Cost Model for Low‐Pressure Membrane Filtration

Pickering, Karen D.; Wiesner, Mark R.

doi:10.1061/(asce)0733-9372(1993)119:5(772)

Cited by 60 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, it is viewed as desirable to maximize roll speed to increase the productivity of the extrusion. 28 As mentioned previously, however, the relationship between roll speed and membrane performance is complicated. Simply increasing the roll speed decreases the film residence in the gap between the die lips and the film pick-up rolls, but it also increases the polymer orientation and decreases the membrane thickness.…”

Section: Film Membranes From Poly(ether Ether Ketone)mentioning

confidence: 97%

Micro- and ultrafiltration film membranes from poly(ether ether ketone) (PEEK)

Sonnenschein¹

1999

J. Appl. Polym. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Film membranes from the thermoplastic poly(ether ether ketone) (PEEK) have been extruded and tested for their microfiltration and ultrafiltration performance. High-performance asymmetric membranes have been obtained by extruding polymer blends of PEEK, polysulphone, and a small molecule solvent mixture, and then by removing the polysulphone and solvent in a subsequent extraction step. The process for making ultrafiltration membranes differs from microfiltration membranes only in the relative blend components, and the temperature of the film pick-up rolls. Processing parameters with important effects on the membrane performance have been identified. Microfiltration membranes are characterized by their pore-size distributions and SEM, and ultrafiltration membranes by their rejection of bovine serum albumin, bubble point, and SEM. Composite membrane for nanofiltration utilizing the PEEK ultrafiltration membrane as a substrate performed similarly to a commercial membrane for the same purpose. This work details the best method for making PEEK film membranes published to date.

show abstract

Section: Film Membranes From Poly(ether Ether Ketone)mentioning

confidence: 97%

Micro- and ultrafiltration film membranes from poly(ether ether ketone) (PEEK)

Sonnenschein¹

1999

J. Appl. Polym. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There are several estimations for the α exponent value for pumps: α = 0.71 for MSF (Multi-Stage Flash) desalination pumps [37] and α = 0.79 for RO pumps [37,38]. Non-membrane components have been scaled for total capital cost: (for MF, UF and NF plant) α = 0.74 [39], α = 0.60 and α = 0.85 (for brackish RO) [40].…”

Section: Formulation Of the Optimization Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Assessment of an Integrated Membrane System for Secondary Effluent Polishing for Unrestricted Reuse

Bick

Gillerman

Manor

et al. 2012

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Extra treatment stages are required to polish the secondary effluent for unrestricted reuse, primarily for agricultural irrigation. Improved technology for the removal of particles, turbidity, bacteria and cysts, without the use of disinfectants is based on MicroFiltration (MF) and UltraFiltration (UF) membrane technology and in series with Reverse Osmosis (RO) for dissolved solids removal. Field experiments were conducted using a mobile UF and RO membrane pilot unit at a capacity of around 1.0 m 3 /hr. A management model was defined and tested towards optimal polishing of secondary effluent. The two major purposes of the management model are: (i) to delineate a methodology for economic assessment of optimal membrane technology implementation for secondary effluent upgrading for unrestricted use, and; (ii) to provide guidelines for optimal RO membrane selection in regards to the pretreatment stage. The defined linear model takes into account the costs of the feed secondary effluent, the UF pretreatment and the RO process. Technological constraints refer primarily to the longevity of the membrane and their performance. Final treatment cost (the objective function) includes investment,

show abstract

“…Kumar et al (2014) recently presented an analytical index for the evaluation of membrane module component of water production cost. Pickering and Wiesner (1993) presented a model of capital and operating cost of low-pressure (LP) membranes based water treatment plant. That research was followed by Owen et al (1995) who first proposed an economic assessment of membrane processes for water and wastewater treatment.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Zhu et al (2009a) further worked on optimizing and comparing two pass membrane desalination to a single pass process with the intention of reshaping the process with lower energy consumption. Park et al (2010), on the line of Pickering and Wiesner (1993) presented a stochastic model to estimate the construction and operation of a Seawater Reverse Osmosis (SWRO) desalination plant. The cost of large scale membrane bioreactor (MBR) plants have been studied by Cote et al (2005) and Verrecht et al (2010).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Since 1993 researchers have been looking at cost models for water and wastewater treatment plants (Pickering and Wiesner 1993). Various researchers have subsequently made isolated efforts to model the cost of water production (Zhu et al 2009a, b;Park et al 2010;Cote et al 2005;Verrecht et al 2010;Ghaffour et al 2013;Hernandez-Sancho et al 2011;Abbott and Cohen 2009;Franceschini and Turina 2012;Owen et al 1995;Cabrera et al 2013).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Cost Evaluation of Water and Wastewater Treatment Plants Using Water Price Index

Kumar

Groth

Vlacic

2015

Water Resour Manage

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As various technologies are used for water and wastewater treatment, a global strategy with the objective of comparing and containing the price of water in the future is required. A study was carried out for this reason on production cost component of the price of water. This paper extends the concept of previously reported Water Price Index (WPI) as a metric for the cost of water production that can be adapted to water and wastewater treatment plants to evaluate their performance. Equations that define the contribution of capital and operational expenditure to the WPI are presented. Case studies from Eraring Power Station, Marquette Water Filtration Plant, Perth Desalination II and a theoretically modelled plant demonstrated the applicability of WPI and the benefit it brings to water practitioners.

show abstract

Cost Model for Low‐Pressure Membrane Filtration

Cited by 60 publications

References 11 publications

Micro- and ultrafiltration film membranes from poly(ether ether ketone) (PEEK)

Micro- and ultrafiltration film membranes from poly(ether ether ketone) (PEEK)

Economic Assessment of an Integrated Membrane System for Secondary Effluent Polishing for Unrestricted Reuse

Cost Evaluation of Water and Wastewater Treatment Plants Using Water Price Index

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About