Is conventional drinking water treatment more economically viable than ultrafiltration in Brazil? A technical, economic, comparative study with risk assessment

Water Supply Pub Date : 2024-06-06 DOI:10.2166/ws.2024.132
E. Skoronski, Altherre Branco Rosa, Flávio José Simioni
{"title":"Is conventional drinking water treatment more economically viable than ultrafiltration in Brazil? A technical, economic, comparative study with risk assessment","authors":"E. Skoronski, Altherre Branco Rosa, Flávio José Simioni","doi":"10.2166/ws.2024.132","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Water treatment systems using ultrafiltration (UF) membranes constitute a viable option for producing drinking water for human consumption. The present study aimed to perform a comparative analysis of conventional water treatment and UF. The treatment methods were compared considering the quality of the treated water and the cost of implementing a water treatment plant (WTP) and operating the systems, with a risk assessment of the influence of the deterioration of water quality on costs. Data were obtained from the operations of a conventional WTP in the municipality of Lages, Brazil, and a pilot plant employing UF. In the conventional and UF systems, treated water had turbidity of 1.90 and 0.19 NTU, an apparent color of 2.12 and 0.28 mg L−1 Pt/Co, and pH of 6.94 and 7.04, respectively. Average total cost (ATC) was $0.0496/m3 in the conventional system and $0.0596/m3 in the UF system. Chemical inputs and sludge treatment were the main variables that affected the ATC in conventional treatment, whereas energy and plant costs were the main components affecting the ATC in the UF system. A 30% reduction in water quality increased the ATC by 2.6% for the conventional and 1.5% for the UF system.","PeriodicalId":23725,"journal":{"name":"Water Supply","volume":"30 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Water Supply","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2166/ws.2024.132","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Water treatment systems using ultrafiltration (UF) membranes constitute a viable option for producing drinking water for human consumption. The present study aimed to perform a comparative analysis of conventional water treatment and UF. The treatment methods were compared considering the quality of the treated water and the cost of implementing a water treatment plant (WTP) and operating the systems, with a risk assessment of the influence of the deterioration of water quality on costs. Data were obtained from the operations of a conventional WTP in the municipality of Lages, Brazil, and a pilot plant employing UF. In the conventional and UF systems, treated water had turbidity of 1.90 and 0.19 NTU, an apparent color of 2.12 and 0.28 mg L−1 Pt/Co, and pH of 6.94 and 7.04, respectively. Average total cost (ATC) was $0.0496/m3 in the conventional system and $0.0596/m3 in the UF system. Chemical inputs and sludge treatment were the main variables that affected the ATC in conventional treatment, whereas energy and plant costs were the main components affecting the ATC in the UF system. A 30% reduction in water quality increased the ATC by 2.6% for the conventional and 1.5% for the UF system.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在巴西,传统饮用水处理方法比超滤方法更经济可行吗?一项技术、经济和风险评估比较研究
使用超滤膜(UF)的水处理系统是生产人类饮用水的可行选择。本研究旨在对传统水处理方法和超滤进行比较分析。在对两种处理方法进行比较时,考虑到了处理后水的水质、水处理厂(WTP)的建设成本和系统运行成本,并对水质恶化对成本的影响进行了风险评估。数据来源于巴西 Lages 市的一个传统水处理厂和一个采用超滤技术的试点水处理厂的运行情况。在传统系统和超滤系统中,处理水的浊度分别为 1.90 和 0.19 NTU,表观色度分别为 2.12 和 0.28 mg L-1 Pt/Co,pH 值分别为 6.94 和 7.04。传统系统的平均总成本(ATC)为 0.0496 美元/立方米,超滤系统为 0.0596 美元/立方米。化学投入和污泥处理是影响常规处理中 ATC 的主要变量,而能源和工厂成本则是影响超滤系统中 ATC 的主要因素。水质每降低 30%,传统系统的 ATC 就会增加 2.6%,而超滤系统的 ATC 则会增加 1.5%。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Studying the applicability of electrodialysis technology to treat groundwater in CKDu regions, Sri Lanka: operational parameter optimization of the pilot project Flood modeling using HEC-RAS 2D and IBER 2D: a comparative study Estimation of the crop water stress index (CWSI) of sunflower (Helianthus annuus L.) using sensor-based irrigation scheduling for different irrigation levels Qualitative analysis of physico-chemical parameters of packaged drinking water commercially available in India Adaptation strategies for cumin in Sabzevar, Iran: planting date and irrigation management
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1