Han Gu, Julio Polanco, Ken P. Ishida, Megan H. Plumlee, Michael Boyd, Erik Desormeaux, Graham J. G. Juby, Mojtaba Farrokh Shad
{"title":"Permeate quality, advanced oxidation process treatability, and cost for two concentrate treatment technologies to enhance recovery for potable reuse","authors":"Han Gu, Julio Polanco, Ken P. Ishida, Megan H. Plumlee, Michael Boyd, Erik Desormeaux, Graham J. G. Juby, Mojtaba Farrokh Shad","doi":"10.2166/wrd.2023.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Closed circuit reverse osmosis (CCRO) and forward osmosis-RO (FO-RO) were evaluated at a pilot scale to generate additional permeate from RO concentrate – achieving a recovery of 61% for CCRO and 35% for FO-RO – at a full-scale advanced water purification facility. This study assessed permeate water quality, suitability of the permeate for treatment by an ultraviolet-advanced oxidation process (UV-AOP), and cost/footprint for a conceptual 10- or 20-mgd system. Both technologies demonstrated inorganic, organic, and microbiological constituent removal suitable for blending with primary RO permeate. Virus challenge testing with MS coliphage demonstrated greater than 5-log removal by both technologies. Pilot-scale UV/hydrogen peroxide AOP treatment of CCRO or FO-RO permeate yielded similar performance (∼1.4-log N-nitrosodimethylamine removal and ∼0.5-log 1,4-dioxane removal) as the full-scale UV-AOP that treats the RO permeate from the purification facility. The estimated full-scale total unit cost (capital plus operation and maintenance costs) of product water produced by the two technologies was estimated to range from $0.91 to $1.12 per cubic meter, depending on the design flow rate of RO concentrate treated, and is estimated to be similar between the two technologies given the +50%/–30% expected accuracy of the Class 5 cost estimate.","PeriodicalId":34727,"journal":{"name":"Water Reuse","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Water Reuse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2166/wrd.2023.002","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Closed circuit reverse osmosis (CCRO) and forward osmosis-RO (FO-RO) were evaluated at a pilot scale to generate additional permeate from RO concentrate – achieving a recovery of 61% for CCRO and 35% for FO-RO – at a full-scale advanced water purification facility. This study assessed permeate water quality, suitability of the permeate for treatment by an ultraviolet-advanced oxidation process (UV-AOP), and cost/footprint for a conceptual 10- or 20-mgd system. Both technologies demonstrated inorganic, organic, and microbiological constituent removal suitable for blending with primary RO permeate. Virus challenge testing with MS coliphage demonstrated greater than 5-log removal by both technologies. Pilot-scale UV/hydrogen peroxide AOP treatment of CCRO or FO-RO permeate yielded similar performance (∼1.4-log N-nitrosodimethylamine removal and ∼0.5-log 1,4-dioxane removal) as the full-scale UV-AOP that treats the RO permeate from the purification facility. The estimated full-scale total unit cost (capital plus operation and maintenance costs) of product water produced by the two technologies was estimated to range from $0.91 to $1.12 per cubic meter, depending on the design flow rate of RO concentrate treated, and is estimated to be similar between the two technologies given the +50%/–30% expected accuracy of the Class 5 cost estimate.