Desalination 194 (2006) 239–250

An experimental comparative study of the technical and

economic performance of a small reverse osmosis desalination
system equipped with an hydraulic energy recovery unit
Essam Sh. Mohameda*, G. Papadakisa, E. Mathioulakisb, V. Belessiotisb
aaDepartment of Natural Resources and Agricultural Engineering, Agricultural University of Athens,
75 Iera Odos, Street, GR 11855 Athens, Greece
Tel. +30 (210) 529-4046; Fax: +30 (210) 529-4023; email: esamsh@aua.gr
b
Laboratory of Solar and Other Energy Systems, National Center for Scientific Research “Demokritos”,
153-10 Aghia Paraskevi Attikis, Greece

Received 20 July 2005; accepted 17 October 2005

Abstract
An experimental study is presented of a small-scale conventional seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) system with
potable water production of 1.7 m3/d, and the modifications made to this system by installing an hydraulic energy
recovery unit and completely changing the pumps. The measured specific energy consumption of the proposed system
was experimentally found to be 3.3 kWh/m3, which is a very promising value compared to the value of 20 kWh/m3 of
the conventional system. Lowering the specific energy consumption results in the reduction of the total system’s
installed power, which achieves lower permeate production costs. The aim of the modifications was to test, investigate
and construct a SWRO system equipped with an hydraulic energy recovery unit operating under variable conditions
of pressure and flow to meet the variable power supply systems for future connection with renewable energy
technologies such as photovoltaics and wind turbines. The only electrical load of the system is a brushless DC motor
of 510 W maximum power, coupled directly to a positive displacement rotary vane pump with a flow rate of 900 L/h.
The expected permeate production cost (excluding the energy production system cost) was calculated to be 3.68 €/m3,
while the reported cost of transported water to some of the Greek Islands is 7 €/m3.

Keywords: Energy recovery; Economic analysis; Energy consumption

1. Introduction industrial development as well as of standard

Energy, in general, is a critical parameter of
economics and of vital importance in social and
*Corresponding author.
development of humans. [1]. Seawater reverse
osmosis (SWRO) is an energy-intensive process
due to the high pressure (40–60 bar) of the main
system pump (high-pressure pump). Typically
75% to 90% of the energy input to the mem-

0011-9164/06/$– See front matter © 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved
doi:10.1016/j.desal.2005.10.031
240 E.S. Mohamed et al. / Desalination 194 (2006) 239–250

branes is dumped in the concentrate stream by in order to lower the specific energy consumption
means of a throttling valve. Consequently, energy and to construct a SWRO system compatible with
recovery has been a major parameter for the RES.
reduction of energy consumption, and as a result,
the reduction of the permeate production cost.
2. Conventional system configuration
Large-scale SWRO plants always contain energy
recovery devices that have lowered the specific 2.1. System description
energy consumption to a value as low as
The conventional SWRO desalination system
2.64 kW/m3 [2]. However, small-scale SWRO
(Fig. 1) consists of a mixing tank, feed water
systems (less than 10 m3/d of permeate pro-
pump, pretreatment system, high-pressure pump,
duction) usually do not contain energy recovery
RO membrane, permeate flushing tank and a
devices in order to decrease the capital cost of the
throttling valve at the outlet of the concentrate
system and take advantage of the low cost of the
line. The system is also equipped with a con-
grid electrical energy supply.
troller for feed water quality monitoring and
Existing small-scale SWRO systems without
control, in addition to the protection of the motors
energy recovery devices (conventional), powered
by renewable energy systems (RES) have a spe- from over-pressure or dry operation. The system
cific energy consumption as high as 15 to works in a closed water loop circuit to avoid
20 kWh/m3 [3]. The absence of an energy recov- continuous solution preparation (see Fig. 2). A
ery device increases the size of the renewable detailed description of the system installed and
energy subsystems required to power the desali- tested at the Agricultural University of Athens,
nation systems, and this results in a very high Laboratory of Agricultural Mechanization, is
water production cost that approaches 23 €/m3. given below.
Moreover, existing conventional RES-powered
desalination systems contain two pump motor 2.1.1 Feed water tank
assemblies utilizing AC power from the inverters The feed water tank is a black polyethylene
that convert the DC power of the battery bank to tank with a capacity of 1 m3, in which the NaCl
a stabilized AC power output. Power inverters solution is prepared. De-chlorinated tap water is
add at least a 10% loss to the system. In addition,
SWRO systems powered by RES usually contain
a large battery bank to provide 2 or 3 days of ope-
ration autonomy, which was considered to be the
most problematic part of the system, especially in
hot climates [4].
The present study compares the performance
of a small-size conventional SWRO desalination
system operating under nominal operating condi-
tions as well as operating at different conditions
of pressure and feed flow with a system equipped
with an Eco-Systems Clark pump-type energy
recovery device [5]. Operating the conventional
system at non-steady state enhances the infor-
mation about future coupling with renewable Fig. 1. Simplified schematic diagram of the conventional
energy technologies. The Clark pump was added SWRO system.
 E.S. Mohamed et al. / Desalination 194 (2006) 239–250 241

Table 1
Technical characteristics of the feed water motor pump
assembly

Pump type Centrifugal

Model ECOJET 120

Maximum suction lift, m 7.5
Maximum shut-off 50
pressure, m
Maximum flow rate, m3/h 2.2
Motor specifications Totally enclosed fan
cooled with rated power of
1 kW, at one phase voltage
of 220 V AC/50 Hz

Table 2
Technical specifications of the high-pressure pump,
motor pump assembly

Pump type Positive displacement piston

pump

Model 3 frame CAT 271

Fig. 2. Conventional SWRO system.
used for the solution preparation. The electrical
conductivity of the NaCl solution was adjusted to
35 mS/cm, which simulates the seawater.
2.1.2. Feed water motor pump assembly
The feed water pump drives the feed water
from the mixing tank to the system and also pro-
vides the positive pressure required at the inlet of
the high-pressure pump. The technical character-
istics of the motor pump assembly are shown in
Table 1.
2.1.3 Feed water pretreatment
The pretreatment system consists of three
filters, the first of which is a cellulose carbon
filter for the dechlorination of the tap water
before it reaches the feed water tank for the first
time of the solution preparation. This filter is not
Rated flow rate, m3/h 0.8
Pressure range, bar 7–105
Rated speed, rpm 1509
used in the continuous operation of the system
since all the feed water in the tank is free of
chlorine. The second filter is a 25 micron car-
tridge filter for the removal of particles larger
than 25 microns. The third filter is a cellulose 5-
micron filter for the final feed water filtration
before it reaches the RO unit.
2.1.4. High-pressure pump motor pump
assembly
After pretreatment, the feed water passes to
the main RO pump which is a 3-frame plunger
CAT pump. This pump provides the RO system
with the high pressure required by the membranes
to overcome the high osmotic pressure of the feed
water. Due to the reciprocating operation of the
pump, a pulsation dampener is used in the
242 E.S. Mohamed et al. / Desalination 194 (2006) 239–250

Table 3 Table 4
RO membrane specifications Basic instrumentation of the RO unit

Membrane type Spiral-wound thin- Equipment Position in the system

film composite
Manometer Inlet and outlet of the
Housing Code line pressure pretreatment filters
vessel Manometer Inlet and outlet of membranes
Model Filmtec SW30-2540 Thermometer Feed water line
Maximum operating 69 Electrical conductivity Product permeate line
pressure, bar meter
Maximum operating 45 Flow meter Product permeate line
temperature, EC Flow meter Concentrate line
Maximum feed flow rate, 1.4
m3/h
Table 5
Product water flow rate, L/h 83
RO unit electronic instrumentation
Minimum salt rejection, % 99.2
Single element recovery, % 8 Sensor Position in the system

Pressure transducer Inlet and outlet of

membranes
discharge line of the pump to provide a smooth Pressure transducer Outlet of the feed pump
feed water flow rate to the membranes. A pres- Flow meter transducer Product permeate line
sure relay at the inlet of the high-pressure pump Flow meter transducer Concentrate line
turns the high-pressure pump power off when the Electrical conductivity Product permeate line
pressure inlet to the pump is less than 1.5 bar to transducer
protect the pump from vacuum operation. The Electrical conductivity Concentrate line
technical specifications of the high-pressure transducer
pump motor pump assembly are shown in Active power transducer Feed water pump motor
Table 2. Active power transducer High-pressure pump
motor
Thermometer Feed water tank
2.1.5. Membranes
The SWRO system consists of one spiral-
wound module. The membrane is the heart of any 2.1.6. System instrumentation
RO desalination system; it separates the feed The RO system was initially equipped with
water stream into two output streams: low- the measuring equipment shown in Table 4. Other
salinity product water and high-pressure pump electronic sensors/transducers were added to the
concentrate. The RO membrane specifications are system in order to monitor and evaluate the
shown in Table 3 [6]. Permeate flow and salt overall system behavior. These added sensors are
rejection are based on 32,000 ppm NaCl solution, reported in Table 5. Additionally, the system was
55 bar feed water pressure, 25EC feed water equipped with a controller that monitored the
temperature and pH 8. The membrane is protected permeate quality; if it is higher than a predeter-
from high pressure with a second pressure relay mined value (1000 µS/cm), it turns the permeate
that turns the pump motor off when the pressure back to the concentrate line by means of a three-
exceeds 69 bar. way solenoid electrical valve.
 E.S. Mohamed et al. / Desalination 194 (2006) 239–250 243

3. Conventional system testing results record the system’s response. These changes were
made within approximately 15 min (see Fig. 3,
In order to test the system performance, the
points C and D). The permeate flow rate varied
two motor pump assemblies (feed and high
from 34 to 115 L/h and was linearly proportional
pressure) were connected to the electrical grid. At
to the membrane feed pressure (see Fig. 4), which
the system start-up, the feed pump was operated
shows the regression statistical analysis results.
only to establish the pre-washing cycle; this cycle
The calculated correlation coefficient is 99.8%,
was completed in about 4.5 min. Then the high-
which indicates the linear relationship between
pressure pump started to operate; following that,
membrane inlet pressure and permeate production
the throttling valve in the concentrate outlet line
flow rate. The concentrate water varied from
was gradually shut down in order to increase the
900 L/h at the beginning of the high-pressure
inlet pressure of the membrane. Several para-
pump operation and decreased to 784 L/h with
meters were measured and recorded such as feed/
the increase of membrane inlet pressure. For an
concentrate flow rate, feed/concentrate electrical
average feed water flow rate of 900 L/h, the sys-
conductivity, membrane inlet and outlet pressure
tem permeate recovery (R) can be expressed as
and the active power consumption of the two
the percentage of the permeate volume flow rate
motors. The feed water temperature remained
( ) to the feed water volume flow rate ( ). The
constant at 27EC during the testing period.
calculated system recovery was found from
Eq. (1) to vary from 3.7% at 34 bar and 12.7% at
3.1. Fresh and drain water production 58 bar. Hence, at a constant temperature of 27EC
the permeate recovery increases 1% with approxi-
At the beginning of the system operation, the
mately every 3 bar increase in the membrane inlet
feed water pump operated as a membrane wash-
pressure.
ing pump for about 4 min (see Fig. 3, area A),
producing 400 L/h of drain water; then the feed
water pressure was gradually increased from 30 (1)
to 58 bar and from 58 bar to 30 bar again to

Fig. 3. Fresh and concentrate water production of the system

244 E.S. Mohamed et al. / Desalination 194 (2006) 239–250
Fig. 5. Permeate and concentrate electrical conductivity.
3.2. Permeate water quality
At the beginning of the system operation, the
concentrate has the same electrical conductivity
as the feed water since all the feed water is passed
through the concentrate stream during the pre-
washing stage. Afterwards the permeate electrical
conductivity drops rapidly within 2 min from
2700 µS/cm to 440 µS/cm at the maximum pres-
sure value of 58 bar (see Fig. 5). The concentrate
Fig. 4. Permeate production vice?,
membrane inlet pressure.
on the contrary rises from 35 mS/cm to 40 mS/cm
following the pressure increase.
3.3. System power and energy consumption
The power consumption of the system is the
sum of the power of the feed pump plus the
power consumption of the high-pressure pump.
The regression analysis of the experimental data
showed a nearly linear relationship between the
 E.S. Mohamed et al. / Desalination 194 (2006) 239–250 245

Fig. 6. High-pressure pump power

vs. membrane inlet pressure.

membrane inlet pressure and the energy con- Table 6

sumption with a coefficient of correlation value Modified system component configurations
of nearly 95% (see Fig. 6). The active power
consumption of the feed pump was measured at Parameter Values
800 W and was constant during the system opera- Battery bank
tion. The active power of the high-pressure pump Type FIAMM TMHD 425/3
was measured at 1600 W; hence the total power Capacity at C5, Ah 315
consumption of the system at a membrane pres- Max. discharge current, A 63
sure of 58 bar was calculated at 2.4 kW. The Max. charging current, A 50
specific energy consumption of the system was Number of cells in series 12
also calculated from the experimental results and Number of cells in parallel 1
was found to be 20 kWh/m3. This number com- Cell voltage 2
pares well with the corresponding value men- Total battery voltage, V 24
tioned in previous work [3]. DC motor
Type Drive systems LV74.9
Rated power, W 510
4. Modified system configuration Rated voltage, V 24
Maximum current, A 25
The goal of the modifications was to decrease Rated revolutions, rpm 1500
the installed power, to achieve lower specific Rotary vane pump
energy consumption and to transform the system Type Fluid-o-tech PO700
to the DC bus to avoid power inverters in future Maximum pressure, bar 16
combinations with renewable energy systems. Rated flow rate at 800
The modifications made to the conventional sys- 1450 rpm, L/h
tem are the elimination of the two AC motor Energy recovery unit
pump assemblies (feed and high-pressure pump), Type Eco-systems Clark pump
the up-grade of the system by adding a second Feed flow low limit, L/h 900
Pressure limit, bar 70
membrane in series, the addition of a brushless
246 E.S. Mohamed et al. / Desalination 194 (2006) 239–250
Fig. 7. Schematic diagram of the modified system.
permanent magnet DC motor with a positive
displacement rotary vane pump as the feed pump
or medium-pressure pump, the addition of a deep
discharge battery bank for power supply to the
pump motor, and the implementation of the eco-
systems Clark pump energy recovery unit at the
concentrate line [6] (see Fig. 7 and Table 6).
The modified RO unit now consists of two
25×40" spiral-wound seawater Filmtec mem-
branes with a total potable water production
capacity of 90–100 L/h under normal operating
conditions. The feed water positive displacement
rotary vane pump pressurizes the NaCl solution
with an electrical conductivity of 35 mS/cm from
the main mixing tank to one of the two cylinders
of the Clark pump. The high-pressure concentrate
enters the second Clark pump cylinder and
exchanges its hydraulic energy with medium feed
water pressure. The result of these actions is the
intensification of the feed water pressure to the
required membrane pressure. The rotary pump is
directly connected to a permanent magnet brush-
less DC motor of maximum power of 510 W,
which is the only power load of the system. The
power source was a battery bank of 315 Ah capa-
city at 24 V. The detailed component configu-
rations of the system are shown in Table 6.
4.1. Modified system testing results
4.1.1. Permeate production and recovery
In order to test the modified system perfor-
mance, the operation was set for three conse-
cutive days in July at an average feed water
temperature of 29EC. The system performance is
shown in Figs. 8–10.
 E.S. Mohamed et al. / Desalination 194 (2006) 239–250 247

Fig. 8. Permeate and concentrate production.

Fig. 9. Operation current and voltage of the motor.

The average feed water flow rate to the RO
system can be easily calculated from the sum-
mation of permeate and concentrate flow rates; it
was found to be 897 L/h (see Fig. 8). Any leak-
ages in the system were neglected. The permeate
flow rate was recorded to be 87 L/h, resulting in
an average system water recovery of 10%. The
gradual decrease in the permeate production that
is shown with the arrows in Fig. 8 is due to the
gradual decrease of the battery voltage, resulting
in the reduction of the motor speed and feed
water flow rate.
248 E.S. Mohamed et al. / Desalination 194 (2006) 239–250
Fig. 10. Membrane inlet pressure and permeate conductivity.
4.1.2. Energy consumption
The energy consumption of the system is the
energy absorbed by the DC motor since it is the
only load of the system. By measuring the opera-
ting current, voltage and operating hours of the
motor, the RO system energy consumption can be
evaluated. Through the three days of the system’s
operation, the DC motor drew an average of
11.7 A at an average battery voltage of 24 V (see
Fig. 9). The specific energy was calculated from
the experimental results by applying Eq. (2) and
was found to be 3.2 kWh/m3.
(2)
4.1.3. Permeate quality and feed pressure
As can be seen in Fig. 10, the system works
under an average feed pressure of 37 bar. This
low-feed pressure is due to the high-feed water
temperature (29EC) and the slightly low feed
water salinity (35 mS/cm). The quality of the
permeate production was recorded to be
370 µS/cm. It can also be noticed in Fig. 10 that
a slight reduction of the feed pressure leads to a
high increase in the permeate salinity. By
measuring the input and output flow rates, the
input and output pressures of the Clark pump, the
overall efficiency can be easily calculated. It was
found to be around 80%, neglecting any internal
pressure and flow losses. This value compares
well with Thomson and Infield [4], taking into
consideration the low operating pressure of the
present system.
5. Economic analysis of the system
An economic analysis was made taking into
account real purchases prices, different life-times
for several parts of the system, a 5% discount
rate, total system life of 20 years and a water
selling price of 7 €/m3. The cost of land required
for the installation and the cost of grid electricity
supply were also taken into consideration.
The final water production cost (see Table 7)
is very competitive compared to the current water
supply prices in some Greek Cyclade islands that
 E.S. Mohamed et al. / Desalination 194 (2006) 239–250 249

Table 7
Summary of the results

Conventional System with energy Further extended

system recovery unit system

Technical parameters
Number of membrane modules 1 2 3
Daily permeate production (m3/d) at 25EC 1.7 2.2 2.4
Permeate recovery, % 7 10 12
Installed power, kW 3.2 0.5 0.5
Specific energy consumption, kWh/m3 20 3.8 3.2
Permeate quality, µS/cm 350 370 390–400
Economic parameters
Investment cost, € 7300 8000 9200
Investment cost annual equivalent (20 year), €/m3 1.06 0.95 0.85
Specific cost of energy, €/m3 1.4 0.27 0.22
Other operating expenses, €/m3 2.99 2.46 2.13
Water production cost, €/m3 5.45 3.68 2.98
Payback period, y 9.5 4.5 3.5

reaches a cost of 7 €/m3 [7]. Similar studies of a
RO unit equipped with a pressure exchanger
energy recovery unit proved that specific energy
consumption of 6.3 kWh/m3can be reached at a
water cost of 5.3 €/m3 [8,9].
At the third column of Table 7, there is an
extended system with energy recovery and three
membranes for future installation of a third mem-
brane in series. It was also proved that the
addition of the Clark pump unit and the upgrade
of the system from 1.7 to 2.2 m3/d was economic-
ally justified by the reduction of the total water
production cost. The analysis was performed
assuming that the systems are connected to the
electrical grid, taking into account only the
electrical energy consumption cost in Greece
(0.07 €/kWh).
6. Conclusions
A small-scale conventional RO system was
installed and tested at the Agricultural University
of Athens, Laboratory of Agricultural Mechani-
zation. Its performance was compared to the per-
formance of a second RO system equipped with
an energy recovery unit, the Eco-systems Clark
pump. The modified system showed an excellent
power and energy consumption behavior, and a
reduction of up to 80% in energy consumption
was obtained compared to the conventional sys-
tem. The small installed power of the modified
system makes it an attractive option for coupling
with renewable energy systems such as photo-
voltaics and wind turbines. The cost analysis
showed that the system upgrade by adding a
second membrane in series decreased the annual
equivalent investment cost by 10% along with a
67% reduction in the specific water production
cost as a result of the increased permeate recovery
and the reduction of the consumed energy. Both
systems are economically acceptable, but the
second configuration has a higher NPV and lower
payback period. If this system is further extended
with a third membrane in series, the expected
energy savings will reach 84% and the water
production cost will decrease to 2.98 €/m3.
250 E.S. Mohamed et al. / Desalination 194 (2006) 239–250

7. Symbols [3] E. Tzen, D. Theofilloyianakos, M. Sigalas and

K. Karamanis, Design and development of a hybrid
Esp — Specific energy consumption, autonomous system for seawater desalination, Proc.
kWh/m3 International Conference RES Islands Tourism and
h — Operating time, h Water, 2003, Crete, Greece.
I — Current, A [4] M. Thomson and D. Infield, A photovoltaic powered
R — Water recovery, % seawater reverse osmosis system without batteries.
— Volume flow rate, L/h Desalination, 153 (2002) 1–8.
V — System voltage, V [5] HERO Systems, Horizon Reverse Osmosis and Sea
Recovery Reverse Osmosis Desalination, www.eco-
sistems.com.
Subscripts
[6] Dow Chemical Company, FILMTEC Membranes,
f — Feed www.FilmTecmembranes.com.
p — Permeate [7] J.K. Kaldellis, K.A. Kavadias and E. Kondili,
Renewable energy desalination plants for the Greek
islands — technical and economic considerations.
Desalination, 170 (2004) 187–203.
References
[8] E.S. Mohamed and G. Papadakis, Design, simu-
[1] V. Belessiotis and E. Delyannis, Water shortage and lation and economic analysis of a stand-alone reverse
renewable energies desalination — possible techno- osmosis desalination unit powered by wind turbines
logical applications. Desalination, 139 (2001) 133– and photovoltaics. Desalination, 164 (2004) 87–97.
138. [9] E.S. Mohamed, Design of a stand alone reverse
[2] J.P. MacHarg, The evaluation of SWRO energy osmosis desalination unit powered by wind turbines
recovery systems, Energy Recovery Inc, USA. and photovoltaics, MSc Thesis, Agricultural Univer-
www.energy-recovery.com. sity of Athens, 2002 (in Greek).