See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/341901715

SEA WATER REVERSE OSMOSIS DESALINATION: ENERGY AND ECONOMIC

ANALYSIS

Article · December 2019

CITATIONS READS

3 9,947

2 authors:

Randy Ncube F. Inambao

University of Johannesburg University of KwaZulu-Natal
8 PUBLICATIONS 15 CITATIONS 174 PUBLICATIONS 1,501 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Sustainable Energy and Climate Variability View project

Renewable Energy View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Randy Ncube on 04 June 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET)
Volume 10, Issue 12, December 2019, pp. 716-731, Article ID: IJMET_10_12_061
Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijmet/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&IType=12
ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359
© IAEME Publication

SEA WATER REVERSE OSMOSIS

DESALINATION: ENERGY AND ECONOMIC
ANALYSIS
Randy Ncube and Professor Freddie L. Inambao*
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Kwazulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9922-5434
* Corresponding Author Email: inambaof@ukzn.ac.za

ABSTRACT
Sea water desalination is a process that separates saline water into two major
components, the low dissolved salts concentration water stream (fresh or potable
water) and the high dissolved salts concentration water, using several generally high
energy and cost mechanisms. Reverse Osmosis (RO) is currently the most widely used
technology owing to its continuous improvement in membrane technology and energy
consumption rates, thereby increasing the throughput and efficiency of the technology.
These improvements have led to a dramatic reduction of both the capital and the
operational costs. Studies on reduction of energy consumption in desalination have
been one of the major priorities in recent years and the results have been very
significant. The incorporation of energy recovery devices has also led to major
benefits in the technology as some of the energy is recycled for productive use.
Research and development of energy and cost effective desalination technologies is an
ongoing process as sources of fresh water continue to diminish at an alarming rate
while at the same time the population growth is increasing dramatically. In this
regard, RO has become the most viable technology in desalination. This paper seeks
to analyze the effects of energy and costs of RO desalination technology.
Keywords: Desalination, reverse osmosis, energy.
Cite this Article: Randy Ncube and Freddie L. Inambao, Sea Water Reverse Osmosis
Desalination: Energy and Economic Analysis. International Journal of Mechanical
Engineering and Technology 10(12), 2019, pp. 716-731.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=10&IType=12

1. INTRODUCTION
The provision of potable and fresh water is becoming an extremely important issue
worldwide. Potable water is very scarce in arid areas and the establishment of human habitats
in such areas strongly hinge on how such water can be made available [1]. Reverse osmosis
(RO) has become the most commonly used and preferred desalination technology world-wide.
With the rise in population and the increased demand for potable water there is a great need to
come up with lasting solutions [2]. Between 2008 and 2013 global desalination capacity grew

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 716 editor@iaeme.com

 Sea Water Reverse Osmosis Desalination: Energy and Economic Analysis

by 57%. This movement is expected to continue for the following main reasons: population
growth, traditional water resources are diminishing, and advances in membrane technology.
Seawater desalination is a major contributor, with about 59% of global desalination capacity
attributed to it [3]. One of the major significant costs in the economics of desalination of
water is energy costs, but the insufficiency of water is motivating the rapid growth and
development of desalination facilities worldwide. Non-renewable conventional fossil fuels
have been exploited as the main source of energy, but excessive emission of greenhouse
gases, leading to global warming, has encouraged worldwide development and
implementation of minimal energy use strategies and green energy supplies. Several
advancements of RO technology have occurred recently and research continues to be carried
out to improve this process [4].

2. ENERGY CONSUMPTION IN DESALINATION

Energy is a critical factor for socio-economic development and is also an important need in
industrial growth, as is quality water [5]. Water and energy are two inseparable commodities
that govern the lives of humanity and promote civilization [1]. The progression of
desalination plants in 30 years of experience related to energy consumption of large seawater
desalination plants is shown in Figure 1 [6].

Figure 1 Energy consumption evolution in Seawater desalination plants in Spain [6]

Usage of renewable energy sources has been implemented in recent years but renewable
sources have proven to have their own inherent disadvantages, including technological
shortcomings and capital intensive installation costs. Energy source and energy efficiency
needs to be considered in designing desalination systems as well as renewable sources and
sustainability, therefore having in place the related infrastructure required to integrate
advanced desalination solutions is important [5]. The amount of energy (thermal and/or
electrical) needed for a desalination plant depends on the technology used. Table 1 shows the
typical values required for the production of 1 m3 of water exclusive of the water transport [7].

Table 1 Typical energy requirements for different desalination techniques [7]

Process Thermal Energy Electrical Energy Comments
(kWh/m3) (kWh/m3)
MFS 12 3.5 Feed steam > 110 °C
MED 6 1.5 Can operate at < 70
°C
RO - 4-7
Note: MFS – Multi-stage flash distillation; MED – Multi-effect distillation.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 717 editor@iaeme.com

 Randy Ncube and Freddie L. Inambao

The only form of energy required in the RO process is electrical energy. A number of
factors affect the energy consumption of the RO unit. One major factor is the salinity of feed
water and the recovery rate of the system. Feed water with high-salinity requires a higher
amount of energy owing to higher osmotic pressure. Osmotic pressure is associated with the
concentration of total dissolved solids (TDS) of the feed water. RO units vary in size from
very small units with a capacity of 0.1 m3/day to very large units with a capacity of 395 000
m3/day. The average energy consumption reported ranges from 3.7 kWh/m3 to 8 kWh/m3. The
consumption may surpass 15 kWh/m3 for very small unit sizes [8]. Several aspects such as
process design, energy recovery system, waste water disposal system, quality of desalinated
water, and the type of membrane, affect energy consumption [9].
The leading factors in minimization of energy usage in RO desalination processes can be
categorized as follows: enhanced system design, energy recovery, high efficiency pumping,
innovative technologies, and advanced membrane materials [4]. Figure 2 shows the various
components of an RO system and their respective energy usage [10].

Power usage (%)

Product transfer pumps, 6.7 %

Miscelleneous, 1.8 %

Seawater supply, 4.5 %

Pre-treatment system, 2.6 %

High pressure pumps, 1st pass,

80.6 %
High pressure pumps, 2nd
pass, 3.8 %

Figure 2 Different components and their power usage in a RO [10].

In order to grasp RO energy usage, it is important to understand the concept of osmosis
and osmotic pressure. RO is a process whereby a membrane separates two solutions of
different salinities so that potable water moves to the region with low saline concentration and
the molecules with high saline concentration move to the other side of the membrane.
Because there is a blockage in solute movement, momentum is transferred to the membrane.
The exerted pressure on the surface of the membrane is referred to as osmotic pressure. To
produce pure water from salty water, there must be a reversal of the natural osmotic flow.
This is reached by applying a force externally on the solution with higher salinity, resulting in
pressure which is greater than the osmotic pressure. Therefore, the minimum pressure
necessary to produce potable water from saline water is equal to the osmotic pressure if there
is no resistance to the flow of water offered by the membrane. The osmotic pressure can be
calculated using Van’t Hoff’s equation as shown in Eq. (1) [11]:

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 718 editor@iaeme.com

 Sea Water Reverse Osmosis Desalination: Energy and Economic Analysis

Where:
Π – Osmotic pressure,
c – Molar solute concentration,
R – Gas constant, and
T – Absolute temperature.
The total energy requirement for the running of an entire RO desalination plant is given by
Eq. (2):

Where:
ET – Total energy requirement,
Ein – Energy required to draw the feed water from the source,
Ept – Energy required for pre-treatment and post-treatment (micro filtration and pumping),
Ehp – Energy required by the high-pressure pump,
EA – Energy required by other accessories (chemical dosing, filter backwashing/cleaning and
pumping the product water), and
EERD – Energy recovered by the energy recovery device (ERD) [12].
Specific energy consumption (SEC), which describes the amount of electrical energy
required to produce one cubic metre of permeate, can be used to evaluate the energy costs of
an RO plant. Ideally, assuming 100 % pump efficiency, work done by the pump is assumed to
be equal to the electrical energy required, as given by Eq. (3):

Where:
Qp – Permeate flow rate,
Wpump – Rate of work done by the pump, which is given by Eq. (4):

In which,

Where:
Pf – Feed pressure at the entrance of the membrane module,
Po – Pressure of the raw water,
Qf – Volumetric Feed Flow rate [13].
Consequently, for a given recovery system for a single stage RO process that operates up
to a certain thermodynamic restriction limit, the optimal SEC, also known as the normalised
SEC (SECnorm), can be expressed as Eq. 6:

[ ][ ]

Where:
ηERD and ηpump – efficiencies of energy recovery devices and pump respectively,
R – Membrane salt rejection,

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 719 editor@iaeme.com

 Randy Ncube and Freddie L. Inambao

Y – Permeate recovery, and is given by Eq. (7):

Normalised SECnorm is defined as SECnorm = SEC/π0, where π0 is the RO feed osmotic

pressure [14].
The approach for a single stage RO operation can easily be applied and extended for a
multiple stage RO process. For a simple two-stage RO configuration, the overall water
recovery, Y, is given by the result of the recoveries at the first and second stage, Y1 and Y2,
by application of the simple mass balance as shown by Eq. (8):

Assuming 100 % pump efficiency, the rate of work done at the first stage, where
thermodynamic restrictions apply is given by Eq. (9):
[ ]

Likewise, the rate of work done at the second stage, where thermodynamic restrictions
apply is given by Eq. (10):
[ ]

Therefore, the normalised SEC for the two stage RO process at the thermodynamic
restriction is given by Eq. (11) [15]:

[ ]

Understanding the minimum amount of energy required to separate pure water from
seawater provides a standard for comparison and can help to guide future efforts to further
reduce energy demand. This minimum energy (theoretical), which is independent of the
desalination method, is realized when the separation occurs as a reversible thermodynamic
process. As a result, the magnitude of energy required for separation will be equal and
opposite in sign to the free energy of mixing. The relationship between the osmotic pressure
and the free energy of mixing is given by Eq. (12) [16]:
̅

Where:
∆Gmix – Free energy of mixing,
R – Ideal gas constant,
T – Absolute temperature,
aw – Activity of water,
nw – Number of moles of water,
Πs – Osmotic pressure of the seawater, and
Vw – Molar volume of water.
One of the major consumers of energy in the process of seawater RO (SWRO) is the feed
pump itself. To achieve maximum possible efficiency, a pump curve typically shows that the
specific speed should be within a specified range for optimal efficiency. Specific speed, nq, is
defined by Eq. (13) [11]:

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 720 editor@iaeme.com

 Sea Water Reverse Osmosis Desalination: Energy and Economic Analysis

in which:
n – Speed of the pump,
Q – Flow rate,
H – Total dynamic head.
For optimal energy, nq should be greater than 900 [11].

2.1. Energy Recovery in RO Systems

The RO desalination process is energy intensive. This is due to the low recovery ratio (25 %
to 40 %) and the high operating pressure (60 bar to 80 bar) [17]. A crucial condition for the
layout of an RO system is the specific energy consumption, which should be kept as low as
possible. This, therefore, means that the recovery ratio must be as high as possible and the
associated feed water pressure be kept as low as possible without compromising the standards
of the quality of water produced. For this reason, most, if not all, of the large and small scale
seawater RO plants are fitted with energy-recovery turbines that help recover some of the
pumping energy as shown in Figure 3 [18].

Figure 3 RO plant with an energy recovery device [12]

Energy recovery devices (ERDs) are the components used to reduce energy consumption
for RO desalination processes and this has been shown to recover the energy from the RO
concentrate stream. The pressure from the concentrate stream is recovered by passing it
through an ERD before the concentrate is sent for disposal. The efficiency of the system
determines the fraction of power recovered.
ERDs are classified into two broad classes: Class I devices which use hydraulic power in
a one step process to cause a positive displacement within the recovery device, and Class II
devices which use the hydraulic energy of the RO concentrate that first converts this energy to
centrifugal mechanical energy and then back to hydraulic energy in a two-step process. ERD
are used by most RO plants today [4]. The positive displacement based devices are pressure
and work exchangers. This type contributes to a higher energy recovery efficiency (ERE) of
between 90 % and 95 %, compared to the turbine type, which has an ERE of between 50 %
and 90 %. Positive displacement based devices have a more promising and competitive
technology in the field of desalination [12].
Over the past decade, the specific energy for RO desalination has significantly reduced
and is gradually approaching the theoretical thermodynamic minimum. The development of

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 721 editor@iaeme.com

 Randy Ncube and Freddie L. Inambao

large pumps with energy recovery devices has led to this significant energy reduction. These
devices, known as ―turbochargers‖, ―pressure exchangers‖, or ―work exchangers‖ represent
efficient ways of energy recovery content of the high-pressure concentrate leaving the
membrane module. These turbines convert the pressure from the concentrate into a high speed
jet that rotates a wheel. This is either used to decrease the power consumed by the driving
motor of the pump or to boost the pressure of the feed to a second stage since the salt
concentration will be higher in the second stage than in the first stage [19, 20]. For a 24 000
m3/day sea water RO unit, the electricity consumption ranges from 4 kWh/m3 to 6 kWh/m3
when an energy recovery system is included. Desalination of brackish water requires low
pressures; therefore, different types of membranes are used. This will result in much higher
recovery ratios, which will significantly reduce energy consumption. For a brackish-water RO
unit, the consumption of electrical energy ranges from 1.5 kWh/m3 to 2.5 kWh/m 3 [8].
Several ERDs have been employed in the desalination process. These include the high
efficiency hydraulic energy recovery (HER) and the osmotic energy recovery (OER) devices.
HER devices are responsible of transferring hydraulic energy to a low-pressure feed stream
from a high pressure brine stream prior to its discharge. OER devices employ the partial
recovery of chemical potential energy (the same energy used in the separation of potable
water from saline water) from the concentrated brine [21]. The power retrievable from the
energy recovery system is related to its capacity as in Eq. (14) [22]:

Where:
Wers – Work done by the energy recovery system,
ηers – Efficiency of the energy recovery systems (approximately constant at 0.67).
Pr – Pressure from the reject stream (bars),
Qrt – total reject flow rate from the RO plant (m3/d).

3. ECONOMICS AND COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH RO

DESALINATION
The costs of desalination differ considerably from one geographic location to another. Costs
are affected by geographical, socio-economic and environmental conditions as well as
protocols regarding construction and operation desalination plants. Therefore, comparing of
desalination costs between different regions directly is complicated and not recommended
[23]. Economic analysis is the most effective factor that determines the applicability of RO
desalination systems [24]. There are many factors that affect the economics of desalination.
These factors include the following: intake water quality, energy cost, plant capital cost, year
of construction of the plant, maintenance cost, labour costs, cost of disposal of the
concentrate, region where the plant is installed and financing interest rate [8, 25]. The largest
sector of water production cost of all desalination systems is energy cost [8]. There are several
cost technologies that have been studied and one such technology is VARI-RO ―Low Energy‖
technology (VRO). This is a variable flow, positive displacement pumping, energy recovery,
and energy conversion system for the RO desalination of brackish water (BWRO) and
seawater (SWRO) [26]. Costs of energy related to stand-alone desalination plants can range
from 30 % to 50 % of the potable water production costs [7]. The operation and maintenance
costs usually range from around 15 % to 30 % of the total water production cost, depending
on size of the plant and process design [27]. The cost of desalted water supplied to consumers
decreased from around $2.0/m3 in 1998 to a price of about $0.5/m3 in the past 5 years. Chief
drivers behind this economic improvement have been high competition and improved

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 722 editor@iaeme.com

 Sea Water Reverse Osmosis Desalination: Energy and Economic Analysis

membrane technologies. A pie-chart of the components costs (from the year 2002) of an RO
desalination plant is shown in Figure 4 [10].

Costs (%)

Maintenance, 8 %
Labor, 4 %
Membrane replacement, 3 %
Equipment amortization, 48 %
Electric power, 33 %
Chemicals, 4 %

Figure 4 Costs associated with RO desalination plants [10].

The power law rule is normally used to calculate the capacity-cost relationship in
engineering. For a plant of known capacity, this law can be used to calculate the capital cost
of a new plant based on the known capital costs of an existing plant as shown in Eq. (15) [28].

Capital cost refers to the total of all start-up costs, which include land, construction and
infrastructure costs necessary to have the plant operative using the market price. Plant
capacity means the potential desalinated water volume produced per day taking into
consideration the current facilities and available equipment [9].
Several scholars have come up with different methodologies for calculation of the costs of
running a desalination plant. Some of the methodologies are well established and can apply to
different kinds of industries. The commonly used indicator in the investment evaluation is the
net present value (NPV) and the energy related operation costs (CE,t) which can be calculated
using Eqs (16) and (17) respectively [25]:

Where:
Io – Initial capital investment,
i – Appropriate discount rates,
n – Number of years,
Rt – Revenue in year t,
Ct – Costs in year t,
EEl,t – Amount of electrical energy used by the plant in year t,

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 723 editor@iaeme.com

 Randy Ncube and Freddie L. Inambao

Eth,t – Amount of thermal energy used by the plant in year t,

PEl,t – Cost of unit electrical energy used by the plant in year t,
Pth,t – Cost of unit thermal energy used by the plant in year t.
In desalination projects, the Rt represents the revenues collected from selling the water
produced; therefore, NPV calculation entails the assessment of the amount of water produced
and the price at which the water can be sold at the point of production from year 1 to year n
[25].

3.1. Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) for Desalination

The total cost of ownership (TCO) of a desalination plant is the cost being calculated over the
plant’s life cycle. This can either be the contract period of a project (typically 20 years) or the
mechanical and civil constructions’ technical life. This type of cost has been compared for
quite a number of SWRO desalination plants realized, under construction or being planned.
The following general split can be made for the TCO [29]:
 ±17% Pretreatment
 ± 6% RO membrane replacement and RO
 membrane cleaning
 ±27% Other fixed costs (amortization of other
 equipment etc.).
 ±50% Other variable costs (energy costs etc.).

3.2. Effects of Membrane Structure and Technology, and Brine Management on

the Costs and Energy Concerns of the RO Process
RO membranes are a fundamental and important part of the desalination process [30]. In the
last two decades or so, membrane technology has gained a massive importance and is now
competing with other separation methods and technologies in terms of energy efficiency,
selective separation, high separation capacity, and capital investments. Several industries have
adopted and converted to a membrane separation process in place of the conventional
separation processes, so in water desalination conventional thermal technologies are being
increasingly replaced with RO technologies [31].
Permeability of RO membranes and their salt rejection capacity have undergone
significant improvements in recent years. Energy consumption in RO systems has
significantly reduced from around 26 kWh/m3 in 1980 to around 3.4 kWh/m3 in recent years
owing to these and other improvements. Nevertheless, there are further opportunities for
improving the permeability of RO membranes using different membrane materials so as to
minimize energy consumption, with a general goal of at least doubling the current
generation’s permeability. The new generation of RO membranes include nanocomposites,
nanotubes and biomimetic membranes. Their working principles, effects on energy,
advantages and disadvantages are summarised in Table 2 [4].

Table 2 Comparison of new generation RO membranes [4]

Membrane type Principle Energy Advantages Disadvantages
consumption
Nanocomposite Zeolite nanoparticles 20 % lower energy More than double Chemical compatibility and
incorporated in a consumption than the flux of structural stability is not
polyamide matrix conventional currently available known.
creating enhanced seawater RO seawater RO Rejection of specific
transport of water membranes. membranes. contaminants is not known.
molecules. Long-term operational data

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 724 editor@iaeme.com

 Sea Water Reverse Osmosis Desalination: Energy and Economic Analysis

not available.
Nanotubes Transport of water 30 % to 50% lower Ten-fold higher Only modeling results
molecules through energy consumption flux than currently available. Rejection of
structured carbon and than conventional available seawater specific contaminants is not
boron nitride seawater RO RO membranes. known.
nanotubes. membranes.
Biomimetic Aquaporins used to Energy consumption Hundred times Inability to withstand high
regulate transport of is not known. more permeable operating pressures.
water molecules. than currently Rejection of specific
available seawater contaminants is not known.
RO membrane. Long-term operational data
not available.

Calculations of the effect of membrane cost on water production cost can be done by
considering the amortized membrane cost per unit permeate produced (also known as the
specific membrane cost, [SMC]). SMC for a single-stage RO process at the limit of
thermodynamic restriction is given by Eq. (18):

* ( )+

Where: Lp – Membrane hydraulic permeability (m/Pa·s),

m – Amortized membrane price in equivalent energy units per unit area (m = βmA/ε
where mA is amortized membrane unit price, ($/m2·s).
For the same product’s water recovery, the normalized specific membrane cost (SMCtr,norm)
decreases with increasing membrane hydraulic permeability, salt rejection and feed osmotic
pressure [32].
Brine, which is the by-product of RO desalination, requires proper management and
subsequent disposal which is environmentally friendly. This has an effect on the costs
incurred. Specific brine management cost (SBC) cost per unit volume of produced permeate is
calculated using Eq. (19):

Where: b – concentrate (brine) management cost ($/m3 brine volume) which can be expressed
by equivalent energy units.
For a single-stage RO process without energy recovery but with an ideal pump (ηpump = 1,
ηERD = 0), the cost of brine management and energy consumption combined is given by Eq.
(20):

To minimize the RO process cost, Eq. (21) calculates the optimal water recovery as follows:

√
√

Where bnorm = b/π0. Brine management cost shifts the optimal water recovery to a higher
value [32].

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 725 editor@iaeme.com

 Randy Ncube and Freddie L. Inambao

Membrane configuration of the unit has a major effect on performance and economics of
the RO plant. Two-stage and six-element-per-vessel units were the usual configuration in the
past, whereas the current units consist of a single stage with seven elements per vessel. There
is a cost advantage in the increased number of elements per vessel [10]. A useful approach to
improving the process design of membrane desalination is to emulate developed optimization
strategies from other separations processes like distillation that recycle one or both counter-
current flowing streams through the use of multistage processing [20].
The crucial shortcoming of the RO membranes is susceptibility to fouling. Membrane
fouling leads to higher operational costs which include higher energy demand, increase in
frequency of cleaning and maintenance, and reduced lifetime of the membrane elements [30].

3.2. Pre-Treatment of Saline Water and its Effects

Naturally, water contains very small suspended particles (approximately 0.1 micron, defined
as colloidal). The surface to mass ratio is huge compared to visible particles which cause them
to deposit in unlimited patterns and therefore add up and thicken where they deposit. This
accumulation and deposition of particles on membrane surfaces results in what are known as
amorphous gels. Such membrane fouling agents are complex mixtures and are difficult,
sometimes impossible, to clean [33]. Through pre-treatment, fouling is significantly reduced,
if not prevented. There is also a possible reduction in the damage to reverse osmosis
membranes. The pre-treatment method to be used depends on the extremes of the
characteristics of the raw water [34]. Effective pre-treatment of saline water is required in
order to increase efficiency and to increase membrane life time. Appropriate pre-treatment
will maximize the process efficiency and increase membrane life by reducing formation of
scales, fouling deposition and degradation of the membrane. The benefits of the pre-treatment
will be product flow optimization, salt rejection optimization and product recovery, reduction
of operating costs, and reduction or decrease in cleaning frequency and membrane
replacement costs. There are several types of pre-treatment methods. These include
coagulation, filtration, scale control and chlorination-dechlorination [17, 34]. Economic
comparisons of the costs of pre-treatment methods, for example membrane filtration versus
granular filtration, are intricate since they involve assumptions on the anticipated long-term
performance. The experience of the evaluator heavily influences such assumptions [35].
The cost of operation of RO technology can be increased due to the frequency of
membrane replacement. However, pre-treatment by means of low-pressure membrane
filtration has proven to increase the membrane lifespan by 20 % to 30 % thereby improving
the cost of RO in the long-term [33]. The cost of pre-treatment can be split into operating
costs and amortization of investment (mainly chemicals for disinfection and coagulation).
When an ulta-filtration (UF) is selected as a pre-treatment method over a conventional one,
there is an increase in investment costs for pre-treatment. Consequently, there is also an
increase in the fixed costs associated with pre-treatment. The chemicals costs (mainly
coagulant) will decrease, but the cost of UF membrane replacement is introduced. When
conventional pre-treatment is used, the TCO of the SWRO desalination plant is approximately
85 US cents/m3 to 90 US cents/m3 whereas when UF is used, the TCO of the dual membrane
desalination plant reduces to between 79 US cents/m3 and 88 US cents/m3. This shows that
there is a reduction of 2 % to 7 % in TCO when UF is used compared with conventional pre-
treatment methods [29]. Energy and cost comparisons of conventional and micro-filtration/
ultra-filtration, MF/UF pre-treatment methods are summarised in Table 3.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 726 editor@iaeme.com

 Sea Water Reverse Osmosis Desalination: Energy and Economic Analysis

Table 3 Summarised comparison of MF/UF and conventional pre-treatment methods [34]

Conventional pre-treatment MF/UF pre-treatment Benefits
Capital costs Cost competitive with MF/UF Slightly higher than Capital costs of MF/UF could be
conventional pre-treatment. 0–25% higher, whereas life cycle
Costs continue to decline as costs using either of the treatment
developments are made schemes are comparable
Footprint Calls for larger footprint Significantly smaller footprint
Foot print of MF/UF could be 30-
50 % of conventional filters.
Energy Less than MF/UF as it could be Higher than conventional MF/UF requires pumping of water
requirements gravity flow through the membranes. This can
vary depending on the type of
membrane and water quality
Chemical High due to coagulant and process Chemical use is low, dependent Less chemicals
costs chemicals needed for optimization on raw water quality
RO capital Higher than MF/UF since RO Higher flux is logically Due to lower SDI values, RO can
cost operates at lower flux possible resulting in lower be operated at 20% higher flux if
capital cost feasible, reducing RO capital costs
RO operating Higher costs as fouling potential of Lower RO operating costs are The NDP (net driving pressure) is
costs RO feed water is high resulting in expected due to less fouling likely to be lower if the feed water
higher operating pressure. potential and longer membrane is pre-treated by MF/UF.
Frequent cleaning of RO life. Membrane cleaning frequency is
membranes. reduced by 10 %, reducing system
downtime and prolonged element
life.
Figure 5 shows the step by step procedure undertaken to produce pre-treated saline water
to be fed into a desalination plant.

Figure 5 Pre-treatment technique [35].

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 727 editor@iaeme.com

 Randy Ncube and Freddie L. Inambao

Pre-treatment benefits include the optimization of:

 Salt rejection,
 Product flow,
 Product recovery,
 Greater plant availability resulting from consistent production of excellent RO feed
water and reduced cleaning requirements,
 Extended life of the RO membranes,
 Reduced operating and membrane replacement cost [17, 36].
There are several effects and possible consequences of poor pre-treatment of the RO plant.
Initial signs are an increase in feed pressure required by the system, which is generally
complemented by frequent requirement of RO chemical cleaning. This net driving pressure
increase can normally be credited to one or more of the foulant types. The effects and
consequences of poor pre-treatment include:
 Increased RO feed pressure resulting in higher power consumption,
 Lower plant availability and increased chemical costs owing to increase in cleaning
frequency,
 Reduced membrane lifespan due to frequent cleaning, thereby increasing the rate of
membrane replacement and subsequent costs,
 Mechanical damage of membrane elements due to excessive pressure drop especially
if water hammer occurs during transient phases of operation,
 Membrane damage is increased caused by overuse of cleaning agents or biocides,
 Degradation of RO permeate quality due to concentration polarization or damaged
membranes,
 Higher backwash frequency in the filtration units,
 Cartridge filter consumption is increased, and
 Chemical consumption of the pre-treatment system is increased.
If the root causes of the poor pre-treatment cannot be identified and addressed on time, the
costs of desalination will increase and, in some cases, productivity decline. Permanent
reduction in design capacity or subsequent shut-down may occur unless and until there is pre-
treatment system re-designing [37].

4. CONCLUSION
Several studies have shown that the effects of energy consumption in RO desalination has
been a thorn in researchers’ flesh. Energy consumption has a negative impact on costs of
running the plants and subsequently affects the costs of potable water production. Studies on
reduction of energy consumption in desalination have been one of the major priorities in
recent years and the results have been very significant. The incorporation of energy recovery
devices has led to major benefits in the technology as some of the energy is recycled and
turned into productive use. Research and development of energy and cost-effective
desalination technologies has been, and still is, an ongoing process as sources of fresh water
continue to diminish at an alarming rate whereas population growth is increasing
dramatically.

REFERENCES
[1] Kalogirou, S.A. Seawater Desalination Using Renewable Energy Sources. Progress in
Energy and Combustion Science, 31, 2005, pp. 242-281.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2005.03.001

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 728 editor@iaeme.com

 Sea Water Reverse Osmosis Desalination: Energy and Economic Analysis

[2] Lee, K.P., Arnot, T.C., and Mattia, D. A Review of Reverse Osmosis Membrane Materials
for Desalination—Development to Date and Future Potential. Journal of Membrane
Science, 370, 2011, pp. 1-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2010.12.036
[3] Shahabi, M., McHugh, A., Anda, M., and Ho, G. A Framework for Planning Sustainable
Seawater Desalination Water Supply. Science of the Total Environment, 575, 2016, pp.
826-835. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2016.09.136
[4] Subramani, A., Badruzzaman, M., Oppenheimer, J., and Jacangelo, J.G. Energy
Minimization Strategies and Renewable Energy Utilization for Desalination: A Review.
Water Research, 45, 2011, pp. 1907-1920. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2010.12.032
[5] Mathioulakis, E., Belessiotis, V., and Delyannis, E. Desalination by Using Alternative
Energy: Review and State-of-the-Art. Desalination, 1, 2007, pp. 346-365.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2006.03.531
[6] Sadhwani, J. and Veza, J. Desalination and Energy Consumption in Canary Islands.
Desalination, 221, 2008, pp. 143-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2007.02.051
[7] Miller, S., Shemer, H., and Semiat, R. Energy and Environmental Issues in Desalination.
Desalination, 366, 2015, pp. 2-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.11.034
[8] Al-Karaghouli, A. and Kazmerski, L.L. Energy Consumption and Water Production Cost
of Conventional and Renewable-Energy-Powered Desalination Processes. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 2013, pp. 343-356.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2012.12.064
[9] Lapuente, E. Full Cost in Desalination. A Case Study of the Segura River Basin.
Desalination, 300, 2012, pp. 40-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2012.06.002
[10] Wilf, M. and Bartels, C. Optimization of Seawater RO Systems Design. Desalination,
173, 2005, pp. 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2004.06.206
[11] Veerapaneni, S., Long, B., Freeman, S., and Bond, R. Reducing Energy Consumption for
Seawater Desalination. Journal‐American Water Works Association, 99, 2007, pp. 95-106.
https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1551-8833.2007.tb07958.x
[12] Gude, V.G. Energy Consumption and Recovery in Reverse Osmosis. Desalination and
water treatment, 36, 2011, pp. 239-260. https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2011.2534
[13] Zhu, A., Christofides, P.D., and Cohen, Y. Energy Consumption Optimization of Reverse
Osmosis Membrane Water Desalination Subject to Feed Salinity Fluctuation. Industrial &
Engineering Chemistry Research, 48, 2009, pp. 9581-9589.
https://doi.org/10.1021/ie900729x
[14] Gao, L., Rahardianto, A., Gu, H., Christofides, P.D., and Cohen, Y. Energy-Optimal
Control of RO Desalination. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 53, 2013, pp.
7409-7420. https://doi.org/10.1021/ie402304d
[15] Zhu, A., Christofides, P.D., and Cohen, Y. Effect of Thermodynamic Restriction on
Energy Cost Optimization of RO Membrane Water Desalination. Industrial &
Engineering Chemistry Research, 48, 2008, pp. 6010-6021.
https://doi.org/10.1021/ie800735q
[16] Elimelech, M. and Phillip, W.A. The Future of Seawater Desalination: Energy,
Technology, and the Environment. Science, 333, 2011, pp. 712-717.
10.1126/science.1200488
[17] Avlonitis, S., Kouroumbas, K., and Vlachakis, N. Energy Consumption and Membrane
Replacement Cost for Seawater Ro Desalination Plants. Desalination, 1, 2003, pp. 151-
158. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0011-9164(03)00395-3

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 729 editor@iaeme.com

 Randy Ncube and Freddie L. Inambao

[18] Al-Karaghouli, A. and Kazmerski, L. Economic and Technical Analysis of a Reverse-

Osmosis Water Desalination Plant Using Deep-3. 2 Software. Journal of Environmental
Science and Engineering A, 1, 2012, pp. 318-328.
[19] Semiat, R. Energy Issues in Desalination Processes. Environmental science & technology,
42, 2008, pp. 8193-8201. https://doi.org/10.1021/es801330u
[20] Chong, T.H., Loo, S.-L., and Krantz, W.B. Energy-Efficient Reverse Osmosis
Desalination Process. Journal of Membrane Science, 473, 2015, pp. 177-188.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2014.09.005
[21] Feinberg, B.J., Ramon, G.Z., and Hoek, E.M. Thermodynamic Analysis of Osmotic
Energy Recovery at a Reverse Osmosis Desalination Plant. Environmental Science &
Technology, 47, 2013, pp. 2982-2989. https://doi.org/10.1021/es304224b
[22] Malek, A., Hawlader, M., and Ho, J. Design and Economics of RO Seawater Desalination.
Desalination, 105, 1996, pp. 245-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/0011-9164(96)00081-1
[23] Ziolkowska, J.R. Is Desalination Affordable?—Regional Cost and Price Analysis. Water
Resources Management, 5, 2015, pp. 1385-1397. 10.1007/s11269-014-0901-y
[24] Hossam-Eldin, A., El-Nashar, A., and Ismaiel, A. Techno-Economic Optimization of
SWRO Desalination Using Advanced Control Approaches. Desalination and Water
Treatment, 12, 2009, pp. 389-399. https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2009.965
[25] Papapetroua, M., Cipollinaa, A., La Commarea, U., Micalea, G., Zaragozac, G., and
Kosmadakisb, G. Assessment of Methodologies and Data Used to Calculate Desalination
Costs. Desalination, 419, 2017, pp. 8-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2017.05.038
[26] Childs, W.D. and Dabiri, A.E. Desalination Cost Savings of VARI-RO™ Pumping
Technology. Desalination, 87, 1992, pp. 109-135 https://doi.org/10.1016/0011-
9164(92)80137-X
[27] Poullikkas, A. Optimization Algorithm for Reverse Osmosis Desalination Economics.
Desalination, 133, 2001, pp. 75-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0011-9164(01)00084-4
[28] Wittholz, M.K., O'Neill, B.K., Colby, C.B., and Lewis, D. Estimating the Cost of
Desalination Plants Using a Cost Database. Desalination, 229, 2008, pp. 10-20.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2007.07.023
[29] Knops, F., van Hoof, S., Futselaar, H., and Broens, L. Economic Evaluation of a New
Ultrafiltration Membrane for Pretreatment of Seawater Reverse Osmosis. Desalination,
203, 2007, pp. 300-306 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2006.04.013
[30] Prihasto, N., Liu, Q.-F., and Kim, S.-H. Pre-Treatment Strategies for Seawater
Desalination by Reverse Osmosis System. Desalination, 1, 2009, pp. 308-316.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2008.09.010
[31] Drioli, E., Stankiewicz, A.I., and Macedonio, F. Membrane Engineering in Process
Intensification—an Overview. Journal of Membrane Science, 380, 2011, pp. 1-8.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2011.06.043
[32] Zhu, A., Rahardianto, A., Christofides, P.D., and Cohen, Y. Reverse Osmosis
Desalination with High Permeability Membranes—Cost Optimization and Research
Needs. Desalination and Water Treatment, 15, 2010, pp. 256-266.
https://doi.org/10.5004/dwt.2010.1763
[33] Jamaly, S., Darwish, N., Ahmed, I., and Hasan, S. A Short Review on Reverse Osmosis
Pretreatment Technologies. Desalination, 354, 2014, pp. 30-38.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.09.017
[34] Vedavyasan, C., Pretreatment Trends—an Overview. Desalination, 203, 2007, pp. 296-
299. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2006.04.012

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 730 editor@iaeme.com

 Sea Water Reverse Osmosis Desalination: Energy and Economic Analysis

[35] 35. Sutzkover-Gutman, I. and Hasson, D. Feed Water Pretreatment for Desalination
Plants. Desalination, 264, 2010, pp. 289-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2010.07.014
[36] Wolf, P.H., Siverns, S., and Monti, S. Uf Membranes for RO Desalination Pretreatment.
Desalination, 182, 2005, pp. 293-300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2005.05.006
[37] Henthorne, L. and Boysen, B. State-of-the-Art of Reverse Osmosis Desalination
Pretreatment. Desalination, 356, 2015, pp. 129-139.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.10.039

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 731 editor@iaeme.com

View publication stats