Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Paper
Find a contact near you by visiting www.ge.com/water and clicking on “Contact Us”.
* Trademark of General Electric Company; may be registered in one or more countries.
©2010, General Electric Company. All rights reserved.
TP1179EN Mar-10
data to design a plant that effectively and efficiently The GE EDR pilot performed well with a length of 28-
met the water quality. month demonstration.
Pilot Plant The biggest problem with THMs formation occurs in
the summer months where the development of
The largest unknowns in the THM precursor solution THMs happens faster at warmer water tempera-
were: Will the solution remove the THM precursors? tures. This formation happens somewhat upon ini-
Will the solution be compatible with the water from tial chlorination, but also as the finished water flows
the existing works? The purpose of the pilot plant through the distribution network.
was to provide a means of generating performance
data to both select and optimize the design of a Fortunately, EDR removal efficiency is also greater
solution. Table 1 shows the river source water char- on warmer waters, compensating for the higher
acteristics. THM formation potential of this water in the sum-
mer. The EDR pilot showed that the THM formation
Table 1: Llobregat River Facts potential (THM-FP) before the EDR was 160+ / -40
µg/L, and after the EDR it was 64+ / -16 µg/L.
Characteristic Amount
Conductivity range: 500 to 2,500 µS/cm The GE EDR pilot validated that:
Bromide 0.5 – 1.2 mg/L • The GE EDR removed a sufficient amount of the
Chloride 150 – 1,300 mg/L THM precursors, so the treated river water was
below the THM limit.
Ba
30 – 190 µg/L
• No additional pretreatment to EDR was required
Sr on the existing works effluent.
1,100 – 2,200 µg/L
TOC • The EDR met its performance measurements
> 5.0 mg/L
even during seasonal variations in river water
salinity and temperature.
Both reverse osmosis and electrodialysis reversal
were piloted, starting in 1999. The EDR pilot pro- • The GE EDR pilot demonstrated conditions of a
gram, initiated in April 2004, tracked performance 90 percent water recovery plant.
of the EDR unit as variations in bromide, organic
matter, salinity, and temperature were experienced. • EDR had lower remineralization and power
costs than RO.
The RO pilot lasted six months, and during this time,
the following challenges were observed: The pilot was also an opportunity to provide a large
amount of data to optimize the design of a full-
• The RO water recovery rate was lower than scale plant. Experiments included comparing re-
desirable due to the high levels of scaling min- sults of single versus double stage EDR design,
erals like sulfates, barium, calcium and alumina temperature variation, flow variation and electrical
power optimization.
• Biological fouling was also a challenge to the
RO membranes and chlorine could not be used The GE EDR uses a Polarity Reversal feature to
on RO membranes prevent the accumulation of organic and inorganic
foulants and scale. In addition, the GE EDR mem-
• The turbidity and SDI resulting from the existing branes are compatible with a free chlorine residual,
pretreatment was too high and variable for an so cleaning the EDR with a solution with free chlo-
RO system and frequent cleanings were rine is an element of flexibility that effectively and
required. inexpensively reduces organic foulants. These fea-
tures contribute to long membrane life, low mainte-
• The variability in the river quality, including sa-
nance costs and high reliability even on this
linity, turbidity, and chemical pollution was chal-
challenging water under dynamic conditions.
lenging to adapt the RO operations without any
additional pretreatment after the existing plant,
like ultrafiltration (UF).
Page 2 TP1179EN Mar-10
2.3 m3/s
Max 4 m3/s Chlorine dioxide Main flow Chlorine
Integration of a Solution
Based on favorable piloting results, the GE EDR
technology was selected as the THM precursor
reduction solution. The project, consisting of EDR
and other plant upgrades, cost 61 million Euros, and
has a capacity of 200,000 m3 per day. The EDR
plant, consisting of nine EDR units, began the com-
missioning in February 2008. It took about one year,
as the existing plant works had to deliver water to
the population. This facility is currently the largest
EDR plant in the world, and one of the largest
brackish water desalination plants of any technol-
ogy type. Due to the water scarcity condition in
Spain, the plant is designed to operate at 90% wa-
ter recovery. (See Figure 1.)
Figure 2: GE EDR Mark 4-2 Cell Pair
Effluent from the existing carbon filters is sent to a
3,000 m3 feed tank, and 9+3 EDR feed pumps pres-
surize the water and transport it from the tank,
through the cartridge filters (2 per EDR unit, having
270 cartridges at 5 micron nominal rating) and 576
GE EDR Mark 4-2 membrane stacks, 64 per unit
(Figures 2 and 3). The stacks are energized with DC
power using DC drive technology that is enclosed in
a group of electrical cabinets in the electrical room.
The membrane stacks are composed of 600 cell
pairs, each consisting of:
• Flow spacer
• Flow spacer
Each of the nine EDR hydraulic skids also has 1+1 2. Mario Ferrer Arasa, Fernando Valero Cervera,
redundancy concentrate recirculation pumps. The Domingo Zarzo Martínez, Xavier Vives Rifé,
concentrate water from each of the EDR units is “Abrera (Barcelona, Spain) Drinking WTP Up-
collected and sent via pipeline to the Mediterranean grade through Electrodialysis Reversal (200,000
at the mouth of the Llobregat River, 30 kilometers m3/day)”, International Desalination Associa-
(18.6 miles) away from the plant. tion, October 2007.
3. Mario Ferrer Arasa, Domingo Zarzo Martínez,
Raúl Lemes, “Startup and Operation of The
World’s largest EDR water Treatment Plant”, In-
ternational Desalination Association, November
2009.
4. Fernando Valero, Ramón Arbós. “Desalination of
brackish river water using Electrodialysis Rever-
sal (EDR). Control of the THMs formation in the
Barcelona (NE Spain) area”. Elsevier, 2009.