Latest RO and NF Membranes for Concentrating to Higher Salinities

Concentrate Disposal Methods Sewer Ocean Dedicated Bine Line Inland Empire Brine Line Santa Ana Water Shed MGD Capacity 80 miles Deep Well Injection Evaporation Ponds The World of Higher Recovery Higher Recovery (using Spiral RO) Ultra-High Modified Pre-treated Post-treated Salinity RO Systems RO Systems RO Systems RO Systems Flow Reversal Pellet Ultra-High Pressure OPUS FRRO Softening UHPRO Closed Circuit Brine Concentrator HERO Max H2O CCRO Membrane Pulse Flow PFRO Recovery RRO Modified RO System Options – A World of Options Modified RO uses conventional RO membranes in unconventional systems No additional process steps are required (no softening, no reactor steps) Scaling is managed, not prevented Process Vendor Proprietary Pros Con Flow Reversal RO Rotec (WFI) Yes No increase in footprint Additional actuator valves (FRRO) Can retrofit existing trains Additional piping Complex controls Reverse flow Closed Circuit RO Desalitec (Dupont) YES Many industrial references Batch mode (CCRO) No specialty components Frequent valve actuation Large footprint due to empty pressure vessels Pulse Flow RO IDE Yes No specialty components Limited installations (PFRO) Recovery RO (Custom) No Non-proprietary Limited installations (RRO) Small footprint Limited recovery No break tank after primary No major design modifications 7 Modified RO Experience Source Site Pilot Conclusions Ref Groundwater Buckeye, AZ CCRO vs RRO CCRO achieved 94% recovery Adelman 2018 RRO achieved 91% recovery Groundwater Eastern Municipal Water District, CA CCRO CCRO achieved 90% recovery for Carey, 2021 months Groundwater City of Santa Monica, CA CCRO vs FRRO FRRO for full scale to achieve 90% Waite et al.,2021 recovery Muni WW Pismo Beach, CA PFRO PFRO achieved higher flux of 15. Liberman et al. 202 gfd at recovery of 86% Muni WW Padre Dam, CA CCRO vs RRO CCRO for full scale to achieve 95% Faulkner et. al.2018 recovery Muni WW Los Angeles, CA RRO RRO for full scale to achieve 92% Yu et al.,2011 Leo J Vander Lans (LVL) recovery Wesner 2017 Recovery RO Scaling Potential Scaling potential based on water quality data collected during pilot testing… 82% Recovery 92% Recovery Primary RO concentrate predicts NO scaling. Specific flux of the membrane decreased 20% The cause of the decrease in specific flux was presumed to be calcium carbonate scaling though this was never verified. LVL Recovery RO Operation Predicted vs Actual Reverse Flushing Predicted: Designed to manage fouling Actual: Not used Automated Cleaning Predicted: Designed to make frequent cleanings easier to perform Actual: Not used Cleaning Frequency Predicted: 45 days Actual: 6 months Membrane Life Predicted: 1 to 2 years Actual: 4 years of run time Conclusion Concentrating to Higher Salinities Need to concentrate to Higher Salinities (or Increase Recovery) Multiple technologies available (Thermal, Electric, and Membrane) “Lowest hanging fruit” Builds on existing technology Modifies existing RO system design Nonproprietary Recovery RO modifications have worked well at LVL since 2012.