BETTER PRETREATMENT FOR SEAWATER DESALINATION PLANTS · ©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies Confidential | Page 22 FORTex - INTRODUCTION • Consulting firm • Contribute in the area

©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies

Confidential | Page 1TRANSFORMING WATER. ENRICHING LIFE.


BETTER PRETREATMENT FOR

SEAWATER DESALINATION PLANTS

Presented by Vortisand® & Fortex


Confidential | Page 2

ALAIN SILVERWOOD - INTRODUCTION

• 35+ years experience in the water

treatment industry

• Technical Director at Vortisand® since

2012

• B.Sc. Bachelor in Science Degree

• In depth knowledge & experience in

various SWRO pretreatment

technologies



AGENDA

• A brief recap of the desalination industry

• The importance of pretreatment in SWRO applications

• Review of available technology for pretreatment

• Introduction to CMF technology

• Utilizing CMF technology at the Red Sea

- Review of the pilot study presented at the IDA Conference

by Jean Simard of Fortex



A RECAP OF THE DESAL INDUSTRY

• The future of desalination

• The water needs of today & tomorrow

• Geographic focus

• Industry challenges



DESALINATION: WHY?

About 25% of the world’s population encounters fresh water scarcity.

Source: United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, Annual Report 2010

In 2030, 3.9 billon people (47% of the global population) will be

subject to water stress. To avoid this, more desalination plants will be

required

Source: OECD Environmental Outlook to 2030, OECD Publishing, 2008



DESALINATION WORLDWIDE CAPACITY

Global contracted and commissioned desalination capacity, 1965 - 2015

Source: GWI Desaldata / IDA, 2015



DESALINATION: GROWTH

Global Desalination Capacity (2015) : 90 M m3/d

RO Process : 80%

Annual Growth Rate : 8%

Capacity Growth : 5.8 M m3/d per year

RO Pretreatment Capacity Growth : 15 M m3/d per year

Pretreatment capacity is typically 2 to 3 times the desalination capacity.

80% of future desalination plants will use reverse osmosis.



REVIEW OF AVAILABLE TECHNOLOGIES

FOR PRETREATMENT

• DAF or Sedimentation

• MMF (1 or 2 stages, gravity or pressurized)

• Microfiltration, Ultrafiltration

• Vortisand® Crossflow Microsand Filter (CMF)



INTRODUCTION TO CROSS-FLOW

MICROSAND FILTRATION

• Conventional MMF Filtration vs Cross-Flow Microsand Filtration

(CMF)

• Operation of the CMF technology

• Key performance indicators of the CMF technology

– Laser Particle Analysis

– TSS

– SDI

• What is the ROI?



Valdelentisco Desalination Plant, Spain (200 000 m3/d)Dual-Media Filters (60 units x 40 m2 each x 7 m/h); Footprint : 70 m x 80 m = 5600 m2

MMF VS CMF: FOOTPRINT REDUCTION



Valdelentisco Desalination Plant, Spain (200 000 m3/d)Dual-Media Filters (60 units x 40 m2 each x 7 m/h); Footprint : 70 m x 80 m = 5600 m2

Dual-Media Filters5600 m2




Valdelentisco Desalination Plant, Spain (200 000 m3/d)Vortisand® (26 units x 16 m2 each); Footprint : 26 m x 70 m = 1800 m2

Vortisand Filters900 m2




Dead-End FiltrationCross-Flow High

Efficiency Filtration

MMF VS CMF



CMF TECHNOLOGY IN ACTION - DIAGRAM



Support Media

Microsand Media

Principles of Crossflow

Large particles stay in suspension

Prevents surface blinding

Reduces resistance through media

Small particles trapped in microsand

CMF TECHNOLOGY IN ACTION - PRINCIPLES



• Maintains larger

particles in

suspension

• Prevents blinding of

surface and

channeling

• Allows for depth

filtration of fine

particles

CMF TECHNOLOGY IN ACTION - VIDEO



KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION – CMF INLET

PSD of cooling tower (USA 2015)



KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION – CMF OUTLET

PSD of cooling tower (USA 2015)

>80%

REMOVAL



SHOW ME THE ROI

• Where does the technology fit?

• Technology benefits– Reduced fouling

– Reduced footprint

– Reduced maintenance costs

– Reduced operational costs

• Where does the technology fit?

PROTECT YOUR FACILITY, YOUR INVESTMENTS AND YOUR BOTTOM LINE



Fine Particle Filtration

1 - 10 Micron

SHOW ME THE ROI – WHERE DOES THE

TECHNOLOGY FIT



JEAN SIMARD - INTRODUCTION

• 30+ years experience in the water

treatment and membrane industry, in both

municipal and industrial applications.

• Technical Director at FORTex

• Designed & installed SWRO desalination

systems in South-East Asia.

• M.Sc., Master in Science Degree

• Process manager for large SWRO

desalination plants in UAE & France.



FORTex - INTRODUCTION

• Consulting firm

• Contribute in the area of storm water

management, potable water production,

process water conditioning and

wastewater treatment.

• The members of our team have

participated in many projects related to

water from the stages of water

characterisation and analysis, design,

construction, start-up and operation.

• Acting as third party superviser for the

Red Sea Vortisand® CMF pilot trial



RED SEA SWRO PILOT TESTING OBJECTIVES

• Crossflow Microsand Filter (CMF) vs Multi Media Filter (MMF)

• Determine CMF optimal operating conditions

• Estimate and compare operating cost related to

– Filtration run time

– Water recovery

– Cleaning frequency

– Chemical consumption

– Energy consumption

– Feed pressure



LOCATION AND WATER CHARACTERISTICS

PARAMETERS VALUE UNITS

PHYSICALPARAMETERS

Colour Colorless mg/lPtCo

Turbidity 1.0–2.5 NTU

Odour Odourless Odourless

Temperature 28-32 Deg.C

PHYSICOCHEMICALPARAMETERS:

pH 8.07

Conductivity 60370 S/cm

Totalhardnessas(CaC03) 7800 mg/l

Totaldissolvedsolids[TDS] 41655 mg/l



VORTISAND CMF PILOT INSTALLATION



MMF COMPARISON SKID



RO – 500 M3/D CONNECTED WITH THE MMF

AND 2 x 300 M3/D CONNECTED TO THE CMF



Seawater Open Intake

CartridgeFilters

Turbo

PumpSea Water Pumps

Recovery 35%

600 m3/d

41 000 mg/l

Cross-FlowMicrosand

Filters

Reject

Potable water

TreatedW.Pumps

Remineralization

R.O.Train No. 1

Treated Water Tank

Distribution

Tank

Chemical dosage 5 ppm Hydrex

BreakTank

TESTING SKID COMPARISON – TRAIN NO. 1



Seawater Open Intake

CartridgeFilters

TurboPumpSea Water

Pumps

Treated Water Tank

Recovery 35%

500 m3/d

41 000 mg/l

Multi MediaFilters

Reject

Distribution

Tank

Potable water

TreatedW.Pumps

Remineralization

R.O.Train No. 2

Chemical dosage 5 ppm Hydrex

TESTING SKID COMPARISON – TRAIN NO. 2



DESCRIPTION Unit MMF RO CMF RO

Number of Filter 2 1

Diameter m 1,50 0,90

Surface/ filter m2 1,77 1,32

Surface total m2 3,54 1,32

Flow /filter m3/h 21 53-72-80

Flow total m3/h 42 53-72-80

Velocity across filter m/h 12 40-50-60

RO # skid 1 2

RO permeate flow/skid m3/h 21 12,5

RO permeate flow total m3/h 21 25

RO feed flow/skid m3/h 59,5 71,5

TESTING SKID COMPARISON



0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Plu

gg

ing

Perc

en

tag

e

Plugging Time (min.)

Plugging Time Comparison - MMF vs CMF

CMF MMF FEED limit 75%

Delta tSlower fouling rate

for CMF filtered water

TYPICAL FOULING RATE HURGADA



0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20

NTU

Piloting days on site

Feed

MMF 12 m/h

CMF 50 m/h

MMF AVG = 0.93 NTU

FEED AVG = 2.51 NTU

CMF AVG = 0.07 NTU

NTU REDUCTION – MMF: 63% VS CMF 97%MMF 12 m/h vs CMF 50 m/h



0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

45 47 49 51 53 55 57 59 61 63 65

NTU


Feed

MMF 12 m/h

CMF 40 m/hFEED AVG = 1.41 NTU

MMF AVG = 0.45 NTU

CMF AVG = 0.11 NTU

NTU REDUCTION – MMF: 68% VS CMF 92%MMF: 12 m/h vs CMF 40 m/h



0

5

10

15

20

25

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

SDI


Feed

MMF 12 m/h

CMF 50 m/h

SDI = 3

FEED SDI AVG = 8.8

MMF SDI AVG = 3.5

CMF SDI AVG = 2.3

SDI REDUCTION – MMF: 60% VS CMF 74%MMF 12 m/h vs CMF 50 m/h



0

5

10

15

20

25

40 45 50 55 60 65

SDI


Feed

MMF 12 m/h

CMF 40 m/h

SDI = 3

FEED SDI AVG = 14.1

MMF SDI AVG = 4.8

CMF SDI AVG = 2.4

SDI REDUCTION – MMF: 66% VS CMF 83%MMF 12 m/h vs CMF 40 m/h



0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

TOC DOC O&G

3.9

1.2 1

2.1

0.6

1

1.5

0.5

0.8

mg

/L

Feed MMF CMF

TOC DOC O&G – REDUCTION AFTER FILTRATION



Filter TypeWater Recovery

(%)

Water Loss

(%)

Pressured MMF Back wash 95 - 98 2 - 5

Pressured CMF Back wash 98 2

WATER RECOVERY



Electric Power28-50 %

Capital Recovery 32-44 %

Membrane replacement 6-9 %

Chemicals 4-6 %

Maintenance and parts 5-8 %

Supervision and Labor3-5 %

Seawater Desalination Power ConsumptionTypical Range of SWRO Facility Cost Components

as a Percentage of Total.

Seagate Desalination Power ConsumptionWater Reuse Association -Desalination committeeWhite Paper – Nov 2011 Graphic provided by Dietrich Consulting Group, LLC

SEAWATER DESALINATION OPERATING COSTS



OperatingCost

Breakdow%

CrossflowMicrosandFilter

Potential-FutureStudies

ElectricPower

28-50%SlowerPluggingrate,smallerSDIandNTU

Reductionofenergyconsumption

CapitalRecovery

32-44%Higherfiltrationspeed

Smallerfootprint-CAPEXreduction

Membranereplacement


Reductioncleaningfrequency

Chemicals


Reductionofcleaningchemicals

Maintenaceandparts


cartridgefilter

Supervisionandlabor

3-5%Manpower

comparabletosandfilter

CMF – FUTURE STUDIES RELATED TO OPERATING COST



• Always better SDI and NTU

• 3 to 4 times faster

• Smaller footprint

• Reduce NTU by 95% vs MMF 65%

• Reduce SDI by 80 % vs MMF 64%

• Total water recovery up to 98% as the BEST Sand Filter

• We can anticipate that the CMF performance will reduce global RO

CAPEX & OPEX costs

STUDY CONCLUSION – CMF ADVANTAGES



• Reduction of RO membrane fouling

• Chemical consumption comparison

• Cartridge filter replacement frequency

• RO Energy consumption with CMF

• Organics removal as TOC, DOC with CMF pretreatment

• Other Organics like TEP, Humic substances, biopolymers, etc.

• RO Global performance with CMF pretreatment

FUTURE WORKS – LONG TERM ECONOMIC COMPARISON



CONCLUSION

• CMF performance will reduce global RO CAPEX

& OPEX costs

• Smaller footprint = smaller CAPEX

• Better water quality at all time = smaller OPEX



QUESTIONS

Thank you for attending this webinar. If you have any questions

concerning pretreatment or are currently working on a pretreatment

desalination project, you can email us at [email protected]

and we would be happy to help.

TRANSFORMING WATER. ENRICHING LIFE.

mailto:[email protected]

Documents

BETTER PRETREATMENT FOR SEAWATER DESALINATION PLANTS · ©2018 Evoqua Water Technologies Confidential | Page 22 FORTex - INTRODUCTION • Consulting firm • Contribute in the area