Post on 14-Apr-2018
7/30/2019 Desalination Presentation
1/14
Water Desalination
as a Possible Opportunityfor the GT- and H2-MHR
S. Locke Bogart and Ken Schultz
Energy Applications & Systems, Inc. General Atomics
2004 International Congress on Advances in Nuclear PowerPlants (ICAPP '04)
15 June 2004
EASI
7/30/2019 Desalination Presentation
2/14
7/30/2019 Desalination Presentation
3/14
Availability is Not the Entire Problem
Contamination is a major problem in many areas
Chemicals fertilizer run-off in rural areas, industrialpollutants in urban areas.
PathogensMore than 2.2 million people die each year
from diseases related to contaminated drinking water. Cost/Price disparity is a major problem in many areas of
the world
in Delhi vendors charge the poor US$4.89 per m3,while families with piped connections pay just US$0.01.
EASI
7/30/2019 Desalination Presentation
4/14
Desalination is a Partial Solution
The process can take water from any source and candeliver a product so pure that it has to be salted to makeit flavorsome.
The process is generally more expensive than naturalwater.
Desalination requires large scale production facilities, plustransport and distribution infrastructure.
Large scale desalination processes have been commercialfor half a century or more.
In areas of the world energy-rich but water-poorgenerally the Middle East.
On Islands with high demand and sufficient affluence.
EASI
Can help overcome disparities, but requires large capital
7/30/2019 Desalination Presentation
5/14
Global Desalination Opportunities
The water availability projection reveals the opportunities.
These tend to be regions with either high population density,relatively high wealth density, or both.
However, the use of nuclear energy for desalination will facegeopolitical limitations.
EASI
7/30/2019 Desalination Presentation
6/14
Commercial Desalination Technologies
Multi-Stage Flash Distillation (MSF).
The oldest technology, but still being constructed.
A thermal technology, suitable for cogeneration.
Multi-Effect Distillation (MED).
A newer technology, now being scaled to MSF plant size.
Potentially more efficient than MSF.
Reverse Osmosis (RO).
The newest technology, now being scaled to relativelylarge plants but still smaller than MSF and MED.
An electrical technology, depending on low costelectricity.
We will compare MED with RO.
EASI
MED: Waste heat from GT-MHR or H2-MHR
RO: Electricity from GT-MHR
7/30/2019 Desalination Presentation
7/14
Considerations for Selection of RO vs. MED
Electric or hydrogen cogeneration of water Thermalenergy for water production as a bottoming cycle favorshigh temperature reactors
Feed salinity: low reverse osmosis; high thermal
Cost of electricity: low reverse osmosis; high thermal
Desired product quality: high thermal; low(er) reverseosmosis,
Plant footprint: low reverse osmosis; high thermal, and
Expandability: high reverse osmosis; low to moderate
thermal.
EASI
7/30/2019 Desalination Presentation
8/14
Reverse Osmosis Features
RO Membrane Assembly
Tampa Bay Main Hall
11.7 MWe
95,000 m3/d
EASI
7/30/2019 Desalination Presentation
9/14
MED Bottoming Cycle PlantCoupled to a GT-MHR
EASI
200C180C 160C
Bottoming cycle would cost ~4.4 points
on GT-MHR efficiency
7/30/2019 Desalination Presentation
10/14
Sample Economic Comparison of RO vs. MED
Major Input Variables.
Plant capital cost.
Fixed Charge Rate (required rate of return).
Thermal or electrical energy requirements.
Cost of thermal or electrical energy.
Plant scale.
Only Output Variable.
Cost of Water.
EASI
7/30/2019 Desalination Presentation
11/14
Values of Major Input Variables
EASI
7/30/2019 Desalination Presentation
12/14
Typical Model Output
EASI
7/30/2019 Desalination Presentation
13/14
Focused Model Output for Selected Inputs
COW ($/m
3) comparisons between full scale RO and MED for a
GT-MHR or H2-MHR for two FCRs and COE = $0.029/kWh
COW ($/m3) comparisons between full scale RO and MED for aGT-MHR or H2-MHR for two FCRs and COE = $0.058/kWh
6% 15%
RO $0.40 $0.59
MED $0.41 $0.66
FCR (%)
Plant Type
6% 15%RO $0.49 $0.68
MED $0.45 $0.71
FCR %
Plant Type
EASI
7/30/2019 Desalination Presentation
14/14
Conclusions
COW for both processes are comparable for any FCR (likelywithin the error bars of the analysis). Decision will be based onother features such as expandability, feed quality, product purity
Desalination Plants are capital intensive; funding should besought through Public Sector
Reverse osmosis presents a lower COW than MED for virtually allcases of COE and FCR. This is due to the lower capital cost perunit output of the RO plant.
MED costs may be a few % optimistic (COE for GT-MHR-wbc+10%, O&M costs estimated from RO)
Only when the COE is high and the FCR is low will the MED plantresult in a lower COW. There may be regions where suchconditions may exist.
EASI