You are on page 1of 13

Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74

New antifoulants for deposit control in MSF and MED plants

Suresh Patel*, Michael A. Finan

Process Additives Division, FMC (UK) Corporation Ltd., Tenax Road, Trafford Park, Manchester M17 1WT, UK Tel. +44 (161) 872-2323, ext. 3350; Fax +44 (161) 875-3171/5

Abstract

New products based on enhanced maleate chemistry have been developed to control the broad range of deposits found in thermal desalination plants. To investigate the performance characteristics of enhanced maleate products, laboratory tests were developed to measure the control of fouling species. The test methods developed for and used in this study provide a further understanding of the key mechanisms of deposit control by additives. The advance performance of products based on enhanced maleate chemistry compared with conventional products currently in use in MSF and MED plants will be presented. Individual product data sets have been combined to produce product performance profiles which can then be used in the selection of additive appropriate to the fouling characteristics of the desalination plant. The enhanced maleates have been successfully tried in both MSF and MED plants. Six months’ data from a 23,000m 3 /d plant in Saudi Arabia, operated at a top brine temperature of 110°C, will be presented. Also 12- month operational data from an 8000m 3 /d MED plant in Europe, top brine temperature 62°C, will be presented. The results from these extended field evaluations have confirmed the initial laboratory results.

Keywords:Calcium carbonate; Magnesium hydroxide; Seawater; Scale; Inhibitor; Dispersant; Desalination; MSF; MED; Belgard EV2030; Belgard EV2050; Field trials

1. Introduction

The main process for production of pure wa- ter from seawater is currently practiced by multi- stage flash (MSF) and multi-effect desalination (MED). The major problem encountered is the deposition of scale onto the heat transfer surfaces

*Corresponding author.

which results in a serious loss of efficiency and production [1]. Without effective scale control, this can lead to the eventual shutdown of the plant for cleaning. The scales that are generally encountered can be divided into two main classes: (1) alkaline scales, e.g., calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide and (2) non-alkaline scales, e.g., cal- cium sulphate.

Presented at the Conference on Desalination and the Environment, Las Palmas, Gran Canaria, 9–12 November, 1999. European Desalination Society and the International Water Association.

0011-9164/98/$09.50 © 1998 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved

64

S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74

The alkaline scales result from the thermal de- composition of bicarbonate ion present in sea- water.

2HCO 3 -

====> CO 3 2- + H 2 O + CO 2

(1)

The calcium ions present in the seawater react with the carbonate ions to form calcium carbon- ate.

Ca 2+ + CO 3 2- ====> CaCO 3

(2)

Furthermore, the carbonate formed in reaction (1) may react with water in the following manner:

CO 3 2- + H 2 O ====> CO 2 + 2OH -

(3)

The hydroxyl ions formed can react with magne- sium present in the seawater to form magnesium hydroxide:

Mg 2+ + 2OH - ====> Mg(OH) 2

(4)

The rate of formation of calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide in seawater depends on temperature, pH, concentration of bicarbonate ions, rate of CO 2 release, concentration of Ca 2+ and Mg 2+ ions, and total dissolved solids. Calcium carbonate is the major scale that is formed up to a seawater temperature of 90°C, whereas magne- sium hydroxide is mainly formed above tempera- tures of 95–100°C. This is due to the increase in formation of hydroxyl ions with increasing tem- perature [see Eq. (3)]. Also, calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide possess low solubilities and have an inverse solubility, that is with in- creasing temperature their solubility decreases. The non-alkaline scale found is calcium sul- phate which exists in three forms: anhydrite (CaSO 4 ), hemihydrate (CaSO 4 1/2H 2 O) and dihy- drate (CaSO 2 2H 2 O). All these forms of calcium

sulphate are more soluble than calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide, and will form when the seawater is supersaturated with respect to calcium sulphate. Marshall and Slusher [2] determined the solu- bilities of the three forms of calcium sulphate at different temperatures and different seawater concentration factors. These results may be used to estimate under what conditions an MSF plant can be operated before calcium sulphate scaling becomes a problem. Hence in most MSF plants, calcium sulphate scaling is prevented by con- trolling the temperature and concentration factor

of the brine within the precipitation limits, that is

a maximum temperature of 120°C and a concen-

tration factor of 2 based on standard seawater. Another foulant that can occur is by the in- gress of fine silt usually when the seabed is dis- turbed during rough sea conditions, dredging activities, etc. [3]. This increases the suspended solids content of the feed seawater and can cause blockages of pumps, pipework and deposition on heat transfer surfaces. The silt can also combine with calcium carbonate and/or magnesium hy- droxide forming a mixed scale. In addition, some antiscalants adhere strongly to silt by adsorption, hence reducing the concentration of the additive in the bulk solution to control chemical fouling, e.g., calcium carbonate and magnesium hydrox-

ide. This could lead to severe fouling of the plant

if the additive concentration is not increased.

To control this scaling problem on heat trans- fer surfaces in MSF and MED plants, the follow- ing methods may be used: (a) acid treatment, (b) additive treatment, and (c) mechanical cleaning. The first method involves the addition of acid which undergoes the following reactions:

HCO 3 - + H + ====> H 2 O + CO 2

This method of scale control is effective but has a number of drawbacks. These are:

S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74

65

1. Stoichiometric amounts of acid must be

added to the seawater; usually a large quantity of

acid is required and is hazardous.

2. Addition of excess acid would give rise to

corrosion problems [4].

3. From Eq. (5), large volumes of CO 2 are re-

leased, hence additional equipment in the form of

a decarbonator is required to remove the CO 2

produced. Due to these drawbacks, the second method is more practical. Chemical additives are used to control the formation of scale by having threshold, crystal growth inhibition and crystal distortion properties. The threshold properties may be de- fined as maintaining the calcium and magnesium ions in solution. Some of these threshold additives have a marked effect on the crystal habit of the

scaling compound, such that the crystal either stops growing or is distorted. The distorted crys- tals are less likely to adhere to each other and to metal surfaces. Polymers based on polycarboxylic acid type chemistry also have the additional ad- vantage of having dispersion properties of calcium carbonate, magnesium hydroxide and silt. Poly- mers can adsorb onto the particulate surfaces and impart a like charge, hence repelling neighbouring particles, thereby keeping the particles suspended

in solution.

The chemical additives that are currently in use have one or more of these properties. These are polyphosphates, phosphonates, polyacrylates

and polymaleates. They are either used on their own or in combination with a mechanical cleaning method, namely sponge ball cleaning. The latter method removes any soft scale (which is formed

in the presence of an additive) that is deposited on

a heat transfer surface [5,6]. Polyphosphates are rarely used in MSF and

MED plants as these tend to cause additional scale

in the form of thick muddy deposits [7] as calcium

phosphate or mixed scale including phosphate ions, which can strongly adhere to the heat trans-

fer surfaces and is difficult to remove.

In this study a new range of antifoulants, en- hanced maleates [8], have been studied and com-

pared to the conventional additives currently in use. In order to compare these additives, a number of tests were designed to provide not only the performance characteristics of the individual additive but also to identify the key mechanism by which these additives retard scale under desalina-

tion conditions.

The objective of this work was to generate per-

formance profiles of individual additives such that

the appropriate additive can be matched to the

fouling characteristics of the desalination plant

and field tested on MSF and MED plants.

2. Experimental

2.1. Calcium carbonate deposition test This test measures the additives’ ability to control calcium carbonate deposition by three mechanisms: (1) threshold, (2) nucleation at the heated metal surface and (3) crystal growth inhi-

bition at the metal surface. This test method utilizes a synthetic seawater (Table 1). This water, containing an additive, is pumped at constant flow rate through a coil 1.1

mm (ID) 316 stainless steel capillary tube

Table 1

Synthetic seawater chemistry used in calcium carbonate deposition test

Calcium, mg/l as Ca 2+ Magnesium, mg/l as Mg 2+ Chloride, mg/l as Cl - Sodium, mg/l as Na + Carbonate, mg/l as CO 3 Sulphate, mg/l as SO 4 Potassium, mg/l as K + Total dissolved solids, mg/l pH

2-

2-

400

1,200

18,711

10,522

184

2,623

395

34,037

8.6

66

S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74

6 6 S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74 Fig. 1. Calcium carbonate deposition

Fig. 1. Calcium carbonate deposition test rig.

immersed in water bath at 90°C. Any calcium carbonate deposition reduces the bore of the tube and causes an increase in pumping pressure. The rate of change in pressure across the capillary tube was monitored by a pressure transducer and plot- ted against time on a chart recorder. Two mg/l of additive was maintained during the test, and the time to reach a ΔP of 1psi (6.895kPa) was meas- ured. The set-up of this equipment is shown in Fig. 1. The greater the time to reach ΔP of 1psi, the better the additive at controlling calcium carbonate deposition.

2.2. Calcium carbonate crystal growth inhibition test This test is designed to measure the additives’ ability to stop the growth of calcium carbonate crystals in the bulk solution phase. A 100 cm 3 synthetic water (Table 2) containing 20mg of calcium carbonate crystals was placed in a water bath at 85°C for 30 min. The solution was filtered through a 0.45 µ filter and the soluble calcium determined in the filtrate by titration with EDTA. This test was repeated with 4 mg/l additive pres-

ent. Also a standard solution was made containing no carbonate ions and the above test repeated. To calculate the percentage inhibition of each addi- tive, the following equation was used:

% inhibition = ([Ca 2+ ] Additive - [Ca 2+ ] Blank /

[Ca 2+ ] Standard - [Ca 2+ ] Blank ) × 100

where [Ca 2+ ] Additive is the concentration of soluble Ca 2+ in an additive-containing solution (mg/l),

Table 2 Synthetic seawater chemistry used in the crystal growth inhibition test

Calcium, mg/l as Ca 2+ Magnesium, mg/l as Mg 2+ Chloride, mg/l as Cl - Sodium, mg/l as Na + Carbonate, mg/l as CO 3 Total dissolved solids, mg/l pH

2-

125

375

19,290

11,940

181

31,911

8.8

S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74

67

[Ca 2+ ] Standard is the concentration of soluble Ca 2+ in a standard solution (mg/l), and [Ca 2+ ] Blank is the concentration of soluble Ca in a blank solution (mg/l). The higher the percentage inhibition, the better the crystal growth inhibition of calcium carbonate.

In addition, the blank solution was repeated and then filtered through a 0.45µ filter and the deposit collected, then dried in an oven at 50°C for 48h. This deposit was analyzed by x-ray pow- der diffraction and was found to be brucite.

2.3. Magnesium hydroxide inhibition test

This test measures the threshold properties of additives to control magnesium hydroxide. One thousand cm 3 seawater (Table 3) was heated to 90°C while the pH was maintained at 8 throughout the 30 min test. The turbidity of the solution at the end of the test was measured using a Hach spectrophotometer. The above test was repeated with 10 mg/l additive present; hence, the lower the turbidity reading obtained with an addi- tive, the greater the inhibition to magnesium hydroxide. The percentage inhibition was cal- culated using the following equation:

% inhibition = 100 - K

where

K = (T Additive - T Standard )/(T Blank - T Standard ) × 100

and T Additive is the turbidity of the additive solution (NTU), T Standard the standard solution (NTU), and T Blank the blank solution (NTU).

Table 3 Analysis of natural seawater

2.4. Mixed calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide scale dispersancy test

The ability of additives to suspend particles of calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide is measured in this test. A mixed calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide scale was prepared by circulating 5l of seawater (Table 3) over a 316 stainless steel heat exchanger at 90°C for 4 days, and the seawater volume was maintained by ad- justing for any loss due to evaporation. Through- out the 4 days, the seawater pH was maintained at 8.5 and the bulk solution temperature was main- tained at 85°C. One hundred cm 3 of this solution was filtered through a 0.45µ filter and the deposit stored at 50°C for 48h. This deposit was analyzed by x-ray powder diffraction and found to be a mixed scale of calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide. One hundred cm 3 of this solution was placed in a Hach spectrophotometer and the turbidity followed over 30 min. This test was the blank run. This was repeated, except that the solution con- tained 10 mg/l additive. The greater the turbidity maintained by the additive, the higher the disper- sancy. The equation used to calculate the percent- age efficiency of the additives is shown below:

Calcium, mg/l as Ca 2+ Magnesium, mg/l as Mg 2+ Chloride, mg/l as Cl - Sodium, mg/l as Na + Carbonate, mg/l as CO 3 Sulphate, mg/l as SO 4 Potassium, mg/l as K + Total dissolved solids, mg/l pH

2-

2-

460 % efficiency = (Td Additive - Td Blank ) /

(Td Standard - Td Blank ) × 100

1,368

19,850

10,802

124 where Td Additive is the turbidity of the additive

containing solution (NTU), Td Standard is the turbid- ity of start of the test (NTU), and Td Blank is the turbidity of blank solution (NTU).

8.4

35,682

428

2,650

The higher the percentage efficiency obtained

68

S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74

by an additive, the better the dispersion activity to mixed calcium carbonate and magnesium hy- droxide scale.

2.5. Calcium sulphate inhibition test

This test measures the threshold properties of additives to control calcium sulphate. A 100 cm 3 of synthetic water containing 2495 mg/l calcium and 7200 mg/l sulphate (full water chemistry is in

Table 4 Synthetic water chemistry used in calcium sulphate inhibition test

Calcium, mg/l as Ca 2+ Sodium, mg/l as Na + Sulphate, mg/l as SO 4 Chloride, mg/l as Cl - Total dissolved solids, mg/l pH

2-

2,495

6,398

2,702

19,290

35,385

8–8.5

Table 5

Additives

Abbreviation Chemical type

Commercial

product

PMA-1

Homopolymer of

Belgard EV

polymaleic acid

PMA-2

Terpolymer of

Belgard EV2000

polymaleic acid

PMA-3

Copolymer of

Sokalan PM10i,

polymaleic acid

Kao KC550

EM-1

Polycarboxylic acid

Belgard EV2030,

 

Belgard EV2035

EM-2

Polycarboxylic acid

Belgard EV2050

PAA

Polyacrylate

Degussa

 

POC 2020

P-NATE

Phosphonate

Albrivap DSB,

Aquamax LT-19

Table 4) was stored at 70°C for 24 h. This test was repeated with the additive under test. Also a standard solution was made containing no sul- phate ions. The solutions were filtered through a 0.45 µ filter and the soluble calcium determined by titration with EDTA. The percentage inhibi- tion is calculated using the equation given in the calcium carbonate crystal inhibition test.

2.6. Additives tested in this study

The additives [3,9–12] evaluated in this study are given in the Table 5.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Calcium carbonate control

3.1.1. Calcium carbonate deposition The results, presented in Fig. 2, show the en- hanced maleates, EM-1 and EM-2, polyacrylate and phosphonate, to be good inhibitors of the deposition of calcium carbonate on a heat ex- changer surface. The mechanism by which cal- cium carbonate deposition is controlled by these additives is predominantly by threshold and re- tarding the nucleation of calcium carbonate nuclei on the heated metal surface, whereas the maleates PMA-l, PMA-2 and PMA-3 show poor deposition control of calcium carbonate.

3.1.2. Calcium carbonate crystal growth inhi- bition The results in Fig. 3 show that PMA-1 and PMA-2 have excellent crystal growth inhibition to calcium carbonate compared to PMA-3. This suggests that not all polymaleates have the same crystal growth inhibition properties in the bulk solution phase. The enhanced maleates both show crystal growth inhibition properties, but EM-1 is almost twice as effective as EM-2. The poly- acrylate has poor inhibition and the phosphonate has mediocre crystal growth inhibition to calcium carbonate.

S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74

69

S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74 6 9 Fig. 2. Calcium carbonate deposition

Fig. 2. Calcium carbonate deposition control.

63–74 6 9 Fig. 2. Calcium carbonate deposition control. Fig. 3. Calcium carbonate crystal growth inhibition.

Fig. 3. Calcium carbonate crystal growth inhibition.

Overall, the two tests show all the additives tested can control calcium carbonate deposition but the mechanism by which they function varies. The additive that demonstrates the best calcium carbonate control is EM-1, closely followed by

EM-2.

3.2. Magnesium hydroxide control

This test was developed to measure the differ- ences in threshold activity between additives to control magnesium hydroxide deposition. The results, presented in Fig. 4, indicate that EM-1

and PMA-3 have excellent magnesium hydroxide control. The polyacrylate and PMA-1 have me- diocre magnesium hydroxide control. No magne- sium hydroxide control is found with PMA-2, EM-2 and phosphonate. Hence PMA-2, EM-2 and the phosphonate would not control magnesium hydroxide deposition by the threshold mechanism.

3.3. Dispersion properties

The dispersion properties of additives become essential if the saturation index of a brine for calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide are

70

S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74

7 0 S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74 Fig. 4. Inhibition of magnesium

Fig. 4. Inhibition of magnesium hydroxide.

(1999) 63–74 Fig. 4. Inhibition of magnesium hydroxide. Fig. 5. Dispersion of mixed calcium carbonate and

Fig. 5. Dispersion of mixed calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide scale.

very high, so that precipitation would occur rap- idly, then threshold inhibitors are likely to be less effective compared to additives with good disper- sion properties. A mixed scale of calcium carbonate and mag- nesium hydroxide was prepared in situ from natural seawater in a small recirculating rig with a heat exchanger to mimic the type of scale found in a desalination plant [13]. The additives evalu- ated in this dispersancy test is presented in Fig. 5. The results indicate that PMA-2, PMA-3, EM-1 and EM-2 have excellent dispersion properties to

the mixed scale. PMA-1 shows mediocre disper- sion properties, whereas the poly-acrylate and phosphonate have very little or no dispersion properties.

3.4. Calcium sulphate control Calcium sulphate starts to form in a desali- nation plant if the concentration factor of the brine is increased and/or top brine temperature is high. Therefore, additives used in desalination plants should possess some activity to control calcium sulphate.

S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74

71

S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74 7 1 Fig. 6. Inhibition of calcium

Fig. 6. Inhibition of calcium sulphate.

Additives were evaluated for calcium sulphate inhibition, and the results are presented in Fig. 6. The best calcium sulphate inhibitor is PMA-1, whereas PMA-2, EM-1 and EM-2 show mediocre calcium sulphate inhibition properties. Less than 20% calcium sulphate inhibition is obtained with PMA-3, polyacrylate [14] and phosphonate. The last three additives should not be used for calcium sulphate control.

3.5. Performance profiles The test data were used to generate perfor- mance profiles of individual additives using radar diagrams. The larger the area occupied by the additives, the better the multi-functional scale control properties. Fig. 7 shows the comparison of PMA-1 with PMA-2. This profile clearly shows that PMA-1 is better overall than PMA-2, but PMA-2 has better dispersion properties. Both products would be used differently, i.e., PMA-1 in high-temperature MSF plants where both calcium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide control is required, and PMA-2 in low-temperature MSF plants where calcium carbonate inhibition and dispersion prop- erties from the additive would be required.

Fig. 8 shows that PMA-3 is significantly dif- ferent from PMA-1 as it has very good dispersion and magnesium hydroxide properties but poor calcium carbonate and calcium sulphate control. PMA-3 would be used in high- temperature plants but would rely predominantly on its dispersive properties to control calcium carbonate and would not be used when calcium sulphate is likely to form. Fig. 9 shows that EM-1 has superior multi- functional properties compared to PMA-1 to control calcium carbonate and magnesium hy- droxide but slightly lower activity against calcium sulphate. This would suggest that EM-1 would make an excellent inhibitor for high temperature MSF plants where calcium carbonate and magne- sium hydroxide would be the predominant scale likely to occur. Fig. 10 shows that EM-2 has excellent calcium carbonate deposition control and disper-sancy but poor magnesium hydroxide control. Hence, EM-2 would be used in low-temperature plants where calcium carbonate control is required. Fig. 11 shows the polyacrylate to be a good calcium carbonate deposition control agent and magnesium hydroxide inhibitor. Again, with polyacrylate, the top brine temperature of MSF

72

S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74

7 2 S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74 Fig. 7. Performance profiles of
7 2 S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74 Fig. 7. Performance profiles of

Fig. 7. Performance profiles of PMA-1 and PMA-2.

Fig. 8. Performance profiles of PMA-1 and PMA-3.

and PMA-2. Fig. 8. Performance profiles of PMA-1 and PMA-3. Fig. 9. Performance profiles of PMA-1
and PMA-2. Fig. 8. Performance profiles of PMA-1 and PMA-3. Fig. 9. Performance profiles of PMA-1

Fig. 9. Performance profiles of PMA-1 and EM-1.

Fig. 10. Performance profiles of PMA-1 and EM-2.

plant would be restricted such that calcium sul- phate control is not required and dispersion of either mixed scale or silt is not required. Fig. 12 shows the phosphonate to be a good calcium carbonate inhibitor but has virtually no dispersion properties and should be restricted to use in low-temperature plants. However, if disper- sion properties are required in a low- temperature plant, then the phosphonate would not be suitable. This analysis clearly shows that EM-1 has the best performance profile for scale control in current high temperature MSF plant and EM-2

has the best performance profile for use in current MED plants.

4. Field trials

To follow-up on the laboratory data on the enhanced maleates, EM-1 and EM-2, the follow- ing trials were conducted:

4.1. MSF

The field trial was carried out for 6 months in a longitudinal MSF unit (24 stages in five

S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74

73

S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74 7 3 Fig. 11. Performance profiles of
S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74 7 3 Fig. 11. Performance profiles of

Fig. 11. Performance profiles of PMA-1 and polyacrylate.

Fig. 12. Performance profiles of PMA-1 and phos- phonate.

Fig. 12. Performance profiles of PMA-1 and phos- phonate. Fig. 13. Heat transfer coefficient for HIS.

Fig. 13. Heat transfer coefficient for HIS. Six-month operation with 2 mg/l EM-1.

modules, the first module consisting of six stages, the next three modules consisting of five stages each, with the last module consisting of three stages, which is designated as the heat rejection section) in Saudi Arabia operating at 110°C top brine temperature, 23,000 m 3 /d distillate pro- duction, recycle brine concentration ratio of 1.3, EM-1 dose rate of 2 mg/l and ball cleaning two times per week (nine cycles/operation). The heat transfer data collected are shown in Fig. 13. A deterioration of heat transfer indicates scaling on heat transfer surfaces. Fig. 13 indicates an initial gradual drop in heat transfer over the

first 18 days but then is constant for the remaining period of the test. This would be a typical profile that is found in all plants if good scale control is achieved. This indicates that some scale is initially formed, but then no further deposition occurred during the test period. This was confirmed in the visual inspection of the brine heater at the end of the field trial. In addition, the GOR in Fig. 14 increases with time, indicating increase in pro- duction of distillate. This improvement may be due to the seawater temperature increase and reduction in condensate temperature.

74

S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74

7 4 S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74 Fig. 14. GOR. Six-month operation

Fig. 14. GOR. Six-month operation with 2 mg/l EM-1.

63–74 Fig. 14. GOR. Six-month operation with 2 mg/l EM-1. Fig. 15. GOR. 4 ppm (for

Fig. 15. GOR. 4 ppm (for 51 days), then 3 mg/l of EM-2.

The results from plant performance and visual inspection at the end of the field trial showed EM- 1 to be a very effective antifoulant.

4.2. MED

A field trial was conducted on a 12-effect desalination unit with thermocompression in Europe for 12 months, producing 8000 m 3 /d

distillate water at a top brine temperature of 62°C [15]. The ejectocompressors are fed with 43 bar steam raised by dedicated boilers. EM-2 was dosed at 3 mg/l. The results in Fig. 15 show the GOR remains virtually constant throughout the test period. Visual inspection was carried out at the end of the field trial, and the evaporator cells including the heat exchanger tubes were found to be clean.

S. Patel, M.A. Finan / Desalination 124 (1999) 63–74

75

The results from these extended field evalua- tions have confirmed the initial laboratory results that EM-1 is an excellent antifoulant for high- temperature MSF plants and EM-2 is an excellent antifoulant for MED plants.

5. Conclusions

The laboratory investigation shows that addi- tives vary in performance depending on the type of mechanisms by which they function to control or retard scale formation. The enhanced maleates were found to be superior antifoulants compared to those currently available commercially. The enhanced maleates can be differentiated since EM-1 has all the multi-functional properties required to control deposition and can be used in high-temperature plants. EM-2 has excellent calcium carbonate inhibition and dispersion prop- erties and hence can be used in low-temperature plants. The extended field trials for EM-1 and EM-2 demonstrate their in use scale control per- formance and confirm the initial laboratory re- sults.

References

[1] S.M. Zubair, M.O. Budair and A.A. Al-Shakhs, AES, 27 (1992) 279. [2] W.L. Marshall and J. Slusher, J. Chem. Eng. Data, 13(1) (1968) 183. [3] Y. Fukumoto, K. Isobe, N. Moriyama and F. Pujo- das, Desalination, 83 (1991) 65. [4] O.D. Linnikov, V.L. Podbereznyi, E.A. Anokhina, and O.V. Guseva, Desalination, 89 (1993) 311. [5] H. Bohmer, Desalination, 93 (1993) 171. [6] F. Al-Bakeri and H. El Hares, Desalination, 92 (1993) 353. [7] A.M. Shams El Din, Desalination, 61 (1987) 89. [8] S. Patel and M.J. Lees, EP-818423, 1998. [9] M.A. Finan, S. Smith, C.K. Evans and J.W.H. Muir, Desalination, 73 (1989) 341. [10] S. Al-Zahrani, A.M. Al-Ajlan and A.M. Al-Jardan, Desalination, 97 (1994) 17. [11] S.A. Al-Saleh and A.R. Khan, Desalination, 97 (1994) 87. [12] S.A. Al-Saleh and A.R. Khan, Desalination, 97 (1994) 97. [13] M. Al-Ahmed and F.A. Aleem, Desalination, 93 (1993) 287. [14] M.C. Van Der Leeden and G.M. Van Rosmalen, Desalination, 66 (1987) 185. [15] C. Temstet, G. Canton, J. Laborie and A. Durante, Desalination, 105 (1996) 109.