Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Integration of MBR Technology and Desalting Membranesfor Water Reuse
Integration of MBR Technology and Desalting MembranesIntegration of MBR Technology and Desalting Membranesfor Water Reusefor Water Reuse
James DeCarolis, Samer Adham, Joan Oppenheimer William H. Pearce, Larry Wasserman,
Membrane Technology Conference & Exposition March 6-9 2005
Phoenix, Arizona
James DeCarolis, Samer Adham, Joan Oppenheimer James DeCarolis, Samer Adham, Joan Oppenheimer William H. Pearce, Larry Wasserman, William H. Pearce, Larry Wasserman,
Membrane Technology Conference & Exposition Membrane Technology Conference & Exposition March 6March 6--9 20059 2005
Phoenix, ArizonaPhoenix, Arizona
AcknowledgmentsAcknowledgmentsAcknowledgments
• USEPA, Bruce Macler, Ph.D., Vance Fong, P.E.
• Metropolitan Water District of Southern, CA (DRIP),Sun Liang, Ph.D., P.E.
• San Diego County Water Authority, Cesar Lopez
• Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), Water TreatmentEngineering and Research Group
• USEPA, Bruce Macler, Ph.D., Vance Fong, P.E.
• Metropolitan Water District of Southern, CA (DRIP),Sun Liang, Ph.D., P.E.
• San Diego County Water Authority, Cesar Lopez
• Bureau of Reclamation (USBR), Water TreatmentEngineering and Research Group
Acknowledgments (cont.)Acknowledgments (cont.)Acknowledgments (cont.)
• City of San Diego MWWD, Steve Lagos, Neil Tran, Dwight Smith
• Membrane Suppliers, Saehan, Hydranautics, Osmonics, Kubota, Zenon and Mitsubishi
• EDC/PPCP Sample Analysis, Greg Loraine (SDSU) and Shane Snyder (SNWA)
• City of San Diego MWWD, Steve Lagos, Neil Tran, Dwight Smith
• Membrane Suppliers, Saehan, Hydranautics, Osmonics, Kubota, Zenon and Mitsubishi
• EDC/PPCP Sample Analysis, Greg Loraine (SDSU) and Shane Snyder (SNWA)
• Project Background • Project Background
• Materials and Methods• Materials and Methods
• MBR & NF/RO Performance Data • MBR & NF/RO Performance Data
Outline of Discussion Outline of Discussion Outline of Discussion
• Cost Estimate Analysis• Cost Estimate Analysis
• Conclusions • Conclusions
• EDC/PCPPs Analysis• EDC/PCPPs Analysis
Project Background Project Background Project Background
• Project was partially conducted in parallel withUSBR funded project aimed at optimizing various MBR Systems for water reuse
• Project was partially conducted in parallel withUSBR funded project aimed at optimizing various MBR Systems for water reuse
• Conducted at the PLWTP located in San Diego➙ PLWTP uses 1 MGD Potable Water for Industrial use
➙ Wastewater at PLWTP is inherently high in salt (TDS=1,600 mg/L)
➙ City considering MBR ➨ RO System to meet Reclaimed Water Needs
• Conducted at the PLWTP located in San Diego➙ PLWTP uses 1 MGD Potable Water for Industrial use
➙ Wastewater at PLWTP is inherently high in salt (TDS=1,600 mg/L)
➙ City considering MBR ➨ RO System to meet Reclaimed Water Needs
• Funding provided by the USEPA under DRIP toevaluate MBR as pretreatment to RO
• Funding provided by the USEPA under DRIP toevaluate MBR as pretreatment to RO
Project ObjectivesProject ObjectivesProject Objectives
• Evaluate MBR Systems recently introduced to US Market
• Evaluate MBR Systems recently introduced to US Market
• Assess the Impact of adding Coagulant and Polymer to the MBR Feed Water on MBR Performance
• Assess the Impact of adding Coagulant and Polymer to the MBR Feed Water on MBR Performance
• Evaluate MBR performance under extreme operatingconditions (Increased Flux, Low HRT)
• Evaluate MBR performance under extreme operatingconditions (Increased Flux, Low HRT)
Project ObjectivesProject ObjectivesProject Objectives
• Evaluate several different desalting membranes (NF/RO) following pretreatment by MBR
• Evaluate several different desalting membranes (NF/RO) following pretreatment by MBR
• Perform cost analysis: 1.) compare cost of conventional and MBR as pretreatment to RO 2.) determine the cost associated with RO duringwastewater reclamation
• Perform cost analysis: 1.) compare cost of conventional and MBR as pretreatment to RO 2.) determine the cost associated with RO duringwastewater reclamation
• Evaluate the ability of commercially available MBR/RO Process units to Remove EDC/PPCPs from advanced primary effluent
• Evaluate the ability of commercially available MBR/RO Process units to Remove EDC/PPCPs from advanced primary effluent
Material and MethodsMaterial and MethodsMaterial and Methods
Pilot TestingPilot TestingPilot Testing
• Phase I - Operated New MBR Systems on Raw Wastewater and Advanced Primary Effluent
• Phase I - Operated New MBR Systems on Raw Wastewater and Advanced Primary Effluent
• Performed pilot testing: train consisted of MBR ➨UV/chloramine ➨ NF/RO
• Performed pilot testing: train consisted of MBR ➨UV/chloramine ➨ NF/RO
• Phase II - Operated Established Suppliers on advanced primary effluent (tested extreme operating conditions)
• Phase II - Operated Established Suppliers on advanced primary effluent (tested extreme operating conditions)
• Throughout MBR testing operated RO/NF downstream of MBR - in all tested 4 different desalting membranes flux 10-12 gfd FWR 50 -75%
• Throughout MBR testing operated RO/NF downstream of MBR - in all tested 4 different desalting membranes flux 10-12 gfd FWR 50 -75%
Pilot Treatment Train Pilot Treatment Train Pilot Treatment Train
ROConcentrate
ROPermeate
MBR BIOLOGICAL
FOULING CONTROL
REVERSE OSMOSIS
Feed Wastewater(Influent or PrimaryEffluent) MBR
Option 1
Option 2
Chlorine AmmoniumChloride
ROUV
Aerobic tank
Effluent
0.8 mmScreen
(S1)
(S2)
(S4)(S5)
(S3)
MBR Pilot Systems (New Suppliers)MBR Pilot Systems (New Suppliers)MBR Pilot Systems (New Suppliers)
KUBOTA US Filter
MBR Pilot Systems (Established)MBR Pilot Systems (Established)MBR Pilot Systems (Established)
MITSUBISHI ZENON
MBR Membranes SpecificationsMBR Membranes SpecificationsMBR Membranes SpecificationsUnits Kubota Zenon Mitsubishi
Commercial Designation ---- Type 510 ZW 500 D Sterapore HFMembrane Classification ---- MF UF MFMembrane Configuration Vertical Vertical HorizontalApprox. Size of Element (LxWxH) mm 490X6X1000 1930X711X229 886X606X1483Number of Sheets per membrane cassette --- 100 ------ ------Number of Fibers per membrane cassette ----- ----- ~2700 ~1820Inside Diameter of Fiber mm ----- 0.75 0.35Outside Diameter of Fiber mm ----- 1.9 0.54Length of Fiber m ----- 1.7 3.24Active Membrane Area (MBR Pilot) ft2 (m2) 1721 (160) 720 (67) 1076 (100)1 Flow Capacity (MBR Pilot) gpm 17.6 7.5 9.2Flow Direction --- outside - in outside - in outside - inNominal Membrane Pore Size micron 0.4 0.04 0.4Absolute Membrane Pore Size micron ----- 0.1 0.5
Membrane Material/Construction ---chlorinated
polyethylene; flat sheet
proprietary/ hollow fiber
polyethylene/ hollow fiber
Recommended Design Flux gfd (L/h-m2) 14.7 (24.9) 15 (25.4) 12.3 (20.8)Standard Testing pH range --- 5.8 - 8.6 5-9.5 2-12Vacuum Pressure for System psi (bar) <3 (<0.2) <11.9 (<0.8) <5.8(<0.4)1 Flow capacity based on MFG recommended design flux and active membrane supplied
with pilot unit.
Desalting Membranes SpecificationsDesalting Membranes SpecificationsDesalting Membranes Specifications
Units Saehan Saehan Hydranautics OsmonicsCommercial Designation --- RE 4040-BL RE 4040-FL LFC3-4040 HL-4040FFMembrane Type 1RO 2RO 2RO NFActive Membrane Area ft2 (m2) 85 (7.9) 85 (7.9) 85 (7.9) 88.5 (8.2)Membrane Material --- Polyamide (TFC) Polyamide (TFC) Polyamide (TFC) Polyamide (TFC)Operating pH Range --- 3-10 3-10 3-10 3-10Max. Feedwater Turbidity NTU <1 <1 1.0 <1Max.Feedwater SDI15 --- <5 <5 <5 <5Max. Operating Temperature oF (oC) 113 (45) 113 (45) 113 (45) 113 (45)Free Chlorine Resistance mg/L <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1Specific Flux @ 25 deg C gfd/psi 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.27Max. Operating Pressure psi (bar) 600 (40) 600 (40) 600 (40) 600 (40)
1 Low Pressure RO; 2 Fouling Resistant RO
Raw Wastewater Raw Wastewater ✓✓ ✓✓ ------------ ------------
Advanced Primary Advanced Primary ✓✓ ✓✓ ✓✓ ✓✓
Flux, gfd Flux, gfd 14.5 15 22 114.5 15 22 155
HRT, hrs HRT, hrs 5.7 5.0 2.0 2.85.7 5.0 2.0 2.8
SRT, days SRT, days 2020--60 60 1111-- 24 1824 18--20 2520 25--30 30
MLSS, g/L MLSS, g/L 99--1212 99--16 1016 10--12 1012 10--1212
US Filter Kubota Zenon Mitsubishi US Filter Kubota Zenon Mitsubishi
MBR Pilot Operating ConditionsMBR Pilot Operating ConditionsMBR Pilot Operating Conditions
RO Operating ConditionsRO Operating ConditionsRO Operating Conditions
Testing Phase Membrane Feed Source BiofoulingControl
Flux(gfd)
Recovery(%)
HydranauticsLFC3-4040
Kubota MBR UV/Chloramine 10-12 50
SaehanRE4040-BL
Kubota MBR UV/Chloramine 10-12 50
OsmonicsHL-4040
Zenon andMitsubishi MBR
Chloramine 10-12 50I
SaehanRE4040-FL
Zenon andMitsubishi MBR
Chloramine 10-12 50
II SaehanRE4040-FL
Zenon andMitsubishi MBR
Chloramine 12 75
MBR PERFORMANCE DATAMBR PERFORMANCE DATAMBR PERFORMANCE DATA
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
0 480 960 1440 1920 2400 2880 3360 3840 4320 4800 5280
Time of Operation, hr
Aver
age
TMP,
psi
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
Aer
obic
Tan
k Te
mpe
ratu
re, d
eg C
Average TMP Chemical Clean Aerobic Tank Temperature
PHASE IIPHASE I
Start up
Target Flux = 15 gfd
Kubota MBR System, 2002 - Point Loma
MBR Operational DataMBR Operational DataMBR Operational Data
Zenon MBR System, Point Loma
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500
Time of Operation, h
Vacu
um P
ress
ure,
psi
0
4
8
12
16
20
24
28
32
36
40
Tem
pera
ture
, °C
Vacuum Pressure Maintenance Clean Zenogem Tank Temperature
VFD Failur
VFDFailure
Chemical Clean
Nitrifcation lost
Flux Increased
MLSS Diluted
Target Flux = 22 gfd
MBR Operational DataMBR Operational DataMBR Operational Data
MBR Particulate RemovalMBR Particulate RemovalMBR Particulate Removal
0.01
0.1
1
10
100
1000
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
Time of Operation, h
Turb
idity
, NTU
MBR Permeate Turbidity Feed Wastewater Turbidity
PART 2 PART 1
Kubota MBR System, 2002 - Point Loma
MBR Organic RemovalMBR Organic RemovalMBR Organic Removal
Zenon MBR System, 2003 - Point Loma
1
10
100
1000
0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500 2750 3000
Time of Operation (hours)
Con
cent
ratio
n (m
g/L)
Primary Effluent BOD5 MBR Permeate BOD5
open symbols denote below
MBR Inorganic Nitrogen RemovalMBR Inorganic Nitrogen RemovalMBR Inorganic Nitrogen Removal
0
10
20
30
40
50
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 5000 5500
Time of Operation, h
Conc
entra
tion,
mg-
N/L
Feed Wastewater NH3-N MBR Permeate Total Inogranic Nitrogen -N
Part 2Part 1
Kubota MBR System, 2002 - Point Loma
MBR Microbial RejectionMBR Microbial RejectionMBR Microbial Rejection
1.E+00
1.E+02
1.E+04
1.E+06
1.E+08
1.E+10
0 250 500 750 1000 1250 1500 1750 2000 2250 2500
Time of Operation, h
Conc
entra
tion
MPN
/100
mL
MBR Permeate Total Coliform Primary Effluent Total Coliform
open symbols denote below detection
Mitsubishi MBR System, 2003 - Point Loma
RO PERFORMANCE DATARO PERFORMANCE DATARO PERFORMANCE DATA
Hydranautics LFC3 Membrane, 2002 - Point Loma
0
50
100
150
200
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400 2700 3000
Time of Operation, h
Net
Ope
ratin
g Pr
essu
re, p
si
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Tem
pera
ture
, deg
C
Net Operating Pressure Chemical Clean Temperature
began chloramine addition
PHASE IIPHASE IFlux 10 gfd
RO Operational DataRO Operational DataRO Operational DataFWR = 50%
Saehan RE4040 FL Membrane, 2003 - Point Loma
RO Operational DataRO Operational DataRO Operational Data
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
0 300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400 2700 3000 3300 3600
Time of Operation, h
Net
Ope
ratin
g Pr
essu
re, p
si
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Tem
pera
ture
, Deg
C
Net Operating Pressure Temperature
Membrane Cleaning
Reduced Flux
FWR = 75%
RO Water Quality DataRO Water Quality DataRO Water Quality Data
Paramater Units RO Feed RO PermeateConductivity micromho 2,620 117Ammonia-N mg/L 0.8 0.3Nitrate/Nitirite -N mg/L 18.9 4.80Nitirite -N mg/L 0.034 0.01TKN mg/L 0.99 NDOrtho-Phosphate-P mg/L 0.53 NDUV 254 cm-1 0.139 0.007TOC mg/L 6.6 NDTotal Hardness mg/L 424 3.38Alkalinity mg/L 75 5.63*Values shown are median of measured values throughout testing.
EDC/PCPPs Analysis EDC/PCPPs Analysis EDC/PCPPs Analysis
• Sampling was done Phase II Testing (Zenon andMitsubishi MBRs)
• Sampling was done Phase II Testing (Zenon andMitsubishi MBRs)
• Samples taken in summer and late autumn; analyzed by two different laboratories
• Samples taken in summer and late autumn; analyzed by two different laboratories
• RO membrane was Saehan 4040 FRM membrane flux of 12 gfd feed water recovery = 75%
• RO membrane was Saehan 4040 FRM membrane flux of 12 gfd feed water recovery = 75%
Cost Analysis Cost Analysis Cost Analysis
• Costs were developed for two reclaimed water treatment trains: conventional and MBR
• Costs were developed for two reclaimed water treatment trains: conventional and MBR
• RO costs were estimated to achieve target TDS of1,000 mg/L. Sizing of RO system based on required blend ratio
• RO costs were estimated to achieve target TDS of1,000 mg/L. Sizing of RO system based on required blend ratio
• The analysis also compared disinfection costs of chlorine vs. UV to meet Class I unrestricted reuse CDHS Title 22 Standards
• The analysis also compared disinfection costs of chlorine vs. UV to meet Class I unrestricted reuse CDHS Title 22 Standards
To disinfection(UV or CC)Oxidation Ditch
WAS
SecondaryClarifier
RAS
NaOCl NH4ClInfluent ChannelBar Screen Grit Chamber
GritScreenings
Lift PumpMicrofiltration
BackwashWaste
Reverse Osmosis
Brine
Permeate
Oxidation Ditch/MF w/RO Blending and Disinfection
Conventional TrainConventional TrainConventional Train
To disinfection(UV or CC)
MBR w/RO Blending and Disinfection
MBR TrainMBR TrainMBR Train
Influent ChannelBar Screen
Grit Chamber
GritScreenings
Lift Pump
Rotary Drum Screen
MembraneBioreactor
WAS
Reverse Osmosis
Brine
NH4ClNaOCl
RAS Permeate
Cost Items: Ditch + MF and MBRCost Items: Ditch + MF and MBRCost Items: Ditch + MF and MBRCapital Costs Ditch + MF MBRHeadworks X XScreening Facility (0.8 mm) XSecondary Treatment (Oxidation Ditch) XChlorine handling, storage and metering X XOperations-laboratory building X XMaintenance Building X XMicrofiltration Unit XMBR Process Costs (e.g. Basins, Blower and Pump Building, Mech.) XMBR Membrane System XO&M Costs Ditch + MF MBRPersonnel X XPower X XSpare Parts X XChemicals XSludge handling and disposal X XMBR Membrane Replacement XMBR Chemical Cleaning XMF O& M Costs X
Cost Items: Chlorine Contact and UVCost Items: Chlorine Contact and UVCost Items: Chlorine Contact and UV
Capital Costs Chlorine Contact UV
Chlorine Contact Tank XChlorine handling, storage and metering XUV System X
O&M Costs Chlorine Contact UV
Personnel X XPower X XReplacement Lamp Costs for UV XChemicals X
Cost Items: Reverse Osmosis Cost Items: Reverse Osmosis Cost Items: Reverse Osmosis
Capital Costs RO
RO System XChloramine handling, storage and metering XO&M Costs ROPersonnel XPower XChemicals for RO XRO Membrane Replacement XRO Cartridge Filter Replacement XRO Maintenance X
ConclusionsConclusionsConclusions
• Different types of desalting membranes fromvarious suppliers successfully operated on municipal wastewater pretreated with MBR
• Different types of desalting membranes fromvarious suppliers successfully operated on municipal wastewater pretreated with MBR
• All MBR systems produced effluent suitable for RO by achieving high removal of particulate, organic, nitrogen and microbial contaminates
• All MBR systems produced effluent suitable for RO by achieving high removal of particulate, organic, nitrogen and microbial contaminates
• MBR systems operated successfully on advancedprimary effluent containing polymer / coagulant residual and under extreme operating conditions
• MBR systems operated successfully on advancedprimary effluent containing polymer / coagulant residual and under extreme operating conditions
ConclusionsConclusionsConclusions
• Cost estimates showed 1 MGD MBR/Cl2 reclaimedwater train to be $3.13/Kgal compared to $4.31/Kgal for conventional train consisting of Ditch + MF/Cl2
• Cost estimates showed 1 MGD MBR/Cl2 reclaimedwater train to be $3.13/Kgal compared to $4.31/Kgal for conventional train consisting of Ditch + MF/Cl2
• MBR/RO effective barrier for most of the EDC/PCPPS analyzed
Integration of MBR Technology and Desalting Membranesfor Water Reuse
Integration of MBR Technology and Desalting MembranesIntegration of MBR Technology and Desalting Membranesfor Water Reusefor Water Reuse
James DeCarolis, Samer Adham, Joan Oppenheimer William H. Pearce, Larry Wasserman,
Membrane Technology Conference & Exposition March 6-9 2005
Phoenix, Arizona
James DeCarolis, Samer Adham, Joan Oppenheimer James DeCarolis, Samer Adham, Joan Oppenheimer William H. Pearce, Larry Wasserman, William H. Pearce, Larry Wasserman,
Membrane Technology Conference & Exposition Membrane Technology Conference & Exposition March 6March 6--9 20059 2005
Phoenix, ArizonaPhoenix, Arizona
