Aggregate Water Treatment Costs due to MTBE Contamination Arturo A. Keller 1 Orville C. Sandall 2 Robert G. Rinker 2 Linda Fernandez 1 Marie M. Mitani 1 Britta Bierwagen 1 Michael J. Snodgrass 2 1 Bren School of Environmental Science and Management 2 Dept. of Chemical Engineering University of California, Santa Barbara
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Aggregate WaterTreatment Costs due to
MTBE ContaminationArturo A. Keller1
Orville C. Sandall2Robert G. Rinker2Linda Fernandez1Marie M. Mitani1
Britta Bierwagen1Michael J. Snodgrass2
1Bren School of EnvironmentalScience and Management
2Dept. of Chemical Engineering
University of California, Santa Barbara
Cost Elements
z Unit water treatment costyReview of applicable technologies
z Extent of current contaminationyLeaking USTs (LUFTs)yContaminated drinking water wellsyPipeline failuresySurface water reservoirs
z Contribution of MTBE to remediation cost
Unit Water Treatment Costz Applicable TechnologiesyAir StrippingyGranular Activated CarbonyBiofiltrationyAdvanced Oxidation ProcessesyHollow Fiber Membranes
z Scenarios:yHigh concentration/low flowrateyLow concentration/high flowrateyTreat to 5 ug/L
Physicochemical DataProperties at 25oC MTBE ETBE TAME TBA Ethanol
Benzene Effluent at 1 ug/LBenzene (no air treatment) 0.16 0.17 0.29 0.38 0.42 N.A. 1.08 1.36 1.47 N.A.
Air Stripping Treatment Costs ($/1000 gal)
Granular Activated CarbonFlow Diagram for GAC with Steam Regeneration
GACTank
GACTank
GACTank
Condenser Decanter
1
4
5
2
3
6
7
8
1. Influent water + MTBE2. Treated water3. Saturated steam4. MTBE + water vapors5. Condensed MTBE + water6. MTBE (liquid)7. Water with dissolved MTBE8. Treated water
Normal Operation Regeneration 1st Tank
Legend1
MTBE Storage
GAC
Cs = 11.699 Cw0.7101
r2 = 0.9987
0.01
0.10
1.00
10.00
0.0001 0.0010 0.0100 0.1000 1.0000
MTBE Concentration, Cw (mg/L)
Equ
ilibr
ium
GA
C C
once
ntra
tion,
Cs
(mg/
g)Equilibrium Adsorption Isotherm for MTBE on GRC-22
Hollow Fiber MembraneMTBE (no air treatment) 0.69 0.72 0.78 0.78 1.16 1.16 1.05 1.05 1.46 1.46MTBE (with air treatment) 1.05 1.12 1.35 1.66 2.25 3.05 1.91 2.29 2.96 3.96*air treatment may not be required for this system.
Treatment Costs ($/1000 gal)
Unit Water Treatment CostTotal Groundwater Site Remediation
Gasoline withMTBE
ConventionalGasoline
Range Typical Range TypicalSite
investigation$30,000 -250,000
$100,000 $20,000-170,000
$77,000
SoilRemediation
$22,000 -260,000
$97,000 $22,000-260,000
$97,000
Watertreatment
$140,000-240,000
$190,000 $55,000-180,000
$110,000
Total $190,000-750,000
$390,000 $97,000-610,000
$280,000
AnnualizedCost
$95,000-150,000
$130,000 $50,000-120,000
$93,000
Groundwater ContaminationAggregate Annualized Cost of UST Treatment
Gasoline with MTBE Conventional GasolineNumberof sites
90% fullremediation
10%natural
attenuation
20% fullremediation
80% naturalattenuation
Older activeUSTs
350 $60 to 240million
$2 to 11million
$7 to 44million
$13 to 70million
Older USTsites
2100 $360 to1,420million
$40 to 160million
$42 to 270million
$81 to 420million
Subtotal 2450 $420 to1,660million
$42 to 170million
$49 to 310million
$94 to 490million
Annualupgraded
tank failures30-880
$15 to 590million
$2 to 68million
$2 to 110million
$8 to 180million
Aggregate Annualized Cost ofWater Treatment1
Low Estimate High EstimateOlder UST sites $320 million $1030 millionFuture UST sites $7 million $370 million
Pipelines $5 million $10 millionPublic Wells $2 million $36 millionPrivate Wells $1 million $4 million
Surface Water $4 million $30 millionTotal $340 million $1,480 million
1relative to conventional gasoline
Conclusions
z Unit Water Treatment Costs for MTBE are40 to 100% greater than for commongasoline components (e.g. BTEX)z MTBE will be at much higher
concentrations than other componentsz Site characterization and remediation
costs are higher for MTBE than BTEX,given the greater extent of contamination
Conclusions
z Natural attenuation is less likely to be anoption due to the low biodegradability ofMTBE under natural conditionsz UST failures in past, present and future
place groundwater supplies at risk;immediate remediation is cheaperz Legacy of MTBE is treatment costs of
hundreds of millions of dollars per year untilthe sources are removed
Acknowledgements
z Study funded under SB 521 through UCToxic Substances Research & TeachingProgramz Contributions fromyE. Schroeder et al. (1998): biofiltrationyM. Suffet et al. (1998): activated carbonyS. Hitz, H. Kun, A. Peterson, B. Smith & M.