Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
2
• Founded in 2009 in Hayward, CA
• FO membranes & elements
• FO and FO+RO systems
• Products works with brines, multiple
industrial salts, or proprietary draw
solutions
FO: Salt & Osmosis Powered Water Purification & Reuse
3
Water: New ways to desalinate seawater and reuse wastewaters
New solution for near ZLD of high COD wastes
Energy: Reduced energy for high purity treatment
Salinity gradient power
Unique applications in oil & gas
Food: Use fertilizers to power purification for irrigation
Concentrate naturally instead of heat based concentration
What is Forward Osmosis? Allows use of “Salt Power” and Osmosis to purify water
Source: National Geographic
Water molecules migrate across a membrane by diffusion, without energy input, into a salt solution (i.e., the “draw solution”).
Opposite dynamic of Reverse Osmosis which requires energy to push water across the membrane.
Key benefit:A new tool, uniquely suited to inexpensively filter or concentrate highly fouling waters that clog other types of membranes.
FO membrane
Feed is concentrated(e.g.: reduced volume waste for disposal or industrial product for beneficial use)
Draw solution drives the process (e.g.: salty solution, seawater, fertilizer, or any liquid with dissolved ions)
Water flows without pressure
Less salty liquid More salty liquid
Example Feed and Draw Solution Exercise FO membrane
Water flows without pressure
Feed DrawExample Feeds:
Graywater or brackish irrigation water
Wastewater discharge
Wine finishing
Brackish or seawater
Any high fouling feed water for reuse
Example Draws for FO:
Fertilizer and soil enhancers
SWRO brine (PRO)
Sugar packets
Table salt (NaCl) + RO
Any clean salt + RO as salt recycle and separation (see below)
HIGH PURITY WATER
System Recovery Occurs at FO Step
REJECT(Concentrated Feed)
DILUTE DRAW SOLUTION (e.g., NaCl)
Target Draw Recycle Recovery
ANY HIGHFOULING
FEED STREAM
ENGINEERED DRAW SOLUTION (e.g., Concentrated NaCl)
Example flow diagram for FO+RO using a simple salt draw
Fast forward: recent FO advancements address hurdles and misconceptions
FO ≠ RO replacement
FO enhances RO & reduces cost
Special draw not necessary
Savings possible now using simple
salts
FO beachhead applications:
water reuse, high COD, and high TDS
applications
Forward Osmosis: Improving Sustainability FO
is a new tool for higher purity and reduced cost and lower energy purification
7
FOOD & BEVERAGE
OIL & GAS CHEMICAL INDUSTRY
WATER
CONSUMER PRODUCTSF&B PROCESSINGSUSTAINABILITY: WATER &WASTE
ENHANCED OIL RECOVERYWASTE CONCENTRATIONWATER REUSE
PRODUCT CONCENTRATION
INDUSTRIAL WATER REUSEMUNICIPAL WATER REUSEDESALINATION
WASTEWATER REUSE
Higher COD, oil, and grease limits than other membranes
Easy to operate
Low cost, high purity
Sustainability: Less Energy, Less
Waste, More Water
GRAYWATER REUSE
Can handle hair, soaps, and other
common contaminants
High purity, low maintenance
Provides water for ultra-high purity reuse
DESALINATION
New approach to:
* Reduce energy
* Improve environmental
permitting
* Reduce cost
No impingement, entrainment or brine
discharge
FERTILIZER DRIVEN
OSMOSIS
Near zero energy purification
Allows simple, localized reuse for
irrigation
May require other water for dilution
Porifera FO for Wastewater and Graywater Reuse: Higher Purity for Less Cost
Municipal Reuse – Indirect and Direct Potable Reuse
Industrial – near ZLD – reuse wastes with oils, VOC’s, high BOD
Food and beverage – multiple ideal applications
Aerospace and Valuable Graywaters– simple, high purity , high recovery, low maintenance solution
Oil & Gas, Mining, Landfill Leachate, Power – multiple applications
8
Lower cost
Higher purity
Less maintenance
FO Significantly Increases Membrane COD Limits
9
RO membranes – Source: Dow Filmtec Feed WQ Guidelines August 2013
Oils and grease: 0.1 mg/L
COD: 10 mg/L
UF membranes - Source: Dow Ultrafiltration Product Manual V.3 April 2011
Oils and grease: 0 mg/L design; 2.0 mg/L max
COD: <20 mg/L design; <60 mg/L max
Hydrophilic PFO membranes a better solution to treat and reuse wastewaters with oils and greases PFO membranes – Source: Porifera and Customer Lab and Tests in 2014
Oils and grease: not yet determined; >100 mg/L
COD: not yet determined; >1,000 mg/L
FO+RO – lowest cost reuse of wastewaters with VOC’s
10
Drilling fluid waste with oils, greases, metals, & volatile organics (VOC’s)
FO+RO Permeate
FO+RO Reject after
10x concentrationAfter UF – Rapid RO
fouling downstream
Distiller – VOC’s pass
into product water
1 2 3
FO+RO Process flow diagram; RO Decoupled from Pretreatment
11
PERMEATE1,000 m³/day300 ppm NaCl
90% Recovery5 psi
15 LMH
FEED1,111 m³/day
5,000 ppm NaClEquivalent
Dilute waste with oils and greases
REJECT111 m³/day
50,000 ppm NaCl EquivalentConcentrated waste with oil and grease
1,860 m³/day90,000 ppm NaCl
DRAW SOLUTION2,860 m³/day
58,500 ppm NaCl
35% Recovery1,200 psi20 LMH
Graywater Recycling Burning Man
12
• Recycling of challenging graywater for the Faux Mirage camp at Burning Man
Graywater Recycling at Burning Man
13
Graywater: foam surfactants,
organics, dust, and glitter
• The graywater is typically trucked to the nearest wastewater plant while new water is trucked in.
• Disposal and water transport cost savings > system related costs
Grawywater feed and
FO+RO permeate
Porifera FO+RO Pilot-scale system
14
ANSI 350 Graywater Challenge Testing
Membrane specific flux was constant when exposed to a challenging NSF/ANSI Standard 350 laundry
graywater (feed quality composition shown), indicating the membrane did not clog or foul.
Pilot Test for Indirect Potable and Boiler Feed Reuse of Secondary Effluent:
15
Maintenance cleanings, biocides, osmotic backwashing
and other solutions being evaluated to reuse secondary
and tertiary effluent without additional pretreatment.
>30% CAPEX and >30% OPEX savings for IPR
FO Operates Similar to UF on secondary effluent
16
1. Began with no fouling prevention measures to determine fouling rate and cleaning strategy
2. High velocity permeate flush
3. High pH 12 (0.1 wt % NaOH + 0.03 wt % SDS basic solution treatment for 1-2 hrs
4. Low pH 2 (0.5 wt %, HCl) acidic solution treatment for 1-2 hrs
0%
50%
100%
Initial After 14 days After cleaning
WORST-CASE
SCENARIO DATA
TAKE-AWAY:
SIMILAR TO MF/UF,
MAINTENANCE
CLEANS ARE KEY
TO CONTROLLING
BIOFOULING
17
Emerging contaminant rejection
>90% Rejection of Measured EC’s in FO conditions (diamond)
FO+RO achieves >98%; UVAOP required for indirect potable reuse?
Data courtesy of: G.Blandin 1,2, H.Vervoort 2, K.Schoutteten 2, P.Le-Clech1, A.Verliefde2
1 UNESCO Centre for Membrane Science and Technology, University of New South Wales, Australia2 Ghent University, Bioscience Engineering, Belgium
18
PERMEATE1.0 mgd
<150 ppm TDS
75% Recovery7 LMH
FEED: Tertiary Effluent1.33 mgd
2,000 ppm TDS
REJECT0.33 mgd
8,000 ppm
1.0 mgd26,000 ppm
NaCl
DRAW SOLUTION2.0 mgd
13,000 ppm NaCl
50% Recovery15 LMH
Example IPR FO + RO Process Diagram and Cost Comparison Process Equip CAPEX Est. OPEX
PFO+RO $1,080,000* $250,000 per year
Current State-of-the-Art Technology: Pretreatment+UF+RO+UVAOP
$1,875,000 $447,000 per year
% Savings over Current Technology 40% 40%
Why is System specific flux important?
19
• 0.60 lmh/bar system at standard conditions
• Osmotic pressure: 14,500 ppm = 12 bar
• Design FO flux: 10 lmh
• FO Footprint: 18 m2
• RO Pressure: 300 psi
High Specific Flux = balanced CAPEX & OPEX
• 0.30 lmh/bar system at standard conditions
• Osmotic pressure: 14,500 ppm = 12 bar
• Design FO flux: 5 lmh
• Footprint: 36 m2
• RO Pressure: 300 psi
Low SF = High CAPEX
• 0.30 lmh/bar system at standard conditions
• Osmotic pressure: 29,000 ppm = 23 bar
• Design FO flux: 10 lmh
• Footprint: 18 m2
• RO Pressure: 520 psi
Or High OPEX
Assumes: FO+RO, 2000 m3/day, NaCl draw; Rec: 75%, RO flux: 15 lmh, RO rec: 50%
Why Porifera FO? Low Fouling, Highest Efficiency = Low Cost & Small Footprint System
42 = 10 = 1
20
renderings to scale
Large Footprint FO Porifera FO InnovationsHigh Material Cost Higher Purity & Efficiency; Lower Cost
1 PFO-200: NextGen Element
10 PFO-100’s: Current Element
Competing 8-inch Spiral Elements
Innovations: FO+RO to be cheaper than UF+RO
21
2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
Equ
ipm
en
t U
nit
Co
st p
er
un
it v
olu
me
p
er
day
Equipment Only Unit Cost
Municipal UF Unit Cost Range
FO Unit Cost Range from Customers
Municipal RO Unit Cost Range
Brings FO to mainstream projects
FO: a tool to reduce total project costsRequires total project cost comparison
22
FO+RO CAPEX: >20% savings for sweetspot projects; >30% when
including land
*Pretreatment
*Support systems
Post-treatment
*Footprint/land
*Intake and outfall
Other project costs
FO+RO OPEX: >20% savings for sweetspot projects; >40% when
including disposal costs
Chemicals
Salt replacement
Membranes
Electricity
Labor/maintenance
*Disposal costs
Systems achieve >90% coupon specific fluxes
24
Coupon flux Element Flux System flux
15.5 lmh 15.4 lmh 14.8 lmh
0.60 lmh/bar 0.59 lmh/bar 0.57 lmh/bar
New element design achieves coupon flux
25
Flux rate and headloss curves versus feed and
draw flow for a Porifera PFO-100 Element (7 m2)
Coupon flux at same conditions
Membrane Spec Sheet ComparisonFO membrane comparison (flat sheet) at 1 molar NaCl driving force
26
Supplier
AquaporinFlatSheet
HTICTA
HTITFC
OasysTFC
Porifera
TorayChemicalKorea
(formerlyWoongjin)
flux[LMH]
Specificflux
[LMH/bar]
RSF
[g/l]
Structural
parameterS[um] Source
7 0.15 0.29 N/A DataSheet,SIWW2014
12 0.26 0.58 500
T.Cathetal.Desalination2012,
doi:10.1016/j.desal.2012.07.005
17.5 0.37 0.41 N/A Datasheet,Weftec2013
30 0.64 1.67 375
T.Cathetal.Desalination2012,
doi:10.1016/j.desal.2012.07.005
33 0.70 0.40 215 DataSheet,SIWW2014
46**not
scaledto
1M 0.49 0.50 N/A
DataSheet,March2014;**
measuredat2Minsteadof1M
drivingforce
System Level Specific flux (not only membrane) is the key parameter that will drive down cost and footprint of FO
PFO-100 Element Specs
27
! !
©2014!Porifera,!Inc.!All!rights!reserved.!
PFO=100!September=2014!
PFO$100'ELEMENT'The!ideal!design!for!forward!osmosis!
Highest!flux!and!Lowest!head!loss!
Two'spacer'types:!fishnet!(FN)!and!spacer=less!(SL)'!Two'mounting'configurations:!stackable!and!single!element!use!!
!
!
Membrane'area'per'element'' 7.0!m2!
Membrane' Proprietary!
Operational'pH'limits' 2!=!11!
Water'processed'by'element'with'5.5'wt%'NaCl'draw'vs.'water'(FO'mode)'' 190=240!L/h!
Reverse'salt'flux'of'element' 0.2!=!0.6!g/L!
Water'processed'by'element'with'5.5'wt%'NaCl'draw'vs.'3.25%'NaCl'(FO'mode)'' 65!=!75!L/h!
Feed'spacer'type'options:'
PFO$100FN'(Standard'configuration)'
PFO$100SL'
!
0.76!mm!fishnet!!
no!spacer!
Physical'dimensions'[mm]' 455!x!386!x!142!
(single!element)!
Materials' ABS!&!CPVC!(wetted)!
316!SS!(structural)!
Shipping/Storage'Solution' Glycerin!&!1%!Sodium!Bisulfite!Solution!
!
! !
SPEC!SHEET!
TFC polymeric material
Max. Temp: 80oC
6 PFO-100 Stack: 42 m2
1 PFO-100 Stack: 7 m2
