We Are Intechopen, The World'S Leading Publisher of Open Access Books Built by Scientists, For Scientists
We Are Intechopen, The World'S Leading Publisher of Open Access Books Built by Scientists, For Scientists
We Are Intechopen, The World'S Leading Publisher of Open Access Books Built by Scientists, For Scientists
6,500
Open access books available
176,000
International authors and editors
190M Downloads
154
Countries delivered to
TOP 1%
most cited scientists
12.2%
Contributors from top 500 universities
Abstract
1. Introduction
As the name suggests, desalination processes are responsible for the removal of
dissolved salts or ions from sea-, brackish- or tertiary-treated wastewater. These
processes however, are not selective, and desirable minerals are just as readily
removed along with the unwanted salts. The resultant desalination permeate or
distillate is therefore void of essential minerals and alkalinity, rendering it unstable
and corrosive. If left untreated, desalinated water will corrode the distribution
infrastructure and will deteriorate the linings used as a protective barrier between
the conduit and the drinking water. This creates a huge financial burden on asset
owners. Recent estimates by the American Water Works Association suggested a
program in excess of $300 billion over a 20-year period would need to be spent in
the US alone to replace pipe damaged as a result of corrosion [1]. The financial
impact of corrosion does not stop with the cost of pipework replacement either: a
recent study by the Chicago-based Center for Neighborhood Technology in con-
junction with the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning found that up to 22
billion gallons of potable water is lost on a yearly basis due to leaks within the
distribution network [2].
More important than the cost of pipework replacement however, is the health
risk posed to consumers of non-stabilized water. Corrosion of pipework by aggres-
sive water can lead to the release of heavy metal ions such as lead, copper and iron
1
Pathways and Challenges for Efficient Desalination
to levels that are considered unsafe for human consumption, inducing “red water”
incidents [3] and posing health risks to its consumers. Lead, for example, is consid-
ered one of the most toxic heavy metals and has been shown to impede both the
physical and mental developments in children [4]. Ingestion of copper on the other
hand, can result in liver and kidney damage. Cadmium, found in galvanized piping,
is also highly toxic, considered a carcinogenic and even short-term exposure can
lead to problems of the liver, heart and kidney [5]. Finally trace metals such as
cadmium, barium, chromium and aluminum have been found to leach from the
mortar linings of concrete lined pipes [6]. Therefore it is critical that following
desalination processes, minerals and alkalinity are added to the water to achieve a
buffered and stabilized water quality that is non-corrosive and safe for use.
Alkalinity is one of the most important water quality parameter due to its ability
to maintain a stable and buffered system, as well as its effectiveness in protecting
against various mechanisms of corrosion. In general terms, alkalinity is defined as
the capacity of an aqueous solution to accept a proton, or rather to neutralize an
acid. Although other systems can contribute to alkalinity, for drinking water pro-
cesses, it is only the carbonate system that is taken into account to define alkalinity.
This is due to its predominance over other buffering systems in the pH ranges
usually associated with water chemistry. Alkalinity for drinking water is therefore
expressed as the following:
2
Remineralization and Stabilization of Desalinated Water
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99458
hand, is released into the water either directly from the pipe, or from lead-
containing corrosion products that are formed on the pipe surface. In terms of lead
corrosion products, the most common of these is lead carbonate whose propensity
of lead (II) carbonates to dissolve into the water stream is directly related to the
concentration of carbonate species already within the water. Finally, alkalinity is
essential to prevent the degradation of concrete and cement-based systems that in
many cases are used as a lining to protect large bore conduits constructed from mild
steel or ductile iron.
Next to alkalinity, calcium hardness is the most important parameter for post-
treatment process for a number of reasons. Firstly, it is the most suitable counter-
ion to the anionic alkalinity species. Other potential alternatives can result in water
that is toxic to plant life (e.g. sodium ions), or are not so readily available (e.g.
potassium). Calcium carbonate on the other hand, is one of the most readily sourced
minerals in the world, making up 4% of the earth’s crust [10]. Secondly, it is the
concentration of calcium ions in addition to alkalinity and pH that defines the calco-
carbonic equilibrium of the water. The calco-carbonic equilibrium defines a water’s
propensity to dissolve or precipitate calcium carbonate and is the primary indica-
tion of water stability for a number of reasons. Water that is aggressive to calcium
carbonate, will be aggressive to concrete or cement-lined pipe, along with asbestos
cement pipe. Because of the amount of water distribution infrastructure that is
either made from concrete (storage tanks) or cement-lined (mild-steel concrete-
lined or ductile iron concrete-lined pipe), this represents one of the largest invest-
ment costs for utility owners and highlights the importance of protecting these from
corrosion. Whilst on the other hand, the precipitation of a thin layer of calcium
carbonate on the surfaces of water treatment infrastructure is considered a suitable
strategy against corrosion for a wide range of materials.
Finally, calcium has a number of health benefits to the consumer, with increased
calcium levels within drinking water being linked to decreased incidences of car-
diovascular disease. This has been acknowledged and accepted by the World Health
Organization, who have clearly stated in their background document for the devel-
opment of Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality, that insufficient calcium intake
is associated with increased risks of osteoporosis, kidney stones, hypertension,
stroke, coronary artery disease, some cancers and even obesity [11]. Calcium in
drinking water is not just important for the body, but also for the teeth. Deminer-
alization and remineralization processes are constantly taking place on the surface
of tooth enamel based largely on the surrounding fluid. Saturation of the surround-
ing fluid with respect to calcium is critical to promote the remineralization or repair
of dental tissue [12].
2.3 Importance of pH
3
Pathways and Challenges for Efficient Desalination
precipitative water (pH > pHsat) so that a protective scale is built up on the surface
of the cement lined pipes or tanks. For other materials of construction, pH also
appears to play an important role in controlling corrosion. The World Health Orga-
nization for example recommends a pH range of 6.8–7.3 to deal with iron corrosion,
8.0–8.5 to deal with lead and copper corrosion and a pH of less than 8.3 to deal with
brass corrosion [13].
4
Remineralization and Stabilization of Desalinated Water
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99458
The most commonly used index that provides a measure of the stability of a
water with respect to its degree of calcium carbonate saturation is the Langelier
Saturation Index (LSI). This is due to the fact that it provides both qualitative
representation of the corrosivity of water, and is relatively easy to calculate. First
proposed by Prof. WF Langelier in 1936 [14], the Langelier Saturation Index can be
calculated as follows:
LSI ¼ pH pHs
where pHs represents the saturation pH of the water, in which condition the
water is in the equilibrium state and neither dissolves, nor precipitates calcium
carbonate.
The saturation pH is a complex iterative calculation, similar to the calculation for
CCPP, requiring a program to accurately determine it. A simplification of this can
be performed by using the ABCD method, which is calculated as follows:
pHs ¼ ð9:3 þ A þ BÞ ðC þ DÞ
Figure 1.
Relationship between calcium hardness and saturation pH for water with 80 ppm of alkalinity (as CaCO3).
5
Pathways and Challenges for Efficient Desalination
Another parameter similar to the LSI is the Ryznar Stability Index [16], which is
looks at the relationship between the saturation pH of the water (with respect to
calcium carbonate) and the actual pH of the water. It is given by:
RSI ¼ 2pHs pH
Based on the value assumed by the RSI index, waters are classified as:
This index provides a reasonably good estimate of expected scale formation even
in the presence of phosphate-based inhibitors.
Similar to both the Langelier Saturation Index and the Ryznar Stability Index,
also the Puckorius Scaling Index (PSI) also considers the corrosion potential of the
water based on the calcium carbonate saturation of the water [17]. Instead of
considering the actual pH of the water however, it defines a new parameter – the
equilibrium pH and is defined as:
PSI ¼ 2 pHEQ pHs
where, pHs is the saturation pH as calculated for the previous indices, and pHEQ
is the equilibrium pH as calculated by:
6
Remineralization and Stabilization of Desalinated Water
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99458
½Cl þ SO4 2
LI ¼
½HCO3 þ CO3 2
The most common techniques that are currently employed worldwide for water
remineralization and stabilization of desalinated or naturally soft water can be
divided into three categories: (1) direct dosing of two or more chemical solutions,
(2) lime dosing systems, and (3) calcite contactors. Each technique comes with its
own benefits and disadvantages, from both a water quality perspective as well as
process considerations. Of these three processes, lime dosing systems and calcite
contactors see the most widespread application, especially for large desalination
plants. This is due to the major drawbacks and costs associated with chemical
dosing, as demonstrated below.
One of the simplest and most effective ways of controlling the quality of the
final water leaving a treatment facility is through the direct dosing of chemical
solutions, either prepared offsite, or involving a simple slurry make down on site
when supplied as a solid material. Whilst any combination of chemicals is possible,
7
Pathways and Challenges for Efficient Desalination
the most common combination is calcium chloride (CaCl2) for hardness addition in
conjunction with sodium bi-carbonate (NaHCO3) to increase the alkalinity of the
final water. Expensive sodium hydroxide may in some cases also be needed to reach
the required pH. Direct dosing of two or more chemicals has the advantage over
other techniques of being able to precisely regulate the quantities of ions added, by
controlling the volumes dosed of known solutions. In addition, full dissociation of
these highly pure compounds in water avoids any complications of the generation
of waste by-products or residual turbidity resulting from low solubility of products.
Despite being a very simple process the greatest drawback of this process is the
cost of the chemicals. For this reason, this approach sees very limited application,
used at best on small plants where relatively speaking CAPEX has a much greater
impact than OPEX.
As an example, in order to achieve 80 mg/l of hardness and alkalinity within the
final water (measured as CaCO3), then the required dosage of CaCl2 and NaHCO3 is
equivalent to:
mg mg g g mg
CaCl2 ¼ 80 ÷ 100:08 110:98 ¼ 89
l l mol mol l
mg mg g g mg
NaHCO3 ¼ 80 ÷ 100:08 84:006 2 ¼ 134
l l mol mol l
Lime dosing systems involve the on-site preparation of a saturated lime solution
from either a hydrated lime powder (calcium hydroxide) or quicklime (calcium
oxide) which is slaked on-site to produce hydrated lime. The saturated solution is
produced by feeding a calcium hydroxide slurry into a lime saturator along with
make-up water and a flocculant. The saturator allows for the separation of a clear
Table 1.
Chemical costs of calcium chloride and sodium bicarbonate dosing to achieve 80 mg/l of hardness and
alkalinity.
8
Remineralization and Stabilization of Desalinated Water
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99458
Figure 2.
Schematic of a typical lime dosing system.
solution of calcium hydroxide from the insoluble contents which are settled to the
bottom with the aid of the flocculant (Figure 2).
The saturated lime solution is then dosed into the final water stream along with
carbon dioxide to form bicarbonate alkalinity in the following reaction:
One of the advantages of lime and reasons that it has been a popular choice for
system designers is its worldwide availability as a commercial product and relatively
low cost in comparison to other chemicals. It’s solubility up to 1700 mg/l at 20°C
makes ideal for its preparation within a side stream lending to its smaller footprint
relative to calcite contactors.
Lime dosing systems do however have a number of drawbacks and are often the
bane of many operators assigned the task to clean and maintain the lime slurry
pipework or lime saturators. In comparison to calcium carbonate, lime is more
expensive per kilogram of available CaCO3. This can be attributed to the fact that lime
is produced by the calcination (burning) and further slaking (hydration) of calcium
carbonate which is then dried to produce a powdered hydrated lime. As a result, lime
is not only more expensive to produce, but has a much higher carbon footprint. For
every kilogram of quicklime that is produced, approximately 700 kcal is required for
dissociation and 0.785 kg of carbon dioxide is released [19]. This difference in carbon
footprint is not only a concern for plants which strive for environmentally sustainable
solutions, but will no doubt further increase the price of lime production as carbon
emission taxes are set to play a bigger role in the future.
The operational costs of lime systems are also increased in comparison to
calcium carbonate due to the fact that for the same desired quantity of calcium
hardness and alkalinity within the final water, twice as much carbon dioxide is
required. As can be seen from the chemical reaction equations, remineralization
using calcium hydroxide requires two molecular equivalents of carbon dioxide for
each mole of calcium hydroxide (refer Eq. (2)). Remineralization using calcium
carbonate however, requires only one molecular equivalent of carbon dioxide for
9
Pathways and Challenges for Efficient Desalination
each mole of calcium carbonate (refer Eq. (3)). Carbon dioxide is in most cases the
largest operating cost for post treatment systems, so this has an important impact
on the overall cost per cubic meter of treated water.
As mentioned previously, hydrated lime contains an insoluble content. This insol-
uble content is for the most part is unburnt calcium carbonate but can also include
silicates and other impurities. These impurities are usually in the order of 5–15% and
must be removed and dealt with as a waste product. Needless to say the lower the
insoluble content, the purer the product and the higher the price of the product. If the
impurities are not effectively removed, they will add to the turbidity in the final water.
To improve the efficacy of the clarification process, a flocculant is often dosed to aid in
the settling. This waste then needs to be thickened on site and sent away for proper
disposal. These factors further add to the operational cost and complexity of lime
dosing systems. The operation of a lime clarifier is very sensitive to factors such as
temperature, flocculent dosing, and throughput flow rate, meaning they do not handle
fluctuations in plant flow very well. Even a perfectly functioning lime clarifier can still
be susceptible to turbidity problems. Absorption of carbon dioxide from the atmo-
sphere can lead to the increase in dissolved inorganic carbon within the lime solution
resulting in precipitation of calcium carbonate and producing a cloudy solution.
Extending the example for chemical dosing, in order to achieve 80 mg/l of
hardness and alkalinity within the final water (measured as CaCO3), then the
required dosage of Ca(OH)2 and CO2 is equivalent to:
mg mg g g mg
CaðOHÞ2 ¼ 80 ÷ 100:08 74:1 ÷ 90% ¼ 65
l l mol mol l
As two molecular equivalents of CO2 are required to generate one molecular equiv-
alent of alkalinity (measured as CaCO3). Considering also 10% of product is removed
as waste from the lime saturator, and then dewatered to a maximum of 30% solids:
mg mg mg
Waste generated ¼ 65 10% ÷ 30% ¼ 22
l l l
This generates treatment costs that are a fraction of that required for chemical
dosing as presented below in Table 2 below.
Table 2.
Approximate operational costs for lime dosing systems to achieve 80 mg/l of hardness and alkalinity.
10
Remineralization and Stabilization of Desalinated Water
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99458
usually limestone or marble, but in some cases dolomite, chalk, precipitated calcium
carbonate or even muscle shells is used. The acidified water dissolves the calcium
carbonate, increasing the calcium hardness of the water, the carbonate alkalinity
and the pH through the following reaction (when carbon dioxide is used as the
acidifying agent) (Figure 3):
As noted earlier, calcium carbonate is one of the most common minerals avail-
able, taking up almost 4% of the earth’s crust [10]. As a result it is a readily sourced
product and processing requirements are minimal as the chemical composition does
not need to be altered before use. Consequently, and as alluded to previously,
calcium carbonate can be supplied at a lower cost than lime. In addition, it requires
half as much carbon dioxide for the same quantity of calcium bi-carbonate (refer
Eqs. (2) and (3)). Added to this, calcium carbonate used for water remineralization
can be very pure, with an insoluble content as little as 0.1%. This further reduces
operating costs, with more available product for use and less produced waste which
requires further handling and disposal. Calcium carbonate is also chemically stable
and non-corrosive making it easy for manual handling. In comparison, calcium
hydroxide is classified as hazardous, and exposure can cause burning and irritation.
The main disadvantage of calcium carbonate is its chemical solubility which is
only 13 mg/l in pure water, and requires the addition of an acid to dissolve quanti-
ties above this. As the water gets closer to the saturation point, the rate of reaction
slows down dramatically. As a result, thermodynamic equilibrium is almost impos-
sible to reach in such a dissolution reactor [20], and requires excessive contact time
between the water and the calcite bed. This increases the overall size of the plant
required to treat a certain volume of water and the resultant capital investment.
Figure 3.
Schematic of typical calcite contactor process.
11
Pathways and Challenges for Efficient Desalination
In order to increase the rate of reaction and circumvent this problem, the pH of
the feed water is often decreased before the calcite contactor, in excess of what
would normally be required. This results in a faster dissolution rate so that the
required hardness and alkalinity increase occurs in a shorter time period. The water
however, does not achieve saturation levels with respect to calcium carbonate, as
the pH of the effluent leaving the reactor is much lower than the saturation pH for
its calcium carbonate content. This also decreases the efficiency of the process
described by Eq. (3), as it requires excess carbon dioxide to be dosed for the
increased acidity. This not only increases the chemical costs for the process, but
produces effluent leaving the reactor with a quantity of unreacted CO2. The pH of
the water must then be adjusted either by the dosage of a strong base (e.g. sodium
hydroxide) or the liberation of carbon dioxide to achieve a zero or slight positive
LSI (Langelier Saturation Value) value, as required by most treatment facilities.
This pH adjustment step adds to both the investment costs: due to the require-
ment of additional infrastructure for stripping equipment or an additional chemical
dosing system, and the operational costs: due either to additional chemical con-
sumption when a strong base is used, or additional power consumption when the
excess CO2 is stripped. In some instances both are required. Sodium hydroxide is a
relatively expensive chemical, and even a small dosage can add significantly to the
overall cost of the remineralization process. In many cases, it is most cost effective
to waste the excess CO2 through stripping rather than convert it to additional
alkalinity through the dosage of a strong base. For plants that require a low level of
remineralization though, (e.g. 50 mg/l) the quantity of free of CO2 that remains in
the water at saturation level is so low that this cannot be achieved through stripping
alone and requires some dosage of a strong base for partial or total pH adjustment.
Other issues facing operators of calcite contactors are turbidity spikes in the
treated water leaving the contactor. These are generally a result of the introduction
of new material to the calcite reactor and the accompanying “fines” supplied with
the raw material. To deal with this calcite contactors require frequent backwashes,
in particular following the loading of new material. This adds an additional need for
a backwash treatment and handling system at plant to deal with this waste stream.
The change in bed heights between fills also result in a change in water quality
leaving the calcite contactor due to variances in the quantity of product available for
reaction. In most cases calcite contactors are loaded manually, increasing the oper-
ational costs due to additional operator utilization. Lime systems on the other hand
are fed automatically from a lime storage silo, requiring operator input only to
receive new deliveries. Calcite contactors also require regular backwash with both
air and water. This serves to remove excess fines and insoluble waste material
caught on the calcite chips as well as resettling the calcite bed to prevent preferen-
tial flow paths of the water through the bed.
Completing the cost comparison example to achieve 80 mg/l of hardness and
alkalinity within the final water (measured as CaCO3), then the required dosage of
CaCO3 and CO2 is equivalent to:
mg mg mg
CaCO3 ¼ 80 ÷ 99% ¼ 65
l l l
Assuming 30% extra carbon dioxide is required to increase the rate of reaction,
and finally an addition of 2.5 ppm of sodium hydroxide is required after degassing
to bring the pH to saturation conditions.
12
Remineralization and Stabilization of Desalinated Water
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99458
Table 3.
Approximate operational costs for calcite contactors to achieve 80 mg/l of hardness and alkalinity.
The approximate treatment costs for calcite contactors are shown below in
Table 3 demonstrating that they are not only less expensive to operate than lime
dosing systems, but they offer a more environmentally friendly solution. The big
drawback for calcite contactors, which is not demonstrated here are the large
physical footprint and investment required. These elements alone can often drive a
designers decision towards lime dosing system, particularly in locations such as
Singapore, where space is a premium.
Historically, the main focus for developments within the field of desalination has
been the improvement and optimization of the reverse osmosis and pre-treatment
processes. This is due to the fact that these areas comprise the largest fractions of
capital investment and are responsible for the largest portion of operating costs. In
comparison, only minor inroads have been made to improve and optimize post
treatment processes. In spite of this, the value and importance of post treatment
processes should not be underestimated, as it is these processes that are ultimately
responsible for the final water quality sent to the consumer.
Whilst calcite contactors have many advantages over lime dosing systems, their
major drawbacks are centered around their slow reactivity which result in large
physical footprint and investment for the dissolution reactors. In order to address
the issue of slow dissolution kinetics of calcite chips, new and innovative processes
have been developed over the last few years that utilize micronized calcium car-
bonate. These processes take advantage of the increased surface area and reaction
kinetics available from the micronized products to achieve decreased contact times,
higher concentrations, improved carbon dioxide efficiency, or a combination of
these factors. Micronized calcium carbonate is dissolved in a Membrane Calcite
Reactor (MCR) which combines a submerged ultrafiltration membrane immersed
in a suspension of micronized calcium carbonate. Carbon dioxide is added to the
calcium carbonate suspension, which in turns reacts to form a calcium bi-carbonate
solution. The membrane acts as a barrier between the dissolved and undissolved
calcium carbonate enabling a perfectly clear solution to be extracted from the
reactor that can be dosed into the desalination permeate. The use of micronized
calcium carbonate results in fast reaction times, and hence decrease footprint and
investment offering an improvement over current processes (Figure 4).
Although remineralization processes primarily concern themselves with the
replenishment of calcium hardness and alkalinity, more recently attention has been
given to the need to replenish magnesium ions, with some countries considering the
implementation of legislation for these purposes. Magnesium is arguably the most
important mineral for the body, being utilized by every organ, in particular the
heart, muscles and kidney. It is the fourth most abundant cation in the body, and
the second most in intracellular fluid [21]. Magnesium deficiency has also been
13
Pathways and Challenges for Efficient Desalination
Figure 4.
Schematic of the Omya advanced remineralization process (OARP) based on micronized calcium carbonate.
scientifically proven to either trigger or cause the following health problems: heart
disease, diabetes, migraines, anxiety, hypertension, depression, fatigue, blood clots,
liver disease, kidney disease, osteoporosis, insomnia, fatigue, cystitis, nerve prob-
lems and hypoglycemia [22]. Despite these facts and the relative importance of
magnesium, up to 75 percent of people do not receive the recommended daily
intake of magnesium (based on studies performed in the US – global intakes vary
greatly based on local diets) [23].
Magnesium deficiency has also been specifically linked to higher rates of mor-
tality in terms of cardiovascular deaths as well as general mortality. A recent Ger-
man study sampling over 4000 people showed a strong correlation between low
serum magnesium levels (< 0.73 mmol/l) and cardio-vascular deaths at a rate of
3.44 deaths per 1000 person years, in comparison to 1.53 deaths per 1000 person
years for those with higher magnesium concentrations. More importantly though,
an even stronger correlation was found between serum magnesium levels and all-
cause deaths. For those with low serum magnesium levels, the mortality rate was
10.95 deaths per 1000 person years compared to 1.45 deaths per 1000 person years
at higher serum magnesium concentrations [24]. Researchers from the Bar Ilan
University together with the Tel HaShomer Hospital gave more weight to this
argument based on their review of death rates in Israel in areas serviced by desali-
nated water in comparison to those supplied by natural water. In their study they
noted a marked difference in the number of deaths from heart disease in the areas
that were supplied water from desalination in comparison to those supplied by
natural water which had not been previously recognized when comparisons were
made before desalination was introduced [25]. The conclusion was drawn by the
researcher that this was as a result of decreased magnesium intake in these areas
after the introduction of desalination. Only causal links however were established
with direct links still to be proven.
Furthermore when reviewing the total number of epidemiological studies from
the 1950’s until present that had been performed on the link between magnesium in
drinking water and cardiovascular mortality, it was determined that there is enough
evidence to support a link, especially for concentrations above 5 mg/l [26]. The
World Health Organization (WHO) also recommends maintaining a minimum
Mg2+ concentration of 10 mg/l in all drinking waters [27]. Despite these recom-
mendations, the replenishment of magnesium salts is rarely performed, if at all. One
of the main obstacles is the relative cost of current methods, which significantly
increases the total cost to desalinate and stabilize the water. The addition of mag-
nesium to drinking water is commonly achieved through the dosing of chemical
solutions such as magnesium chloride or magnesium sulphate. The high solubility of
both salts allows for the supply of highly concentrated solutions, or simple solution
make-down systems on site using crystalline salts, and the accurate dosing of these
14
Remineralization and Stabilization of Desalinated Water
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99458
Author details
© 2021 The Author(s). Licensee IntechOpen. This chapter is distributed under the terms
of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/
by/3.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is properly cited.
15
Pathways and Challenges for Efficient Desalination
References
16
Remineralization and Stabilization of Desalinated Water
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.99458
[17] Puckorius R, Brooke JM. A new [25] Findel H. What To Do? Desalination
practical index for calcium carbonate Found to Cause Fatal Heart Disease.
scale prediction in cooling systems. Israel National News. 7. April 2016.
Corrosion Journal. 1991;47:280–284. Available from: https://www.israelna
DOI: 10.5006/1.3585256 tionalnews.com/News/News.aspx/
210501 [Accessed: 2021-06-03]
[18] Larson TE, Skold RV. Laboratory
Studies Relating Mineral Quality of [26] Calderon R, Hunter P.
Water to Corrosion of Steel and Cast Epidemiological studies and the
Iron. Corrosion Journal. 1958;71:43–46. association of cardiovascular disease
DOI: 10.5006/0010-9312-14.6.43. risks with water hardness in Calcium
and Magnesium in Drinking-Water:
[19] Kumar GS, Ramakrishnan A, Public Health Significance, World
Hung YT. Lime Calcination, Advanced Health Organization, 2009; p108-142.
Physicochemical Treatment Available from: https://www.who.int/
Technologies. Humana Press. 2012: water_sanitation_health/publications/
611-633. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1- publication_9789241563550/en/
59745-173-4_14 [Accessed: 2021-06-03]
17