Recycling Treated Municipal Wastewater for Industrial Water Use
Recycling Treated Municipal Wastewater for Industrial Water Use Recycling Treated Municipal Wastewater for Industrial Water Use
5.4 Base Water Reuse System Costs 5.4.1 Treatment TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Components and Costs Recycling Treated Municipal Wastewater for Industrial Water Use Section 3.3.3 defined the base water reuse system to be an advanced secondary WWTP with disinfection facilities. It was assumed the facility had all the required facilities to meet the base level water quality established except for additional disinfection system equipment to disinfect year-round and provide a residual disinfectant for transmission. The base system disinfects to a total coliform limit of 23/100 ml and provides a 2.5 mg/L chlorine dose for residual. Newdisinfection equipment and the associated O&M costs are the only additional treatment system requirements identified for the base water reuse treatment system. The chlorine doses and disinfection assumptions identified in Section 3.3.3 are applied to all WWTPs regardless of the disinfection process. The cost model reflects having the facilities sized to meet the highest dose requirement (with a peaking factor considered for feed rate ranges). As shown in Table 14, the capital cost for disinfection is estimated as a base system cost plus a cost per gallon/day (gpd) to account for the incremental costs of metering pumps, tank storage, and building footprint. Table 14. Base System: Sodium Hypochlorite Capital Costs Capacity, mgd Construction Cost Base, $ ($/gpd) ≤ 0.5 $100,000 $0.10 0.5 - 5 $150,000 $0.03 >5 $250,000 $0.02 The O&M costs for the sodium hypochlorite system in the cost model include the chemical cost at $0.70/gallon of 12.5% sodium hypochlorite and equipment maintenance. The electrical costs are considered negligible. 5.4.2 Storage Storage is not considered in the base water reuse system. 5.4.3 Pump Station The cost model uses a flow-based cost equation, as shown in Table 15, to determine the pump station costs. The pump station cost equations reflect some economy of scale and are based on Camp Dresser & McKee (CDM) estimates prepared for other projects (CDM, 2006 & 2003). These cost equations were checked with data compiled by MCES in review of lift station costs (MCES, 2006a & 2006b) and were found to be representative and on the conservative side. The capacity shown is for the annual average flow and assumes a peaking factor of 3 for the maximum flow pumped. Craddock Consulting Engineers 31 In Association with CDM & James Crook TM3-Component&Costs_0707
TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Components and Costs Recycling Treated Municipal Wastewater for Industrial Water Use Table 15. Pump Station Unit Costs Capacity, mgd Capital Cost, $/gpd ≤ 0.5 0.61 0.5 to 7.5 0.49 ≥ 7.5 0.40 Source: CDM, 2006 & 2003 5.4.4 Transmission Piping Transmission piping is a significant cost of the base system. For this study, the cost model was developed to account for a range of transmission main sizes and lengths, providing a family of cost curves. These cost curves, based on flow and pipe length, allow one to estimate the cost of transmission piping from a WWTP to an industry. Capital Costs The transmission system is a force main from the WWTP to an industry or a group of industries. Pipe materials for reclaimed water mains are typically polyvinyl chloride pipe (PVC) , DR 18, Class 150, AWWA Specifications C-900 and C-905 with push-on joints, or ductile iron pipe (DIP), Class 51, with push-on joints and cement lining on the inside and a bituminous coating (16 mils DFT) on the outside. For this cost model, it is assumed that all mains will be PVC, DR 18, Class 150 for pipe 24 inch or less in diameter and DIP Class 51 for pipe larger then 24-inch. The unit cost for materials and labor to install reclaimed water piping are summarized in Table 16. Construction and project costs are provided. The unit costs were developed from a transmission cost tool documented in Appendix B. These compare to force main interceptor costs (MCES, 2006a & 2006b) and water distribution system costs (Gumerman et al, 1992). The reclaimed water transmission piping is sized to convey the peak hour demand and to maintain a target velocity at the peak hour demand of 5 to 7 feet per second (fps). A peaking factor of 3.0 (peak hour/annual average) is assumed for this study. It is recognized that peak hour requirements can be much higher for some industries, particularly with batch or shift related process activity. A peaking factor of 3.0 assumes that there is a main pipeline with laterals to multiple facilities and peak flows of the various industries do not all coincide. An overall minimum target pressure of 40 pound per square inch (psi) was assumed at the delivery point. This is a pressure that is suitable for most cooling water systems (one of the largest potential uses of reclaimed water for Minnesota’s industries). The annual average day reclaimed water demand evaluated with this cost model ranges from 0.1 to 30 mgd. Regression analysis was performed to find the best fit line to estimate pipeline capital costs for a given flow at given pipe lengths. Appendix B provides the details of these analyses. 32 Craddock Consulting Engineers In Association with CDM & James Crook TM3-Component&Costs_0707
- Page 354 and 355: Date Day of Wk 4/19/07 Thursday 4/2
- Page 356 and 357: Date Day of Wk 4/19/07 Thursday 4/2
- Page 358 and 359: MCES Seneca Plant Final Effluent Sa
- Page 360 and 361: Date Day of Wk 10/8/06 Sunday 10/9/
- Page 362 and 363: Date Day of Wk 10/8/06 Sunday 10/9/
- Page 364 and 365: Date Day of Wk 10/8/06 Sunday 10/9/
- Page 366 and 367: Metropolitan Council Recycling Trea
- Page 368 and 369: Section 5 - Costs Table of Contents
- Page 370 and 371: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 372 and 373: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 374 and 375: WWTP 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 1 Treatmen
- Page 376 and 377: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 378 and 379: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 380 and 381: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 382: o Synthetic medium o Two-stage Surf
- Page 385 and 386: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 387 and 388: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 389 and 390: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 391 and 392: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 393 and 394: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 395 and 396: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 397 and 398: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 399 and 400: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 401 and 402: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 403: Table 13 WATER REUSE SYSTEM COST OF
- Page 407 and 408: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 409 and 410: Cost of Service, $/1000 gallon 1.00
- Page 411 and 412: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 413 and 414: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 415 and 416: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 417 and 418: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 419 and 420: Cost of Service, $/1000 gallons 8.0
- Page 421 and 422: TM3: Recycled Wastewater System Com
- Page 423 and 424: Appendix A Water Reuse Regulatory E
- Page 425 and 426: Table A-1. 2000 California Water Re
- Page 427 and 428: California Department of Health Ser
- Page 429 and 430: Other Media Type Filters Fuzzy Filt
- Page 431 and 432: Appendix B TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Rec
- Page 433 and 434: Appendix B Reclaimed Water Transmis
- Page 435 and 436: Exhibit 1 Transmission Main Cost To
- Page 437 and 438: Pipe Installation Data (DR 18 PVC P
- Page 439 and 440: Equipment Costs (with O&P) Item Des
- Page 441 and 442: Water Reuse Pipe Line Construction
- Page 443 and 444: Construction Unit Costs Item (2006
- Page 445 and 446: Crew Costs (with O&P) St. Paul Pres
- Page 447 and 448: Capital PROJECT Cost Curves for Rec
- Page 449 and 450: Diam (in) Annual Average Day Flow A
- Page 451 and 452: Diam (in) Annual Average Day Flow A
- Page 453 and 454: Pipe Capital Project Cost, $ Millio
TM3: Recycled <strong>Wastewater</strong> System Components and Costs<br />
<strong>Recycling</strong> <strong>Treated</strong> <strong>Municipal</strong> <strong>Wastewater</strong> <strong>for</strong> <strong>Industrial</strong> <strong>Water</strong> <strong>Use</strong><br />
Table 15. Pump Station Unit Costs<br />
Capacity, mgd Capital Cost, $/gpd<br />
≤ 0.5 0.61<br />
0.5 to 7.5 0.49<br />
≥ 7.5 0.40<br />
Source: CDM, 2006 & 2003<br />
5.4.4 Transmission Piping<br />
Transmission piping is a significant cost of the base system. For this study, the cost<br />
model was developed to account <strong>for</strong> a range of transmission main sizes and lengths,<br />
providing a family of cost curves. These cost curves, based on flow and pipe length,<br />
allow one to estimate the cost of transmission piping from a WWTP to an industry.<br />
Capital Costs<br />
The transmission system is a <strong>for</strong>ce main from the WWTP to an industry or a group of<br />
industries. Pipe materials <strong>for</strong> reclaimed water mains are typically polyvinyl chloride<br />
pipe (PVC) , DR 18, Class 150, AWWA Specifications C-900 and C-905 with push-on<br />
joints, or ductile iron pipe (DIP), Class 51, with push-on joints and cement lining on<br />
the inside and a bituminous coating (16 mils DFT) on the outside. For this cost model,<br />
it is assumed that all mains will be PVC, DR 18, Class 150 <strong>for</strong> pipe 24 inch or less in<br />
diameter and DIP Class 51 <strong>for</strong> pipe larger then 24-inch.<br />
The unit cost <strong>for</strong> materials and labor to install reclaimed water piping are summarized<br />
in Table 16. Construction and project costs are provided. The unit costs were<br />
developed from a transmission cost tool documented in Appendix B. These compare<br />
to <strong>for</strong>ce main interceptor costs (MCES, 2006a & 2006b) and water distribution system<br />
costs (Gumerman et al, 1992).<br />
The reclaimed water transmission piping is sized to convey the peak hour demand<br />
and to maintain a target velocity at the peak hour demand of 5 to 7 feet per second<br />
(fps). A peaking factor of 3.0 (peak hour/annual average) is assumed <strong>for</strong> this study. It<br />
is recognized that peak hour requirements can be much higher <strong>for</strong> some industries,<br />
particularly with batch or shift related process activity. A peaking factor of 3.0<br />
assumes that there is a main pipeline with laterals to multiple facilities and peak flows<br />
of the various industries do not all coincide.<br />
An overall minimum target pressure of 40 pound per square inch (psi) was assumed<br />
at the delivery point. This is a pressure that is suitable <strong>for</strong> most cooling water systems<br />
(one of the largest potential uses of reclaimed water <strong>for</strong> Minnesota’s industries).<br />
The annual average day reclaimed water demand evaluated with this cost model<br />
ranges from 0.1 to 30 mgd. Regression analysis was per<strong>for</strong>med to find the best fit line<br />
to estimate pipeline capital costs <strong>for</strong> a given flow at given pipe lengths. Appendix B<br />
provides the details of these analyses.<br />
32 Craddock Consulting Engineers<br />
In Association with CDM & James Crook<br />
TM3-Component&Costs_0707