Consideration for the Co-Siting of Desalination Facilities with

Consideration for the Co-Siting of DesalinationFacilities with Municipal and IndustrialFacilities – A WRF StudyWRF-06-010DPatrick TreanorKennedy/Jenks Consultants

Presentation Overview•Project Goals•Research Methods•Co-Siting Desalination Scenarios•Some Research Results•Desalination Decision Tool© 2004 Copyright K/J

Project Goals• Understand the benefits and disadvantages of cositingdesalination plants with existing facilities(Power Plants, WWTP, and Industrial)• Document successful as well as unsuccessful cositingProjects (i.e. Operational vs. Never Built)• Develop a high-level decision tool for use byengineers and owners to conceptualize co-sitingdesalination projects© 2004 Copyright K/J

Research Methods and DataCollection• Developed seven theoretical Co-locationScenarios of Desalination Plants with OtherFacilities•Researched literature to find co-siting projects• Identified 31 Case Studies (some Operationaland some in various stages of Planning orDiscarded)•Compiled Data From 171 Reference Studies• Analyzed and Compared Data from each casestudy• Used case studies to develop a decision tool© 2004 Copyright K/J

Co-Siting Scenarios1: Power Plant – SWRO Co-siting2: SWRO – WWTP Co-siting3: BWRO – WWTP Co-Siting4: SWRO – Power Plant Co-siting5: Power Plant – BWRO Co-siting6: SWRO – Industrial Co-siting7: BWRO – Industrial Co-siting© 2004 Copyright K/J

AbbreviationsBWROSWROWWTPQBrackish Water Reverse OsmosisSea Water Reverse OsmosisWaste Water Treatment PlantFlow© 2004 Copyright K/J

© 2004 Copyright K/J

© 2004 Copyright K/J

© 2004 Copyright K/J

© 2004 Copyright K/J

© 2004 Copyright K/J

© 2004 Copyright K/J

© 2004 Copyright K/J

Research Presented for 31 Case Studies•General:Scenario, Location, Timeline, Status, Piloting, Intake and Outfall Configuration, and Water Source.•Technical:Plant Flows, Flows of Existing Facilities, Salinity and Salinity Variations, Recovery, FeedTemperature and Energy Consumption.•Economics:Capital Cost, Annual O&M cost, and Funding Sources.•Environmental:Land Use, Endangered Species, Permitting/Regulatory, Intake Issues, Discharge Issues, andMitigation Requirements.•Public Perception and Public Relations:Issues of Public Concern, Political Will, Public Outreach, and Resistance by Special InterestGroups.•Advantages and Disadvantages:Advantages, Disadvantages, and Key Lessons Learned.© 2004 Copyright K/J

Co-location Study Trends

Case Study Project Locations – USA Focus

Shared Intakes and Outfall Summary

Source Water Types

STEP 5: RISK CONTROLS (continued)ADMINSTRATIVE CONTROL EXAMPLES Frequency Reduce the number of times the task isdone in a period of time. Alternate use of power tools and handtools.

Capital Cost

O&M Cost

General Advantages of Desal Co-Siting• Shared intake infrastructure• Reduced Construction, No Increase in Total IntakeVolume• Shared discharge infrastructure• Reduced Construction, Outfall Blending,Beneficial Use of Brine• Land Available and Zoned• Power plant synergies• Higher Temp, Electricity Rates,Less Transmission, benefits for power plant© 2004 Copyright K/J

© 2004 Copyright K/JDecision Tool