Chemical Panel Engineers Australia WA Division &

The Institution of Chemical Engineers (WA)

Desalination
Sustainably Drought Proofing Australia

Auditorium, Engineers Australia 712 Murray Street, West Perth, WA

Monday, 14 March 2011

Gary J. Crisp
Global Business Leader – Desalination: GHD
BSc. Civil Engineering, C Eng., MICE, CP Eng., FIE Aust., PMP
 It’s not about water.

It’s about energy!

“Energy is eternal delight!”
Energy is liberation.
William Blake, author, poet, visionary, 1757 – 1827
 Energy Use Across the Water Cycle
(1kWh/m3 = 3.79 kWh/kgal - 4 kWh/m3 = 15.14 kWh/kgal)
WTP DISTRIBUTION
SOURCE
DISPOSAL/
RECYCLE
TRANSPOR USE
T WWTP
COLLECTION

6
Upper Bound
5 5.5
Lower Bound
4.5
kW hr/m3

3
2.5
2
1.6
1 0.5
0.6 0.5
0.05 0.05 0.3 0.01 0.05 0.05
0.03
0

California State Water Project = 2.5 kWh/m 3 = 9.50 kWh/kgal

Gold Coast Desalination Plant = 3.23 kWh/m 3 = 12.24 kWh/kgal
 Presentation Overview

• Reverse Osmosis Basics Plus

• The Big Six

• The Sustainability of Seawater Reverse Osmosis (SWRO)

• Future RO Developments

• Conclusions
 Desalination – Where Are We Today?
14,754 Desalination Plants Worldwide – 16,700 MGD

Source : IDA Desalination Yearbook 2009-2010

 Projected New
Desalination Capacity
in 2010
6.8 GL/day

Actual New
Capacity in 2009
3.9 GL/day

Source: WDR,
July 2010
 Water Resource Cost Trends: US $/m3
Perth Seawater Desalination Plant Water Cost 0.90 $/m3

Cost ($/m3) THE TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE

The TRUE Value of Water
Obtained with Minimal
Environmental Impact
The
Environmental
“Forgotten”

Global Water Intelligence - October 2006

Year

• Water from the oceans is still perceived as a ‘technology’ solution, but desalination should be
recognised as a ‘policy’ solution
Membrane Separation - Filtration Spectrum

Courtesy of Osmonics
 An RO Membrane is like a Microscopic
Reverse Osmosis Strainer that allows Water Molecules to
pass through

Water
Protozoa
Molecules

Bacteria

Virus Inorganics
Organics
Seawater Reverse Osmosis (SWRO)
Seawater Reverse Osmosis (SWRO)
Osmotic Pressure vs Salinity

90.0
80.0
70.0
P Osmotic (Bar)

60.0
50.0
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
TDS (1000 mg/L)

Osmotic Pressure vs Salinity

0.77 bar per 1000 mg/L

 Seawater Reverse Osmosis (SWRO)
Specific Energy Consumption (SEC)

• Theoretical minimum SEC for seawater @ 35000 mg/L TDS is 0.75 kWhr/kL.

• (0.77 bar/1000 mg/L) x (35000 mg/L) = 27 bar = 2700 kPa (2700 kN/m2) required to
overcome seawater osmotic pressure for water at 35000 mg/L.

• Therefore energy to desalinate 1 kL or 1 m3 of seawater @ 35000 mg/L = 2700

kN/m2 x 1 m3 = 2700 kN-m = 2700 kJ = 2700 x 2.778 x 10-4 kWh = 0.75 kWh
(1 kN-m = I kJ = 1 kW second = 0. 0002778 = 2.778 x 10-4 kWhr)

• Therefore 2700 kilojoules = 0.75 kWh for 1kL results in an SEC of 0.75 kWh/kL .
Cross-Section TFC

Polyamide 0.2 µm
Polysulfone

Ultra thin
Barrier Layer
Microporous 40 µm
Polysulfone
Substrate
Reinforcing 120 µm
Polyester
Fabric
Membrane arrangement
Membrane element

Feed spacer

Permeate spacer

Membrane leaf
Reverse Osmosis Spiral Wound Membrane
The Desalination Process
The Big
Australia’s six big desalination plants
 Australia Rainfall and Seawater Desalination

Gold Coast Desal Plant

(operating)_
•133 MLD capacity
•25 km distribution pipeline

1143 mm
787 mm
Sydney Desal Plant (operating)
•250 MLD capacity
Perth 1 Desal Plant (operating) Adelaide Desal Plant 508
(undermm
const.) •25 km distribution pipeline
•144 MLD capacity •300 MLD capacity
•~11 km distribution pipeline •~11 km distribution pipeline
Victorian Desal Plant (under const.)
Perth 2 Desal Plant (under const) 533 mm •450 MLD capacity
•150 MLD capacity •~84 km distribution pipeline
•~26 + 80 km distribution pipeline

*Average
annual rainfall Courtesy – Bob Yamanda - SDCWA
The Big Six – No. 1
Perth Seawater Desalination Plant (Perth I) - 38 mgd (144 MLD)
• Client: Water Corporation
• Capacity: 38 mgd (144 MLD)
• Plant Capital Cost: $266 million
• Connecting System (IWSS): $51 million
• Total Capital Cost: $317 million
• Total Operating Cost: $16 million/year
• Unit Cost: $1,172/AF (AU$1.00/m3)
• Commissioning Completion: 2007
• GHD Involvement: Production of Basis of Design and Basis of Construction
Documents, 3rd Party Review of Designs from both Competing Consortia, Durability Reviews During
Design and Construction Phase, Integration Network Concept and
Detailed Design including the largest Pumping Station in the Perth Integrated System, the Nicholson Road
Pumping Station (10 MW). Seaglider Oceanographic Measurements
• Configuration: Open Intake, Diffuser Outfall, Travelling Band Screens, Dual
Media Pressure Filtration, 5 Micron Cartridge Filtration, 2 Pass SWRO System, Lime and CO2 Re-
mineralisation
• Seawater Feed Quality: 35000 – 38000 mg/L TDS
• Product Water Quality: < 200 mg/L
• Specific Energy Consumption (SEC): < 13.58 (13.18) kWh/kgal - 3.59 (3.48) kWh/m3)
• Technology Contractor: Degremont (France/Spain)
• Delivery Method Competitive Alliance - DBO
• Awards: GWI Membrane Desalination Plant of Year 2007
ERI Awarded GWI Environmental Contribution of the Year 2006
 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant

6.5 ha

• Located in Kwinana • 140 mg/L Product Water

• 144 MLD Capacity: 50 GL/Y • Commenced operation in Nov. ‘06
• 24 MW Power Required • Wind Power is used as offset
Courtesy of Water Corporation
 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant

3 ha

6.5 ha
 Pinjar
2001 Yarragadee Expansion
Neerabup Wanneroo

Sth Whitfords Lexia

Gwelup Goldfields &
Mirrabooka
Agricultural WS
2002 Yarragadee Bores
PERTH Mundaring
Victoria
Nicholson Rd Pumpstn
Canning Integrated
GROUNDWATER SOURCE
Jandakot Wungong
Water Supply
PSDP
Scheme
SURFACE WATER SOURCE
Serpentine

Mandurah Nth Dandalup • Ground water north of Swan River

AREA SERVED
• Dams south of Swan River
• Transport over 115 miles between top & bottom

TRUNK MAINS
Sth Dandalup

Samson Pipehead Dam

Harvey Dam and Wokalup Pipehead Dam

Stirling
Harris Pumpback
 Aerial View of Desalination Plant
Admin
Remineralisation/ /Lab
Storage
SWRO & Pre-
BWRO treatment
Potable
water pump
station
Chemical Brine
Storage Residuals discharge
HV Treatment
substation
Raw Seawater
screen and pump
station

Courtesy of Water Corporation

Seawater Brine
Intake discharge
 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Seawater Intake System – Inlet Structure

Courtesy of the Water Corporation

 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Seawater Intake System – Inlet Structure

Courtesy of the Water Corporation

 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Seawater Intake System – Pipes and Works

Courtesy of the Water Corporation

Courtesy of the Water Corporation

 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Onshore Active Screening – Band Screen

Courtesy of the Water Corporation

 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Seawater Intake and Outlet Works

Courtesy of the Water Corporation

Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Single Stage Dual Media Pressure Filtration and Cartridge Filters
 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
High Pressure Pumps 2.6 MW Each (6 in total)

Each Pump Equivalent to

15 Toyota Lexus GX
Wagon 8st 4dr Man 6sp
4x4 4.0i
0.179 MW @ 5200rpm
each.*
*Red Book (Australia) specifications

Courtesy of the Water Corporation

 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Reverse Osmosis Process Flow – Operating Principals & Arrangement

First Pass Second Pass

(Common By-pass)

HP PRODUCTION
PRETREATED Pump
WATER

1st Stage

2nd Stage

Energy Recovery
System
(12 x 16 in Parallel)
1ST PASS FEEDING
(recycling)

REJECT

MDJV in Alliance with Water Corporation

 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Circulation Pumps 134 kW each (12 in total)

Each Pump Equivalent

to 1 Toyota RAV 4 5st
4dr Man 4x4 2.0i
0.132 MW @ 5200rpm
each.*
*Red Book (Australia) specifications

Courtesy of the Water Corporation

Perth Seawater Desalination Project (PSDP) First
Pass Reverse Osmosis Racks
 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
RO Building Looking South – 2nd Pass RO

Courtesy of the Water Corporation

 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Pressure Exchanger Rack 1.2 MW each (12 in total)

Each Rack Equivalent

to 8 Ford Escape
Wagon 4dr Auto 4sp
4x4 3.0i
0.152 MW @ 4750rpm
each.*
*Red Book (Australia) specifications

Courtesy of Water Corporation

Perth Seawater Desalination Project
PX Process
Perth Seawater Desalination Project
Beyond Tomorrow
 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Potabilization System and Drinking Water Storage Tank

Courtesy of Water Corporation

 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Drinking Water Transfer Pump Station

Courtesy of Water Corporation

Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Concentrate Discharge

Courtesy of Water Corporation

Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Concentrate Discharge

Courtesy of Water Corporation

Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Perth Seawater Desalination Project
Long Term Monitoring Macrobenthic

To monitor the response of the

sediment fauna over several years

Benthic macrofauna pilot survey –

complete

Benthic macrofauna
comprehensive baseline survey –
commenced March 2006

Annual monitoring (for three years

initially)
 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Brine Discharge System

a
3H
50 m limit for 30 m mixing zone –
mixing zone achieve 42 x dilution

20 diffuser ports
at 5 m spacing Outfall
pipeline
 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Seawater Concentrate - Salinity

Initial mixing zone

= 100 metres water surface

45x
dilution
farfield

dif
fu
se
r

Courtesy of Water Corporation

Perth Seawater Desalination Project
Baseline DO
 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Real Time Monitoring

Courtesy of Water Corporation

 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Rhodamine Dye Test

These tests proved

the Mathematical /
Computer Model
analyses.

Note the marine

growth on the
diffuser ports.

Courtesy of Water Corporation

Under the Surface

Courtesy of the Water Corporation

Sustainable Power - Wind Energy for
PSDP
Greenhouse Gas Emissions (tonnes per annum)

Option
Energy
Renewable or
Grid Gas
Sequestration

24 MW (21.1 MW average -
231,000 85,000 0
185 GW hrs/annum)

Stanwell/Griffin Joint Venture - Emu Downs wind generation facility

– 100 Miles North of Perth

Water Corporation is purchasing 68 percent of the energy output

Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Sustainable Power - Wind Energy
Zero Greenhouse Gas Emissions

Stanwell/Griffin Joint Venture - Emu Downs wind

generation facility – at Badgingarra
200 north of Perth
Water Corporation is purchasing 66
percent of the energy output
24 MW (185 GW hrs/annum)
Opened on 12 November 2006

Courtesy of the Water Corporation

 Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Sustainable Power - Wind Energy

• Capacity = 80 MW
• No. of Turbines = 48
• Hub Height = 68 m
• Blade Length = 41 m
• Wind Farm Area = 45 km2
• Wind Farm (66%) = 31 km2
Perth Seawater Desalination Plant

Courtesy of the Water Corporation

The Big Six – No. 1
Perth Seawater Desalination Plant – Demonstration Plant
 Perth Seawater Desalination Project
Plant Load Requirements
Single Source 132 kV supply from Western Power

Drive Variable Speed Voltage

Application Drives Serviced Number Size Requirement Selected
(kW)
Seawater Intake Seawater Intake
Switchboard Pumps 6 560 Yes 690 V
Main Switchboard RO Pass 1 HP pumps 6 2,500 No 11 kV
RO Pass 2
Switchboard RO Pass 2 HP pumps 6 630 Yes 690 V
RO Auxiliary RO Pass 1 HP Booster
Switch Board Pumps 12 110 Yes 415 V
Drinking Water
Switchboard Drinking Water Pumps 4 560 Yes 416 V
Post Treatment
Switchboard Minor Drives Only Yes 417 V
 Perth Seawater Desalination Project
Specific Energy Consumption of Components and Total

Perth Seawater Desalination Plant - Specific Energy Consumption (SEC) for Components of Plant

Desal Plant Intake

Total Potable Plus Pre- Pumping Potable
Water Intake Treatment Potable Excluding Pre- Water Desal Plant
Production Pumping Only Pumping Total Plant Treatment Pumping Only Total Plant

ML kWh kWh kWh kWh kWh/kL kWh/kL kWh/kL kWh/kL

144 7,228 501,271 7,988* 516,487 0.19 0.21* 3.48 3.60

*approx 7 miles of conveyance to Perth Integrated Water Supply System (IWSS)

 Perth Seawater Desalination Project
Costs (2007)

• Capital

• Desalination Plant $290 million

• Connecting System (IWSS) $ 58 million

• Total $348 million

• Operating and Maintenance

• Desalination and transfer pumps+ membranes $ 17 million/year

• Unit Costs

• Total Unit Cost $ 1.00

• Fence Unit Cost $ 1.16

Perth, Australia: Two-year Feed Back on
Operation and Environmental Impact
(Steve Christie – Water Corporation, Véronique Bonnélye - Degremont)

Unprecedented marine monitoring programme included:

• computer modelling for diffuser design and validation
• rhodamine dye tracer tests
• extensive far field dissolved oxygen tests
• a water quality monitoring programme
• diffuser performance monitoring programme
• WET testing
• Macrobenthic surveys.
All studies have proven that the PSDP is having negligible impact on
the surrounding environment.
Impacts on seawater habitat are limited by a validated diffuser design
and treatment of suspended solids.
The Big Six – No. 2
Gold Coast Desalination Plant - 35 mgd (133 MLD)
• Client: Water Secure - Queensland
• Capacity: 36 mgd (133 MLD)
• Plant Capital Cost: $745 million (tunnels $213 million)
• Connecting System (IWSS): $198 million
• Total Capital Cost: $943 million
• Total Operating Cost: $32 million/year
• Unit Cost: $2,932/AF ($2.03/m3)
• Commissioning Completion: 2009
• GHD Involvement: Owners Engineer Construction and Design Review,
Durability, 3rd Party Review, overall alliance project
management from owners viewpoint, water quality (raw and
product), instrumentation and commissioning, M&E
Review, SCADA Review
• Configuration: Open Intake, Diffuser Outfall, Drum Screens, Dual Media
Gravity Filtration, 5 Micron Cartridge Filtration, 2 Pass SWRO
System, Lime and CO2 Re-mineralisation
• Seawater Feed Quality: 35000 – 38000 mg/L TDS
• Product Water Quality: < 200 mg/L
• Specific Energy Consumption (SEC): < 12.38 kWh/kgal (3.30 kWh/m3)
• Technology Contractor: Veolia (France)
• Delivery Method Alliance - DBO
• Awards: GWI Membrane Desalination Plant of Year 2008
 Gold Coast Desalination Plant

• Located in Tugin • 140 mg/L Product Water

• 36 mgd Capacity: 38,427 AF/Y • Commenced operation in Nov. ‘08
• 22 MW Power Required • Green Energy as offset
 DUAL MEDIA FILTERED

Fe2(SO4)3
SCREENS

Chlorine

Chlorine

Chlorine

H2SO4

Poly
FILTERS SEAWATER

Antiscalant
TANK

H2SO4

SMBS
HP PUMPS

PRETEATMENT CARTRIDGE
FILTERS
SMBS

Fe2(SO4)3
THICKENER

Poly
33% Bypass Line

Poly
INTAKE TUNNEL
CENTRIFUGE

INTAKE
RESIDUALS
OUTFALL REVERSE OSMOSIS ERD
nd
2 PASS RO

Antiscalant
NaOH
1st PASS RO
1st PASS
PERMEATE TANK
OUTFALL TUNNEL

Chlorine

Chlorine
Lime
CO2

SEAWATER
FILTERED SEAWATER DISTRIBUTION
BRINE NETWORK
LOW SALINITY WATER REMINERALISATION POTABLE WATER
TANK TANK
REMINERALISATION
Aerial View of Desalination Plant

Pre- SWRO &

treatment BWRO

Remineralisation/
Residuals Admin
Chemical Storage
Treatment /Lab
Storage

Seawater HV
Intake substation Potable
& screen water pump
Brine station
discharge
shaft
26 km 1.1 m distribution main
30 ML reservoir & pump station

Twin 2.5 OD intake/outfall tunnels

2.2 km & 2.0 km sized for 340 MLD

125 MLD Plant ave. 94% availability

133 MLD peak daily production
Marine Tunnels
 Marine Tunnels

 10 m diameter & 70 m deep vertical shaft

 Marine Tunnels

 Specially built TBMs (75 m /week)

Marine Tunnels

 SEP supported by tug drawn

 barge- install inlet/outlet risers

 inlet
 outlet
 Seawater Intake

 Intake riser 4 m from seabed 18 m water depth

 Coarse screen 150 mm – vertical bars. Horizontal flow, low velocity to prevent
entrainment <0.15 m/s

 Seawater flows (340 MLD)

 3mm fine screening – drum screens

 Shock dosing of Hypochlorite

 Monitoring of seawater quality EPA & process

Contra-shear Drum Screen

Seawater Intake - Coarse Screen

6.32 m

2.11 m
 Pretreatment

 6 Months piloting of pretreatment

 Chemical addition, two static mixers

 Four flocculation tanks

 18 dual media gravity filters

 24 h filter run time

Pretreatment
 Residuals
 Filter backwash (5 mgd), neutralised CIP wastewater, lime sludge treated in Residuals
Section

 Wastewater is coagulated with ferric sulphate/polymer and clarified in lamella separator

 Sludge (15% solids) dewatered by centrifuge and sent to isolated cell in landfill (max. 50
cubic metre)
 Desalination Plant Feed

 Filtered seawater split into 2 streams

 45% to RO % 55% to ERD

 RO booster pumps provide suction pressure for HP pumps & ERD booster pumps to feed
ERD

 Cartridge filters – 5 µm
 First Pass SWRO
 Four HP Torishima VSD pumps (5 MW feed) 9 SWRO trains through
common HP manifold

 9 trains at 100% capacity

 Each SWRO train has Calder DWEER ERD

 45% recovery
 Desalination Plant Feed – 1st Pass
4 x High Pressure Pumps 4.8 MW Each
(Each equivalent to 28 Toyota Lexus GX Wagon 8st 4dr Man 6sp 4x4
4.0i
0.179 MW @ 5200rpm each - Red Book Specifications)
 Seawater Reverse Osmosis - ERD

Operating Principles & Arrangement

First Pass Second Pass (Partial Split)

PRODUCTION
(Common By-pass)

PRETREATED 3+1 HP
1st Stage
WATER Pumps

2nd Stage

CalderDWEER.exe 1ST PASS FEEDING

Energy (recycling)
Recovery
System
(1 per rack)
REJECT
 Energy Recovery Device - 1st Pass
Pressure Exchanger Rack 1.6 MW Each (9 racks in total)
(Equivalent to 11 Mazda Tribute Wagon 4dr Auto 4sp 4x4 3.0i
0.152 MW @ 4750rpm each - Red Book Specifications)

Re-circulation Pumps 180 kW Each

Equivalent to 11 Toyota Lexus GX Wagon 8st
4dr Man 6sp 4x4 4.0i 0.179 MW @ 5200rpm
each - Red Book Specifications)
RO Building Pressure Vessel Racks - 1st Pass
 Second Pass SWRO
 Rear permeate from SWRO

 3 trains at 100% capacity

 85% recovery

 Brine re-circulated back to filtered seawater tank

 Total desalination energy consumption <3.4 kWh/m3

 Remineralisation and Storage
 Carbon dioxide and lime water addition
 Chlorination
 Two 4 mg glass fused bolted steel tanks (5 h storage) to provide disinfection contact time and
for control
 Water quality monitoring TDS< 220 mg/L etc
 Ultimately Fluoridation.
 Brine Discharge

 Brine (185 MLD) from first pass RO mixed with supernatant from residuals, sent back to
sea

 Brine diluted and dispersed through 20 diffusers 60° to the horizon staggered on 306 yd
long diffuser manifold

 Extensive modeling to ensure optimum mixing to background levels in near field

 Mixing zone 120 m x 400 m

6.5 yd Diffuser

6.0 yd

1200mm PE
 Network Connection
 4 potable water transfer pumps
 26 km of 1.1 m pipeline
 30 ML reservoir “Robina Mixing Reservoir” Desalinated water mixed with water from
Mudgeraba WTP
 Pump Station Tarrant drive
The Big Six – No. 2
Gold Coast Desalination Plant - 36 mgd (133 MLD)

Courtesy of WaterSecure
The Big Six – No. 2
Gold Coast Desalination Plant - 36 mgd (133 MLD)

Courtesy of WaterSecure
The Big Six – No. 2
Gold Coast Desalination Plant - 35 mgd (133 MLD)

Courtesy of WaterSecure
The Big Six – No. 2
Gold Coast Desalination Plant - 36 mgd (133 MLD)

My Office for 2 years

Courtesy of WaterSecure
Gold Coast Desalination Plant - 36 mgd (133 MLD)

Courtesy of WaterSecure
The Big Six – No. 2
Gold Coast Desalination Plant - 36 mgd (133 MLD)

Minimal Drum Screen Screenings (note the “Wheelie Bin”) Drum Screen 1/8 inch (3mm) mesh

American Translation “Trash Can”

Courtesy of WaterSecure
The Big Six – No. 2
Gold Coast Desalination Plant - 36 mgd (133 MLD)

3 duty 1 standby High Pressure Pumps (4.8 MW each)

Courtesy of WaterSecure
 Gold Coast Desalination Plant
Specific Energy Consumption of Components and Total

Gold Coast Desalination Plant - Specific Energy Consumption (SEC) for Components of Plant

Desal Plant Intake

Total Potable Plus Pre- Pumping Potable
Water Intake Treatment Potable Including Pre- Water Desal Plant
Production Pumping Only Pumping Total Plant Treatment Pumping Only Total Plant

kgal kWh kWh kWh kWh kWh/kL kWh/kL kWh/kL kWh/kL

36,137 20,941 463,590 47,725* 489,256 0.15 0.35* 3.05 3.54

*approx 26 km of conveyance to system with high static head

 The Big Six – No. 2
Gold Coast Desalination Plant - 36 mgd (133 MLD)
Why So Expensive?

Connecting System (IWSS): $198 million

Total Capital Cost: $943 million
Total Operating Cost: $32 million/year
Unit Cost: $2.38/kL

Wonthaggi Desalination Plant – Electricians $220,000/year

 The Big Six – No. 3
Sydney Desalination Plant - 66 mgd (250 MLD) – Expandable to 132 mgd (500 MLD)
• Client: Sydney Water – New South Wales
• Capacity: 66 mgd (250 MLD) - expandable to 132 mgd (500 MLD)
• Plant Capital Cost: $787 million (tunnels $189 million)
• Connecting System: $410 million
• Other: $246 million
• Total Capital Cost: $1,443 million
• Total Operating Cost: $37 million/year
• Unit Cost: $1,950/AF ($1.74/m3)
• Commissioning Completion: 2010
• GHD Involvement: Feasibility Study, Preparation of Environmental Statement and
Secured Approvals. Prepared Reference Design and Basis of Design
and Construct, Seawater quality sampling program, All Geotechnical
Investigations (on & offshore), Pilot Plant Infrastructure Design and
Facilitation, Procurement Method Evaluation, Tender Documentation,
Tender Evaluation (Owners Engineer), Technical Advisor – Design
Review of Contractors Design, Durability, Construction Surveillance
& Commissioning Support, Marine & Estuarine Monitoring Program
Management, Represented Owner’s Interest During Construction.
• Configuration: Open Intake, Diffuser Outfall, Drum Screens, Dual Media Gravity
Filtration, 5 Micron Cartridge Filtration, 2 Pass SWRO System, Lime and CO 2 Re-
mineralisation
• Seawater Feed Quality: 32000 – 41000 mg/L TDS
• Product Water Quality: < 140 mg/L TDS
• Specific Energy Consumption (SEC): < 14.76 kWh/kgal (3.9 kWh/m3)
• Technology Contractor: Veolia (France)
• Delivery Method DBO
• Awards: A Great Contender for 2011 GWI Award, Multiple Australian Awards
 The Big Six – No. 3
Sydney Desalination Plant - 66 mgd (250 MLD) – Expandable to 132 mgd (500 MLD)

Courtesy of Sydney Water

The Big Six – No. 4
Adelaide Desalination Plants I and II – 40 + 40 mgd (150 MLD each)
• Client: South Australia Water
• Capacity: 40 mgd + 40 mgd (150 MLD + 150 MLD)
• Plant Capital Cost: $1,255 million (Estimated)
• Connecting System (IWSS): $246 million (Estimated)
• Total Capital Cost: $1,500 million
• Total Operating Cost: $67 million/year (80 mgd)
• Unit Cost: $3,033/AF ($2.70/m3) Estimated levelised cost
• First Water: December 2012
• GHD Involvement: Owners Engineer due diligence review during
project development phase, Environmental
Impact Statement and Development
Approvals, Water
Quality Integration Review and Ongoing Support.
• Configuration: Open Intake, Diffuser Outfall, capacity to 72
mgd 2 Pass SWRO System, initial capacity 54
mgd Lime and CO2 Re-
mineralisation
• Seawater Feed Quality: 35000 – 38000 mg/L TDS
• Product Water Quality: < 200 mg/L
• Specific Energy Consumption (SEC): < 18.9 (17.0) kWh/kgal - 5 (4.5) kWh/ m3
• Technology Contractor: Acciona (Spain)
• Delivery Method BOOT
• Awards: Not Completed Yet
The Big Six – No. 4
Adelaide Desalination Plants I and II – 40 + 40 mgd (150 MLD each)

Courtesy of SA Water
The Big Six – No. 5
Southern Seawater Desalination Plant (Perth II) - 40 mgd (150 MLD) to 80 mgd (300 MLD)
• Client: Water Corporation of Western Australia
• Capacity: 40 mgd (150 MLD) 1st Stage, 80 mgd (150 MLD) 2nd Stage
• Plant Capital Cost: $640 million (Estimated with double intake/outfall)
• Connecting System (IWSS): $98 million (Estimated)
• Total Capital Cost: $738 million (Estimated)
• Total Operating Cost: $29 million/year (Estimated)
• Unit Cost: $2,042/AF ($1.81/m3) Estimated
• Commissioning Completion: 2011
• GHD Involvement: Alliance Team / Plant Engineering/ Bid (note, out of 8 expressions of
interest, which were reduced to two by the Water Corporation, the GHD – Acciona - United Utilities Team
was one and did not win the Alliance Contract. It should be noted that Acciona using this design
went on to win both Adelaide desalination plant projects from which GHD were excluded due to their partial
owners role in this project and their Owners Engineer Role on Melbourne, for whom Acciona was
also bidding, hence another set of consulting engineers was selected by the contractor). Seaglider
Oceanographic Measurements
• Configuration: Open Intake, Diffuser Outfall, Travelling Band Screens, UF PVDF
Pressure Filters, 5 Micron Cartridge Filtration, 2 Pass SWRO System, Lime and CO2 Re-mineralisation
• Seawater Feed Quality: 35000 – 38000 mg/L TDS
• Product Water Quality: < 200 mg/L
• Specific Energy Consumption (SEC): < 16.04 (12.97) kWh/kgal - 4.24 (3.36) kWh/m3)
• Technology Contractor: Tecnicas Reunidas, Valoriza Agua (Spain)
• Delivery Method Competitive Alliance - DBO
• Awards: Not Completed Yet
The Big Six – No. 5
Southern Seawater Desalination Plant (Perth II)
150 MLD (40 mgd) Expandable to 300 MLD (80 mgd)

Courtesy of Water Corporation

 The Big Six – No. 6
The Victorian Desalination Project - 120 mgd (450 MLD) to 160 mgd (600MLD)
• Client: Victorian Government
• Capacity: 120 mgd (450 MLD) 1st Stage, 160 mgd 2nd Stage (600 MLD)
• Plant Capital Cost: $1,840 million (Estimated)
• Connecting System (50 Mile Pipeline): $820 million (Estimated)
• Underground power connection $246 million (Estimated)
• Total Capital Cost: $2,870 million
• Total Operating Cost: $98 million/year (Estimated)
• Unit Cost: $2,550/AF ($2.27/m ) Estimated
3

• Commissioning Completion: 2011

• GHD Involvement: Feasibility Study, Environment Effects Statement and
Approvals, Reference Design, Seawater quality sampling
program, all geotechnical investigations (on & offshore),
Pilot Plant facilities and support, Marine growth
experiment, Management of Landowner Engagement, GIS &
Mapping, Data Management, Tender Preparation and
Evaluation, Design Review, Strategic Direction and
Ongoing Support to Completion.
• Configuration: 4 m Dia. Undersea Inlet and Outlet Tunnels, Drum Screens,
Dual Media Pressure Filtration, Cartridge Filtration,
2 Pass SWRO System, Lime and CO2 Re-mineralisation
• Seawater Feed Quality: 35 000 – 38 000 mg/L TDS
• Product Water Quality: < 120 mg/L
• Specific Energy Consumption (SEC): < 18.17 (15.90) kWh/kgal - 4.8 (4.2) kWh/ m3
• Technology Contractor: Degremont (France/Spain)
• Delivery Method PPP - BOO
• Awards: Not Completed Yet
The Big Six – No. 6
The Victorian Desalination Project - 120 mgd (450 MLD) then 160 mgd (600 MLD)

Courtesy of Victorian Government

Future Desalination Developments
SWRO will still become more efficient due to:

• New high rejection membranes

• Chlorine Tolerant Membranes

• New large diameter membranes

• New energy recovery devices

• Membrane pre-treatment advances

• New materials (more plastics and composites)

• Advanced pre-treatment and post treatment

 Future Desalination Developments
• Non-chemical treatments for disinfection pre- and post treatment

• Changing of WHO Boron Guidelines to 2.4 mg/L from 0.5 mg/L (hence
only one pass required with a potential savings of 15%)
• Optimal Control Systems and Configurations

• Nano-technology and smart membranes

• Forward Osmosis

• High efficiency reverse osmosis (HERO) and Electro Dialysis Reversal

(EDR) may become the solution for inland towns where groundwater
sources are limited
 Desalination – Key Trends?
• SWRO Desalination Technologies Dominate;

• Large - (over 50 MLD) and Mega - (over 360 MLD) Desalination

Plants Are the Wave of the Future!

• Most Large Urban Coastal Centers Worldwide Have Established a

Target to Produce 25 % of their Drinking Water from Desalination.

• R&D Activities are in 10-Year High – Expected to Yield

Breakthroughs in Membrane and Desalination Technologies by
2012.

• Large SWRO Projects Are Aiming at Sustainability – Green is In!

 Year 2005-2010
The Five Lowest-Cost SWRO Projects Worldwide
Cost of Water Power Use of RO
SWRO Plant (US$/kL) System
(kWh/kL)
& TDS (ppt)

Sorek, Israel – 409 MLD 0.53 2.59

(startup – 2014) (40 ppt)
Mactaa, Algeria – 719 MLD 0.56 2.56
(startup – 2013) (39 ppt)
Tuas, Singapore – 136 MLD 0.57 3.04
(startup – 2007) (34 ppt)
Tenes, Algeria – 200 MLD 0.59 2.85
(startup – 2011) (38 ppt)
Hadera, Israel – 329 MLD 0.60 2.67
(startup – 2010) (40 ppt)
 Key Factors Affecting Costs
• Source Water Quality - TDS, Temperature, Solids, Silt and Organics Content.

• Product Water Quality – TDS, Boron, Bromides, Disinfection Compatibility.

• Concentrate Disposal Method;

• Power Supply & Unit Power Costs;

• Project Risk Profile;

• Project Delivery Method & Financing;

• Other Factors:
• Country (Australia is very expensive)
• Location (Remote is more expensive)
• Intake and Discharge System Type;
• Pretreatment & RO System Design;
• Plant Capacity Availability Target.
Reducing Power Use for SWRO Separation

- Still a Hair Rising Challenge?

Lowest Theoretical Energy Use =
0.75 kWh/kL (100 % Recovery)
Lowest Theoretical Energy Use
@ 50 % Recovery =
1.09kWh/kL
ADC - Lowest Energy Use @
42 % Recovery & 10.2 LMH =
1.59 kWh/kL
ADC – “Most Affordable Point”
48 % Recovery & 15.3 LMH =
2.01 kWh/kL
Low Bracket of Energy Use for
Large SWRO Projects
(45-50 % Recovery & 14.3 to
16.3LMH) =
2.51 to 2.74 kWh/kL

Note: All Energy Use Values for Seawater @

SWRO Power Consumption (July 1, 2001)

•
 50 MGD SWRO Plant –
Key Energy Uses

RO System –
71 % Product Water Delivery
(2.54 kWh/kL) 6%
Pretreatment –
(0.20 kWh/kL)
11 %
(0.40 kWh/kL)

Other Facilities
7%
(0.24 kWh/kL)

Total Energy Use

Intake – 5 % 3.57 kWh/kgal
(0.19 kWh/kL)
 Optimizing RO System Performance
• Higher Productivity 8-inch RO Elements;
• Large –Diameter RO Membranes;
• Innovative RO System Configurations;
•Pump-Center or Three -Center Designs;
•Larger Energy Recovery Devices.
 2008-11
Evolving SWRO Membrane Performance
• Larger Membrane Element Area: 37.2 vs. 41.9 m2 (440 ft2 vs. 400 ft2);

• Larger RO Element Productivity: 34 to 47 m3/day (9,000 to 12,500 gpd);

• Improved Salt Rejection: 99.7 to 99.8 %;

• Increased Boron Rejection: 90 to 93 %;

• Wider Membrane Spacers: 28 mil vs. 34 mil

(mil thou – one thousandth of and inch)
2.6 MGD Power Seraja SWRO Plant,
Singapore – 16-inch Elements
Large RO Elements – Key Manufacturers/Models

Source: IDA Journal, Vol. 2, 2010

 Optimizing Performance by Redistributing
Flux/Energy Courtesy - Nikolay Voutchkov
Flux of First Element Can Be Reduced by:
1.Increase in Permeate Pressure:
•Permeate Pressure Control Valve;
•Permeate Interconnector Disk (Acciona).

2. “Inter-stage” Design:
Low Permeability/High
Permeability Membrane
Combo.

3. Decrease in Feed Pressure:

• Two Pass RO System
w/ Interstage Booster Pump;
• “Nano-Nano” Configuration.
Flux is Proportional to the Difference of the Feed and Permeate Pressures
 Conventional RO System Configuration
(Perth Seawater Desalination Plant – Perth I)

Feed

Permeate
Seawater Second
(Brackish RO)
Pass
HP Pump First (SWRO) Pass Booster Pump

Concentrate – First Pass to ERD

Concentrate – Second Pass

Courtesy - Nikolay Voutchkov

 Split “Regulated” First Pass RO System Configuration
(Gold Coast Desalination Plant)

20% to 40% of Total Permeate

Feed
Smaller

Permeate
Seawater
Second
(Brackish
RO) Pass
HP First (SWRO) Pass Smaller
Pump Booster Pump

Concentrate – First Pass to ERD

Concentrate – Second Pass Courtesy - Nikolay Voutchkov

 Split “Regulated” First Pass RO System Configuration
(Adelaide Desalination Plant)

20% to 40% of Total Permeate

Feed
Smaller

Permeate
Seawater
Second
(Brackish
RO) Pass
HP First (SWRO) Pass Smaller
Pump Booster Pump
Plug
Concentrate – First Pass to ERD

Concentrate – Second Pass

Courtesy - Nikolay Voutchkov

 Internally Staged Design (1-1-5)

Element Flow at Standard Test Conditions

Low Productivity/ High Productivity/
High Salt Rejection Low Salt Rejection

7,500 gpd 9,000 gpd 12,500 gpd

Compared to Standard SWRO Design, ISD SWRO Offers:
- Higher average permeate flux with same lead element flux;
- Good permeate quality;
- Energy Savings - 5% - 10%.

Courtesy: Dow Filmtec

Courtesy - Nikolay Voutchkov
 Internally-Staged Design (ISD)

Low Productivity/ High Productivity/

High Rejection Low Rejection
Feed
Seawater Second

Permeate
(Brackish
RO) Pass
HP Pump Booster Pump
Lower Feed
Pressure
Concentrate to ERD

Concentrate – Second Pass

Courtesy - Nikolay Voutchkov

 ISD + Split “Regulated” RO System Configuration
Southern Seawater Desalination Plant (Perth II)

Feed 20% to 40% of Total Permeate

Seawater

Permeate
Smallest
Second
(Brackish
RO) Pass
HP Pump First SWRO Pass Smallest
Lowest Feed Booster Pump
Pressure
Concentrate to ERD
Concentrate – Second Pass

Courtesy - Nikolay Voutchkov

 3-Center Design –
Pump, Energy Recovery & RO Membrane Centers

Highly Efficient
Energy Use
2.5 to 2.6 kWh/kgal

Courtesy: IDE Courtesy - Nikolay Voutchkov

 Bigger Pumps Rule!
Pump Efficiency Increases with Size
Perth, Australia –
6 Pumps for 12 RO Trains

• Pump Efficiency ~
n x (Q/H)0.5x (1/H)0.25
Where:
n = pump speed (min -¹);
Q = nominal pump capacity (m³/s);
H = pump head (m).

Pump Efficiency:
One Pump Per Train – 83 %;
One Pump Per 2 Trains – 85 %;
Three Pumps Per 16 Trains – 88 %.

Ashkelon, Israel –
(3+1) 7,100-hp Pumps per 16 RO
Trains Courtesy - Nikolay Voutchkov
 Radially Split Case Pumps
Occupy Less Space;
Easier to Maintain;
Less Vibrations;
Only One Mechanical Seal
on the Drive End (Horizontally Split
Case Pumps Have2 seals);
Internal Fiber-Composite Bearings
(Water Lubricated) – vs. External
Grease Lubricated;
Largest Pumps First Installed for
Expansion of Dhekelia SWRO Plant
(Cyprus) to 14 MGD;
Unit Capacity – 7 MGD (2,800 hp) –
87 % Efficiency. Courtesy - Nikolay Voutchkov
 Energy Recovery Systems
are Getting Bigger & More Efficient!
Pressure Exchangers Allow the Use of
Larger Pumps/RO Trains

Pelton Wheel

Pressure Exchanger

of
4 4 -46 %
r ovides ergy
P n
the E

i des2%
Prov Energy
e
of th
Provides 40 - 42 % of the Energy
ERI System – Current Status

• Largest In Operation - Hamma

(Algeria) – 50 MGD

• Largest in Construction – Hadera

(Israel) – 73 MGD;

• Base Unit – PX 220;

(0.37 MGD) in ops since 2002;
• 10 to 16 Units per RO Train
(2.5 – 4 MGD RO Train).
 ERI – New Energy Recovery
Equipment
• PX 260 • Titan 1200
- 18 % Larger Capacity than PX220; - 500% Larger Capacity than PX220;
- Wider Flow Paths to Higher Throughput
- Similar Overall Energy Recovery (Slightly
@ Minimum Pressure Losses.
Lower Efficiency Compensated by Lower
Mixing);

- Side-ported Design Allows to Maximize

Flow Production.

• PX 300 (45 to 68 m3/hr)

- 36 % Larger Capacity than PX220
- Reduced Cycle Speed - Less Mixing
than PX 220 and 260
- Quieter Unit
- Site-ported Housing
 DWEER System – Current Status
• Used in Ashkelon, Gold Coast, Tuas, Singapore
Sorek, and Singapore. Triple DWEER 1100
• 1.34 MGD SWRO Train – One 4 MGD SWRO Trains
DWEER System – Model 1100;
• Ashkelon – 2 x 40 DWEER 2200
Systems;
• RO w/ DWEER – 0.5 to 0.7 kWh/M3
Less Energy than Pelton Wheel @
(45 % Recovery).
Calder AG (Flowserve) – ROVA 300

• Can Handle 6.8 MLD of Brine Flow

(Three Times Bigger than Existing
Units);

• Duplex Stainless Steel;

• New Seal Design Reduces Brine

Mixing < 1.5 %.

• Currently Tested in Oman and

Cayman Islands.
Calder AG (Flowserve) – DWEER GA

• 25 % Higher Capacity Than DWEER

1100;

• FRP Instead of Steel Vessels;

• New LinX Valve With Two Seal Rings

for Lowest Leakage;

• Specific Power Consumption Losses

Reduced by 26 %.
 Hydraulic Turbocharger – Large
Installations
(8.9 to 10.0 kWh/kgal)
Pump Efficiency ~ • 720 MLD Mactaa, Algeria – 2.6 kWh/kL
n x (Q/H)0.5x (1/H)0.25
• 114 MLD Plant in Jebel Ali, UAE
• 9 RO Trains;
• 16 Single-stage HP RO Pumps;
• Up to 525 psi (40 bar) of Boost;
• HP RO Pumps Operating @ Full Flow @ ½
Pressure –
5-7 % Extra Efficiency.

• 150 MLD NEWater Ulu Pandan Plant,

Singapore
The Sustainability of SWRO
Energy Recovery Devices

CALDER – DWEER KSB – SALTEC

PRESSURE EXCHANGER PRESSURE EXCHANGER

AXIAL PISTON PRESSURE

EXCHANGER PUMP

PEI – TURBO BOOSTER

CALDER - PELTON WHEEL ERI - PX

IMPULSE TURBINE PRESSURE EXCHANGER
The Sustainability of SWRO
Energy Recovery Devices

IDE – IRIS DYPREX

PRESSURE EXCHANGER
ROVEX PRESSURE
PRESSURE EXCHANGER
EXCHANGER

FEDCO HYDRAULIC
PRESSURE BOOSTER
ERI – TITAN PX
PRESSURE EXCHANGER
The Sustainability of SWRO
Energy Recovery Devices

AQUALING – NEW RECUPERATOR

PRESSURE EXCHANGER
AQUALING – ORIGINAL RECUPERATOR
PRESSURE EXCHANGER
Biofouling – Still the Key “Energy Chellenge”
of SWRO Desalination
 Membrane Pretreatment is Becoming More
Popular for Large Plants!
• 300 MLD Adelaide SWRO Plant, Australia
– Disk Filters + Submersible UF;
– Largest SWRO Facility with Submerged Membrane Pretreatment.
• 150+150 MLD Southern Seawater Desalination Plant, Australia
– Disk Filters + Pressure UF;
– Largest SWRO Facility with Pressure Membrane Pretreatment.
• Where Membrane Pretreatment Has Worked Well? – for Source Waters
of Low Bio-fouling Potential:
• Subsurface or Deep Open Ocean Intakes;
• Plants w/ DAF or Other Pretreatment Ahead of UF/MF Membranes.
• Where Membrane Pretreatment Has Faced Challenges?
• Shallow Open Intakes Exposed to Heavy Algal Blooms;
• Systems Designed for Overly High Flux Rates Based on Short-term
Piloting.
 New “Tools” for Combating Biofouling
• Wider Membrane Element Spacers;

• Lower Fouling Membrane Materials;

• Alternative Means of Controlling Biofouling:

• Building Deeper Open Intakes (over 40 ft deep);
• DAF Pretreatment;
• Granular Media Bio-filtration;
• Chlorine Dioxide Oxidation;
• Continuous Membrane Cleaning;
• Nutrient Balancing;
• Membrane Bioreactors for SWRO Pretreatment.
 “The Best” of Seawater Desalination
Present Status & Future Forecasts
Parameter Today Within 5 Years Within 20 Years

Cost of Water US$2.0-3.0 US$1.5-2.5 US$1.0-1.5

(2010 US$/kgal)

Construction Cost 1200-2150 1060-1720 530-930

(Million US$/kL/day)

Power Use of SWRO System 2.5-2.8 2.1-2.6 1.3-1.7

(kWh/kL)

Membrane Productivity 24-47 34-57 95-151

(gallons/day/membrane)

Membrane Useful Life 5-7 7-10 10-15

(years)

Plant Recovery Ratio (%) 45-50 50-55 55-65

 Selected Tariffs
City Combined Tariff Average Domestic use
(L/head/day)
Adelaide $3.60/m3 605
Brisbane $4.85/m3 605
Chicago $0.99/m3 616
Copenhagen $8.00/m3 114
Los Angeles $2.49/m3 606
Melbourne $4.36/m3 606
San Diego $4.93/m3 616
Sydney $5.03/m3 606

Costs in US$ per cubic metre of water = Water + Wastewater fixed costs +
Water Variable costs
Wastewater variable costs
Total Sales Tax

Summary of key data from the 2010 GWI Global Water Tariff Survey
The Sustainability of SWRO
 The Sustainability of SWRO
Mammoth Water Condenser, Coolgardie Water Distillery, 132,000 gpd

The ultimate in un-sustainability

In 1896 the worlds largest desalination plant was built in Western Australia at Coolgardie
 It’s not about water.
It’s aboutenergy!
The Sustainability of SWRO
Affordable Desalination Collaboration (ADC)

Theoretical minimum SEC for seawater @ 35000 mg/L TDS is 2.83 kWh/kgal (0.748 kWhr/m3 )
To convey 1 kgal of untreated water horizontally over 260 miles uses 12.38 kWh/kgal (3.3 kWh/m3)
Gold Coast Desalination Plant produces high quality water locally at 12.38 kWh/kgal (3.3 kWh/m3)
Responding to the Clear Trend of
Global Warming!

The total Energy Needed to

Operate All
California Desalination Projects
(1514 MLD)
Will Result in 0.03 – 0.04 %
Increase in the Current California
Water Sector Energy Demand.
The Sustainability of SWRO
Specific Energy Consumption for Different Water Sources

Process Electrical Thermal Total

(kWh/m3) (kWh/m3) (kWh/m3)

MSF 3.2 – 3.7 9.8 – 6.8 13.0 – 10.5

MED 2.5 - 2.9 6.6 - 4.5 9.0 – 7.4
METC 2.0 - 2.5 12.0 - 6.5 14.0 - 9.0
MVC 8.0 - 17.0 N/A N/A
SWRO 3.3 - 8.5 N/A 3.3 - 8.5
BWRO 1.0 - 2.5 N/A 1.0 - 2.5
Waste Water Reuse 1.0 - 2.5 N/A 1.0 - 2.5
Conventional 0.2 – 1.0 N/A 0.2 – 1.0
Water piped > 250 Miles 3.3 N/A 3.3
 Unit Costs of Carbon Footprint Reduction
Alternatives
CF Reduction Alternative Unit Cost of Carbon
Footprint Reduction
(US$/tons CO2 reduced)

1. Collocation & Energy Efficient Technology US$20/ton CO2

2. CO2 Use for Water Production US$70/ton CO2

3. Purchase of Carbon Credits US$100/ton CO2

4. Re-forestation US$200/ton CO2

5. CO2 Sequestration in Coastal Wetlands US$400/ton CO2

6. Solar Panels US$1,900/ton CO2

7. Green Building Design US$3,400/ton CO2

The Sustainability of SWRO
Water Source Comparison (including another unsustainable concept)

14

12.0
12 Unit cost ($/m )
3

Power (kWh/m3)
10

6
<3.5 and reducing $5.10
to 3.3 by 2010
4

2
$1.07 1.0 $1.16
$0.62 0.5

0
Current metro bulk South West Seawater Kimberley
water Yarragadee Desalination Pipeline

To convey 1 kL over 370 miles uses 3.3 kWh/m 3

The Sustainability of SWRO
Energy Comparison
Old Fridge Energy Requirement
= 1300
kWh/Year

Efficient Desalination Plant (SEC)

Specific Energy Consumption
= 15.52 kWhr/kgal (4.1 kWh/m3 )Total

Equivalent Annual Water Production

= 84000
gallons /year (317 m3/year)
Garage Fridge
= A single total domestic water use
per year inside and outside

Reverse Cycle Air 8 kW @ 4 h/day in

Winter and Summer (6 months)
= 5760 kW/h (Water for 4.5 homes)
The Sustainability of SWRO
Energy Comparison – The MacMansion

Temperature under black roof 61°C.

Radiated Heat 39 °C inside house.
Temperature under reflective roof 31°C.
Radiated heat 26 °C inside house
The Sustainability of SWRO
Energy Comparison – The MacMansion

If you look at all the energy requirements of new homes (City Beach 8858
kW/hr per year average per home) you would not believe there is a
greenhouse gas emission issue.

Some Big Mac’s (supersized) have up to 15 kW air conditioning systems.

To add insult to injury, the latest fashion is a black roof with no eaves –
additional air conditioning required (high calories – just like the Big Mac
supersized).

Reverse Cycle Air 15 kW @ 4 hr/day in Winter and Summer (6 months) =

10800 kW/h (SWRO water for 8.5 homes

I did not see one black roof on the Canary Islands (and I do not think it
was just because the islanders have aesthetic appreciation).
The Sustainability of SWRO
Energy Comparison – The MacMansion

The West Australian Tuesday March 8 2007

Record heat ruins fruit,

drains power
Western Power claimed it coped with the
increased demand despite using temporary
generators as power consumption hit a
peak of 3574MW at 4.55 pm, beating
Tuesday’s high of 3533 MW.
The Perth Seawater Desalination Plant uses
0.67% of this energy, whilst Perth was
using over 30% of the energy for air-
Note the new umbilical cords to ensure that the
conditioning.
black roof keeps the Big Mac cool inside
So …
How Many Jumbos?
The Sustainability of SWRO
Energy Comparisons

+
+

+
+ +
The Sustainability of SWRO
Energy Comparisons

or, how many PSDP’s?

=

+
The Sustainability of SWRO
Energy Comparisons
and the answer is!

One Jumbo Jet +

Taking Off Power = 77 MW
Cruising Power = 65 MW
Full Power of One Engine = 26 MW
Full Power Requirement PSDP = 24 MW
Water for 405,000 homes (Aus) 300,000 homes (USA) or a total
116,000 passengers transported in one year assuming Jumbo is
always full, and Jumbo’s cannot use renewable energy. +
 So …
How Many Queen Mary II’s?
The Sustainability of SWRO
Energy Comparisons

+
+

+
+ +
The Sustainability of SWRO
Energy Comparisons
=
or, how many PSDP’s?

+
The Sustainability of SWRO
Energy Comparisons
and the answer is! =

+
Guest Capacity:
• 3,056 maximum capacity (Incl. third and fourth berths)
Crew:

+
•1,253
Power:
•118 MW, gas turbine/diesel electric plant

= Power for Water for 1.7 Million People

Not So Sustainable
Surface Water Source – Serpentine Dam
Serpentine Dam - Streamflow
Note: years are water years May to April
200.0

Catchment Area 664 km2

180.0

160.0
Annual Streamflow (GL)

140.0

120.0

100.0

80.0

60.0

40.0

20.0

0.0
11

14

17

20

23

26

29

32

35

38

41

44

47

50

53

56

59

62

65

68

71

74

77

80

83

86

89

92

95

98

01

04
19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

20

20
Streamflow Longterm average(62 GL) moving average
1975 to 1994 MAF (37 GL) 1997 to 2004 MAF(24 GL) 2001 to 2005 MAF(19 GL)

Courtesy of the Water Corporation

Seawater Desalination vs. Surface Water Source
Footprint Comparison – Serpentine Dam

• Constructed from 1957 to 1961

• Catchment area = 664 km2 (vs. 31 km2)

• Surface area at FSL = 1067 ha (vs. 9.5 ha)

• No in-stream flow allocations

• Yield estimated in early 50s @ 50 million m3/year - 98% reliability

• PSDP yield: 50 million m3/year + @ 100% reliability - 0% failure

• Yield in 2006 was 5 million m3/year ; a 90% reduction

• Desalination 0% failure = 50 million m3/year - 100% reliability

Where Future Cost Savings Will Come
From?
Main Areas Expected to Yield Cost Savings in the
Next 5 Years (20 % Cost Reduction Target)
• Improvements in Membrane Element Productivity :
• Polymetric Membranes (Incorporation of Nano-particles Into
Membrane Polymer Matrix);
• Carbon Nanotube Membranes.

• Increased Membrane Useful Life and Reduced Fouling:

• Smoother Membrane Surface
• Increased Membrane Material Longevity;
• Use of Systems for Continuous RO Membrane Cleaning;
• UF/MF Membrane Pretreatment.

• Commercial Forward Osmosis Systems;

• Larger RO Elements, Trains and Equipment;

• New configurations and control systems;

• New Materials (especially pipework), more HDPE and FRP.

Nano-Structured SWRO Membranes
 Potential to
Reduce 60 to 80 %
of Energy Costs &
15 to 25 % of Cost
of Water

Source: OASYS
 Harnessing Osmotic Power

Source: Statkraft
Osmotic Power – A Competitive Energy Source

Source: Statkraft
Desalination Energy Use Factors
Why SWRO is Sustainable & the Future Solution
1. SWRO reflects the “true benchmark value of water”, the “triple bottom line” as
environmental, social and financial costs are all included in the unit cost of water. No
conventional source adequately caters for environmental costs.
2. SWRO is drought free and provides a totally new (original) source, contrary to recycling.
3. SWRO does not disturb rivers, estuaries, delta’s, the sea and associated habitat (fish,
siltation, stagnation and in-stream flows). Dams result in the sea getting saltier in confined
gulfs e.g. Arabian Gulf. Even semi – confined Cockburn Sound in Perth has not shown any
signs of salinity increase after 3 years of operation (DB09-278 Perth, Australia: Two-year
Feed Back on Operation and Environmental Impact).
4. SWRO does not disturb aquifers and associated habitat (water table, seawater intrusion,
springs, acid sulphate soils and stygofauna).
5. SWRO brine discharges and residuals can be environmentally managed (this has been
proven beyond any doubt in Perth (DB09-278).
6. SWRO is efficient and becoming more efficient with constant advances.
Why SWRO is Sustainable & the Future Solution
7. SWRO submerged intakes adequately designed, entrain negligible algae, zooplankton and
no fish. Entrainment of sea life is minimal with well designed submerged open intakes with
low velocity. Only some algae and zooplankton (and no fish) in minuscule quantities are
entrained. Proven by Perth and Gold Coast Desalination Plants.
8. SWRO can use wind or any renewable energy to ensure no emissions.
9. SWRO has the smallest environmental and terrestrial footprint of any source (Perth 16
acres Land + 6 acres Sea + wind farm 12 miles2 for 17% of the city’s water).
10. SWRO can be located near to where it is needed.
11. SWRO need not utilise long pipelines/canals (no need for millions of tons of steel, cement
or massive excavations – such as required when “bringing water down from the north” and
using 4.5 times less energy).
12. SWRO results in minimal greenhouse gas production during the manufacture of
components.
13. SWRO results in minimal greenhouse gas production during the construction of the plant.
Why SWRO is Sustainable & the Future Solution
14. The deployment of SWRO plants on coasts ensures that there is a water catchment
plan in place (for water quality purposes), ensuring the highest degree of ocean
protection.
15. SWRO results in zero evaporation, siltation or salt build-up in dams (e.g. Wellington
Dam, WA).
16. SWRO water quality is not affected by bush fires, first rain or activities in catchments
which can affect water quality and future run-off (e.g. Melbourne).
17. SWRO could ultimately be partially powered by osmotic power (a new form of
renewable energy). Locate SWRO Plants adjacent to WWT Plants.
18. SWRO can utilise greenhouse off–sets from renewable energy development from
anywhere in the world, after all climate change is a global issue.
19. SWRO can be provided at guaranteed full capacity within two years of
environmental clearances being obtained.
20. The future development potential of SWRO is still amazing (especially membranes,
materials, control systems and logic and energy reduction).
 Concluding Remarks

• The Ocean Is Becoming One of the Key Sources of Reliable and

Draught-Proof Coastal Water Supply in the Next 10 Years;
• Seawater Desalination is Economical Today and Will Become Even
More Cost-Competitive in the Future;
• The Future of Seawater Desalination Is Bright – 20% Cost of Water
Reduction in the Next 5 Years;
• Long-term Investment In Research and Development Has the
Potential to Reduce the Cost of Desalinated Water by 80 % In the
Next 20 Years.
 
“I have said that I thought if we could ever
competitively get fresh water from
saltwater…that it would be in the long range
interests of humanity which would really
dwarf any other scientific accomplishment.”
John F. Kennedy, September 22, 1961

“If we could produce clean unlimited energy

at a viable cost, that would indeed be a
great service to humanity and would dwarf
any other scientific accomplishment.”
Gary J. Crisp, 2006
Perth Seawater Desalination Plant
Awarded
GWI World Membrane Desalination
Plant of the Year 2007

ERI Awarded GWI

Environmental
Contribution of the
Year 2007

Courtesy of Water Corporation Courtesy of ERI

Gold Coast Desalination Plant
Awarded
GWI World Membrane Desalination
Plant of the Year 2009

Courtesy of WaterSecure
 International Desalination Association
Awarded 2011 World Congress - to

Perth
Western
Australia

See You There!

Questions?
Thank you.
Pseudo Greenies and Nimby’s
 Fuelling the Future
• BBC News Program – Can be down loaded onto i-pod
• http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/4627237.stm
• Most Energy Originates from the Sun
• Coal Visual, CO2, acid rain, mercury.
• Hydro Carbons Visual, CO2.
• Wind Visual, Noise, Birds.
• Wave Visual, terrestrial.
• Solar Visual.
• Hydro Visual, terrestrial, fauna and flora.
• Energy Independent of the Sun
• Nuclear Fission Visual, Slow Radioactive Decay Period,
Meltdown potential, Waste Disposal is Big Issue.
• Nuclear Fusion Visual, Fast Radioactive Decay Period, No
Meltdown, Potential, Waste Disposal is not a Big
Issue.
• Tidal Visual, terrestrial.
• Geothermal Visual.
Nuclear Fusion (Hans Bethe) 1938

 Fusion works on the principle that energy can be released by forcing

together atomic nuclei rather than by splitting them.
 A decision was made (June 2005) to site the $16bn ITER
(International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) nuclear fusion
reactor at Cadarache in France.
 ITER is an experimental reactor that will attempt to reproduce on
Earth the nuclear reactions that power the Sun and other stars.
 Goal of ITER is to produce 500 MW of Fusion Power, with and input
of 50 MW of Power.
 Not Expected to be in commercial operation before 2040.
Nuclear Fusion (Hans Bethe) 1938
 Project estimated to cost $15bn and will run for 35 years

 It will produce the first sustained fusion reactions

 Final stage before full prototype of commercial reactor is built

 Temperatures to produce fusion need to be above 100 million

degrees Celsius, contained in a magnetic bottle (Tokamak)

Nuclear Fission (Otto Hahn, Leis Meitner
and Fritz Strassmann) 1938

Nuclear Fission works on the principle splitting atoms.

Fission reactions drive existing nuclear power stations.

Limited uranium available.

Difficult to handle, transfer and store nuclear waste.