DESALINATION

ELSEVIER

Desalination 157 (2003) 151-158

www.elsevier.com/locate/desal

Energy consumption and membrane replacement cost for

seawater RO desalination plants
S.A. Avlonitis*, K. Kouroumbas, N. Vlachakis
Department oJ Mechanical Engineering, Technological Educational Institution (T E.l.) o f Halkidas,
34400 Psaxna Evia, Greece
Tel. + 30 (228) 99655; Fax ~ 30 (228) 99655; email: savlon@teihal.gr

Received 12 January 2003; accepted 20 January 2003

Abstract

The aim of this work is to assess and evaluate the energy and the membrane replacement cost for the seawater
reverse osmosis (SWRO) plants. As a result of that, suggestions are given for energy cost reduction as well as
optimum membrane cleaning procedure. A detailed comparative study was conducted for the energy recovery systems
for SWRO plants available in the market. The energy cor~sumption was measured in relation with other operating
factors such as recovery, feed concentration, productiviW, temperature, etc. All the data were collected from existing
SWRO plants in different locations in Greece under real operating conditions. Four different energy recovery systems,
which are used in seawater SWRO plants, were examined. These are the classical Pelton wheel, the turbocharger,
the pressure exchanger and the Pelton wheel introduced by Grundfos company. The above energy recovery systems
have been applied in small and medium size RO plants commissioned by different companies. The deterioration of
the membrane performance is an actual fact leading after 2-5 years to the replacement of the membranes with a
considerable cost. The lifetime of the membranes is greatly effected by the feed water quality and the pretreatment
process. It was found that the normal cleaning procedure, which is recommended by the SWRO plant builders and
the membrane makers, gives poor results especially for small size SWRO plants, with severe bio-fouling problems.
As it is presented in this work, in some cases, destruction of the membrane modules is the result of severe biofouling. In this work data of the performance of the membranes before and after the cleaning procedure are presented
and a different cleaning procedure is recommended. The later is based on the combination of hydrodynamic and
chelnical cleaning of the membranes, resulting in great improvement of the membranes performance. This cleaning
procedure will extend the lifetime of the membranes and reduce the membrane replacement expenditures.
K,words: Reverse osmosis plants; Energy consumption; Membrane cleaning; Maintenance

*Corresponding author.
Presented at the EzlropeaJl Conjerence on Desalination and the Environment: Fresh Water for All, Malta, 4-8 A4cLv2003.
European Desalination SocieO~, lnlernatio~tal Water Association.

0011-9164/03/$-- See fiont matter 2003 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved
PIE S0011-9164(03)00395-3

152

S.A. Avlonitis et al. /Desalination 157 (2003) 151-158

1. Introduction

The two main factors of the water production

cost in SWRO plants are the energy cost and the
membranes replacement cost, contributing almost
50% of the total water production cost, especially
for small size SWRO [1 ]. The increasing demand
for more fresh water is pushing the industry to
improve the operational efficiency of the SWRO
desalination plants and increase the lifetime of
the membranes.
The seawater desalination energy consumption
depends on several factors such as:
The concentration of feed water
The method of desalination
The physicM and chemical characteristics o f
feed water
The existence and the type of the energy
recovery system
The operating conditions
The location of the desalination plant
The capacity of the plant
On top of all these the availability and the cost
of energy is a crucial factor
The theoretical mechanical work per cubic
meter of desalinated water (specific work), under
reversible conditions, for desalination of seawater
is estimated to be less than 1 kWh/m 3 [2,3],
regardless of the desalination method. However,
the actual desalination specific work in any desalination method is much higher than 1 kWh/m 3. If
the irreversibility of the process is taken into
account, for seawater, the specific work depends
on the type of the desalination process and varies
from 0.9834 kWh/m 3 to 12.87 kWh/m 3 for
electrodialysis. The specific work for desalination
in an MSF plant in Kuwait has been calculated
between 22.2 kWh/m 3 to 40 kWh/m 3 [4]. Even for
the dual-purpose plants the energy requirements
have been found to be in the range of 1622 kWh/m 3 [5]. N.M. Wade [6] has concluded that
the for desalination plants with a capacity of
31,822 m3/d the energy consumptions for different
thermal desalination processes are: 51.7 kWh/m ~

for multistage flush distillation (MSF), 45 kWh/in 3

for multi effect distillation (MED) and 8 6.7 kWh/m 3 for reverse osmosis (RO). In a seawater distillation plant coupled to a combined
cycle steam turbine power generating plant, with
capacity o f 283,875 mVd, the specific energy
consumption was found to be 6.76 kWh/m 3 [7].
On the other hand, ifa membrane method is used
for desalination (reverse osmosis), with energy
recovery system installed, the specific work has
been found to be 5.09 kWh/m 3 [4]. The data
presented show a great difference in energy
consumption between the distillation and membrane
methods. However, the comparison of the figures
of the desalination energy consumption for the
two methods is misleading. For the distillation
methods the energy is the equivalent actual fuel
energy though for reverse osmosis is the electricity
energy. Ira reasonable efficiency coefficient 0.33
is assumed for the production of electricity energy
from fuels then the specific work for reverse
osmosis for the above example should be tripled
leading to 15.27 kWh/m 3. It can be concluded that
in any case the energy consumption in SWRO
plants is much less than in seawater distillation
plants.
More data for the desalination energy consumption have been presented by G.F. Leitner [8]
where the energy consumption for SWRO plants
is between 3.7-5.3 kWh/m 3. In Denmark the
seawater should be preheated resulting to a higher
specific energy consumption, 8.3 kWh/m 3, for a
SWRO plant [9]. In several SWRO plants in
Greece the specific energy consumption has been
estimated about 5 kWh/m 3 [1]. The use o f high
rejection and high flow membranes in a SWRO
plant and the two passes treatment led to an actual
consumption in the order of 3.6-3.7 kWh/m 3 [10].
The more important part in any SWRO plant
as far as the energy consumption is concerned is
the energy recovery system. Most of the commercially available energy recovery systems will
be e x a m i n e d and an a s s e s s m e n t for their
efficiency will be made. However, for small size

153

S.A. Avlonitis et al. /Desalination 157 (2003) 151-158

SWRO plants, capacity less than 100 m3/d, the

capital cost of energy recovery systems is prohibitive and the energy consumption is more than
10 kWh/m 3. In this case special pumps can be used
[11 ] to reduce the specific energy to 3.5 kWh/m 3.
For larger plants the speed controlled pumps [12]
can be used to reduce the energy cost.
AN the membrane producers give very detailed
instruction for the treatment and operation of their
products. To increase the efficiency and to ensure
the life time of the membranes, effective pretreatment of the feed water is required. The proper
pretreatment will maximize the efficiency of the
process and increase membrane life by minimizing
scaling formation, fouling deposition and membrane
degradation
The net result of the pretreatment will be the
optimization of:
Product flow
Salt rejection
Product recovery
Operating and membrane replacement cost
Different pretreatment methods have been
used [13], which can be summarized to:
Coagulation
Filtration with media, carbon and cartridge
filters
Scale control by acid, antiscalants dosing,
softening by cation exchange resin, lime
softening and adjustment of operating variable
Ch Iorination-dechlorination

However, most of the times the pretreatment

method is not completely sufficient so that membrane cleaning procedures should be applied. Tile
membranes should be cleaned whenever:
The normalized permeate flow drops by 10%.
The normalized salt content of the product water
increases by 10%.
The differential pressure (feed pressure-brine
pressure) increases by 15% from the reference
normal operating conditions.
Different chemicals are used for membrane
cleaning [14], which are acid or alkaline cleaners
or others under brand names. The cleaning solution
is pumped from the cleaning tank to the membranes, it is recycled for a period of time and
finally it is drained out o f the system.
2. S e a w a t e r R O plants in G r e e c e

There are several SWRO plants located in

different Greek islands under the supervis.ion of
local authorities. These plants with the operational
characteristics are presented in Table 1.
Although the above plants appear to have
different structural and operational characteristics,
"they have something in common. They are small
and medium size, located mainly in remote island
areas. Another important aspect of the operation
of these plants is the period of time that they are
in operation. For Oia and Ios plants the operation
period is 50% of their maximum capacity because

Table 1
Reverse osmosis plants in Greece
Location
Oia
Oia
Oia

Capacity, Type of
m3/d
membranes
400
FilmTec
180
FilmTec
300
FilmTec

Recovery, Operating
%
pressure, bar
33
62
40
61
28
59

Permeate
quality,!aS/cm
700
700
450

los
lthaki
Syros
Mykonos

500
600
580
500

40
25
38
23

800
900
250
430

Osmonics
B-10 DuPont
FilmTec
B-10 DuPont

67
71
56
70

Temperature,Energy recovery
C
system
25-27
Pelton wheel
25-27
Turbo charger
25-27
Pelton wheel,
Grundfos
25-27
PX-60
25-27
Pelton wheel
25-27
Pelton wheel
25-27
Pelton wheel

154

S.A. Avlonitis el al. / Desalination 157 (2003) 151-158

of the seasonal demand of water. This has a

significant effect on the water cost and the life
time of the membranes [ 1].
3. Energy recovery systems and specific energy

consumption
The SWRO desalination is an energy intensive
process because of the low recovery ratio (2540%) and the high operating pressure (60-80 bar).
Consequently the industry is in continues effort
to recover the naaximum possible energy from the
disposed brine. In the early days of the desalination indnstry the energy recovery system in use
for the SWRO was the Pelton wheel, converting
the hydraulic energy of the rejected brine into
rotational energy, which is delivered in the form
of mechanical shaft power helping to drive the
motor of the high pressure pump (Fig. 1). The
recommended energy saving is about 40%. In any
case the percentage of the energy recovery depends
on several factors, such as the capacity of the
plant, the recovery ratio, the operating pressure
etc. The Pelton wheel is in operation when the
by-pass valve-2 is closed. Valve-I controls the
recovery ratio of the operation, and the flow rate
of the brine passing through the Pelton wheel. It
is apparent that the applied high pressure is
controlled by valve-1. When valve-I is turned to

HP
Feed pump
water D _ . _ Q ~ ~ . ~ ~ . . . . . - . - " " ~
ROelements
Motor

close the pressure and the recovery ratio are

increased. It is interesting to be mentioned that
the higher the pressure the better the quality and
higher the permeate flow. On the other hand, the
higher the recovery ratio the poorer the quality of
the produced water.
In order to assess the efficiency of any recovery
system, the total energy consumption in each
different plant has to be found for a long period
of time and the specific energy consumption could
be calculated in k w h per m 3 of potable water. This
consumption is the total energy which is spent
for the desalination process, including energy consumption for dosing pumps, cleaning pump etc.
A different version of the Pelton wheel has
been introduced by Grundfos. The Pelton wheel
is driving the shaft of a multistage centrifugal
booster pump which is connected in series with
another high pressure pump. This gives energy
savings up to 34%. The design of the system of
the two pumps is illustrated in Fig. 2. It must be
noticed that when the recovery ratio is increased,
by closing valve-2, the applied total high pressure
is decreased. As a result of that the increase of
the permeate flow rate can be achieved in
accordance to low recovery ratio. The obvious
results of such a design is the better quality o f the
permeate combined with high applied pressure
and low recovery ratio.

RO elements Permeate
Penneate
Valve-I
~HPpump
Motor

,..-.-..- ~

Turbine
pump
Brine

}.

to disposali~

tpwu~i~i~LV a l v e _ _
By-pass

Valve-2

Fig. 1. Pelton wheel energy recoveU system.

Feed
water

I -"~

"/

L~

[
Valve-2
Pelton

[ wheel
turbine

[ Brineto
i disposal

Fig. 2. Grundfos Pelton wheel energy recovery system.

155

S.A. Avlonitis et al. / Desalination 157 (2003) 151-158

A more efficient, flexible and simple energy

recovery system has been introduced by different
companies and is commonly referred to as turbo
charger [15]. These devices are centrifugal in
nature and the energy saving is achieved because
the high pressure pumps operates in smaller pressure (Fig. 3). The brine pressure energy is returned
by the turbo charger in the form of a boost in the
pressure of the feed stream. The turbo charger is
located between the HP pump and the membranes
replacing the brine control valve.
The energy recovery system which uses the
principles o f the positive displacement are
commonly referred as pressure exchangers, FX.
These systems transfer the energy in the reject
stream direct to the new seawater stream. This
direct connection allows a real net energy transfer
efficiency from the reject stream to the feed stream
of over 95%. The energy shaving is achieved by
reducing the volumetric output o f the high
pressure pump (Fig. 4).
All the above mentioned energy recovery
systems for RO plants have been examined
thoroughly for long period of time and energy
consumption data were collected for one month
in August. At the period of the data collection the
recovery ratio, the applied pressure, the feed
solution and the temperature were constant, as
they have been presented in Table 1. Their efficiency has been evaluated using the specific energy
consumption (Table 2).

RO elements
[---..~ ~ ~
Feed puHmPp
water ~
~t ~ 1 ~
~'~'/~q'~

,--1 [
I I
I

I [.~
i I ~
[ ~...~

-I~ permeate

Bri,~e
to disposal

Hydraulic
Turbo

Charger

Fig. 3. Turbo charger energy recovery system.

Perrneate
water

pmnp

Booster
pump

PE
~

Feed
solution

high
pressure

Brine
low
pressure

Fig. 4. Pressure exchanger energy recovery system.

The analysis indicates that the most efficient
energy recovery system is the pressure exchanger.
If the recovery ratio is taken into account and the
specific energy is divided by the recovery ratio,
then the energy consumption per m 3 and recovery
ratio is more in favor o f the pressure exchanger
and the turbo charger energy recovery systems.
The higher specific energy consumption was

Table 2
Specific energy consumption for SWRO plants
Location

Production, Power of the

m3
~ pump,
kW
Oia
12,000
110
Oia
5,400
75
Oia
9,000
75
los
14,880
75
lthaki
9,275
200
Syros
17,856
110
Mykonos 15,000
160

Energyrecovery system Energy

consumption,
kWh
Pelton wheel
55,200
Turbo charger
25, l l 0
Pelton wheel, Grundfos 47,563
PX-60
45,073
Pelton wheel
87,000
Pelton wheel
109,992
Pelton wheel
125,350

Specific energy
consum3ption,
kWh/m
4.60
4.65
5.28
3.02
9.38
6.16
8.36

Recovered energy
consumption,
kWh/m~
13.93
l 1.62
18.85
7.55
37.12
16.21
36.33

156

S.A. Avlonitis" et al. /Desalination 157 (2003) 151-158

found in lthaki plant, where DuPont B-10 membranes are in use. This high energy consumption
is combined with high applied pressure and low
recovery ratio.

4. Membrane replacement cost

All tile SWRO membranes makers propose a
pretreatment procedure of the seawater and a
periodical cleaning of the membranes. The
purpose of these actions is to keep the membranes
in operation as long as possible. In Table 3 some
data are given for the membranes performance
their life-time and the replacement cost. In these
calculations the maximum actual operation time
has been set at 50% of the plants capacity for the
first two islands, though for the other three at 90%,
taking into account the seasonal demand of water
and the maintenance procedures of the plants. For
the first Oia plant the actual operation time was
only 31%. An average replacement cost for the
8-inch membranes was assumed ofC 15 00/element
for spiral-wound membranes and (~6000/element
for hollow-fiber membranes.
The data in Table 3 show clearly that the
specific membrane cost is related to the capacity
and the actual operation time of the plant. The
higher the capacity and the operation time the
lower the specific membrane cost.
The 400 m3/d plant in Oia has been monitored
for its performance for a long period of time. New
FilmTec lnembranes ( S W 3 0 H R - 8 0 4 0 ) were
installed on 29-3-99. After 10,000 h of operation

all the indications of severe foulhlg effects appeared,

such as pure permeate quality, low permeate flow
and high pressure drop along the membranes. The
normal cleaning procedure, suggested by the
manufacturer of the plant, was applied twice with
Floclean MC3 and Floclean MC 11 with no noticeable results. The fouling effects were so great that
the membrane elements burst many times (Fig. 5)
although the applied pressure never exceeded
65 bar. Seven membrane elements out of thirty
six were damaged at the high season period when
there was the maximum demand of water.
In order to solve the problem, a different
cleaning method for the membranes was applied.
Each membrane element was cleaned individually
in another pressure vessel, reversing the feed flow,
with the same chemicals, but with higher feed
flow (hydrodynamic cleaning). The cleaning flow
rate was increased from 2.9 m3/h to 8.2 m3/h. This

Fig. 5. Damaged membrane elements.

Table 3
SWRO lnembrane replacement cost
Location
Oia
Oia
Oia
Dos
Ithaki
Syros
Mykonos

Membranelife, Operation time,

years
h

Waterproduction,

4
5
5
5
5
5
5

188,383
164,250
273,750
456,250
985,500
952,650
821,250

11,303
2|,900
21,900
21,900
39,420
39,420
39,420

ITI 3

Replacementcost,
~

Specific membrane cost,

C/m3

54,000
21,000
36,000
54,000
108,000
36,000
108,000

0.29
0.13
0.13
0.12
0.11
0.04
0.13

S.A. Avlonitis et al.

Desalination 157 (2003) I51-158

flow rate is still lower than the maximum permitted

flow rate of 14 m3/h. Tile results were impressive
and are illustrated in Fig. 6 for the permeate flow
rate and in Fig. 7 for the permeate quality. In these

14000

16000
I

18000

,~

26000
110

,T,

--V-X Permeate flw 7~r

6-3-2000

~o 60

24000

--li-- Temperature

~-v~V-V'vvwV~
v
~v~

70

figures the temperature variation of the feed solution

is also presented, since it affects both permeate
flow and permeate quality.
The plant, after the hydrodynamic cleaning,

Operation time (h)

20000
22000

100

/"

9-9-2002
\~m~
v~/ \
Hydrodyn~mi~/~.m

"

157

90 C
80
E

cleaning

70
50

60

I
I

14000

16000

'

24000

26000
Fig. 6. Permeate flow rate.

Operation time (h)

18000
20000
16000
22000
24000
26000
110
I
I
I
I
I
--m-- Conductivity
~
Hydrodynamic
k
d~/ / cleaning
100
//
~'
~/1''-~

14000
1000
950
900
850
E
O
03

18000
20000
22000
Operation time (h)

800

750
~ m :/ 7 ' 0/ ~ 0

.-

qi~ I/~~/~!

._.

! i. / " / r . .

>

*5 650

\/

-'/

Y '~'

,~

~"

,T

14000

,--

-Temperature
l~r'--V

450- -v
4OO

80

ID

E
09

70

to

L) ~5o -

_ Normalcleaning

90

16000

18000
20000
22000
Operation time (h)

60

~v/
I

24000

26000
Fig. 7. Permeate quality.

158

S.A. Avlonitis et al. /Desalination 157 (2003) 151-158

is in operation for 5,000 h and its perfonnance is

excellent. The permeate quality is 600 gS/cin at
60 bar and 20C, the pressure drop along the RO
module is 2 bar and the permeate flow rate is
14.6 m3/h. This cleaning procedure is applied
every time the first indications of membranes
fouling appear.

5. Conclusions
The cost o f desalinated water was always ml
obstacle to a large expansion of the desalination
industry. The two main factors o f the total water
cost by reverse osmosis, the energy consumption
cost and the membrane replacement cost, have
been examined for small-size plants. The energy
recovery systems in the market have been investigated in several S W R O plants and a specific
e n e r g y c o n s u m p t i o n f r o m 3.02 k W h / m 3 to
9.38 kWh/m 3 has been established. The specific
membrmae replacement cost can be three times
h i g h e r for p l a n t s w h i c h are in o p e r a t i o n
periodically during the four to five years o f the
average membrane lifetime. This cost varies from
C0.04/m 3to t~0.34/m ~. The membrane replacement
cost can be lowered if a hydrodynamic cleaning
procedure is applied. It is believed that the desalination industry moves forward progressively with
more efficient energy recovery systems, better and
more resistant membranes, new membrane cleaning
chemicals and processes with a goal to produce
more and less expensive desalinated water.

References

[1} S.A. Avlonitis,Operationalwater cost and productivity

improvements for small-size desalination plants,
Desalination, t42 (2002) 295--304.

[2] K.S.Spiegler, Salt-WaterPurification.2rid ed., Plenum

Press, New York, 1977.
[3] K.S. Spiegler and Y.M. El-Sayed, The energetics of
desalinationprocesses, Desalination, 134 (2001) 109128.
[4] M.A.Darwish and F. A1-Asfour,Energy consumption
in equivalent work by different desalting methods:
case study for Kuwait, Desalination, 152 (2002) 8392.
[5] G.P. Maheshwari, M. A1-Ramadhan and M. A1Abdulhadi, Energy requirement of water production
in dual-purpose plants, Desalination, 101 (1995) 133140.
[6] N.M. Wade, Distillation plant development and cost
update, Desalination, 136 (2001) 3-12.
[7] D.W.Dean, Seawater desalination plant for Southern
California, Desalination and Water Reuse, 5(2) (1995)
19-24.
[8] G.F.Leitner, Breaking the cost barrier for seawater
desalting, Desalination and Water Reuse, 8(1 ) (1998)
15-20.
[9] S. Hinge and M. Salemsen, Seawater desalinationwins
in Denmark, Desalination and Water Reuse, 6(2)
(1996) 52-54.
[10] J.H. Redondo, Lanzarote IV, a new concept for twopass SWRO at low O&M cost using the new highflow FilmTee SW 30-380, Desalination, 138 (2001)
231-236.
[11] M. Thomson, M.S Miranda and D. Infield, A smallscale seawater reverse-osmosis system with excellent
energy efficiency over a wide operating rate,
Desalination, 153 (2002) 229-236.
[12] D.-H. Hellmann, H. Rosenberg and E.F.Tusel, Saving
of energy and cost in seawater desalination with speed
controlled pumps, Desalination, 139 (2001) 7-19.
[13] Handbook oflndustrial Membrane Technology. M.C.
Porter (Ed.), Noyes Publications, Park Ridge, New
Jersey, 1990.
[14] W. Byrne, Reverse Osmosis - - a Practical Guide for
Industrial Users, Tall Oaks Publishing Inc., 1st ed.,
1995.
[15] Technical Data and Specification Manual, Fluid
Equipment Development Co., 2002.