Desalination Concentrate Management Policy for the Arid West

Transcription

1 Desalination Concentrate Management Policy for the Arid West Bob Raucher Stratus Consulting Ed Archuleta University of Texas at El Paso Scott Reinert El Paso Water Utilities

2 The WateReuse Research Foundation The mission of the WateReuse Research Foundation is to conduct and promote applied research on the reclamation, recycling, reuse, and desalination of water. More Information Research Reports 2

3 A Few Notes Before We Get Started Today s webcast will be 75 minutes. There are 1.25 Professional Development Hours available. A PDF of today s presentation can be downloaded when you complete the survey at the conclusion of this webcast. Links to view the recording and to download the presentation will also be ed later. If you have questions for the presenters, please send a message by typing it into the chat box located on the panel on the left side of your screen. If you would like to enlarge your view of the slides, please click the Full Screen button in the upper right corner of the window. To use the chat box, you must exit full screen. 3

4 Today s Presenters Edmund Archuleta University of Texas, El Paso Formerly, El Paso Water Utlities Robert Raucher Stratus Consulting 4

5 Presentation Overview Overview of El Paso desalination Project objectives and methods Need, opportunity, and value for inland desalting 30,000-foot review of Issue Papers Review of Workshop, El Paso, October 2012 Key findings and recommendations

6 Kay Bailey Hutchison Desalination Plant Opened in 2007 to deal with: Drought Emergency situations Growth Brackish water intrusion

7

8 Project Objectives 1. Describe barriers to concentrate management (CM), focus on arid Southwest 2. Identify and explore potential solutions 3. Lay out potential paths forward for implementing solutions

9 Overview and Methods Develop issue papers and case studies to examine barriers: Regulatory and permitting Legal and other institutional/policy Economic and financial Technological Hydrogeological Identify potential solutions to policy, regulatory, and permitting barriers Conduct expert workshop to further explore these topics Final report submitted July 2013

10 Need, Opportunity, and Value... Need: Freshwater withdrawals as a percent of available precipitation (2005)

11 Need: Projected Change in Drought Frequency

12 Need, Opportunity, and Value... Opportunity: Availability of brackish groundwater resources in the United States (TDS < 3,000 mg/l)

13 Opportunity: Brackish Water Availability

14 Value: Triple Bottom Line Analysis to Compare Alternatives Financial outcomes Social outcomes Environmental outcomes

15 El Paso Triple Bottom Line: Desal and Reuse appear Expensive, But Save Big $s in the End Social (> $2.4M) Air quality related health risk reduction ($2.4M) Supply reliability (+) Climate-insensitive supply source (++) Sustaining agricultural communities (+) Environmental (> $15.7M) Carbon footprint reduction ($15.77M) Energy savings 3.6M MWh Air quality (+) Groundwater quality (+) Surface water (+) Carbon footprint of piping (+) Financial ($967M) 74% cost saving to supply water to all EPWU customers

16 Number of Desalting Plants by State (through 2010) source: Mickley 2012

17 First Step: Issue Papers, Key Findings Inland desalting technically viable There is need, opportunity, and value Barriers to inland desalting: Costs: declining, especially relative Energy demands: growing efficiency Concentrate (brine) management: the most significant remaining hurdle Concentrate management (CM) challenge that extends to water reuse and any facility that uses membrane processes.

18 Options for Inland CM Surface water discharge Wastewater treatment plant/sewer Land disposal (land application) Evaporation ponds Deepwell injection (DWI) High recovery (e.g., zero liquid discharge) and beneficial use

19 Most CM Options Impractical for Many Locations and Municipal Scale Operations Surface Water Discharge or Wastewater Treatment Plant Generally infeasible except in coastal settings with adequate dilution (NPDES permits) Brine lines to coastal outfalls will facilitate discharge in some locations Land disposal/application Environmental limitations due to impacts on soils, vegetation, habitat, underlying groundwater, etc. Evaporation Ponds Limited to small scale, flat terrain settings with no flooding or over-topping risk Expensive liner requirements to protect underlying groundwater Solids and near solids may need ultimate disposal at landfill High recovery Tends to be very energy intensive and expensive New approaches being investigated

20 LINED EVAPORATION POND

21 Deepwell Injection Regulated under Underground Injection Control (UIC) program, per SDWA State primacy Regional EPA UIC Class I, II, and V wells

22 Injection Well JDF-3 2

23 Deepwell Injection: Class I Municipal wastes (wastewater) Industrial wastes (hazardous and non-hazardous) Including desal concentrate and other drinking water treatment residuals Stringent requirements < 600 nationwide

24 Deepwell Injection: Other Classes Class II: Oil and gas Class V: Miscellaneous nonhazardous Class VII?? (precedent for new classes )

25 Deepwell Injection: Key UIC Barriers Underground Source of Drinking Water (USDW) TDS < 10,000 mg/l Aquifer Exemption (AE) process Primary standards requirement for Class V Regulations not specific to desal concentrate

26 Deepwell Injection: Key UIC Barriers Lengthy and expensive permit process Procedural and technical requirements Multiple agencies involved Limited experience in some states Lack of UIC Program funding Different mentalities for Class I and II regulations

27 Deepwell Injection: Potential Solutions Create General Permit under Class I Texas precedent shows promise Extend to federal level (federal primacy) Redefine USDW Streamline AE process Broaden opportunities under Class II Create new desal concentrate Class VII Others?

28 Concentrate Management Workshop Concentrate Management Workshop October 2012

29 Workshop Approach Convened a diverse group of participants in October 2012 Regulators Utility professionals Researchers and consultant experts spanning relevant disciplines Reviewed a series of Issue Papers and Case Studies Developed and prioritized a suite of potential solution approaches Breakout groups fleshed out the top 5 solution options

30 Concentrate Management Workshop October 2012

31 Workshop Recommendations 1. Create Class V subclass Include treatability component Identify statutory and regulatory changes to redefine endangerment Clarify point of compliance Identify constraints/costs for future use Work with state partners

32 Concentrate Management Workshop October 2012

33 Workshop Recommendations 2. Develop compilation/guidance for state DWI permit processes and practices Regulatory agencies, policy-makers, utilities, stakeholders Technical criteria Public participation practices Permitting practices Develop template for model general permit Develop review process for states/epa

34 Workshop Recommendations 3. Develop General Permit under Class I (similar to TX) Reduce public notification requirements Require PE and PG approval Implement at state and federal levels Develop guidance for implementation based on review of current permitting processes, best practices, and potential legal barriers

35 Workshop Recommendations 4. Provide primacy to states for AE process Avoid a second-level AE review by EPA after state review has already been completed

36 Workshop Recommendations 5. Hold competition for developing technological advances to enable beneficial use and/or higher recovery SALT Prize for best technology innovation Reduce desal costs by identifying innovative low-cost, environmentally sound CM strategies

37 Dimensions of the Path Forward 1. Reg and permit process changes (altering procedural or technical requirements) 2. Advocacy (lobbying and champions) who and how to make the push for change, to which audiences, using what messages 3. Research needs and demos (to show it works, or to develop solutions) 4. Tools and/or Guidance 5. Public outreach and education 6. Funding to make it happen

38 Next Steps Organize the relevant groups and stakeholders to: Examine new classification under UIC program for drinking water treatment and/or desal residuals Develop talking points to support the need for states/epa to create general permit

39 Next Steps Develop systematic characterization of saline groundwater resources Separate desal concentrate from other waste streams to help with public perception, and facilitate more suitable requirements Promote near-term and long-term solutions that would allow for more meaningful changes to statutory and/or regulatory process

40 Acknowledgments WateReuse Research Foundation Project #11-09 (Deana Bollaci, PM) Co-funders: WaterRF, WERF El Paso Water Utilities (Ed Archuleta, PI, Mike Fahy, Hector Gonzalez, Scott Reinert) CHIWAWA (UTEP, TAMU, NMSU) Stratus Consulting (Bob Raucher, Janet Clements, Jeff Oxenford, Stratus Consulting) Mickley and Associates (Mike Mickley) Bickerstaff Heath, LLP (William Dugat)

41 Acknowledgments Project Advisory Committee Jeffrey Moeller, Water Environment Research Foundation Jennifer Warner, Water Research Foundation Jonathan Gledhill, Policy Navigation Group Sean Lieske, City of Aurora Andrew Shea, HDR Engineering

42 Questions?