Technologies and Costs for Removal of Arsenic From Drinking Water

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table C18.1 - Base Costs Obtained from the WATERCO$T Model for Polymer Feed SystemsCost ComponentFeed Capacity (lb/hr)Capital Cost1 10 100 200 CategoryManufactured Equipment $11,670 $11,670 $14,730 $18,970 pLabor $700 $700 $700 $760 cPipes and Valves $280 $280 $280 $300 pElectrical $1,290 $1,290 $1,290 $1,290 pHousing $3,600 $3,600 $4,050 $4,500 pContingencies $2,630 $2,630 $3,160 $3,870 cTotal $20,170 $20,170 $24,210 $29,690Table C18.2 - WATERCO$T Model Base Construction Cost Analysis for Polymer Feed SystemsCost ComponentFeed Capacity (lb/hr)Average1 10 100 200 PercentManufactured Equipment 57.86% 57.86% 60.84% 63.89% 60.11%Labor 3.47% 3.47% 2.89% 2.56% 3.10%Pipes and Valves 1.39% 1.39% 1.16% 1.01% 1.24%Electrical 6.40% 6.40% 5.33% 4.34% 5.62%Housing 17.85% 17.85% 16.73% 15.16% 16.90%Contingencies 13.04% 13.04% 13.05% 13.03% 13.04%Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%International Consultants, Inc.Contract 68-C6-0039 C-18February 1999W/W Cost Model Capital Cost Breakdown
Table C19.1 - Base Costs Obtained from the WATERCO$T Model for Rapid Mix, G=900Cost ComponentBasin Volume (ft3)Capital Cost100 500 1,000 5,000 10,000 20,000 CategoryExcavation & Sitework $220 $380 $490 $1,360 $2,720 $5,460 cManufactured Equipment $4,310 $9,830 $14,760 $66,840 $133,670 $267,340 pConcrete $390 $870 $1,280 $3,610 $7,220 $14,450 pSteel $570 $1,350 $2,010 $5,600 $11,180 $22,360 pLabor $1,230 $2,300 $3,410 $13,140 $26,280 $52,550 cElectrical $6,980 $6,980 $7,180 $7,470 $8,760 $16,100 pContingencies $2,060 $3,260 $4,370 $14,700 $28,470 $56,740 cTotal $15,760 $24,970 $33,500 $112,720 $218,300 $435,000Table C19.2 - WATERCO$T Model Base Construction Cost Analysis for Rapid Mix, G=900Cost ComponentBasin Volume (ft3)Average100 500 1,000 5,000 10,000 20,000 PercentExcavation & Sitework 1.40% 1.52% 1.46% 1.21% 1.25% 1.26% 1.35%Manufactured Equipment 27.35% 39.37% 44.06% 59.30% 61.23% 61.46% 48.79%Concrete 2.47% 3.48% 3.82% 3.20% 3.31% 3.32% 3.27%Steel 3.62% 5.41% 6.00% 4.97% 5.12% 5.14% 5.04%Labor 7.80% 9.21% 10.18% 11.66% 12.04% 12.08% 10.50%Electrical 44.29% 27.95% 21.43% 6.63% 4.01% 3.70% 18.00%Contingencies 13.07% 13.06% 13.04% 13.04% 13.04% 13.04% 13.05%Total 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00% 100.00%International Consultants, Inc.Contract 68-C6-0039 C-19February 1999W/W Cost Model Capital Cost Breakdown
Page 1:
United StatesEnvironmental Protecti
Page 5:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTSThis document was pr
Page 8 and 9:
2.5.7 Reverse Osmosis .............
Page 10 and 11:
5.0 POINT-OF-ENTRY/POINT-OF-USE TRE
Page 12 and 13:
LIST OF FIGURES2-1 Pressure Driven
Page 14 and 15:
LIST OF ACRONYMSAAAWWAAWWARFBLSBVC/
Page 16 and 17:
POUpoint-of-useppbparts per billion
Page 18 and 19:
# Alternative treatment processes s
Page 20 and 21:
This page was intentionally left bl
Page 23 and 24:
ends up as ferric hydroxide. In alu
Page 25 and 26:
Optimization Hierarchy for Coagulat
Page 27 and 28:
Substantial arsenic removal has bee
Page 29 and 30:
Vickers et al. (1997) reported that
Page 31 and 32:
was reduced to 0.05 mg/L when the i
Page 33 and 34:
Field StudiesSurveys of lime soften
Page 35 and 36:
Effect of pHpH may have significant
Page 37 and 38:
RegenerationRegeneration of AA beds
Page 39 and 40:
een developed provide important inf
Page 41 and 42:
applicability of IX at a particular
Page 43 and 44:
TABLE 2-1Typical IX Resins for Arse
Page 45 and 46:
solution strength. Arsenic elutes r
Page 47 and 48:
2.4.12 Typical Design ParametersThr
Page 49 and 50:
2.5.2 Important Factors for Membran
Page 51 and 52:
arsenic size distribution to correl
Page 53 and 54:
AWWARF (1998) also performed UF pil
Page 55 and 56:
presumably due to changes in electr
Page 57 and 58:
RO performance is adversely affecte
Page 59 and 60:
TABLE 2-10Arsenic Removal with RO a
Page 61 and 62:
eversal is the decreased potential
Page 63 and 64:
2.6 ALTERNATIVE TECHNOLOGIES2.6.1 I
Page 65 and 66:
20 mg As per gram of iron was remov
Page 67 and 68:
The most significant weakness of th
Page 69 and 70:
3.0 TECHNOLOGY COSTS3.1 INTRODUCTIO
Page 71 and 72:
included in the estimates presented
Page 73 and 74:
Table 3-3Water Model Capital Cost B
Page 75 and 76:
3.2.3 Implementing TDP Recommended
Page 77 and 78:
sources. The September 1998 index v
Page 79 and 80:
Amortization, or capital recovery,
Page 81 and 82:
3.3 ADDITIONAL CAPITAL COSTSThe cos
Page 83 and 84:
PilotingThe Technology Design Panel
Page 85 and 86:
The 1993 Technology and Cost Docume
Page 87 and 88:
cause disinfection by-product (DBP)
Page 89 and 90:
Figure 3-1Pre-oxidation - 1.5 mg/L
Page 91 and 92:
3.6 PRECIPITATIVE PROCESSES3.6.1 Co
Page 93 and 94:
enhanced coagulation treatment plan
Page 95 and 96:
Figure 3-4Enhanced Coagulation/Filt
Page 97 and 98:
Small Systems (Less than 1 mgd)The
Page 99 and 100:
Figure 3-6Coagulation Assisted Micr
Page 101 and 102:
3.6.6 Enhanced Lime SofteningEnhanc
Page 103 and 104:
Figure 3-8Enhanced Lime SofteningO&
Page 105 and 106:
3. Empty Bed Contact Time (EBCT) is
Page 107 and 108:
For design flows greater than 1 mgd
Page 109 and 110:
Figure 3-9Activated AluminaCapital
Page 111 and 112:
Figure 3-11Activated Alumina (pH 8
Page 113 and 114:
Figure 3-13Activated Alumina (pH Ad
Page 115 and 116:
3.7.2 Granular Ferric HydroxideGran
Page 117 and 118:
6. The capital costs include a redu
Page 119 and 120:
Figure 3-15Bed Volumes to Arsenic B
Page 121 and 122:
Figure 3-17Anion Exchange (< 20 mg/
Page 123 and 124:
Figure 3-19Anion Exchange (20-50 mg
Page 125 and 126:
quality feed stream and often requi
Page 127 and 128:
Figure 3-20Greensand FiltrationCapi
Page 129 and 130:
3.11 COMPARISON OF COSTSThe April 1
Page 131 and 132:
4.0 RESIDUALS HANDLING AND DISPOSAL
Page 133 and 134:
mechanical dewatering processes. Wh
Page 135 and 136:
Storage lagoons are best suited for
Page 137 and 138:
the current Industrial Pretreatment
Page 139 and 140:
4.3.3 Dewatered Sludge Land Applica
Page 141 and 142:
usually determined by the Paint Fil
Page 143 and 144:
for arsenic toxicity by a substanti
Page 145 and 146:
The solids content of the backwash
Page 147 and 148:
carbonate hardness removal produces
Page 149 and 150:
Domestic sewage means untreated san
Page 151 and 152:
4.4.10 Reverse OsmosisReverse osmos
Page 153 and 154:
Figure 4-1Anion Exchange (< 20 mg/L
Page 155 and 156:
Figure 4-3Anion Exchange (20-50 mg/
Page 157 and 158:
Page 159 and 160:
Page 161 and 162:
Figure 4-9Activated Alumina (pH 7 -
Page 163 and 164:
Figure 4-11Activated Alumina (pH Ad
Page 165 and 166:
Figure 4-13Greensand FiltrationWast
Page 167 and 168:
5.0 POINT-OF-ENTRY/POINT-OF-USE TRE
Page 169 and 170:
chromatographic peaking, which occu
Page 171 and 172:
5.3.1 Case Study 1: Fairbanks, Alas
Page 173 and 174:
Manufacturer and laboratory data su
Page 175 and 176:
Figure 5-2POU Reverse OsmosisO&M Co
Page 177 and 178:
# Installation time - 1 hour unskil
Page 179 and 180: Figure 5-3POU Activated AluminaTota
Page 181 and 182: 6.0 REFERENCESAmy, G.L. and P. Bran
Page 183 and 184: Cooperative Research Centres for Wa
Page 185 and 186: Fuller, C.C., J.A. Davis, G.W. Zell
Page 187 and 188: Le, X.C., and M. Ma (1998). “Dete
Page 189 and 190: Scott, K., J. Green, H.D. Do and S.
Page 191: Appendix AVery Small Systems Capita
Page 194 and 195: Table A4 - VSS Document Capital Cos
Page 197 and 198: Table B1.1 - Base Costs Obtained fr
Page 207 and 208: Table B11.1 - Base Costs Obtained f
Page 209 and 210: Table B13.1 - Base Costs Obtained f
Page 211: Appendix CW/W Cost Model Capital Co
Page 214 and 215: Table C2.1 - Base Costs Obtained fr
Page 222 and 223: Table C10.1 - Base Costs Obtained f
Page 240 and 241: This page was intentionally left bl
Page 243 and 244: APPENDIX D: BASIS FOR REVISED ACTIV
Page 245 and 246: Company case study is 18 minutes (2
Page 247 and 248: egressed against their respective v
Page 249 and 250: costs for small systems is as follo
Page 251 and 252: were based on $40/sq ft). The proce
Page 253 and 254: Basis. Capital cost components incl
Page 255 and 256: The source water at Plant D has the
Page 257 and 258: equation y = (2*10 -8 )x 2 + 0.0002
Page 259 and 260: The maximum run length is 18,500 be
Page 261 and 262: Since the available arsenic capacit
Page 263 and 264: If the first column can be operated
Page 265 and 266: which includes lighting, ventilatio
Page 267 and 268: disposal costs, if needed, are cove
Page 269: Appendix EBasis for Revised Anion E
Page 272 and 273: 2. The estimated cost of the anion
Page 274 and 275: 9. The capital costs have been esti
Page 276 and 277: Thus, the cost of a road and fence
Page 278 and 279: length when sulfate is at or below
Page 280 and 281:
the labor rates for both large and
Page 282 and 283:
2. US EPA. Technologies and Costs f
Page 284:
This page was intentionally left bl
show all

Technologies and Costs for Removal of Arsenic From Drinking Water

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?