在巴西,传统饮用水处理方法比超滤方法更经济可行吗?一项技术、经济和风险评估比较研究

Water Supply Pub Date : 2024-06-06 DOI:10.2166/ws.2024.132
E. Skoronski, Altherre Branco Rosa, Flávio José Simioni
{"title":"在巴西,传统饮用水处理方法比超滤方法更经济可行吗?一项技术、经济和风险评估比较研究","authors":"E. Skoronski, Altherre Branco Rosa, Flávio José Simioni","doi":"10.2166/ws.2024.132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Water treatment systems using ultrafiltration (UF) membranes constitute a viable option for producing drinking water for human consumption. The present study aimed to perform a comparative analysis of conventional water treatment and UF. The treatment methods were compared considering the quality of the treated water and the cost of implementing a water treatment plant (WTP) and operating the systems, with a risk assessment of the influence of the deterioration of water quality on costs. Data were obtained from the operations of a conventional WTP in the municipality of Lages, Brazil, and a pilot plant employing UF. In the conventional and UF systems, treated water had turbidity of 1.90 and 0.19 NTU, an apparent color of 2.12 and 0.28 mg L−1 Pt/Co, and pH of 6.94 and 7.04, respectively. Average total cost (ATC) was $0.0496/m3 in the conventional system and $0.0596/m3 in the UF system. Chemical inputs and sludge treatment were the main variables that affected the ATC in conventional treatment, whereas energy and plant costs were the main components affecting the ATC in the UF system. A 30% reduction in water quality increased the ATC by 2.6% for the conventional and 1.5% for the UF system.","PeriodicalId":23725,"journal":{"name":"Water Supply","volume":"30 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is conventional drinking water treatment more economically viable than ultrafiltration in Brazil? A technical, economic, comparative study with risk assessment\",\"authors\":\"E. Skoronski, Altherre Branco Rosa, Flávio José Simioni\",\"doi\":\"10.2166/ws.2024.132\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Water treatment systems using ultrafiltration (UF) membranes constitute a viable option for producing drinking water for human consumption. The present study aimed to perform a comparative analysis of conventional water treatment and UF. The treatment methods were compared considering the quality of the treated water and the cost of implementing a water treatment plant (WTP) and operating the systems, with a risk assessment of the influence of the deterioration of water quality on costs. Data were obtained from the operations of a conventional WTP in the municipality of Lages, Brazil, and a pilot plant employing UF. In the conventional and UF systems, treated water had turbidity of 1.90 and 0.19 NTU, an apparent color of 2.12 and 0.28 mg L−1 Pt/Co, and pH of 6.94 and 7.04, respectively. Average total cost (ATC) was $0.0496/m3 in the conventional system and $0.0596/m3 in the UF system. Chemical inputs and sludge treatment were the main variables that affected the ATC in conventional treatment, whereas energy and plant costs were the main components affecting the ATC in the UF system. A 30% reduction in water quality increased the ATC by 2.6% for the conventional and 1.5% for the UF system.\",\"PeriodicalId\":23725,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Water Supply\",\"volume\":\"30 11\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Water Supply\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2024.132\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Water Supply","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2024.132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

使用超滤膜(UF)的水处理系统是生产人类饮用水的可行选择。本研究旨在对传统水处理方法和超滤进行比较分析。在对两种处理方法进行比较时,考虑到了处理后水的水质、水处理厂(WTP)的建设成本和系统运行成本,并对水质恶化对成本的影响进行了风险评估。数据来源于巴西 Lages 市的一个传统水处理厂和一个采用超滤技术的试点水处理厂的运行情况。在传统系统和超滤系统中,处理水的浊度分别为 1.90 和 0.19 NTU,表观色度分别为 2.12 和 0.28 mg L-1 Pt/Co,pH 值分别为 6.94 和 7.04。传统系统的平均总成本(ATC)为 0.0496 美元/立方米,超滤系统为 0.0596 美元/立方米。化学投入和污泥处理是影响常规处理中 ATC 的主要变量,而能源和工厂成本则是影响超滤系统中 ATC 的主要因素。水质每降低 30%,传统系统的 ATC 就会增加 2.6%,而超滤系统的 ATC 则会增加 1.5%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Is conventional drinking water treatment more economically viable than ultrafiltration in Brazil? A technical, economic, comparative study with risk assessment
Water treatment systems using ultrafiltration (UF) membranes constitute a viable option for producing drinking water for human consumption. The present study aimed to perform a comparative analysis of conventional water treatment and UF. The treatment methods were compared considering the quality of the treated water and the cost of implementing a water treatment plant (WTP) and operating the systems, with a risk assessment of the influence of the deterioration of water quality on costs. Data were obtained from the operations of a conventional WTP in the municipality of Lages, Brazil, and a pilot plant employing UF. In the conventional and UF systems, treated water had turbidity of 1.90 and 0.19 NTU, an apparent color of 2.12 and 0.28 mg L−1 Pt/Co, and pH of 6.94 and 7.04, respectively. Average total cost (ATC) was $0.0496/m3 in the conventional system and $0.0596/m3 in the UF system. Chemical inputs and sludge treatment were the main variables that affected the ATC in conventional treatment, whereas energy and plant costs were the main components affecting the ATC in the UF system. A 30% reduction in water quality increased the ATC by 2.6% for the conventional and 1.5% for the UF system.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信