Water - Pinch 1

School of Chemical Engineering
Domestic Water Usage
Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Typical Consumption
•  Tasks
–  Hand washing – 18 L (2 min)
–  Shower – 200 L (5 min)
–  Teeth brushing – 45 L (5 min)
–  Watering flowers – 120 L (3 min)
–  Washing Car – 400 L (10 min)
–  Washing plates 135 L (15 min)
–  Washing Machine 130 L (every 2 days)
–  Toilet flushing (15 L/ flush)

Example - Victoria’s Water Profile
•  Vital Points - Water use

–  More than 5 million ML of water is used in
Victoria each year, 90% from surface water and
10% from groundwater.
–  majority of Victoria’s water resource is used for
irrigation (78%),
–  while urban uses (both metropolitan and
regional) account for 17% of Victoria’s water
consumption.

Virtual Water Usage

•  Also known as embedded, embodied or hidden
water
–  Water used in production of a good or service
•  Concept created by John Allan (2005)
–  Measures how water is embedded in production &
trade of food & consumer products
–  US, Argentina & Brazil export billions of litres of
water each year while Japan, Italy & Egypt
‘import’ billions of litres of water


Examples

World Trade
•  Imbalances
–  Asia ~ average virtual water consumption
1,400 L/day per person
–  Europe, US & Australia ~ average
consumption 4,000 L/ person
–  Roughly 70% of all water used by humans
goes into food production
–  Israel prohibits export of oranges (quite
heavy water quzzlers)


Gradings
•  Green
–  volume of rainwater that evaporated during
production process (agricultural products)
•  Blue
–  volume of surface or ground water that
evaporated during production process
•  Gray
–  volume of water that is contaminated during
production
–  Note: concept not useful for making decision

re best allocation of resources
Virtual Water Footprints

Soft drinks

Victoria - Virtual Water

•  A detailed analysis of Victoria’s virtual water
cycle shows that:
–  Victorians harvest ~ 25% of state’s total historic
average stream flows
–  Of this harvested water, ~ 40% (2000GL) is
exported out of state as virtual water, mainly
embodied in food products
–  Victorians each consume about 0.8 ML of virtual
water each year which is about eight times their
direct water use
•  A recent UNESCO funded study also found
–  Australia, the world’s driest inhabited continent,
was the largest net exporter of virtual water in the
world.


Water Pinch Analysis
•  Approaches to Water Network Design

–  Introduction
•  water applied in numerous industrial processes
•  contaminants transferred to this water
•  must be removed from wastewater in treatment
processes prior to discharge to environment
–  Ultimately
•  goal is zero discharge, i.e. closed loop circuit
Life Impact The University of Adelaide Slide 13

Processes
•  Typical unit operations

–  Extraction, absorption or distillation with steam
•  mass transfer operations
•  water serves as separating agent
–  Washing operations
•  e.g. crystallizers, fermenters
–  Make-up water
•  boiler feed water & cooling water cycles
–  Other unit operations
•  cyclones & filtration (solid-liquid separation)

Process Plant – Water Use

Water Treatment Processes

•  Expensive – must minimize
–  freshwater usage &
–  waste generation
–  important for economics & environment
•  Network optimization requires:

–  water reuse in water-using processes
–  application of regeneration processes by
using redistributed water treatment

Current Practice
•  Existing process plants

–  freshwater fed to processes in parallel arrangement to each
unit
–  next, water streams mixed & sent to central treatment facility
–  No reuse or regeneration practised
–  Large consumption of fresh water & generation of large
quantities of wastewater requiring treatment

Water Re-use Networks (WRN)

•  Water reuse
–  avenue for substantial reduction in
consumption
–  lot of work has gone into design of WRNs
–  does not account for treatment/regeneration
processes

WTN Water Treatment Networks
•  Current need
–  non centralized network for water treatment
–  Streams are either separately treated or only partially mixed,
which reduces effluent flows to be processed
–  lowers cost
–  centralized system contains all processes & common stream
passes thru’ all treatment technologies

Cont’d
•  Further reductions
–  may be achieved by additional application of wastewater
generation processes within the network of water using
processes
–  examples below of integrated water networks:

Mathematical Model
•  Data for Water Network Problems
–  Contaminants
•  All chemicals & other substances (e.g. solid
phase suspensions i.e. SS, BOD)
–  Fresh water/raw water sources
•  Assume no. of available sources is known
•  Water quality, cost & maximum availability is
known
–  Water using processes

•  Number of streams is a fixed parameter
Process Engineering
•  Water Use
–  Plethora of units, e.g:
•  Reactors (vapour & liquid)
•  Extraction
•  Steam stripping
•  Steam ejector (vacuum production)
•  Washing equipment (CIP)
•  Hosing operations (cleaner production)

Key Concept
•  Models of water-using processes
–  Water comes into contacts with contaminants
Process
–  Mass transfer model Fp mp
stream
Fp
Water
stream
–  Quantitative representation Cp, in
Process p
Cp, out
•  Contaminant concentrations are very small

•  Can assume flow rates are constant
•  Water stream mass balance of contaminant i in process p
(
mip = Fp Cpi,out − Ci,in
p ) where
⎯⎯⎯ → p − denotes process
where
⎯⎯⎯ → m = mass of contaminant
C = concentration
F = water stream flowrate
Contaminants
•  Concentrations determined from process conditions

•  Maximal concentrations
–  Estimated from equilibrium conditions
–  Some cases – e.g. equipment washing – concentrations
depend on solubility, fouling or corrosion limits
•  How do we account for kinetics?

–  Reduce equilibrium concentrations by small value ε

–  Maximum concentration
Ci,max = Ci,eq − ε
similar to
⎯⎯⎯⎯ → ΔTmin or HRAT
Model
•  Linear Mass Transfer
–  Quantitatively represented on plot of concentration
versus mass load of contaminant
Mass transfer
Cp, out
Concentration
mp
Cp, in
Contaminant
Life Impact The mass
University of Adelaide load
Changes in Flowrate
•  Constraint
–  Operation requires - a minimum flow rate below
which it can not operate
–  Outlet concentration goes to maximum value (~
solubility limit)
Cp, out_max
High outlet
Concentration
Reducing water concentration

(less water)
flowrate
Cp, out
Cp,
Life
in Impact The University of Adelaide
Contaminant mass load
Limits
•  Maximum Outlet Concentration
–  Set by a number of possible concentrations
•  Maximum solubility
•  Corrosion limits
•  Fouling limits
•  Minimum mass transfer driving force
•  Minimum flow required
•  Maximum inlet concentration

Problem
•  Considering use of clean water only

–  If we reduce flow rate to minimum – we will minimize
consumption as shown earlier
•  But
–  Trade-off: we miss opportunities to reuse water
•  For reuse
–  We must have some level of inlet concentration of
contaminant C p, out_max
High outlet
Concentration
Reducing water concentration

(less water)
flowrate
Cp, out

Cp, in
Water Profile Diagram

•  Limiting Water Profile
–  Both inlet & outlet water concentrations set to
maximum values
Cp, out_max
Concentration
Cp, in_max

Limiting Water Profile

•  Boundary
–  between feasible & infeasible regions
Infeasible Region
Cp, out_max
Concentration
Limiting Water Profile
Cp, in_max
Feasible Water Streams

Advantages
•  Operations with differing characteristics may be
compared on common basis (e.g. extraction vs
hosing)
•  No model of mass transfer required
•  Not a function of flow pattern (e.g. co-current vs
counter-current)
•  Works on any type of water-using operation e.g.
fire-makeup water, cooling tower makeup water

Scenarios
•  Single Contaminant – water reuse
•  Desire
–  Reuse water
–  How can we develop the target for minimum
water consumption allowing reuse of water
streams?

Single Contaminant
•  Examples
–  Organic, specific compound
•  Toluene, benzene, starch, sugar, wine or
–  Aggregate Property
•  Total organics, SS, DS, COD, BOD,

Key Assumption
•  Most Contaminants
–  Very dilute
–  Consequence
•  mass flow rate water ~ mass flow rate of mixture
hence mC not mC
⎯⎯⎯→ C= ⎯⎯⎯→C =
mW mW + mC
•  Definition
–  Limiting water flow rate
–  Flow rate required if contaminant is to be picked up by the
water between the min & max concentration

Problem
•  Data
Process Number
1
2
3
4

Contaminant Mass
Load kg/h
2
5
30
40

Cin,max (ppm)
0
50
50
400

Cout,max (ppm)
100
100
800
800


Limiting Fresh Water Flows
Limiting flow rate

kg 1 L 10 6 mg 1 tn
1. mW1 =2 × × × = 20 tn / h
h (100 − 0 ) mg kg 1000L
kg 1 L 106 mg 1 tn
2. m W 2 =5 × × × = 50 tn / h
h (100 − 0 ) mg kg 1000L
kg 1 L 106 mg 1 tn
3. mW 3 = 30 × × × = 37.5 tn / h
h ( 800 − 0 ) mg kg 1000L
kg 1 L 106 mg 1 tn
4. m W 4 =4 × × × = 5 tn / h
h ( 800 − 0 ) mg kg 1000L
Total flow rate (assuming fresh water) = 20 + 50 + 37.5 + 5 = 112.5 tn / hr

Concentration Intervals

Limiting Water Data
C(ppm)
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
2 7
100
37 41
10 20 30 40
Contaminant mass load (kg/h)
Limiting Composite Curve
C(ppm)
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
2 7
100
37 41
10 20 30 40
Constructing Composite Curve
•  a) profile of two individual streams

•  b) composite curve

Targeting Minimum Water Flow Rate
C(ppm)
800 41
Limiting Composite
700 Curve
600
500
Water Supply Line
(Minimum Flowrate 90 t/hr)
400
21
300
200 Minimize Flowrate

Pinch
9
100
10 20 30 40
Fig: Targeting minimum flowrate
for single contaminant
Consequences
•  Evolution of a design strategy
–  Use composite curve to determine minimum water
requirement for each region
•  Regions are
–  Below pinch &
–  Above pinch
•  Conclusions
–  Below pinch – minimum flow rate = 90 tn/hr but
–  Above pinch, not all 90 tn/hr are required
–  Minimum above pinch determined by simple mass balance
(45.7 tn/hr)
Basis of Design
C(ppm)
800
45.7 tn/hr
700 (100 ppm)
600
Minimum
500
Flowrate
45.7 tn/hr
400
300
45.7 tn/hr
200 (100 ppm)
44.3 tn/hr
Pinch (100 ppm)
100
90 tn/hr
(0 ppm)

Design Strategy
•  Design
–  Use minimum flowrate 90 tn/hr below pinch
–  Above pinch
–  Use minimum flowrate 45.7 tn/hr & balance
goes to effluent

Advantages
•  Mass balance
–  Tightly defined allowing specific rules to be applied in design
•  Strategy
–  Compatible with minimizing effluent treatment costs thru’
distributed effluent treatment

Evolve Design
•  Design is then improved
–  References
–  Wang & Smith (1994) Chem Eng Sci 49;981
–  Kuo & Smith Trans IChemE, A76: 287-301

Final Design
90 tn/hr 0 tn/hr
F.W. 800 ppm
20 tn/hr
1
50 tn/hr
2
20 tn/hr
3
5.7 tn/hr
4
44.3 tn/hr
0 tn/hr 45.7 tn/hr
effluent
effluent effluent
(400 ppm)

Water - Pinch 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Water - Pinch 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Water - Pinch 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

School of Chemical Engineering

Domestic Water Usage

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Example - Victoria’s Water Profile

• Vital Points - Water use

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Virtual Water Usage

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

– Note: concept not useful for making decision

Virtual Water Footprints

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Victoria - Virtual Water

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

• Approaches to Water Network Design

Life Impact The University of Adelaide Slide 13

• Typical unit operations

Life Impact The University of Adelaide Slide 14

Life Impact The University of Adelaide Slide 15

Water Treatment Processes

• Network optimization requires:

Life Impact The University of Adelaide Slide 16

• Existing process plants

Life Impact The University of Adelaide Slide 17

Water Re-use Networks (WRN)

Life Impact The University of Adelaide Slide 18

Life Impact The University of Adelaide Slide 19

Life Impact The University of Adelaide Slide 20

– Water using processes

Life Impact The University of Adelaide Slide 22

• Contaminant concentrations are very small

• Concentrations determined from process conditions

• How do we account for kinetics?

Reducing water concentration

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

• Considering use of clean water only

Reducing water concentration

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Water Profile Diagram

Contaminant mass load

Limiting Water Profile

Limiting Water Profile

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Limiting Fresh Water Flows

Limiting flow rate

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

Life Impact The University of Adelaide

• a) profile of two individual streams

•  Vital Points - Water use

–  Note: concept not useful for making decision

•  Approaches to Water Network Design

•  Typical unit operations

•  Network optimization requires:

•  Existing process plants

–  Water using processes

•  Contaminant concentrations are very small

•  Concentrations determined from process conditions

•  How do we account for kinetics?

•  Considering use of clean water only

•  a) profile of two individual streams