
341
728
3,300
910
4,938

0.15
0.67
0.18
1

$
$
$
$

1500
682
1,147
4,400
910
6,457

0.18
0.68
0.14
1

$
$
$
$

3750
1705
2,290
5,500
1,820
9,610

$
$
$
$

0.24
0.57
0.19
1

Operation & Maintenance of Recarbonation - Liquid CO2 as a CO2


source

0.32
0.55
0.13
1

$
$
$
$

0.40
0.47
0.13
1

Construction Cost 1979$


assuming from qasim

Operation & Maintenance of Recarbonation - Liquid CO2 as a CO2


source
y = -0.0001x2 + 3.4808x + 3878.7
R = 0.9991
$25,000
$20,000
$15,000
$10,000
$5,000
$0
2000
4000
6000
8000
Installed Capacity (kg/day)

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

35200
997
5,570
15,320
25,240
29,730
3,360
79,220
11,880
91,100

0.07
0.19
0.32
0.38
0.04
1.00
0.15
1.15

Average
0.07
0.20
0.32
0.39
0.02
0.15

ENR Skilled Labor Index


ENR Cement Cost ($/ton)
ENR Steel Cost ($/cwt)
ENR Labor Rate ($/hr)
ENR Materials Index

Average
0.60
0.21
0.09
0.11

ENR Construction Cost Index


ENR Labor Rate ($/hr)
ENR Materials Index
ENR Building Cost Index

0.15
1.15

Average
0.23 Electricity Cost ($/kWhr)
0.60 ENR Materials Index
0.16 ENR Labor Rate ($/hr)
1.00

{i}Acid

Acid: Sulfuric & Hydrochloric Acid


This estimates the amount of acid addition which is depenedent on NF/RO feed flow rate.
Capital Calculations
NF/RO Feed flow (peak day flow w/ OTF)
Dose by mass
Density
Percent solution
Dose by volume

96% H2SO4
(433.69)
(37.47)
7.00
1.841
0.96
0.0040

Dose Rate by volume

(0.1484)

1978 Capital Cost:

Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:

O&M Calculations
NF/RO Feed flow (average daily flow)
Dose by mass
Density
Percent solution
Dose by volume
Dose Rate by volume
Acid Cost ($/ton):

37% HCL
-433.69
(37.47)
73.40
1.600
0.37
0.1240

L/sec.
m3/day
mg/L
g/L
decimal
mL/L
3
(4.6461) m /day

#NUM!
#NUM!
#NUM!
#NUM!
#NUM!
#NUM!
#NUM!
#NUM!

0.7
0.07
0.16
0.07
0
0
1.00

96% H2SO4
4,665.93
403.14
7.00
1.841
0.96
0.0040
1.5967
$
124

O&M Cost:

Applicable Range
Lower Limit Upper Limit
0.04

#NUM!
#NUM!
#NUM!
#NUM!
#NUM!
#NUM!
#NUM!
#NUM!

37% HCL
4665.93
403.14
73.40
1.600
0.37
0.1240
49.9858
72

L/sec.
m3/day
mg/L
g/L
decimal
mL/L
m3/day

1,630

0.04 $
0.05 $
0.91 $
$
1.00 $

136
190
4,173
146,778
151,276

$
$
$
$
$

14,741 1978 Costs

%
Materials
Energy
Labor
Chemical Cost $/yr:
November 2006 O&M $:

Sulfuric Acid feed


Capital Cost
General Form: (A)*(XB) + C
A=

1,227
1,720
37,723
2,668,039
2,708,709

Today's
Costs

6010.6

W ater Treatment Cost Estimation Program

20 Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 30-32)

{j}IronCoag

Capital Calculations
NF/RO Feed flow (peak day flow w/ OTF)
Molecular weight
Bicarbonate Alkalinity:
Alternative dose
Calculated dose
Basis dose rate
Chemical Cost $/ton bulk

Fe2(SO4)3-7H2O

FeCl3 6H20

54
4687307
526.0
180
2.95
0.0
258.6
1,212.2
$150

54
4687307
270.2
180
2.95
0.0
265.7
1,245.4
$1,420
Fe2(SO4)3-7H2O

Capital Cost:

Units
L/sec.
L/day
g/mol
mg/L
mmoles/L
mg/L
mg/L
kg/day

FeCl3 6H20

164,585

168,194

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

328,850
89,611
9,948
17,128
445,537

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

336,061
91,576
10,166
17,503
455,307

24,704

25,298

0.07 $
0.09 $
0.84 $
$
1.00 $

3,599
5,188
58,357
73,206
140,350

$
$
$
$
$

3,686
5,313
59,761
712,017
780,776

%
Manufactured & Electrical Equipment
Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:

0.72
0.21
0.02
0.05
0
0
1.000

O&M Cost:
%
Materials
Energy
Labor
Ferric Sulfate Cost $/yr:
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

Ferric Sulfate Feed


Capital Cost
General Form: A*X^B*e^(C*X)
A=
B=
C=
O&M Cost
General Form: A*e^(B*X)+C
A=
B=

10613
0.319
0.000393

1260926
0.00001394

W ater Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{j}IronCoag

1978 Costs

Today's
Costs

1978 Costs

Today's
Costs

W ater Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{k}Alum

Capital Calculations
Al2(SO4)3-18H2O
NF/RO Feed flow (peak day flow w/ OTF)
Molecular weight of Alum
Cost $/100 lbs.
Bicarbonate Alkalinity
Alternative dose
Alternative dose rate
Calculated Alum Dose Rate (6 mmol/mmol HCO3)
Calculated dose
Calculated dose rate
Basis dose rate

54
195
666.41
15
180
2.95
0
0
0.492
328
64
64

Capital Cost:

Units
L/sec
3
m /hr.
g/mol
per 100 lbs
mg/L
mmoles/L
mg/L
kg/hr
mmoles/L
mg/L
kg/hr.
kg/hr.

Lower Limit Upper Limit


4
2300 Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 16)

48,335 1978 Costs Construction Cost Equations (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 16)

$
%

Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:

0.46
0.03
0.04
0.47
0
0
1.00

O&M Cost:

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

61,701
3,760
5,843
47,283
118,587

Today's
Costs

4,723 1978 Costs

Applicable Range
Lower Limit Upper Limit
4
2300 Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 16)

%
Materials
Energy
Labor
Alum Cost:
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

0.17 $
0.03 $
0.8 $
$
1.00 $

1,671
331
10,625
185,535
198,162

Today's
Costs

Coagulant: Aluminum Sulfate (Alum) (Liquid) Feed Cost Calculations


Capital Calculations
Liquid Alum dose rate
Multiplier between dry and liquid
Alternative dose
Alternative dose rate
Basis dose rate

128
2
0
0
128

Capital Cost:

Units
kg/hr.

O&M cost (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 19,20)

mg/L
kg/hr.
kg/hr.
53,996 1978 Costs

$
%

Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:

0.71
0.15
0.12
0.02
0
0
1.00

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

106,388
41,375
15,005
625
163,393

Applicable Range
Lower Limit Upper Limit
4
2500
Construction Cost Equations (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 16)

Today's
Costs

O&M Calculations
Units
Liquid Alum dose rate
Multiplier between dry and liquid
Alternative dose
Alternative dose rate
Basis dose rate

128
2
0
0
128

O&M Cost:

kg/hr.
mg/L
kg/hr.
kg/hr.
$

2,376 1978 Costs O&M cost (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 17,18)

%
Materials
Energy
Labor
Alum Cost:
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

0.04 $
0.59 $
0.37 $
$
1.00 $

198
272
283
371,069
371,823

Today's
Costs

Applicable Range
Lower Limit Upper Limit
4
2500

Alum Feed
Capital Cost
General Form: A*X^(B)*e^(C*X)
A=
B=
C=

Dry Feed
12333.4
0.3205
0.000515

Liquid Feed
13223.3
0.285
0.000377

Dry Feed

Liquid Feed

O&M Cost
General Form: A*e^(B*X)+C

W ater Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{L}PACl

Capital Calculations
Al6(OH)12Cl6
Primary Treatment Feed flow (peak day flow w/ OTF)
MW of PACL
Cost $/100 lbs.:
Alternative dose rate

Bicarbonate Alkalinity:
PACl Dose Rate
PACl Dose Rate (18:1 HCO3:PACl)
Calculated dose rate
Basis dose rate
1978 Capital Cost:

46
166
596.66
80
0
0
180
2.95
98
0.164
16
16
%

Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:

0.46
0.03
0.04
0.47
0
0
1.00

1978 O&M Cost:

Materials
Energy
Labor
Alum Cost:

Units
L/sec.
m3/hr.
g/mol
per 100 lbs.
mg/L
kg/hr
mg/L
mmoles/L
mg/L
mmoles/L
kg/hr.
kg/hr.
$

30,385 1978 Costs

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

38,787
2,363
3,673
29,723
74,547

$
0.17 $
0.03 $
0.8 $
$

November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

1.00

1,275
252
8,107
251,020
260,653

Dry Feed
Liquid Feed
12333.4
13223.3
0.3205
0.285
0.000515
0.000377

O&M Cost
General Form: A*e^(B*X)+C
A=
B=
C=

Today's
Costs

3,603 1978 Costs

Alum Feed
Capital Cost
General Form: A*X^(B)*e^(C*X)
A=
B=
C=

Applicable Range
Lower Limit Upper Limit
4
2300

Dry Feed
Liquid Feed
1205293
-6880.7
0.000019433
-0.000659
-1202070
8700

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

Today's
Costs

{L}PACl

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{m}De-Cl2

(not included here are: sodium thiosulfate, hydrogen peroxide, ammonia)


NaHSO3
Volume Treated ():

Na2SO3

SO2
m3/day

445,294

Free Chlorine Level (mg/L)

1 mg/L

Default Free Chlorine Level (mg/L)

0.5

0.5

0.5 mg/L

Calculated dose rate (mg/L)


Alternative dose rate (mg/L)
Basis dose rate kg/day:
Water Usage (totally dissolved)
Cost $/ton:

1.47
0
654.6
0.0
300 $

0.9
0
400.8
0.0
300 $

0.9
0
400.8
0.0
300

mg/L
mg/L
kg/day
$/ton

Relationship between ORP & Dose, see Membrane Manual 29


1978 Capital Cost:

Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:

1978 O&M Cost:

Materials
Energy
Labor
Chemical Cost $/yr:
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

$ 922,114
########
$ 454,246
$ 111,474
$ 19,192
$
$ 72,149
########

$ 177,192
$ 354,039
$ 87,287
$ 21,421
$ 3,688
$
$ 13,864
$ 480,299

$ 177,192
$ 354,039
$ 87,287
$ 21,421
$ 3,688
$
$ 13,864
$ 480,299

$ 11,633
0.24 $ 460,617
0.1 $ 215,160
0.66 ########
$ 75,072
1.00 ########

$ 6,879
$ 88,511
$ 41,345
$ 328,877
$ 45,963
$ 504,695

$ 6,879
$ 88,511
$ 41,345
$ 328,877
$ 45,963
$ 504,695

0.72
0.19
0.04
0.01
0
0.04
1.00

Polymer Feed - Yes I know - This is a place holder equiation. I need to find out how these chemical injection systems differ fro
Capital Cost
General Form: A*e^(B*X)+C
A=
11760.71
B=
0.00665
C=
8200
O&M Cost
General Form: A*e^(B*X)
A=
B=

3000.8
0.00207

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{m}De-Cl2

Chemical options:

Applicable Range
Lower Limit Upper Limit
0.5
100

ese chemical injection systems differ from polymer.

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{n}CL2

Units
Production Flow
Chromium (Cr 2+):
Nickel (Ni 2+):
Iron (Fe 2+):
Manganese (Mn 2+):

0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L

Total:
Desired Residual
Cl2 needed
Alternative Dose
Basis
Cl2 Cost

2.50
2.50
0.00
946.25
20

1978 Capital Cost:


Manufactured & Electrical Equipment
Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:

1978 O&M Cost:


Materials
Energy
Labor
Chemical Cost $/yr:
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

Chlorine storage and feed with Cylinder storage


Capital Cost
General Form: A*X^B + C
A=
B=
C=
O&M Cost
General Form: A*X^B+C
A=
B=
C=

Alternative Units

4,380.79 L/sec.

mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
kg/day
per ton, tanks

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

137,974
199,102
135,936
25,019
11,487
371,544

$
0.18 $
0.18 $
0.64 $
$
1.00 $

27,196
10,189
11,422
48,947
7,234
77,792

0.52
0.38
0.06
0.04
0
0
1.00

680.75
0.763
11010

47.6
0.89
6000

W ater Treatment Cost Estimation Program

0.00E+00
0.00E+00
0.00E+00
0.00E+00
0.00E+00
3.52E-02
3.52E-02

mMoles/L
mMoles/L
mMoles/L
mMoles/L
mMoles/L
mMoles/L
mMoles/L

NHCL
Data from water analysis.
Production Flow to be treated

Units
4380.79 L/sec.

Alternative Units

Chromium (Cr):
Copper (Cu):
Iron (Fe):
Manganese (Mn):

0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

Desired NH2Cl Residual

3.00 mg/L

5.84E-02 mMoles/L

Cl2 needed/L:
Ammonia Needed/L:
Calculated Cl2 Dose

4.14 mg/L
0.99 mg/L

5.84E-02 mMoles/L
5.84E-02 mMoles/L

1568.49 kg/day

Alternative Cl2 Dose

2.15 kg/day

Basis Cl2 Dose


Cl2 Cost $/ton:
Calculated Aqua Ammonia
Alternative Aqua Ammonia
Basis Ammonia kg/day:
NH4OH Cost $/ton:
Total Capital Cost
Total O&M Cost

mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L

0.00E+00
0.00E+00
0.00E+00
0.00E+00

mMoles/L
mMoles/L
mMoles/L
mMoles/L

Applicable Range

20 per ton
375.55
757.00
757.00
200

Applicable Range
Lower Limit Upper Limit
4
4500
Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b,
figure storage
1-3)
Chlorine
and feed with Cylinder storage

2.15 kg/day
$

The addition of Chlorine and Ammonia to water produces chloramines.


Chloramines are the "combined chlorine residual." They are more persistent
in the water lines than "free chlorine," which is HOCl, and OCl-.
If there is sufficient ammonia in the water already, it doesn't need to be added,
of course. If not, chlorine and aqueous ammonia should be added at the molar
ratio of 1:1, Cl2:NH3(aq). We will use the moles of divalent metal ions
and NO2- to calculate a chlorine demand. The molar ratio is 1:2 Cl2 to divalent
cations, and 1:1 for Cl2:NO2-. The residual for Chloramines must be at least
2 mg/L which translates to approximately .03 moles per liter at pH 7.

Lower Limit Upper Limit

kg/day
kg/day
kg/day
per ton

1665.4 lbs/day

#VALUE!
$57,885

O&M Cost
A=
B=
C=
Source: Qasim, et al, Aug. 1992, AWWA

Chlorine Feed
1978 Capital Cost:

Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:
1978 O&M Cost:

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

12,230
16,489
10,844
2,036
957
30,326

0.18 $
0.18 $
0.64 $
$
1.00 $

16
16

0.52
0.38
0.06
0.04
0
0
1.00

Capital Cost:
A*X^B*e^(C*X)
A=
B=
C=
O&M Cost:
A*e^(B*X) +C
A=
B=
C=

Ammonia Feed
1978 Capital Cost:

Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:
1978 O&M Cost:
Materials
Energy
Labor
Ammonia Cost:
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

0.66
0.09
0.15
0.1
0
0
1.00
%

$
0.4 $
0.06 $
0.54 $
$
1.00 $

680.75
0.763
11010

47.6
0.89
6000

Anhydrous Ammonia Feed


same place and form.
X=kg/day ammonia feed capacity

Materials
Energy
Labor
Chemical Cost $/yr:
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

General Form: A*X^B + C

110
2300
Capital Cost
Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b,
A= figure 42-44)
B=
C=

#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
#VALUE!
12,776
57,869
57,869

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

3849.2
mg/L
-0.000035

-28063
-2.41E-04
36160

{p} Ozone

Production Flow to be treated


Flow Rate:
Ozone level required (typically 1-5 mg/L)
Total ozone needed:
Contact time :
Contact chamber size:
Power (~26.5kWh per kg ozone):

4380.79
262847
1
378.50
2
525.7
22067

Units
L/s
L/min
mg/L
kg/day
min
m3

Alternative Units
69444 gpm
832.7 lbs/day
3
##### ft

kWh

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS: $ 2,927,245


TOTAL OPERATING COSTS: $

233,064

Note: Ozone requirements (ozone demand) are based on water quality analysis outside of this program

Ozone Generator:
Ozone Requirements:

1978 Capital Cost:

Contact Chamber:
378.50 kg/day

Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:
1978 O&M Cost:
Materials
Energy
Labor
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:
Ozone Generation Costs
Construction Costs:
General Form: A *X ^B*e^(C*X)
A=
B=
C=
O & M Costs:
General Form: A*X^B+C
A=
B=
C=

0.81
0.03
0.16
0.00
0.00
0.00
1.00

$ 972,674
#######
$ 75,656
$ 470,344
$
$
$
#######

0.11
0.77
0.12
1.00

$ 98,627
$ 22,580
$ 177,200
$ 33,283
$ 233,064

Applicable Range
Lower Limit Upper Limit
4
1800
Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 11-13)

18631.2
0.674
-0.000121

1978 Capital Cost:


B) Manufactured Equipment
H) Housing
A) Excavation and Site Work
F) Piping and Valves
D) Steel
C) Concrete
Capital Cost:

%
0.00
0.00
0.50
0.00
0.31
0.19
1.00

Ozone Contact Chamber Costs


Construction Costs:
General Form: A *X ^B+C
A=
1771.4
B=
0.5967
C=
1700
O&M Costs: NONE

392.4
0.919
6800

Source: Qasim, et al, Aug. 1992, AWWA

Source: Qasim, et al, Aug. 1992, AWWA

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

$ 72,735
$
$
######
$
$ 57,911
$ 27,032
######

{q}LimeFeed

Volume Treated

FROM WATER ANALYSIS


Ca (2+):
Mg (2+):
HCO3 (-):
CO2 (2-):
Excess:
Total
volume treated:
Lime Dose:
Lime Cost $/ton:
Soda Ash Cost $/ton:
Alternative dosage rate Lime
Alternative dosage rate Soda

2.1
0.0
180.0
0.8

Materials
Energy
Labor
Lime Cost:
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

Alternative Units
0.1 mmoles/L
0.0 mmoles/L
3.0 mmoles/L
0.0 mmoles/L

0.0 mg/L
0.0
0.0
0.72
5.0
6.4

mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L

0.0 mg/L

118 mg/L

0 mg/L

$
$

60
160
0.0
0.0

mg/L
per ton
kg/hr.
kg/hr.

117.8 kg/hr
0.0 kg/hr

Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:
1978 O&M Cost:

Units
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L

Soda Ash
Requirement
0.58

18554 m /hr.

Basis Lime:
Basis Soda:

1978 Capital Cost:

Lime
Requirement
Purity
0.9

5154 L/sec.

0.7
0.25
0.02
0.03
0
0
1.00
%

Applicable Range
Lower Limit Upper Limit
4
4500 Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 24-26)
4
4500

$
88,611
$ 172,131
$
57,435
$
5,356
$
5,533
$
$
$ 240,456

$
15,124
0.06 $
1,889
0.09 $
3,176
0.85 $
36,151
$
64,799
1.00 $ 106,016

Updated from
EPA-600/2-79-162b, Aug. 1979

W ater Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{q}LimeFeed

Mg
Ratio
Limit
eq
mg/L

Ca
1
0.00
0.00
0.0

Mg
Ratio
eq
mg/L

Ca

(From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 24-26)

1.80

1
0.05
2.1
Ca

1
0.000
0.0

100
0.09
100
11.4
19

HCO3+CO2 Ca(OH)2 Mg and Ca react with Alkalinity and Lime to precipitate CaCO3 and Mg(OH)2
4
3

0.00
0.0

1
0.00
0.0
Mg

Ratio
eq
mg/L

0.00
0.0

0.00
0.0

HCO3+CO2 Ca(OH)2 Remaining Mg or Ca react with remaining alkalinity


2
1
5.94
0.00
362.1
0.0

Na2CO3
Ca(OH)2 If Ca and/or Mg are in excess of Alkalinity, then add soda ash
1 1*mg+1*Ca 1*Mg
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.0
0.0
0.0

mol/m3
g/mol Calcium Carbonate
g CaCO3 /m3 treated
g sludge/m3 treated assuming 30% solids

8,493 kg sludge per day


18,684 lbs sludge per day

W ater Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{r}Antiscalent

Units
Volume Treated
Alternative dosage rate (default = 0.5 mg/L):
Basis Polymer Feed
American Water Chemicals $/500 lb.:

1978 Capital Cost:

5,154
0
222.6
500

Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:
1978 O&M Cost:

0.76
0.19
0.04
0.01
0
0
1.00
%

Materials
Energy
Labor
AntiScalant Cost $/yr:
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

Polymer Feed
Capital Cost
General Form: A*e^(B*X)+C
A=
B=
C=

Alternative Units

L/sec.
445,294
mg/L
kg/day
per 500 lbs.

$ 59,895
$ 126,323
$ 29,505
$
7,241
$
1,247
$
$
$ 164,315

$
4,758
0.1 $
990
0.24 $
2,664
0.66 $
8,830
$ 170,232
1.00 $ 182,717

11760.71
0.00665
8200

O&M Cost
General Form: A*e^(B*X)
A=
B=

3000.8
0.00207

Source: Qasim, et al, Aug. 1992, AWWA

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{s}PolyElectrolyte

Units
Volume Treated
Alternative dosage rate (default = 0.5 mg/L):
Basis Polymer Feed
American Water Chemicals $/500 lb.:

1978 Capital Cost:

1978 O&M Cost:

Materials
Energy
Labor
PolyElectrolyte Cost $/yr:
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

O&M Cost
General Form: A*e^(B*X)
A=
B=

L/sec.
mg/L
kg/day
per 500 lbs.

0.76
0.19
0.04
0.01
0
0
1.00

$ 59,895
$ 126,323
$ 29,505
$
7,241
$
1,247
$
$
$ 164,315

Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:

Polymer Feed
Capital Cost
General Form: A*e^(B*X)+C
A=
B=
C=

5154
0
222.6
500

Alternative Units
445,294

$
4,758
0.1 $
990
0.24 $
2,664
0.66 $
8,830
$ 170,232
1.00 $ 182,717

11760.71
0.00665
8200

3000.8
0.00207

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{t}KMnO4

Units
Feed/Product Flow
Mn 2+
Fe 2+
Calculated KMnO4 Dose:
Alternative dosage rate
Basis KMnO4
KMnO4 $/lb (hopper trucks):

5154
0.00
0.00
0.000
2
890.6
1.9

1978 Capital Cost:


Manufactured & Electrical Equipment
Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:

1978 O&M Cost:


Materials
Energy
Labor
KMnO4 Cost $/yr:
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

Permanganate Feed
Capital Cost
General Form: A*X^B*e^(C*X)
A=
B=
C=

0.66
0.19
0.05
0.1
0
0
1.00

L/sec.
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
mg/L
kg/day
per lb.

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

Alternative Units
3
445,294 m /day

35,277
64,612
17,378
5,331
7,342
94,662

$ 5,600
0.03 $
350
0.05 $
653
0.92 $ 14,488
########
1.00 ########

9681.7
0.0304
0.00122

O&M Cost
General Form: A*e^(B*X)+C
A=
B=
C=

-2125.9
-0.01689
5600

Source: Qasim, et al, Aug. 1992, AWWA

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{v}Clearwell

Construction cost for clear well storage


Below Ground (concrete)
Storage Capacity

15852 kgal
3
60000 m

1978 Capital Cost:

Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost:
November 2006 Unit Cost ($/kgal)

0.02
0.13
0.3173
0
0.2753
0.25695
1.00
$512

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

3,169,927
175,936
1,068,429
3,039,822
2,241,342
1,593,252
8,118,781

Data from EPA-600/2-79-162b, August 1979, pg453-454. They are used in determining cost formula.

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{v}Clearwell

Ground Level (steel)


Storage Capacity

1978 Capital Cost:


Manufactured & Electrical Equipment
Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost:
November 2006 Unit Cost ($/kgal)

14531 kgal
3
55000 m
%
0.6891
0.13
0.01
0.07066
0.044
0.0569
1.00
$297

$ 1,628,817
$ 3,114,799
$
548,995
$
49,227
$
239,546
$
184,068
$
181,289
$ 4,317,924

ining cost formula.

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{w}GravityFilt

Units
Desired Flow Rate
Temperature
Total Suspended Solids
Wash Cycle
TSS Density
Media Depth

22.0
24
35
1.2

Maximum Media Capacity


Required Media Volume
Calculated Bed Area:
Alternative Bed Area:
Tank Depth
Backwash rate
Backwash duration
Backwash frequency
Loading Rate
Media Cost Delivered
$/yd3 Sand
$/yd3 Coal
$/yd3 Greensand
$/yd3 Garnet

Alternative Units
81721 gpm

5153.87 L/s
53.15 oF

110
2,544.54
2,120.45
0.00
1.56
13.93
6

mg/L
hr
g/L*
m
L-TSS/m3*
m3
m2
m2
m
gpm/ft2
min.
times per day

1.31 yd
3328.26
4156.08
0.00
1.7

yd3
yd2
yd2
yd

2.2 gpm/sqft

$
$
$
$

540
540
1,620
1,215

TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS:


Rapid Sand:
Coal/ Sand:
Coal/ Sand/ Garnet:
Sand/Greensand/Coal
TOTAL OPERATING COSTS:
Media costs assume equal parts of each type.

$
$
$
$

699
699
2,098
1,573

$/m3
$/m3
$/m3
$/m3

$ 17,568,907
$ 1,797,258
$ 1,797,258
$ 2,546,115
$ 2,995,430
$
730,268

*Media capacity based on information in 'Water Treatment and Plant Design',


R.L. Sanks, Co: 1978, Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc.
Construction cost is 100% Manufactured Equipment
O&M costs are included with the structure.

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

{w}GravityFilt

Gravity Filter
Backwashing Pump

Gravity Filter Structure


Applicable Range
Lower Limit
Upper Limit

What is relationship of BW pump to filter


area for min and max calcs
Actual
Filter area (m2):
2,120.45

13

2600

Filter area (m ):
Limits (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 67-69)

1978 Capital Cost:

2,150,536

1978 Capital Cost:

Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:

0.69
0
0.07
0.24
0
0
1.00

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

4,117,857
454,960
1,074,241
5,647,058

Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:

1978 O&M Cost:


Materials
Energy
Labor
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

%
0.24
0.52
0.24
1.00

$
$
$
$
$

25,105
12,540
30,460
16,944
59,945

Backwash Pumping Costs


Construction Costs:
General Form: A + B*X + C*X^2
A=
B=
C=
O & M Costs:
General Form: A*X^B+C
A=
B=
C=
Source: Qasim, et al, Aug. 1992, AWWA

36000
1254.21
-0.1212

73.3
0.75
2200

1978 O&M Cost:


Materials
Energy
Labor
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

Gravity Filter Structure Costs


Construction Costs:
General Form: A *X^B*e^(CX)
A=
B=
C=
O & M Costs:
General Form: A*X^B+C
A=
B=
C=
Source: Qasim, et al, Aug. 1992, AWWA

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

Applicable Range
Lower Limit
Upper Limit
18000

Actual
2,120.45

13

4,625,190

0.26
0.18
0.22
0.23
0.05
0.06
1.00

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

3,337,171
2,158,515
3,075,255
2,214,120
593,953
542,835
11,921,849

0.12
0.36
0.52
1.00

$
$
$
$
$

262,655
65,601
220,630
384,092
670,324

35483.4
0.591
0.000162

359.5
0.8568
8100

260016000
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0

y = 53.377x0.7007
R = 0.9941

1000

50
100
200
300
400
600
800
1000
1200
2000
1400
1600
1800
2000
2300
2600
2800

{x}UFSCC

Upflow Solids Contact Clarifier (UFSCC)

Production Flow to be treated


Retention Time
Assumed Depth = 4.8 m
Calculated Settling Area
Alternative settling Area
Basis:

4380.79
180
4.8
9856.8
0
9856.8

1978 Construction Cost


Manufactured & Electrical Equipment
Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:

%
0.516
0
0.293
0
0.11
0.081

%
1978 O&M Cost:
Materials
Energy
Labor
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

Units
L/sec
min.
m
m2
m2
2
m

Alternative Units
69444 gpm

$ 2,921,679
$ 4,183,673
$
$ 2,587,194
$
$ 825,425
$ 462,918
$ 8,059,211

G=70
$
58,325
0.17 $
20,637
0.23 $
31,301
0.6 $
98,413
$ 150,352

G=110
$ 92,595
0.14 $ 26,981
0.38 $ 82,101
0.48 $ 124,989
$ 234,071

Construction Cost Equations (From EPA-600/2-79-162b, figure 63)


$ = a+b*x
a
b
<400 m2
62801.114 416.77163
>400 m2
132264.71 244.33215
O&M Cost (From EPA-600/2-79-162b figure 63 & 64)
$=a+b*x
G = 70
G = 110
G = 150

a
b
5967.9519 5.3118202
5806.5744
8.80491
5939.8245 12.384121

W ater Treatment Cost Estimation Program

$
0.11 $
0.5 $
0.39 $
$

G=150
128,007
29,307
149,342
140,393
319,042

{y}IX

Ion Exchange
Regeneration/Backwashing Pump

Production Flow to be treated


Equiv/L , CATION >+1
Equiv/L , ANION
Service Flow Rate :
Cation Equivalents/Liter of Resin
Anion Equivalents/Liter of Resin
Desired Run Cycle:

4380.79
1.05E-04
7.21E-03
20
20
11
1

Medium:
Min Volume:
Time until exhaustion of min volume:
Resin for desired Run Cycle:
Resin Expansion Coefficient
Total Vessel Volume
Nominal Resin Price $/m3
Resin Cost:

Filter area (m2):

L/s
equiv/L
equiv/L
L/(hr*L resin)
equiv/L
equiv/L
days

Applicable Range
Lower Limit Upper Limit
16
40

Cation

Anion
3
788.5 m
3.2 days
3
788.54 m
2
3
1,577
1,577 m
$1,607
$6,250
1,267,299 $4,928,385
788.5
397.6
788.54
2

Units
3
150 kg/m
236,563 kg
$0.02 per kg
820,280

10 percent
3
2,366 m
591,406

Mass of NaCl /vol of resin:


NaCl required:
Chemical cost per kg NaCl:
TOTAL CHEMICAL COST PER YEAR:

Chemical concentration:
Regeneration fluid req'd :
STORAGE TANK COST:

Units
Pumping
Height DIfference
Pipe Diameter
Length of Pipe
Efficiency
Number Transfer Pumps
Pressure Differential
Capacity per Pump
Size

32
0.51
10
78
1
200
5.154
6512.9

m
m
m

kPa
m3/s
hp

1978 Capital Cost:


Manufactured & Electrical Equipment
Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:

1978 O&M Cost:

0.69
0.00
0.07
0.24
0.00
0.00
1.00

Materials
Energy
Labor
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

Vessel:
Aspect ratio:
4 height/dia
2
Bed area :
49.61 m
Base pressure vessel correlation:
Number of Vessels (Reality check) Height is 31.8 m
(446 kPa/ 50 psig)
b=
3.446
log($) = b + m*log(m^3)
m=
0.562
Cost factor for operating pressure:
2
Tank cost at base pressure:
$ 174,786
TOTAL TANK COST:
$ 349,572

Regeneration (with NaCl)

Applicable Range
Lower Limit Upper Limit
Actual
49.61
13
2600

Alternative Units
3
9 lb/ft
521,526 lb
$0.01 per lb.

Total Construction Cost:


Manufactured & Electrical Equipment
Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
Steel
Concrete
November 2006 Capital Cost $:

1978 O&M Cost:

Materials
Energy
Labor
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:

3,570

0.24
0.52
0.24
1.00

$
$
$
$

1,783
4,332
2,410
8,525

0.57
0.01
0.03
0.43
0.00
0.00
1.04

$ 2,208,278 Resin w/ Tank & Regeneration Tank


$ 1,845,612
$
31,839
$
86,053
$ 1,118,253
$
$
$ 3,081,756
$ 820,280

0.24
0.52
0.24
1.00

625 kgal

Alternative Units

80,000 gallon
100,000 gallon

104.3 ft
1.7 ft
32.8 ft

29.0 psi
81,699 gpm

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

$
97,922
$ 187,501
$
$
20,716
$
48,914
$
$
$ 257,131

319,000.00
333,000.00

$
$
$
$

233,956
426,546
179,673
840,175

{z}MF-P input

Process input
Design MF product flow rate
Design MF product flow rate
Design MF product flow rate
Design MF product flow rate
Design MF product flow rate
Plant availability (%)
Membrane Module equipment cost
Cost per membrane
modular system flow rate
Flow per module
No. membranes per module
Pump efficiency
Motor efficiency
Design feed pressure
Backflush pressure
Backwash Flow
Backwash intervals
Backwash and backflush duration

99,989,169
100.0
69437
4380
378,459

95
211,500
$650
675
7.5
90
80
93
30
29
600
15
0.1

Units
gpd
MGD
gpm
L/s
3
m /day

Alternative Units

Alternative Units

Lower Limit Upper Limit


0.01

378,459,004

L/day

%
90M10C
gpm
gpm
%
%
psi
psi
gpm
minutes
minutes

42.6 L/s

207
200
37.9
900
6

kpa
kpa
L/s
second
second

0.972 MGD

576
0.0104 days
0.0001 days

Operations & Maintenance Cost Input


Electricity Rate
Sodium Hypochlorite Cost
Design dosage
Specific gravity (NaOCl)
Solution concentration
Membrane Life
Staff Days/day

0.07
0.43
200
1.168
12
10
3

Process Flow Calculation


Units
Feed flow
4380.3 L/s
Product flow
4351.1 L/s
Backwash
908.4 L/hr
Recovery rate
99.3 %
Feed pump horsepower
1519 hp
Feed pump (kwh)
9,429,856 kwh
Backflush (kwh)
62,866 kwh
Number of Modules
103
Number of Membranes
9270
Building Area
49995 ft2

$/kWh
$/L
mg/L
%
Years

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

Alternative Units
69430 gpm
68966 gpm
4 gpm

4645 m2

O&M Cost Estimation


Direct Capital Costs
Membrane Modules
Membrane
Building
Installation
Miscellaneous
Plant interconnecting piping
Engineering
Total Direct Capital Costs

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

21,784,500
6,025,500
4,999,464
7,210,000
1,089,225
1,143,686
2,287,373
44,539,748

Indirect Capital Costs


Interest During Construction
Contingencies
A&E Fees, Proj. Management
Working Capital
Total Indirect Captial Cost

$
$
$
$
$

2,672,000
8,908,000
4,454,000
1,782,000
17,816,000

Total Construction Cost

$ 62,355,748

@
@
@
@

211500
650
100
70000
5
5
10

6
20
10
4

$ each
$ each
2
$/ft2
1076 $/m
$/90M10C
% of Module Cost
% of Module and misc.
% of Module and misc.

Electricity
Labor
Chemicals (Sodium Hypochlorite)
Membrane Replacement
Cleaning Chemicals(NaOCl)
Repairs and Replacement and Misc.
Total O & M Cost

% of Total direct
% of Total direct
% of Total direct
% of Total direct

Total costs

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

664,491
254,000
215,000
603,000
43,000
891,000
2,670,491

196019357.xls.ms_office

Pure water permeability (m3/s)


Feed Flow (m3/s)
Transmembrane pressure (Pa)
Area (m2)
Channel height dh(m)
Cf (mol/m3)
Density (kg/m3)
Viscosity (Pa s)
a (Pa m3mol-1)
Diffusivity of NaCl (m 2/s)

2.66E-04
2.66E-03
1,550,000
37
1.00E-05

3.97E+00
3.97E+01
1,404,096
551245
1.00E-05

25.68

13.96

1000
0.001
4908
1.20E-09

1000
0.001
4908
1.20E-09

Calculated paramters determined by configuration and operating


conditions
Jv (m/s) 1st pass
7.19E-06
7.19E-06
Pv/tm (m3m-2s-1Pa-1)
4.64E-12
5.12E-12
Average Uc (m/s)
Schmidt Number
Reynolds Number
a
b
c
k (m/s) for laminar flow in flat channel

1.44E+01
838
143
0.875
0.250
0.065
3.23E-03

1.44E+01
838
143
0.875
0.250
0.065
3.23E-03

0.996

0.996
0.996
0.996
0.995
0.995

Ra Test

A
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
A and B

Iterations neccessary for model convergence (pp 9.13 item 8, reference A)


Solving the design equations
1
2
3
4
Jv/k
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Recovery
0.1000
0.0910
0.0911
0.0911
Intrinsic Rejection Ro
0.996
0.996
0.996
0.996
Appartent Rejection Ra
0.9955
0.9956
0.9956
0.9956
Cw (mol/L)
28.5895
2.83E+01
2.83E+01
2.83E+01

5
0.00
0.0911
0.996
0.9956

6
0.00
0.0911
0.996
0.9956

7
0.00
0.0911
0.996
0.9956

8
0.00
0.0911
0.996
0.9956

Cp (mol/L)
Cr (mol/L)
3

-2

Jv Theoretical (m m s)
Exp (Jv/k)

{bb}Rejection

2.83E+01

2.83E+01

2.83E+01

2.83E+01

0.1144

1.13E-01

1.13E-01

1.13E-01

1.13E-01

1.13E-01

1.13E-01

1.13E-01

28.5261

28.2444

28.2472

28.2472

28.2472

28.2472

28.2472

28.2472

6.55E-06

6.55E-06

6.55E-06

6.55E-06

6.55E-06

6.55E-06

6.55E-06

6.55E-06

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

1.00

Project Name

Model Development

Date

Stage

06/07/04

A1

This sheet originally from Ellen


Velocity

2.3 m/sec

Outfall Length (enter "m" or "ft.")

100 m

Concentrate Flow
Pipe Diameter
dP

0.70
0.62
0.37
99.9
900

Schedule 80 Pipe Cost

Total Pipe Cost

What is purpose of graph?


Show dp or diameter as a func
other

Used for predicting optimum pi

Two equations, one simpler (D


Wisebeck) given to calculate d
on pipe diameter size.

m /sec
m
m
kPa
$/m

The other eqn which is used to


Hazen Williams with HDPE pip

$90,025

Use this one.


Velocity

Length
2.3

100

Flow m /s Diameter (m) dP1 kPa


dP2 kPa
0.001
0.024
22.947
4.496
0.01
0.074
5.379
1.422
0.02
0.105
3.476
1.005
0.03
0.129
2.692
0.821
0.04
0.149
2.246
0.711
0.05
0.166
1.952
0.636
0.06
0.182
1.740
0.580
0.07
0.197
1.579
0.537
0.08
0.210
1.451
0.503
0.09
0.223
1.348
0.474
0.1
0.235
1.261
0.450
0.11
0.247
1.188
0.429
0.12
0.258
1.124
0.410
0.13
0.268
1.069
0.394
0.14
0.278
1.020
0.380
0.15
0.288
0.977
0.367
0.16
0.298
0.938
0.355
0.17
0.307
0.903
0.345
0.18
0.316
0.871
0.335
0.19
0.324
0.842
0.326
0.2
0.333
0.815
0.318
0.3
0.408
0.631
0.260
0.4
0.471
0.527
0.225
0.5
0.526
0.457
0.201
0.6
0.576
0.408
0.184
0.7
0.623
0.370
0.170
0.8
0.666
0.340
0.159
0.9
0.706
0.316
0.150
1
0.744
0.296
0.142
1.1
0.781
0.278
0.136
1.2
0.815
0.264
0.130

1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
2

0.849
0.881
0.911
0.941
0.970
0.998
1.026
1.052

0.251
0.239
0.229
0.220
0.212
0.204
0.197
0.191

0.125
0.120
0.116
0.112
0.109
0.106
0.103
0.101

What is purpose of graph?


Show dp or diameter as a function of the

Used for predicting optimum pipe diameter.


Two equations, one simpler (DarcyWisebeck) given to calculate dP, depending
on pipe diameter size.
The other eqn which is used to calculate dP is
Hazen Williams with HDPE pipe, Cf = 145

Pressure Drop vs Diameter - Two


Versions
100
Eq III

dP (Kpa)

Alt

10
1
0
0.0

0.5
Diameter (m)

1.0

Project Name

Model Development

Date

Stage

06/07/04

A1

Ionics Formulas for USBR Pricing of an EDR System


Last Revision Date

7/6/2000

TDS
1000 mg/l
Production Flow
105.25 mgd
Capital Cost
$
35,326,384
Total Power
22.8 kWh/Kgal
Membrane Replacement
$
5,049,026
WATER RECOVERY
75%
Staff days/day
3
All cost numbers are only within +,- 15%
Estimate O&M Costs
Electricity
Labor
Membrane Replacement
Cleaning Chemicals
Cartridge Filters
Repairs and Replacement
Insurance
Lab fees
Total O & M Cost

$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$

58,171,969
31,810
5,049,026
105,252
2,024,874
176,632
70,653
1,010,417
66,640,633

Total Costs

35,326,384

Capital Recovery

2,566,423

Annual cost

69,207,056

$/m Product
$/1000 gal Product
$/acre foot Product

$0.50
$1.90
$617.99

Ms. Antonia von Gottberg


avongottberg@ionics.com, personal communication.

500

{ee}ED2

First Stage
Input from Interface
Production Flow to be treated
Flow Rate
Feed TDS
Product TDS
Average Equivalent Weight:
Percent Recovery:
Production Data
Delta N eq/m3:
Desal Ratio:

Value:
4380.79
15771
500
500
35.55
0.5

0.470

Sum cations efficiencies:

0.470

Cl-:

0.470

Sum anions efficiencies:

0.470

Transport effieciency:
Sum of Anion & Cation Efficiency.
Area/membrane pair Asahi is 0.85 m^2
Dilute side resistance "Rd"
Concentrate side resistance "Rc"
Membrane resistance "Rm"
Total resistance Rt = (Rd+Rc+Rm):
Current density
Current Efficiency:
Membrane Voltage Potential "Vm"
Voltage per cell Vc = Rt*CD+Vm:

0.940

Membrane Requirements
Total Membrane Area
Number of cell pairs:

Sample Values:

0.850
0
0
0.070
0.070
30
0.860

Membrane Replacement
Membrane Cost/m2:
Membrane Life Expectancy (yrs):
Construction Cost Items
Construction Cost Factor (%):
Electricity Cost $/kWh:
Labor and Overhead
Labor cost, Lh ($/h)
Shifts per day, S (number/day)
Workers per shift, Ws (number/shift)

0.00
1.00

Membrane Characteristics
Transport efficiencies Sum<=1.00
Insert rows after Na+ or Clto add more ion efficiencies.
Na+:

Energy Requirements
Power requirements
Pumping energy requirements
Total

Units
L/sec.
3
m /Hr.
mg/L
mg/L

0.400

Capital Recovery
System lifetime, r (yr)
Downtime, Dt (%)
Annual interest rate, i (%)

Suggested Values
25.00 $
100.00
15
15

1.65
0.07 $

1.65
0.08

29.05 $
0.2
1

15.00
0.2
1

30
0.05
6

First Stage Capital Costs


Based on Membrane Cost @ $25/m2

First Stage O&M Costs/ year


Chemicals
Maintenance
Membrane Replacement:
Labor Cost:
ED Electicity Cost/year @ $0.07/kWhr:
Capital Recovery
November 2006 O&M $:

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

1,249
16,965
82,201
100,415

0.400

m2
(ohms/cm)/cm2
(ohms/cm)/cm2
(ohms/cm)/cm2:
amps/m2

0.860
30 - 300

volts/pair
0.021

0.00 kWhr/m3:
0.17 kWhr/m3
64345 kWh/day

1.000

0.17

0 m2
0

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

15
15
10

{ee}ED2

Second Stage
Input from Interface
Flow Rate
Flow Rate
Feed TDS
Product TDS
Ave Equivalent Weight:
Percent Recovery:
Production Data
Delta N
Desal Ratio:

Value:
2576.9
9277
500
500
35.55
0.50

0.470

Sum cations efficiencies:

0.470

Cl-:

0.470

Sum anions efficiencies:

0.470

Transport effieciency:
Sum of Anion & Cation Efficiency.
Area/membrane pair Asahi is 0.85 m^2
Dilute side resistance "Rd"
Concentrate side resistance "Rc"
Membrane resistance "Rm"
Total resistance Rt = (Rd+Rc+Rm):
Current density
Current Efficiency:
Membrane Voltage Potential "Vm"
Voltage per cell Vc = Rt*CD+Vm:

0.940

Membrane Requirements
Total Membrane Area
Number of cell pairs:

0.850
0
0
0.070
0.070
30
0.860
0.650
0.671

Labor and Overhead


Labor cost, Lh ($/h)
Shifts per day, S (number/day)
Workers per shift, Ws (number/shift)

1.65
$0.07

1.65
0.08

29.05
0.2
1

15
0.2
1

30
0.05
6

15
15
10

0.400

Second Stage Capital Costs


Based on Membrane Cost @ $100/m2

Second Stage O&M Costs/ year


Chemicals
Maintenance
Membrane Replacement:
Labor Cost:
ED Electicity Cost/year @ $0.07/kWhr:
Capital Recovery
November 2006 O&M $:

$
$
$
$
$
$
$

1,249
848
48,353
50,450

0.860
30 - 300

1.000

0.17

0 m2
0

Total
Total capital cost (1st and 2nd stage)

Suggested Values
100
15

0.400

volts/pair

0.00 kWhr/m3
0.17 kWhr/m3
37850 kWh/day

$100.00
15

Capital Recovery
System lifetime, r (yr)
Downtime, Dt (%)
Annual interest rate, i (%)

m2
(ohms/cm)/cm2
(ohms/cm)/cm2
(ohms/cm)/cm2
amps/m2

Membrane Replacement
Membrane Cost/m2:
Membrane Life Expectancy (yrs):
Construction Cost Items
Construction Cost Factor (%):
Electricity Cost $/kWh:

0.00 equiv/m3
1.00

Membrane Characteristics
Transport efficiencies Sum<=1.00
Insert rows after Na+ or Clto add more ion efficiencies.
Na+:

Energy Requirements
Power requirements
Pumping energy requirements
Total

Sample Values:
L/sec
m3/hr.
mg/L
mg/L

$0

Water Treatment Cost Estimation Program

Project Name

Model Development

Date

Stage

06/07/04

A1

Pumps
Number of pumps:
Height differential:
Discharge pressure:
Full flow rate:
Basis flow rate
Pump Efficiency:
Velocity (m/s)
Motor Efficiency:
HP
Power consumption:

1
100
1750
5.15
5.15
75
2.4
87
24251
20795

Alternative Units
328.1
254
81,699
81,699

ft
psi
gal/min
gal/min

8 ft/sec

hp calc may change if hp calc c


kW

PD
VST
Cent
3 - 300 HP
3 - 500 HP
3 - 1200 HP
7,275,306
3,016,431
234
1,727,931
1,727,931
1,727,931
4,000
$9,003,237
$4,748,362 $1,728,164

Direct Costs (material and labor)


Pump, drive, Piping and driver
Piping
Controls
Installed Capital Cost

Operating Costs
Power Cost $/year
Lubrication ($/L oil)
Cooling water ($/m3 water)
Maintenance (hr/Hp)

Units
pump
m
kPa
m3/s
m3/s
%
m/s
%

12,113,659
59,483
9,559,752
1,056,738
$22,789,633
Source: "Pump Handbook" Karassik, Krutzsch, Fraser and Messina pg (9-66)
0.7
0.075
1.5

Required Information
Plant life expectancy, n
Annual Interest Rate, i
Annual fixed-charge rate, AFC
Present-worth factor, PWF
Captial-recovery factor, CRF
Operating factor, OF
Annual levelized cost, ALC

30
6%
10
13.76
0.073
0.95
$0

calc may change if hp calc changes for RO sheet

6.31E-05
6.31E-04
3.15E-03
6.31E-03
6.31E-02
1.26E-01
3.15E-01

1
10
50
100
1000
2000
5000

235.9613
235.613
234.065
232.13
197.3
158.6
42.5

250
200
150
100
50
0
0

2000

gal/min

y = -0.0387x + 236
R = 1

gal/min

2000

4000

6000

Linear (gal/min)

Project Name

Model Development

Date

Stage

06/07/04

A1

Stiff and Davis Saturation Index


For water with TDS > 15000 mg/L

Ca+2 mg/L as CaCO3

Alkf mg/L as CaCO3

148

CO2 mg/L as CO2

7.91 Calculated from alkalinity & pH

H
Major Ions mg/L
TDS Concentrate
Cac=

2.88E-08
500
3317
35

Alkc=

979

Ionic Strengthf =

0.01

Ionic Strengthc =
pCa
pAlk
pHs =

0.05
4.28
2.55
9.21

S&DSIf

-1.67

pCac

3.46

pAlkc

1.70

pHsc =

7.66

Alkc/CO2

2.38 K from 'Stiff&Davis'

2.50 for concentrate Ionic Strength and Temperature

123.85

pHc =

8.34

S&DSIc
For the Concentrate Stream with Acid
Guess mg H2SO4

0.68

Alk C acid

972

879

CO2 acid

14

97

Alk c acid/CO2 acid

68.4

9.1

pHc acid
pAlk
pHs =

8.09
1.70
7.67

7.24
1.75
7.71

pHc =

8.09

7.24

S&DSI (c adjusted)

0.42

-0.48

7.00 Guess mg HCl

73.40

h and Temperature

Project Name

Model Development

Date

Stage

06/07/04

A1

Use pCa and pAlk and pH vs MO Alk/CO 2 from 'Stiff&Davis' sheet


From Water Analysis
Caf in mg/L CaCO 3
Alk f in mg/L CaCO 3
TDSf
pHf
Temperature
pHf
CO 2f
pCaf
pAlkf
"C"
pHs
LSIf

5
148
500
7.54
12
7.54
8
4.28
2.55
2.48
9.31
-1.77

From Report or RO&NF


Recovery
Rejection

0.85
0.995

Concentrate Values
Cac
Alk c
TDSc
CO 2c

35
979
3319
7.91

Product Values
Cap
Alk p
TDSp
CO 2p

pHc
pCac
pAlk c
"C"
pHs
LSIc

8.34
3.46
1.70
2.56
7.72
0.62

pHf
pCap
pAlk p
"C"
pHs
LSIp

Acidification
Guess mg/L Acid
Alk acid

H2SO4

0
1
3
7.91
5.37
6.51
4.86
2.29
13.66
-8.29

HCl

7.0
140.4

73.4 Could change this to a goal seek equation


46.94

CO2 acid

14.2

96.73

Alkf/CO2

9.88

0.49

pHf acid
pAlk

7.3
2.58

6.00
2.22

pCa
"C"acid

4.28
2.48

3.46
2.56

pHs =

9.34

8.23

-2.07

-3.31

931.94

311.59

LSIf
Alkc acid
Alkc/CO2

65.58

3.22

pHc =

8.06

6.80

pAlkc

1.72

2.22

"C"c

2.56

2.56

pHs

7.74

4.77

LSIc

0.32

-1.43

Product Stabilization
Guess mg/L
Alkstab

Ca stab

Caustic Soda Soda Ash


Lime
Calcium
98% NaOH
99.16% NaHCO 3 90% CaO Hypochlorite
2.1
100 0.015105
0.0666
3
95
1
1
0

CO2 stab

5.6

-33.1

7.9

7.9

Alkstab/CO2stab

0.6

-2.9

0.1

0.1

pHp stab (actual pH after chem. addition)


pAlk
pCa
TDS stab

6.1
4.2
6.5
7

2.8
6.5
145

5.4
4.9
5.9
3

5.4
4.9
6.0
3

"C"stab

#NUM!

2.3

2.4

2.3

2.3

pHs (theoretical pH of stabilized water)

13.1

11.7

13.1

13.2

LSIstab

-7.0

-7.7

-7.8

#NUM!

his to a goal seek equation

"C" Values dependent on Temperature


Temperature C
TDS (mg/L)
5
10
10
2.51
2.39
20
2.53
2.41
30
2.54
2.42
50
2.55
2.43
100
2.58
2.45
200
2.6
2.48
300
2.62
2.5
500
2.65
2.52
1000
2.68
2.56
2000
2.71
2.58
5000
2.73
2.6
Calculated Values
10
2.48
2.38
20
2.51
2.40
30
2.52
2.42
50
2.54
2.44
100
2.57
2.46
200
2.59
2.49
300
2.61
2.50
500
2.63
2.52
1000
2.65
2.55
2000
2.68
2.57
5000
2.71
2.61

and TDS in mg/L from figure 2 in AST


15
2.28
2.29
2.3
2.31
2.34
2.37
2.38
2.41
2.44
2.47
2.49

20
2.17
2.18
2.19
2.2
2.22
2.26
2.27
2.3
2.33
2.36
2.38

2.27
2.30
2.31
2.33
2.36
2.38
2.40
2.42
2.44
2.47
2.50

2.17
2.19
2.21
2.23
2.25
2.28
2.29
2.31
2.34
2.37
2.40

x = TDS in mg/L
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C
C

(45) = 0.0368Ln(x) + 1.5825


(40) = 0.0371Ln(x) + 1.6678
(35) = 0.0383Ln(x) + 1.7581
(30) = 0.0372Ln(x) + 1.865
(25)= 0.0372Ln(x) + 1.965
(20) = 0.0372Ln(x) + 2.0658
(15) = 0.037Ln(x) + 2.1775
(10) = 0.0362Ln(x) + 2.2963
(5) = 0.0377Ln(x) + 2.412

Temp

R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

0.9871
0.987
0.9923
0.9785
0.9785
0.9811
0.9854
0.9862
0.9882

C (x) = A Ln (x) +B

45
40

0.0368
0.0371

1.5825
1.6678

35

0.0383

1.7581

30

0.0372

1.865

25
20

0.0372
0.0372

1.965
2.0358

A=

15
10

0.037
0.0362

2.1775
2.2963

0.0377

2.412

0.037189

B =- 0.0207*Temp + 2.491

Incomplete
Hydraded Lime
93% Ca(OH)2

Gas
CO 2(g)

Lime & Soda ash


TDS Factor
Could change this to a goal seek equation
95
1.22

0
1

1.00
2

7.9

8.9

-33.09

0.1

0.2

-2.9

5.4
4.9
6.5
3

5.6
4.5
6.5
5

#NUM!
2.8
6.5
118

2.3

2.3

2.4

13.7

13.4

11.7

-8.3

-7.8

#NUM!

0.8

R2 = 0.9983

TDS in mg/L from figure 2 in ASTM D 3739


25
2.07
2.08
2.09
2.1
2.12
2.15
2.17
2.2
2.23
2.26
2.28

30
1.97
1.98
1.99
2
2.02
2.05
2.07
2.1
2.13
2.16
2.18

35
1.86
1.87
1.88
1.9
1.93
1.96
1.98
2
2.03
2.05
2.08

40
1.77
1.78
1.79
1.8
1.83
1.86
1.88
1.9
1.93
1.96
1.98

45
1.68
1.69
1.71
1.72
1.74
1.77
1.79
1.81
1.85
1.87
1.89

2.06
2.09
2.10
2.12
2.15
2.17
2.19
2.21
2.23
2.26
2.30

1.96
1.98
2.00
2.02
2.04
2.07
2.09
2.10
2.13
2.16
2.19

1.85
1.88
1.89
1.91
1.94
1.97
1.98
2.00
2.03
2.05
2.09

1.75
1.78
1.79
1.81
1.84
1.86
1.88
1.90
1.92
1.95
1.98

1.64
1.67
1.69
1.70
1.73
1.76
1.77
1.79
1.82
1.84
1.88

2.9
2.7

C(5) = 0.0377Ln(x) + 2.412


R2 = 0.9882

2.5
2.3

2.1
1.9
1.7

=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=
=

1.3
1.1
10

100

0.9871
0.987
0.9923
0.9785
0.9785
0.9811
0.9854
0.9862
0.9882

Coefficients for Calculated "C"

C (x) = A Ln (x) +B

3
2.5
2
1.5
1

0.0385
0.038
0.0375
A

R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2
R2

1.5

0.037

1.5
1
0.5
0

0.037
0.0365
0.036
0

R2 = 0.9983

10

20

30

Temperature
C (x,T)= 0.0372*Ln(x)-0.0209*T+2.499

40

50

n(x) + 2.412

10
15
20
25
30
35

40
y = 0.0368Ln(x) + 1.5825
R2 = 0.9871

1000

10000

0.0385

A
Linear (B)

0.0375

45
Log. (5)
Log. (30)
Log. (45)

0.0365

y = -0.0207x + 2.4911
R = 0.9951

Project Name

Model Development

Date

Stage

06/07/04

A1

Temp
Ionic Strength

50

40

1.5
2.27
2.57
2.7
2.8
2.82
2.85
2.85
2.82
2.81
2.8

1.7
2.45
2.77
2.92
3.04
3.1
3.1
3.09
3.09
3.08
3.05

0.634
0.6053
0.6061
0.615
0.5679
0.576
0.5466

x2
-2.5651
-2.508
-2.5612
-2.5826
-2.4127
-2.4149
-2.2635

0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2

Curve Fits: x = ionic strength


Temp
50
40
30
25
20
10
0

From Feed Water Analysis

x3

30
K
1.85
2.65
2.95
3.14
3.25
3.32
3.33
3.32
3.3
3.28
3.24

x
3.2205
3.2522
3.3709
3.3744
3.1941
3.1519
2.9032

25

20

1.97
2.75
3.07
3.25
3.36
3.42
3.44
3.42
3.4
3.38
3.35

2.12
2.9
3.18
3.35
3.47
3.5
3.55
3.54
3.52
3.49
3.45

a
1.5931
1.7809
1.9387
2.0527
2.2134
2.3873
2.616

r2
0.9738
0.9821
0.9813
0.9832
0.9771
0.9784
0.9681

T
I
K=
K=
From Concentrate Analysis
T
I
K=
K=

Source: ASTM Method for S&DSI

11.75
0.01

Curve fit: T = Temperature, I = Ionic Strength


3

(.0016*T+.5528)I +(.0002T^2-.0142T-2.2695)*I +(-.0004T^2+.0266T+2.9072)I+(-.0206T+2.


2.378852025

11.75
0.05

(.0016*T+.5528)I +(.0002T^2-.0142T-2.2695)*I +(-.0004T^2+.0266T+2.9072)I+(-.0206T+2.


2.504296137

2.3
3.05
3.35
3.5
3.6
3.65
3.68
3.68
3.65
3.62
3.6

2.52
3.25
3.5
3.63
3.7
3.75
3.78
3.78
3.75
3.72
3.7

K(50) = 0.5466x3 - 2.2635x2 + 2.9032x + 2.616


R2 = 0.9681

4
3.5
3
2.5
K

10

1.5
K(0) = -0.5554x4 + 2.8557x3 - 5.3423x2 + 4.3314x + 1.5292
R2 = 0.9933

1
0.5
0
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

Ionic Strength

y = -0.0004x2 + 0.0266x + 2.9072


R = 0.8987

4
3

y = -0.0206x + 2.598
R = 0.9941

2
y = 0.0016x + 0.5528
R = 0.8147

1
0
-1
-2
-3

20

40
y = 0.0002x2 - 0.0142x - 2.2695
R = 0.8316

60

x3
x2
x
a
Linear (x3)
Poly. (x2)
Poly. (x)
Linear (a)

ature, I = Ionic Strength

4T^2+.0266T+2.9072)I+(-.0206T+2.598)

4T^2+.0266T+2.9072)I+(-.0206T+2.598)

2.9032x + 2.616

pCa

pAlk
5
4
3
2
1

50

4.75
3.7
2.7
1.7
0.7

1
10
100
1000
10000

40
30
25

20

14x + 1.5292

10
0

Conversion of Ca and Alk to pCa and pAlk

Poly. (50)
Poly. (0)

5
pCa and pAlk

pAlk = -0.4452Ln(x) + 4.7833


6

4
3
2
1

266x + 2.9072

0
1

10

100

1000

10000

Ca and Alk as mg/L CaCO3

x3
x2
x
a
Linear (x3)
Poly. (x2)
Poly. (x)
Linear (a)

pCa = -0.4343Ln(x) + 5

pH vs Alk/CO 2
Fig 3 D 4582 1998 Annual Book of ASTM Standards Volume 11.02 Water (II)

pH of Water

pH of Water MO Alk/CO 2
Expressed as mg/L CaCO 3/mg/L CO 2
5.3
0.098
5.4
0.12
pH vs Alk/CO2
5.6
0.19
5.8
0.305
10
6
0.5
9
6.2
0.775
8
6.4
1.25
7
6
6.6
2
5
y = 0.423ln(x) + 6.3022
6.8
3.2
4
R = 0.9997
7
5
3
2
7.2
8
1
7.4
13
0
7.5
17
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
7.6
21.5
MO Alk/CO2
7.8
34
8
54
8.2
100
8.3
1000
pH=0.423 Ln(Alk/CO 2) + 6.3022

0.4452Ln(x) + 4.7833

Alk
Ca
Log. (Alk)
Log. (Ca)

0.4343Ln(x) + 5

Project Name

Model Development

Date

Stage

06/07/04

A1

UV
Volume treated:
Power consumption per lamp:
Alternative power consumption per lamp:
Lamp replacement time:
Alternative lamp replacement time:
Required UV lamps:
Lamp replacement cost:
Annual lamp replacements:
Annual power consumption:
Required annual labor hours:

Capital cost:
Annual lamp replacement cost:
Annual power cost:
Annual labor cost
Total annual operating cost:
data from Irvine Moch, 5/2/2000

69437
0.05
0.00
1.0
0.0
4907
$48.00
4907
2,149,266
834

$2,009,031
$235,536
$150,449
$24,219
$410,204

Units
gal/min
kW
kW
year
year
lamps
per lamp
lamps
kWh
hours

Alternative Units
######## gal/day

Units

Alternative Units

12 months
0 months

Project Name

Model Development

Date

Stage

06/07/04

A1

Double Wall Fiberglass Tanks

Required Tank Capacity

Units
500,000 gallons

Nov 2000 Construction Cost

Material
Labor
Equipment
November 2006 Capital Cost $:

$
0.901 $
0.089 $
0.010 $
$

546,043
603,206
62,239
6,881
672,326

Construction Cost Equations (From http://www.get-a-quote.net)


$ = a+b*x

a
2842.7

b
1.0864

Alternative Units
1,892,700 liters

Project Name

Model Development

Date

Stage

06/07/04

A1

Microfiltration / Ultrafiltration
Units
Production Flow to be treated

2001 Construction Cost

99.99 mgd

Manufactured & Electrical Equipment


Housing
Excavation, Site Work & Labor
Piping and Valves
November 2006 Capital Cost $:
2001 O&M Cost:
Materials
Energy
Labor
November 2006 Operation & Maintenance $:
Construction Cost2
$ = a*x^b

O&M Cost2
$ = a*x^b

1.00
0.00
0.00
0.00

%1

Alternative Units
69437 gpm

$ 50,374,732
$ 62,915,209
$
$
$
$ 62,915,209

$ 3,083,396
0.13 $
514,167
0.12 $
359,730
0.75 $ 2,839,634
$ 3,713,531

a
2.4914

b
-0.3471

a
1.0451

b
-0.5462

1 from Oneby, Nordgren, and Ericson, Membrane Microfiltration As A Cost Effective Solution For A Small Utility,
AWWA Membrane Conference Proceedings, 2001
2

from Elarde & Bergman, The Cost of Membrane Filtration for Municipal Water Supplies,
AWWA Membrane Conference Proceedings, 2001

{gg}StdAnalyses

Brackish 1
Aluminum
Antimony
Arsenic
Barium
Beryllium
Boron
Cadmium
Calcium
Chromium
Copper
Iron
Lead
Magnesium
Manganese
Mercury
Nickel
Potassium
Selenium
Silver
Sodium
Strontium
Zinc
Alkalinity-Bicarbonate
Alkalinity-Carbonate
Carbon Dioxide (aq)
Chloride
Cyanide
Flouride
Nitrate (as N)
o-Phosphate
Sulfate
Silica
pH
pOH
Solids (TDS)
Total Suspended Solids:
Conductivity
Temperature

0.050

0.001
100.000
0.010
0.050
0.050
0.005
35.000
0.550

Brackish 2

Brackish 3

Hi Brackish

Seawater

0.35

0.01
3.30E-04

0.0983

0.03
6.00E-07

182
0.023
0.09
0.019
0.006
85
0.0811

110

637

80

283

4.78

10

131

175.8
2.71

815
5

3284
15

189.00

125.00

163.00

13
560

13.7
811

44.8
6545

300.000
17.000
7.620

0.31
10.7
0.37
231
11.9
7.39

1100
12
7.2

680
18
6.8

905.000
1.000
1560.000
25.000

1453
1.3
2758
25

3070
1
5232
25

11757
1
19604
25

1.800
0.005
0.005
110.900
1.300
0.050
232.000
0.000
10.100
95.000
0.640
1.000

Municipal

W ater Treatment Cost Estimation Program

1.10E-04
406
5.00E-05
3.00E-03
0.01
3.00E-05
1.29E+03
2.00E-03
3.00E-05
5.40E-03
385
9.00E-05
3.00E-04
10741
14
0.01
144.00
0.5
2.50E+00
19333
1.3
0.5
0.07
2688

Secondary Eff

2nd Eff RO
Perm

0.0029

0.0025

0.2230

0.1300

22.2

64.0000

1.1000

7.3
0.03

24.0000
0.0285

0.004
2
0.005

14.3000

1.3000

25
0.61
0.02
25

62.5000
0.2600
0.0593
345.00

3.1500

2.7
71.7

55.00

5.30

0.11
0.0005

0.5

0.04
20
10
7.2

35005
1
54534
25

184
1
362
25

0.30
12.50
3.70
39.50
27.00
7.50
6.50
425
790.00
25.00

11.60
16.60

1.22

6.80
7.20
18
25.00
25.00