11.07.2015 Views

Technologies and Costs for Removal of Arsenic From Drinking Water

Technologies and Costs for Removal of Arsenic From Drinking Water

Technologies and Costs for Removal of Arsenic From Drinking Water

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

APPENDIX D: BASIS FOR REVISED ACTIVATED ALUMINA COSTSD.1 OVERVIEWFour sets <strong>of</strong> costs were developed <strong>for</strong> disposable activated alumina (no regeneration) - two<strong>for</strong> unadjusted pH <strong>and</strong> two where the pH has been adjusted to the optimal pH <strong>of</strong> 6. The costs <strong>for</strong> pHadjustment to optimal pH 6.0 are included as a separate module in these cost estimates since it is onlyused <strong>for</strong> two <strong>of</strong> the options. The costs in the cost models routinely used to estimate unit costs are allbased on regeneration <strong>of</strong> the media, operation at optimal pH, <strong>and</strong> use <strong>of</strong> single columns. Most <strong>of</strong> thecosts are based on fluoride removal rather than arsenic removal. It was determined that the existingcost models could not be used to estimate costs <strong>for</strong> disposable activated alumina. A similar summaryto this was prepared <strong>for</strong> the proposed rule <strong>for</strong> the disposable activated alumina costs. It was includedin Appendix G <strong>of</strong> the November 1999 Technology <strong>and</strong> Cost Document (1). The main change betweenthat design <strong>and</strong> the design used <strong>for</strong> the final rule is that smaller columns operated in series will be usedinstead <strong>of</strong> a single column. This will provide greater utilization <strong>of</strong> the media be<strong>for</strong>e disposal <strong>and</strong> ismore consistent with the designs used by commenters in evaluating disposable activated alumina.D.2 DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS AND BASISD.2.1Capital <strong>Costs</strong> - Natural pH1. The pH will not be adjusted to operate the process at the optimal pH between 5.5 <strong>and</strong> 6.0.The activated alumina process will be operated at the natural pH <strong>of</strong> the system to simplify theprocess <strong>and</strong> avoid potential problems with lowering the pH. Two pH ranges will beevaluated 7.0 #pH < pH 8.0 <strong>and</strong> 8.0 # pH #8.3.Basis. Comments from AWWA <strong>Arsenic</strong> Technical Workgroup Meeting on TreatmentTechnology. EPA expressed a concern about small systems adjusting pH downward <strong>and</strong> theAWWA Technical Workgroup agreed that there were significant risks if small systems wereadjusting pH downward (the water could become very acidic if the treatment chemicals areoverdosed). The AWWA Technical Workgroup believed that lowering the pH would requireD-1

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!