Bahrain Master Plan Water Treatment Review

Kingdom of Bahrain
Electricity and Water Authority

Master Plan 2015-2030
Water Treatment Review
July 2015

Kingdom of Bahrain
Master Plan 2015-2030
335975 MEU MWE 0002 D
http://pims03/pims/llisapi.dll/open/13365683
28 July 2015
Kingdom of BahrainElectricity and Water AuthorityMaster
July 2015
P.O. Box 2
Manama
Kingdom of Bahrain
Mott MacDonald, Office 21, Al Moayed House, Building 2332, Road 2830, Block 428, Al Seef District, Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain
T +973 17586350 F +973 17910087 W www.mottmac.com
Contents
Chapter Title Page
Executive Summary i
1 Introduction 6
1.1 Objectives and Scope of Work _________________________________________________________ 6
1.2 Background ________________________________________________________________________ 6
1.3 Methodology _______________________________________________________________________ 7
1.4 Structure of This Report ______________________________________________________________ 7
2 Water Quality Requirements 8

2.1 Water Quality Standards ______________________________________________________________ 8
2.2 Comparison of Water Quality Standards __________________________________________________ 9
2.3 Recommended Water Quality Standards for Bahrain _______________________________________ 11
2.4 Summary _________________________________________________________________________ 15
3 Review of Desalination Water Treatment Technologies 16

3.1 Membrane Desalination______________________________________________________________ 16
3.1.1 Reverse Osmosis __________________________________________________________________ 16
3.1.1.1 Overview of Process ________________________________________________________________ 16
3.1.1.2 Review ___________________________________________________________________________ 17
3.1.2 Brackish Water Reverse Osmosis (BWRO) ______________________________________________ 18
3.2 Thermal Desalination________________________________________________________________ 18
3.2.1 Multi-Effect Distillation (MED) _________________________________________________________ 18
3.2.1.2 Review ___________________________________________________________________________ 19
3.2.2 Multi-Stage Flash (MSF) _____________________________________________________________ 20
3.2.2.2 Review ___________________________________________________________________________ 21
3.3 Alternative Desalination Technologies __________________________________________________ 22
3.4 Combination of Technologies _________________________________________________________ 23
3.5 Comparison of Desalination Technologies _______________________________________________ 24
3.5.1.1 Energy Use _______________________________________________________________________ 25
3.5.1.2 Chemical Consumption ______________________________________________________________ 25
3.5.1.3 Advantages and Disadvantages _______________________________________________________ 26
3.6 Summary _________________________________________________________________________ 27
4 Review of Desalination Water Treatment Chemicals 29

4.1 Pre-Treatment _____________________________________________________________________ 29
4.1.1 Control of Bio-Fouling of Seawater Intakes _______________________________________________ 29
4.1.1.1 Recommendation __________________________________________________________________ 30
4.1.2 Control of Bio-Fouling of Membranes ___________________________________________________ 30
4.1.2.1 Coagulation, Flocculation and Sedimentation _____________________________________________ 30
4.1.2.2 Dissolved Air Floatation (DAF) ________________________________________________________ 31
335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 23 December 2014

4.1.2.3 Recommendations__________________________________________________________________ 32
4.1.3 Anti-Scalants ______________________________________________________________________ 32
4.2 Hydrocarbons _____________________________________________________________________ 33
4.2.1 Recommendation __________________________________________________________________ 33
4.3 Remineralisation ___________________________________________________________________ 33
4.3.1 Calcium Carbonate Precipitation _______________________________________________________ 34
4.3.1.1 Langelier Saturation Index ___________________________________________________________ 34
4.3.2 Chemicals Used for Remineralisation ___________________________________________________ 34
4.3.3 Recommendation __________________________________________________________________ 36
4.4 Disinfection _______________________________________________________________________ 36
4.4.1 Ozone ___________________________________________________________________________ 37
4.4.2 Ultraviolet Light ____________________________________________________________________ 38
4.4.3 Chlorine Dioxide ___________________________________________________________________ 39
4.4.4 Chlorine __________________________________________________________________________ 39
4.4.5 Comparison of Disinfectant Chemicals __________________________________________________ 41
4.4.6 Recommendation __________________________________________________________________ 42
4.5 Summary _________________________________________________________________________ 42
5 Review of Existing Desalination Treatment Sites 43

5.1 Overview of Existing Sites ____________________________________________________________ 43
5.2 Thermal Desalination Plants __________________________________________________________ 46
5.2.1 Al Hidd IWPP ______________________________________________________________________ 46
5.2.1.1 Water Quality ______________________________________________________________________ 47
5.2.1.2 Site Issues ________________________________________________________________________ 48
5.2.2 Sitra Plant ________________________________________________________________________ 49
5.2.2.1 Water Quality ______________________________________________________________________ 50
5.2.2.2 Site Issues ________________________________________________________________________ 50
5.2.3 ALBA Coke Plant ___________________________________________________________________ 52
5.2.3.1 Water Quality ______________________________________________________________________ 53
5.2.3.2 Site Issues ________________________________________________________________________ 53
5.3 Membrane Based Plants _____________________________________________________________ 54
5.3.1 Al Dur IWPP ______________________________________________________________________ 54
5.3.1.1 Water Quality ______________________________________________________________________ 56
5.3.1.2 Site Issues ________________________________________________________________________ 56
5.3.2 Ras Abu Jarjur (RAJ) Plant ___________________________________________________________ 57
5.3.2.1 Water Quality ______________________________________________________________________ 58
5.3.2.2 Site Issues ________________________________________________________________________ 58
5.4 Summary _________________________________________________________________________ 62
6 Conclusions and Recommendations 63

6.1 Water Quality Standards _____________________________________________________________ 63
6.2 Water Treatment Technologies and Chemicals ___________________________________________ 63

6.3 Recommendations for Existing Bahraini Desalination Plants _________________________________ 64

6.3.1 Hidd _____________________________________________________________________________ 64
6.3.2 Sitra _____________________________________________________________________________ 64
6.3.3 Alba _____________________________________________________________________________ 65
6.3.4 Al Dur ____________________________________________________________________________ 65
6.3.5 Ras Abu Jarjur (RAJ)________________________________________________________________ 66
7 References 67
Appendices 68
Appendix A. Water Quality Data _________________________________________________________________ 69
Appendix B. Meeting Minutes ___________________________________________________________________ 70
Glossary 71

Executive Summary
The Electricity and Water Authority (EWA) are currently developing their Kingdom
of Bahrain Electricity and Water Master Plan 2015-2030. As a part of this Master
Plan, Mott MacDonald (MM) undertook a Water Treatment Review in July 2014,
which will support the wider water supply planning process by providing
recommendations for existing water production facilities.
This document is the output of that review and reports on and evaluates the
existing technologies and chemicals currently being used at Bahraini desalination
facilities by EWA. A review of the standards for producing potable water in the
Gulf and internationally was undertaken in order to produce recommended water
quality standards for EWA to adopt. Alternative technologies and chemicals have
also been evaluated for their suitability for adoption by EWA and
recommendations accordingly.
Water Quality Standards
Bahrain adopts the Gulf Standards Organisation (GSO) Standard for Unbottled
Drinking Water (GS/149/2008) which only contains a limited number of
parameters compared to those adopted by other Gulf States (Oman, Qatar and
Abu Dhabi).
It is recommended that Bahrain revises its standards in accordance with recent

developments in international guidelines and in line with other GCC states. This
has been discussed with representatives of EWA and they have provided a new
set of standards which have been incorporated into this report as Tables 2.2, 2.3,
2.4 and 2.5.
To this extent, recommendations have been provided for updating water quality
standards based on WHO guidelines and standards currently being used at non-
EWA operated plants such as Al Dur and Hidd.

i http://pims03/pims/llisapi.dll/open/13365683
Desalination Technology
Bahrain water desalination facilities use a range of technologies including multi-

stage flash (MSF), multi-effect distillation (MED), seawater reverse osmosis
(SWRO) and brackish water reverse osmosis (BWRO).
Alternative desalination technologies were reviewed including Forward Osmosis,

Membrane Distillation and Capacitive Desalination. It is not recommended that
these technologies are adopted in Bahrain at the present time, as they have not
yet achieved large scale commercial operation.
A comparison was made between MED, MSF, and RO technologies, utilising

many criteria including production yield, power consumption, chemical
consumption and process robustness.
The MED and MSF thermal desalination processes are robust processes with low
maintenance requirements; however their operation is tied to power plant output
and when seasonal power demand diminishes, water production follows
correspondingly. This is problematic for Bahrain especially in winter months when
power demand is lower but water demand does not follow.
On a volumetric basis, while RO uses more chemicals, the technology uses less
power and has a greater production yield. The additional cost of chemicals is a
fraction of the potential savings in power. RO plants are standalone and can be
upgraded and updated in a modular fashion throughout their life.
Whilst it is beneficial to maintain a diversification of desalination technologies, for

future plant upgrades it is recommended to consider RO processes as the primary
desalination technology. If thermal desalination is selected for combined power
and water plants, it is recommended to consider a hybrid MED/RO process for
improved power efficiency and reliability.

ii http://pims03/pims/llisapi.dll/open/13365683
Recommendations for Existing Bahraini Desalination Plants
The existing Bahraini desalination plants have been evaluated and a series of
recommendations made to improve resilience, increase efficiencies and reduce
costs. The following was noted:
Hidd
This plant appears to be operating well and producing a good quality water. The
impact of the power plant on potable water production was highlighted as a
problem, which is more noticeable during the winter months. It was
recommended to give consideration to RO technology for any future upgrade at
Hidd in order to alleviate the production swings due to power and provide some
diversification in desalination technology. Potential improvements to the storing
and loading of limestone were also highlighted.
Sitra
The Sitra production plant is an MSF plant that has had three major phases, with
the oldest being commissioned in 1976 and the latest in 1985. Due to its age, the
plant is subject to frequent outages, mainly due to tube failure rates. The plant is
also in need of significant civil, structural, mechanical and electrical rehabilitation.
Potabilisation does not occur on site but rather occurs through blending with
groundwater.
With the on-going objective of reduction in the reliance of groundwater blending

and to improve the stability and potabilisation of the supplied water from Sitra, it is
recommended to implement a full potabilisation system.
In the long-term, for any future plant replacement or expansion, it is recommended

that RO with associated pre-treatment is strongly considered.

iii http://pims03/pims/llisapi.dll/open/13365683
Alba
The potable water quality from the Alba MED plant appears to be achieving
acceptable water quality in accordance with the Gulf Standards (GS) with the
exception of TDS and pH. To improve TDS and pH values, revised dosing rates
for lime and carbon dioxide have been provided for consideration.
Al Dur
The Al Dur plant is operating very well and produces a high standard product
water. As it is not coupled to power generation, water can be produced on
demand and is not dependent on seasonal changes in power production. In
addition, it is equipped with a redundant feed so that it can produce water even
during power plant shutdowns making it highly reliable. The system should be
considered as a model for reference in the design of new desalination plants for
Bahrain.
Some minor improvements to the current arrangement were identified. The plant
currently uses ferric chloride brought in bags. Given the quantity of ferric chloride
consumption, a bulk delivery and onsite storage system would increase efficiency
and should be promoted.
If the final turbidity limit was relaxed for post lime dosing, lime slurry could be used
which would result in less water being used for limewater make-up. This would
provide the benefit of increasing liquid lime storage durations and lime pumping
capacities. Whilst this currently may not be an option, it is worth considering this
efficiency as a future plant improvement opportunity.
Ras Abu Jarjur (RAJ)
The RAJ BWRO plant is old and in need of significant civil, structural and
mechanical upgrade. There are currently plans to upgrade the existing hollow
fibre Du Pont RO racks to Toray spiral wound modules.

iv http://pims03/pims/llisapi.dll/open/13365683
We believe this is a positive step in the right direction but that a thorough review of
available technologies should be undertaken prior to the full replacement of the
Du Pont membranes. In addition, future upgrades should consider alternative
energy recovery options.
The hydrocarbon adsorption regeneration system requires a full replacement. As

an alternative, it is recommended to investigate other newer technology
hydrocarbon adsorption systems with longer lives e.g. zeolites, nano-clays and
polymers.
The pH of the final water marginally exceeds 8.0 on occasions and on average the
LSI is low at -0.35. Potabilisation dosing recommendations were made as to how
to achieve this. Efficiencies can also be made in the lime dosing process through
improvements in the control functionality and storage. These improvements
would markedly improve site health and safety as well as final water potabilisation.

v http://pims03/pims/llisapi.dll/open/13365683
1 Introduction
Mott MacDonald (MML) has been appointed by the Kingdom of Bahrain Electricity
and Water Authority (EWA) to undertake a water treatment study as a part of the
Electricity and Water Master Plan 2015-2030. The study is to serve as an input to
the power and water generation project development; part of the wider Master
Plan programme of work.
The purpose of this report is therefore not only to evaluate the existing
technologies, chemicals and water quality standards currently being used at
Bahraini desalination facilities, but to also provide recommendations for future
water treatment in Bahrain.
1.1 Objectives and Scope of Work
The Scope of Work for this project required MM to prepare a “Water Treatment Study” encompassing:
“Review existing technologies and chemicals used for water treatment and recommend any changes to
bring them up to the State of the art technology.”
This report addresses the issues of water supply standards, existing plants and establishing stand-alone
potabilisation systems, and evaluates the latest technologies for Bahrain’s future water supply. Specifically,
the objectives are as follows:
1. Review current Bahraini, regional and international water quality standards and recommend any
changes that should be adopted by Bahrain in order to follow current best practice and guidance
and/or achieve efficiencies in treatment;
2. Evaluate alternative desalination technologies and chemicals and recommend those that should be
considered by EWA for future development; and
3. Assess the existing desalination plants technologies and chemical systems and highlight areas for
potential upgrading or improvement.
1.2 Background
The Electricity and Water Authority are currently developing their Kingdom of Bahrain Electricity and Water
Master Plan 2015-2030. This process involves a detailed review of a range of different aspects of the
Authority’s work from estimating future demands and infrastructure requirements, to evaluating raw water
resources and potable supply treatment options.
Water in Bahrain is derived from two main sources, namely desalinated seawater and groundwater. Five
commercial-scale potable water desalination treatment plants are in operation across the island, operated
6 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 23 December 2014

by both EWA and independent private companies. A range of different treatment technologies are being
utilised including both thermal and membrane-based processes.
The plants are of varying ages and there have been a number of developments in the field of desalination
since many were commissioned; offering improvements in chemical and energy usage, resilience and both
operational and capital costs. A holistic review of the methods being currently adopted by the wider
industry is a key part of understanding areas where modifications could be undertaken in order to capture
potential efficiencies. In addition, such an appraisal allows recommendations to be made for the future of
water treatment in Bahrain.
1.3 Methodology
This report is based on a literature review, modelling work and information gathered through liaison with
the client and five production plant site visits undertaken by MML during July 2014.
The following data was collected and reviewed for the water treatment study:
 Spreadsheets received from EWA containing monthly water quality data from Hidd, Sitra, Alba, Al
Dur and Ras Abu Jarjur treatment plants over the period June 2013 to June 2014. This data is
reproduced in the tables in Appendix A.
 A report written by Black and Veatch in 2006 (hereafter referred to as the “B&V Report”) that
assessed various potabilisation alternatives in Bahrain and was reviewed for this study.
Chemical modelling was undertaken by the MM team in order to ascertain existing and recommended
potabilisation dosing rates.
1.4 Structure of This Report
Section 2 reviews existing national, regional and World Health Organization (WHO) water quality standards
and recommends revised standards to be used in Bahrain in order to be kept current with international
developments in water quality guidelines.
Sections 3 and 4 review water treatment technologies and chemicals respectively. The latest
developments in these areas are described and evaluated, and their applicability for use in Bahrain is
discussed.
Section 5 describes the technologies currently adopted at Bahraini desalination plants, reviews their
effectiveness and identifies areas for improvement.
A summary of the conclusions and recommendations in the previous chapters is provided in Section 6.

2 Water Quality Requirements
International water quality standards are continually being reviewed and updated
with technological developments and medical data. EWA have adopted the Gulf
Standards for Unbottled Drinking Water (GS/149/2008) for the plants they own
and operate. The water quality standards being adhered to in Bahrain have been
reviewed in comparison to current international guidelines from the World Health
Organization and other GCC countries. A proposed set of potable water quality
standards has been compiled which is recommended to be adopted for both
existing and future treatment plants in Bahrain.
2.1 Water Quality Standards
Drinking water quality standards, or ‘guideline values’, describe the quality parameters set for drinking
water and can refer to the chemical, physical or biological characteristics of water against which
compliance can be assessed. Many countries adopt their own standards; drawn from regional legislation
(such as the European Union’s Drinking Water Directive) and/or the recommendations of international
bodies (such as the World Health Organization). Standards can be selected not only based on health
criteria, but also aesthetic preferences.
Those of particular note for Bahrain are summarised below.
World Health Organization (WHO)
The WHO Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality (2011) provide general recommendations on the need to
stabilise and remineralise desalinated waters for consumer use. The guidelines provide limits for naturally
occurring chemicals that are of health significance.
The WHO Guidelines identify 32 aesthetic parameters. Some other parameters have recommended
values, mainly based on consumer acceptance. The aesthetic parameters most often specified with
guideline values are pH (hydrogen ion), chloride, iron, sulphate and aluminium.
Gulf Standards Organisation
Bahrain adopts the GCC Standardization Organization (GSO) standards for Unbottled Drinking Water
(GS/149/2008). The GSO standard is “concerned with unbottled drinking water fit for human consumption”
and provides both health and aesthetic guideline values which are adopted by, or used as the basis of,
standards across the Gulf.

United Arab Emirates (UAE)
The Regulation & Supervision Bureau (RSB) regulate the water sector of the Emirate of Abu Dhabi. The
Bureau has an obligation under law to ensure the continued availability of potable water. In exercising this
duty, they have set water quality standards to ensure safe drinking water supplies to consumers. These
were most recently updated in 2014.
Oman
The Directorate General for Specifications and Measurements is responsible for Omani National
Standards. Standard No.8: Unbottled Drinking Water was last updated in 2006, based on the World Health
Organization 2004 guidelines. It includes both health and aesthetic guideline values.
Qatar
Kahrama’a (Qatar General Electricity & Water Corporation) is an independent corporation supplying water
in the State of Qatar and reports complying with both national Health and Safety and WHO standards in its
water quality compliance.
2.2 Comparison of Water Quality Standards
Information has been gathered from plants in Oman, Qatar and the UAE in order to review the water
quality standards being adopted at desalination plants at a regional scale. The following table presents
these water quality standards for comparison against those currently adopted by Independent Water and
Power Producer (IWPP) plants in Bahrain for comparison.

Table 2.1: Comparison of water quality standards and recommendations for Bahrain
WHO EU Directive UK GSO Qatar Oman UAE Bahrain Bahrain
Parameter Units Guidelines for Drinking- 98/83/EC Water Supply GS/ Kahrama’a Standard Oman Standard Abu Dhabi Hidd Al Dur
water Quality (4th Edition) (Water Quality) 149/2008 Nr 8/2006 RSB Water Quality Regs 2014 IWPP IWPP
Reg 2000
Colour Pt-Co Scale - Acceptable 20 15 0-15 15 15 15 <1.0
Turbidity NTU - Acceptable 4 (at tap) 5 0-5 5 4 2 (max) <0.2
1 (at works)
Taste No Parameter Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Unobjectionable Unobjectionable Unobjectionable
Odour No Parameter Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Acceptable Unobjectionable Unobjectionable Unobjectionable
Temperature °C - - - Acceptable Acceptable <40 <40
pH - 6.5-9.5 6.5-9.5 6.5-8.0 6.5-8.5 9 7.0-9.2 6.5-8.5 7.0 – 8.0
Total dissolved solids mg/L - - - 100-1,000 125-250 1,000 100-1,000 200-500
Electrical Conductivity µS/cm - <2,500 <2,500 150-400 160-1,600 440-1,100 250-500
Total Hardness mg/L as - - - 500 300 100-300
CaCO3
Calcium mg/L as Ca - - - 65-150 200 - 70-200*
Magnesium mg/L as Mg - - - 10 150 30 - <30
Alkalinity mg/L as - - - 65-150 - 70-200
CaCO3
Sodium mg/L as Na - 200 200 20 400 150 150 <50
Chloride mg/L as Cl - 250 250 50 600 250 250 <100
Aluminium mg/L as Al - 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 <0.2
Iron mg/L as Fe - 0.2 0.2 0.1 1.0 0.2 0.2 <0.1
Copper mg/L as Cu 2.0 2.0 2.0 1.0 0.05 2.0 1.0 1.0 <0.05
Zinc mg/L as Zn - - - 0.05 3 5.0 3.0 <0.1
Manganese mg/L as Mn - 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.1 0.4 0.4 0.05 <0.05
Boron mg/L as B 2.4 1.0 1.0 0.5 2.4 2.4 1.0 <1.0
(updated value)
Residual Chlorine mg/L as Cl2 0.2 - 5 - - <5.0 0.2-1.0 <5.0 0.2-0.5 0.5 – 0.6 0.4-0.6
0.2-0.5
(after 30 mins)
Bromate mg/l 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 - - - 0.01 0.01
Langelier Saturation Not set - - 0.0-0.5 - +0.1 - + 0.3
Index
Source: See References Section.
*Value in brackets indicates turbidity limit after powdered chemical addition such as lime or soda ash. Desalinated water limit must remain at <1.0.

10 http://pims03/pims/llisapi.dll/open/13365683
There are variations in drinking water standards around the Gulf depending on the location and the
contract being used.
As can be seen in Table 2.1, the Gulf Standards Organisation (GSO) standard for Unbottled Drinking
Water (GS/149/2008), adopted by EWA only contains a limited number of parameters compared to those
adopted by the other GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) states included in the table (Oman, Qatar and Abu
Dhabi). The Omani and Abu Dhabi standards and the GSO standards have similar values for most of the
parameters, while the Kahrama’a standard included much lower values for many of the metals present. It
is noted that a revised GSO for Unbottled Drinking Water was drafted in 2012 and water quality
parameters should be reviewed once finalised.
It is also significant that both the Omani standard and the Abu Dhabi standards have been revised to
permit a higher boron value of 2.4mg/L in line with the latest revision of the WHO Guidelines for Drinking-
water Quality, where the boron standard has been revised from 1.0mg/L to 2.4mg/L. Boron has always
been a problematic element for membrane desalination plants to remove because of its small particle size.
This in turn has meant that most plants have needed a two stage reverse osmosis (RO) system (see
Section 3.1.1) to achieve the boron standard. Adoption of the WHO’s 2011 revision would potentially
mean that a single stage RO system should be sufficient to achieve the new boron standard, resulting in
reduced capital and operating costs for RO treatment.
2.3 Recommended Water Quality Standards for Bahrain
As EWA has adopted the Gulf Standards Organisation (GSO) for Unbottled Drinking Water (GS/149/2008),
some parameters important for remineralisation and water palatability may not be monitored at their water
desalination plants.
Discussions have been held with EWA and the water quality standards presented herein have been
selected.
It should be noted that three levels of standard have been proposed. These are:
 Desalination Plant Delivery Point – These standards should be applied for treatment plants
discharging into the system.
 Distribution Network – Operation Target – This is the target value that should be used for the
operation of the distribution system.
 Distribution Network – Allowed Limit – This would represent the limits of what is considered
acceptable.
These have been based on the recommendations in the 2011 WHO Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality
and existing limits from the IWPPs at Hidd and Al Dur. These limits take into consideration water supply
technologies being used in Bahrain, including the standard disinfection process of chlorination for residual
free chlorine. If disinfection methods are to change to chlorine dioxide or chloramination then limits would
11 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

need to be imposed for chlorate, chlorite, mono-chloramine, di-chloramine, and tri-chloramines. However,
changing the disinfection process is not recommended in this report.
Table 2.2: Key Water Quality Parameters (Maximum permitted values)

Desalination Distribution Network
Plant Delivery
S. No Parameters Unit Point Operation Target Allowed Limits
1 Colour Pt/Co scale <1 <5 15
2 Turbidity NTU <0.2 <1 <5
3 Taste Unobjectionable Unobjectionable Unobjectionable
4 Odour Unobjectionable Unobjectionable Unobjectionable
5 Temperature (max) OC 40 - -
6 pH pH value 7.0-8.0 7.0-8.0 6.5-8.5
7 Total Dissolved Solids mg/l 100-300 100-500 100-1000
8 Electrical Conductivity μS/cm 200-500 200-900 200-1800
9 Total Hardness (max) mg/l as CaCO3 250 500 500
10 Calcium (min) mg/l as Ca 25 25 25
11 Magnesium (max.) mg/l as Mg 5 10 30
12 Alkalinity ( min) mg/l as CaCO3 70 70 50
13 Sodium (max) mg/l as Na 50 100 200
14 Chloride (max) mg/l as Cl 100 125 250
15 Aluminium (max) mg/l as Al 0.2 0.2 0.2
16 Iron (max) mg/l as Fe 0.1 0.2 0.2
17 Copper (max) mg/l as Cu 0.05 0.2 1.0
18 Zinc (max) mg/l as Zn 0.1 0.2 0.5
19 Manganese (max) mg/l as Mn 0.05 0.1 0.4
20 Boron (max) mg/l as B 1.0 1.5 2.0
21 Residual Chlorine mg/l as Cl2 0.4-0.6 0.3-0.5 0.2-0.7
22 Bromate (max) µg BrO3/l 2 5 10
23 Langelier Saturation Index 0.0 to +0.30 0.0 to +0.30 0.0 to +0.30
24 Total Organic Carbon mg/l <0.5 <1.0 <1.0
12 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Table 2.3: Additional Parameters (Maximum permitted values)

Plant Delivery
25 Sulphate mg SO4/l 50 50 50
26 Potassium mg K/l 10 10 10
27 Nitrate mg NO3/l 2 2 2
28 Nitrite mg NO2/l 0.1 0.1 0.1
29 Ammonium (ammonia and mg NH4/l 0.5 0.5 0.5
ammonium ions)
30 Dissolved or emulsified mg/l 0.01 0.01 0.01
hydrocarbons; mineral oil
31 Phosphorus mg P/l 2.2 2.2 2.2
32 Arsenic µg As/l 50 50 50
33 Cadmium µg Cd/l 5 5 5
34 Cyanides µg CN/l 50 50 50
35 Chromium µg Cr/l 50 50 50
36 Mercury µg Hg/l 1 1 1
37 Lead µg Pb/l 10 10 10
38 Antimony µg Sb/l 5 5 5
39 Selenium µg Se/l 10 10 10
40 Barium µg Ba/l 700 700 700
13 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Table 2.4: Organic Chemicals (Maximum permitted values)

Plant Delivery
41 Endrine µg/l 0.2 0.2 0.2
42 Lindane µg/l 2 2 2
43 Methoxychlor µg/l 10 10 10
44 2,4 dichlorophexy acetic µg/l 10 10 10
acid
45 2,4,5 trichlorophenoxy µg/l 10 10 10
propionic acid
46 Phenols µg/l 0.5 0.5 0.5
47 Heptachlor µg/l 0.03 0.03 0.03
48 Aldrin µg/l 0.03 0.03 0.03
49 DDT µg/l 2 2 2
50 Chlordane µg/l 0.2 0.2 0.2
51 Dieldrin µg/l 0.03 0.03 0.03
52 Heptachlor epoxide µg/l 0.03 0.03 0.03
53 Trichloroethene µg/l 10 10 10
54 Tetrachlormethane µg/l 3 3 3
55 Tetrachloroethene µg/l 10 10 10
56 Chloroform µg/l 10 10 10
57 Polycyclic aromatic µg/l 0.2 0.2 0.2
Hydrocarbons
58 Trihalomethanes µg/l 50 50 50
59 1,2 Dichloroethane µg/l 3 3 3
60 Benzene µg/l 1 1 1
61 Benzo (a) pyrene µg/l 0.01 0.01 0.01
62 Bromoform µg/l 30 30 30
63 Dichloromethane µg/l 5 5 5
64 Bromodichloromethane µg/l 10 10 10
65 Chlorobenzene µg/l 10 10 10
14 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Table 2.5: Micro-biological Parameters (Maximum permitted values)

Plant Delivery
66 Total coliforms Number/100 ml 0 0 0
67 E. coli or thermotolerent Number/100 ml 0 0 0
Faecal coliform bacteria
68 Enterococci Number/100 ml 0 0 0
69 Total Bacterial Count Number/ ml at 10 at 37°C 10 at 37°C 10 at 37°C
22°C or 37°C
2.4 Summary
Bahrain currently adopts the Gulf Standards Organisation (GSO) Standard for Unbottled Drinking Water
(GS/149/2008) which only contains a limited number of parameters compared to those adopted by other
GCC states (Oman, Qatar and Abu Dhabi).
Various recommendations have been made as to proposed revisions to the water quality standards which
were presented in revision A of this report. These have discussed with representatives from EWA.
Following these discussions EWA provided a table setting out a new set of potable water quality standards
that they prefer to work to. These have been compiled into Tables 2.2, Table 2.3, Table 2.4 and Table 2.5.
These parameters have prepared based the standards included in the Hidd and Al Dur Power and Water
Purchase Agreements and consideration of the World Health Organization Guidelines for Drinking-water
Quality (Fourth Edition), standards adopted in other countries and existing practices at comparable
treatment plants.
15 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Kingdom
m of BahrainElectricitty and Watter AuthorittyMaster
Water Tre
eatment Review
3 Revie
ew of Desa
alinatiion Water
W T tmentt
Treat
Technolog
gies
Water inn Bahrain is derived d from twoo main so

ources, naamely desa alinated sea
s water
and grooundwaterr. This section revie ews and contrasts
c current tre
eatment
technolo ogies, inccluding meembrane and
a distillaation desa
alination, as
a well ass
alternattive newerr processe es on the market. IIt is conclu
uded that Reverse Osmosis
is the most
m favou urable dessalination treatmentt technology for usee in Bahra
ain and it
is recom
mmended for future e productioon plants.
3.1 Membrane
e Desalina
ation
3.1.1 Reverse Osmosis

O
3.1.1.1 Overview of Process
Reverse oosmosis (RO O) is a membrane desalin nation processs, where pre

e-treated sea
awater is pum mped under
high presssure (typicallly 60-70 bar)) through a semi-permeable membran ne. The mem mbrane struccture is such
that waterr molecules can
c pass thro ough the me embrane whille the salts within
w the watter are exclu
uded and
become cconcentrated into brine, which
w is then discharged to the sea.
Figure 3.1: Simplified Schematic

S of Reverse Osm
mosis (RO) Sysstem
Source: De
esalData
As can bee seen from the

t above dia agram, a num
mber of diffe
erent chemica al dosing sysstems are req
quired,
including pre-treatmen
nt, pre-condittioning, mem
mbrane clean ning and postt-treatment. The post-tre eatment
processess of reminera
alisation and disinfection are common n with all dessalination tec
chnologies an
nd
discussedd in more dettail in Section
n 4.
16 33
35975/MEU/MW WE/0002/B 28 Ju uly 2015
htttp://pims03/pims/llisapi.dll/open
n/13365683
The treatment steps include:
Pre-treatment
 Chlorine for biofouling control in raw water mains.
 Coagulant for the removal of solids from the water (in conjunction with the media filter).
 Dechlorination (sodium bisulfite). Dechlorination is necessary before the RO membranes as generally
they are not chlorine resistant and will be damaged if exposed to excess chlorine.
Pre-conditioning:
 Scale Inhibitor. Scale inhibitors are commonly used to prevent the precipitation of chemicals such as
calcium carbonate or calcium sulphate on the membranes.
 Acid / Alkali (not shown in the above schematic). Acid or alkali can be added prior to the RO system.
Acid dosing (lowering the pH) will reduce the likelihood of scaling on the membranes, while alkali
dosing (raising the pH) will change the nature of boron in the water so that it can more easily be
removed.
Membrane cleaning:
 Various chemicals are used for membrane cleaning, including acids, alkalis and detergents. The exact
chemicals used depend on the nature of the fouling on the membranes. The cleaning sequence and
chemicals used are then modified depending on the nature of the fouling.
Post-treatment
 Remineralisation. Common with all desalination technologies, the desalinated water is very low in
minerals which can result in it being corrosive to the materials in the water distribution system.
Consequentially, it is necessary to remineralise the water.
 Disinfection. As with remineralisation, all water treatment systems require a disinfection stage. This is
commonly carried out using chlorine, but other disinfectants can be used.
Many of these processes are discussed further in Section 4.
3.1.1.2 Review
One of the major advantages of the RO desalination process is that it can be independently dispatched
within its technical limits as there is no other coupling with the power plant than the electrical connection. In
comparison, a thermal desalination processes are supplied with the low pressure steam and electricity.
The electric power consumption (and main component of the operating costs) is associated with pumping
the water through the RO membranes. Various technologies have been developed, collectively referred to
as Energy Recovery Devices (ERD) (not shown on the simplified diagram in Figure 3.1) which recovers
some of this pumping energy from the water brine flow. There are a number of different types of ERD, the
most common being Pelton Wheels, Turbo-Chargers and Pressure Exchangers. A Pelton Wheel is
currently being used at the Al Dur desalination plant. Typically, turbo-chargers can achieve energy
recovery efficiencies in the order of 70% depending on the size of the units.
17 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

One of the main challenges of applying reverse osmosis treatment is the prevention of fouling of the
reverse osmosis membranes themselves. In order to do this a number of pre-treatment steps are used.
High levels of suspended solids can overload the plants resulting in fouling of the membranes and reduced
plant throughput. This can particularly occur when algal blooms occur, as has been observed in the
Arabian Gulf. There are, however, effective pre-treatment processes that have been adopted in the Gulf to
successfully address this issue. Pre-treatment steps are discussed separately in Section 4.
Overall, there are many advantages to RO technology over other desalination processes. Most importantly,
RO technology has lower CAPEX and lifecycle costs, can be upgraded in a modular fashion, and is not
dependent on power demands. These advantages are discussed further in this report.
Summary
Reverse osmosis remains a well-developed and widely used desalination process, with numerous
successful applications both in the Gulf and internationally. It is recommended as being a suitable
technology for application in Bahrain.
3.1.2 Brackish Water Reverse Osmosis (BWRO)
As discussed in Section 1.2, water in Bahrain is sourced from groundwater as well as the sea. The
groundwater utilised for potable water supply is brackish and of variable water quality – both in terms of
salinity and TDS, and hydrocarbon contamination (see Section 4). Brackish waters tend to have TDS in the
range of 1,000 to 15,000mg/L. In comparison, the TDS of seawater is around 45,000mg/L.
Technologies for the treatment of brackish groundwater are very varied and depend on the nature of the
groundwater and the water quality issues encountered, but the most common treatment is reverse
osmosis.
Brackish water reverse osmosis (BWRO) systems will typically achieve recoveries, the amount of product
water produced compared to the feedwater, in the order of 65-80%. This means that for every 1,000 m3
treated, between 650 and 800 m3 of potable water will be produced and between 200 to 350 m3 of brine
water. In addition, since water with lower salinities are being treated, less pressure and hence less power
is required than for sea water desalination using reverse osmosis.
3.2 Thermal Desalination
3.2.1 Multi-Effect Distillation (MED)
Multi-Effect Distillation (MED) is a thermal desalination process consisting of multiple stages (‘effects’) of
the heating of seawater. Seawater (the “feedwater”) is introduced into all stages of the process with the
product water (distillate) only being removed at the end of the treatment chain. The seawater is heated by
18 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Kingdom
Water Tre
eatment Review
direct con
ntact between n a heat exchhanger surfa ace and the incoming sea awater. Steaam provides the initial
heating sttage but is on
nly introduce
ed at the firstt effect. The heating of subsequent effects
e is provvided by the
vapour fro
om the previo ous effects, thereby
t iteratively reducing the energ gy usage at each
e stage.
A Thermo o Vapour Com mpressor (TVVC) is often added to the e process in order
o ease the amount of
to incre
distillate p
per unit steam
m input and this
t process is termed MED-TVC. Fo or the remain nder of the re
eport, MED
and MED--TVC will nott be differenttiated unlesss is specificallly required.
The figure
e below provides a schem
matic overvie
ew of the ME
ED-TVC proccess.
Figure 3.2: Schematic Diagram of Multi-Effect

M Dis
stillation (MED
D-TVC) Processs
Source: De
esalData
3.2.1.2 Review
MED tech hnology is old

der than RO and MSF tecchnologies but
b the ‘curre ent version’ used
u in desalination
facilities w
was develope ed during the
e late 1990s and early 20
000s. Since this time, mo ore than half of all
thermal IW WPP were co ontracted witth MED. The
e largest MEDD unit is in op
peration in Yanbu,
Y Saudi Arabia and
its name plate
p capacitty is 15 MIGDD.
The most critical opera ational param meter of the modern MED on is the top brine temperrature which
D desalinatio
is imposed by the alka aline scale. Currently
C the MED shouldd not be operated beyond d 65oC otherrwise scale
will form e
easily. Ironica
ally, this limittation in the top
t brine tem
mperature leaaves room fo or further imp
provement
in MED since the theo oretical performance ratio o (PR) of ME
ED could be up
u 23 while the practical maximum
PR of MS SF is not exce eeding 12~13 3. However,, it should be
e noted that the
t design pe erformance rratio is
similar to that of MSF at the mome ent.
19 33
35975/MEU/MW WE/0002/B 28 Ju uly 2015
n/13365683
MED has a lower electrical energy consumption compared to other desalination processes, thereby
offering financial savings and a lower environmental impact. It is, however, dependent upon the availability
of steam from power processes.
The chemical demands of MED desalination are low, with minimal pre-treatment being required.
Variations in seawater conditions can therefore be tolerated. There is a risk of scale formation on the heat
exchanger surface which is managed by limiting the top brine temperature at the first effect and the
addition of anti-scalants and by ensuring a sufficient flow of seawater to fully wet the heat exchanger.
Thermal desalination plants are reliable and subject to few outage or maintenance issues, but it should be
noted that outages can occur more frequently towards the end of their asset lives.
In Bahrain the MED process is used at the Hidd IWPP site along with Multi-Stage Flash (MSF), with the
MED plant reported to be more efficient (see Section 5). The demand on the power plant has a significant
control on the water production facility, which is considered to be a limitation of thermal desalination
facilities. MED is also used in Bahrain at the Alba Coke Plant.
Summary
MED is one of the oldest and most widely-used desalination technologies, with a long history in Bahrain.
MED offers a reliable, high quality treatment method with low chemical usage but high energy demand. It
should continue to be considered for selection in future desalination developments but with an awareness
of the limitations and challenges that are apparent with such energy-intensive and dependent desalination
processes.
3.2.2 Multi-Stage Flash (MSF)
MSF is another widely used thermal distillation desalination process. In contrast to MED, ‘feedwater’ is
only introduced into the last stage of the process, having been de-aerated. Product water (distillate) is
again only removed at the end of the treatment process. The brine is “flashed” between each stage
through an orifice causing vapour to be produced. This vapour is condensed onto the condenser section
of the stage, in-turn heating the recycling brine. The condensate is collected and cascaded through all the
stages and removed via the product water pump from the last stage.
The figure below provides a schematic overview of the Multi Stage Flash (MSF) process.
20 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Kingdom
Water Tre
eatment Review
Figure 3.3: Schematic Diagram of MSF

M Process
Source: De
esalData
3.2.2.2 Review
MSF was first installed d in Kuwait inn 1975/6 and d has a long history in thee Gulf. It is a mature techhnology with
well-estabblished scalee and corrosio on controls. The operatio
onal limit of the MSF is im mposed by thhe sulphate
scale whicch is very diffficult to remo
ove once formed. Curren ntly, the top brine temperrature and th he maximum
o
TDS at the outlet of thhe brine heatter is 120 C and
a 67,000~ ~68,000ppm respectively.. It is unlikelyy these two
major ope erational paraameters will be improved d in next 15 years.
y Howev ed that manufacturers
ver, it is note
are trying to minimize energy conssumption by optimizing th he tube lengtth and diame eters which rresult in a
significantt reduction in
n the specificc power conssumption fromm 4.5kWh/m3 to 3.3kWh/m3. The larrgest MSF
unit is und
der constructtion in Saudi Arabia with a name plate capacity off 20 MIGD.
The perfo ormance ratio o (PR) is the efficiency index of the th

hermal desaliination which
h shows how w much
w a unit (2,326kJ) heatt input. Histo
distillate iss produced with orically the PR
R of MSF waas in the rang
ge of 8 to 10
depending g on the leve
el of optimiza
ation in termss of steam co
onsumption anda the cost of material and
a fuel.
MSF is a highly energy intensive process.

p MSSF plants are
e consequenttially often pa
aired with po
ower plants,
reducing tthe combinedd energy req
quirements by
b a half to a third. This adds
a a depenndency on thhe power
productionn, however, which
w e problematic.
can be
The MSF process is used

u at Sitra and Hidd in Bahrain. Th he Sitra plantt is considere
ed old and
conseque eptible to outages due to tube failuress. It is noted at the Hidd IWPP where
entially susce e both
technolog
gies are in op
peration, thatt the MSF unnits require le
ess maintena ance than the e MED units..
21 33
35975/MEU/MW WE/0002/B 28 Ju uly 2015
n/13365683
Summary
MSF should continue to be considered for selection in future desalination developments but with an
awareness of the limitations and challenges that are apparent, in particular in relation to the energy
demands and dependencies of thermal desalination processes.
3.3 Alternative Desalination Technologies
There are a large number of alternative desalination technologies that are available or are under
development. So far these technologies have not yet achieved large scale commercial operation.
The most commonly discussed technologies are:

 Forward Osmosis
 Membrane Distillation
 Capacitive Desalination
These technologies are briefly reviewed in the following sections.
Forward Osmosis
Forward osmosis is similar to reverse osmosis in that water flows across a semi-permeable membrane
which excludes the salts. Under reverse osmosis the driving force for the process is provided by hydraulic
pressure. Under forward osmosis the water is effectively “sucked” through the membrane by having a
“saltier” solution, known as draw-solution, on the other side.
The chemicals used to make up the “saltier” solution can be carefully selected so that the water can more
easily be separated from the draw solution.
Various chemicals have been investigated with different properties. In essence the chemicals may
become gases or solids and hence can be easily separated from the water, or the solution can be more
easily treated using conventional reverse osmosis because the membranes are less prone to fouling and
so can be operated at higher rates or higher recovery percentages.
Forward osmosis has not reached full scale commercialization stage yet and is therefore not
recommended for future development in Bahrain at the present time.
Membrane Distillation
Membrane distillation is similar to thermal desalination technologies in that the seawater is heated and
then the water vapour that is produced is condensed back into water. Under membrane distillation a
membrane is used to separate warm water from cold water which is permeable to water vapour but is
impermeable to liquid water. The water vapour can therefore diffuse across the membrane, leaving the
salts beyond in the seawater stream, producing pure water on the other side of the membrane.
22 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

A number of pilot scale membrane distillations, using various membranes and configurations, have been
trialled but so far these have not demonstrated commercial application.
As such, it is not recommended that membrane distillation is adopted by Bahrain at this stage.
Capacitive Desalination
Various types of electrically driven desalination technologies have been developed.
Under capacitive desalination the water is passed through electrodes which attract and absorb the cations
(positive ions such as Na+) and the anions (negative ions such as Cl-) and produces a stream of purer
water. After a time, the charges on the electrodes are reversed and the absorbed ions are released to
produce a high salt wastewater stream.
This technology is non-pressure, non-membrane desalination process and is more applicable to brackish
water. It remains under development and is currently at the lab scale/R&D phase.
For these reasons, capacitive desalination is not recommended for treatment plants in Bahrain.
Summary
It is not recommended that any of these newer, alternative, technologies are adopted in Bahrain during this
planning horizon to 2030, as they have not yet achieved large scale commercial operation or are not
appropriate for large-scale desalination treatment.
3.4 Combination of Technologies
Some new combined power and water plants in the Gulf region (UAE and Qatar) are opting for a
combination of MED and RO processes. This takes advantage of lower temperature-operated MED
processes coupled with a power plant heat recovery steam generator.
Such combined plants can be more efficient in terms of power consumption compared to stand alone
power and desalination plants (including RO) and they do provide the versatility of having different
desalination technologies. However, they need to be finely tuned to ensure all three plants (power, MED
and RO) are operating as efficiently as possible. This would require increased monitoring and control from
operations staff.
23 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Kingdom
Water Tre
eatment Review
Figure 3.4: Schematic Diagram of Combined

C MED
D-RO Processs
Source: Mahbub et al. 200

09
3.5 Compariso
on of Desa
alination Technologie
es
Thermal d desalination plants have a long standing history in Bahrain and

a familiaritty with the te
echnology iss
quite stron
ng.
The new A Al Dur powe er and RO plant is demon nstrating tha

at RO desalinnation is a te
echnically fea
asible option
n
for Bahraiin. A valid concern
c is lesss flexibility for
f source water contamiination risks such as high h TDS, algall
blooms oor oil spills. These risks are addre essed at the e pre-treatmeent stage an nd can be mitigated
m byy
ensuring ffuture RO plants have ro obust speciffications to allow
a for all possible
p source water co ontaminationn
risks.
As a result of the loweer energy co onsumption and

a the incre easing cost of
o oil, reversee osmosis is increasinglyy
being sele ected as the
e preferred desalination
d technology
t o
over thermall desalination
n. Further, a noticeablee
issue of ccombined wa ater power plants (CWPP P) with therm
mal desalinatiion is the dependency off the thermall
desalination plant on steam supplly from the power
p plant. The changiing demand pattern of power affectss
the steamm supply to the thermal desalination n units. As a result, du uring periodss of low powwer demand,
steam raissed directly from
f fuel fired boilers leads to an incrrease in desa
alinated wateer costs.
Reverse o osmosis andd thermal (M

MED and MS SF) desalinattion processe
es have bee en compared d in terms off
their enerrgy use, chem
mical consum
mption and advantages/ddisadvantagees in the follo
owing section
ns.
24 33
35975/MEU/MW WE/0002/B 28 Ju uly 2015
n/13365683
3.5.1.1 Energy Use
The thermal (distillation) desalination technologies, particularly MSF, have a long track record of successful
commercial operation in the Middle East. However, thermal desalination requires considerably more
energy than reverse osmosis (membrane) desalination. A comparison of the energy requirements of
different technologies is presented in the table below.
Table 3.1: Comparison of energy requirements between RO and thermal desalination (MED/MSF)
Energy RO MSF MED
Performance ratio (kg of distillate per 2326 kJ) - 9 9
3
Thermal energy (MJ/m ) - 258 258
Elec. Equiv. (kWh/m3)* - 24 24
Electrical (kWh/m3) 4.0 3.5 1.2
Total (kWh/m3) 4.0 27.5 25.2
*Electricity that could be generated if the desalination plant was not operating, at 33% of steam turbine efficiency
As can be seen from the above table, seawater reverse osmosis typically requires approximately a sixth as
much energy as thermal desalination processes. This could have significant implications for cost if the fuel
price is high.
3.5.1.2 Chemical Consumption
A comparison of the chemical consumption for each process is made in Table 3.2. RO treatment requires
the use of more chemicals, especially for pre-treatment, whereas the MED and MSF processes require
significantly less quantities of chemicals per m3 of produced water.
Table 3.2: Comparison of chemical consumption between RO and thermal desalination (MED/MSF)
Chemical consumption per m3 of desalinated
water produced (g/m3)
Chemical Description RO MSF MED
Anti-scalant All Desalination processes 2.92 4.4 11.6
Anti-foam Thermal Desalination processes 0.7 0.4
Sodium Sulphite Thermal Desalination processes 3.5 0.4
Tri-sodium phosphate MED process - 0.3
Sulphuric acid Seawater conditioning 65
Caustic soda Boron removal 23
Ferric chloride DAF coagulant 75
Coagulant aid (Nalco) DAF coagulant aid 0.8
Polymer (sludge treatment) DAF sludge treatment 0.4
Sodium meta bisulfite RO module protection 0.3
Citric acid RO module cleaning 2.8
Source: MML
25 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

3.5.1.3 Advantages and Disadvantages
A holistic comparison of the three technologies is made in Table 3.3.
Table 3.3: Comparison of RO, MSF and MED processes

Area RO MSF MED
Process Membrane separation using Multi-stage flashing of sea Multi-effect distillation of
mechanical pressure water in flash chamber. steam on tube surface.
differentials.
CAPEX Moderately high High High
Total electrical power Moderate to high Medium Low
consumption (depending up on raw water
TDS)
Heat energy Not required Typically 260 kJ/kg of Typically 260 kJ/kg of
distillate distillate
Chemical consumption High Moderate Moderate
Sea water oil contamination Very sensitive Good Good
Sea water algal bloom Good, subject to design of Good Good
pre-treatment process
Maintenance requirements Moderate throughout life of Good for majority of Good for majority of
RO subject to pre-treatment desalination unit life. desalination unit life.
operation.
Operational flexibility Plant is standalone; Capacity subject to Capacity subject to
production capacity is not availability of steam from availability of steam from
dependant on power plant power generation. power generation.
operation. Operation of auxiliary Operation of auxiliary
boilers is sometimes boilers is sometimes
required. required.
Expansion and upgrade Expansion is modular. To Thermal desalination unit Thermal desalination unit
upgrade, modules, racks, cannot be expanded. cannot be expanded or
pumps can be replaced as partially upgraded.
required.
Environmental impact Concentrated Brine Thermal Pollution Thermal Pollution
Operational issues Membrane Fouling Tube degradation Heat Exchanger Scaling
Product to seawater intake 35-40% 12.5% 12.5%
ratio
Product water quality 100 - 500 <25 <25
(mg/L TDS)
Source: MML
Table 3.3 provides a general comparison of various factors associated with the operation of each
technology. Although RO requires more chemicals, the difference in energy requirement makes RO
cheaper at producing desalinated water.
The MSF and MED processes rely on a steam supply from the power plant. The power output reduces at
times of decreasing demand. Auxiliary boilers can be brought online to supplement the steam supply to
26 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

the thermal desalination units at these times. The RO process, however, is standalone and can be
optimised independently of other processes.
When considering overall reliability, the MSF and MED processes can be more reliable in the first two-
thirds of their operating life; with increased outages observed towards the end of the units’ lives, when tube
replacement frequencies increase. RO plants may require more maintenance throughout their lives;
however this is primarily related to the selection and design of the pre-treatment process and maintenance
programme.
The environmental impacts from a thermal plant are potentially more serious than an RO plant with
discharges of warm water, chlorine and anti-scalants. In addition, because of the lower recovery rates
there are greater volumes of discharge for a given water production. This is true if desalination processes
are directly compared. However, if power plants are included in the analysis, the comparison is not as
clear-cut, as thermal desalination can act as the condenser for the power plant.
Thermal processes have the advantage that the product water quality is generally higher. RO could,
however, achieve comparable quality with additional membrane passes, as is the case at Al Dur (see
Section 5).
Spreading the risk over several technologies would provide additional security. For future desalination
options for the Bahrain water supply, it is recommended to maintain a balance between RO and thermal
desalination, but for RO to be the favoured option.
3.6 Summary
Alternative desalination technologies were reviewed including Forward Osmosis, Membrane Distillation
and Capacitive Desalination. These technologies were not recommended for new development in Bahrain
as they have not yet achieved large scale commercial operation.
The MED and MSF thermal desalination processes are robust process with generally low maintenance
requirements. The operation of the thermal processes is often tied to power plant output so increasing
power production leads to increased water production and reduced power leads to reduced water
production when both are operating at their most efficient point.
On a volumetric basis, RO uses more chemicals, less power, and has a greater production yield. The
additional cost of chemicals is a fraction of the potential savings in power. RO plants are standalone and
can be upgraded and updated in a modular fashion throughout their lives.
Whilst it is beneficial to maintain a diversification of desalination technologies, for future plant upgrades in
Bahrain it is recommended to consider RO processes as the primary desalination technology.
If thermal desalination is selected for combined power water plants, it is recommended to consider a hybrid
MSF/RO or MED/RO process for improved power efficiency and reliability. Further consideration needs to
27 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

be given to the most economic dispatching of the various power and water production plants to achieve an
overall optimal balance.
28 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

4 Review of Desalination Water Treatment

Chemicals
The use of appropriate chemicals in the water treatment process determines the
effectiveness of the treatment stream, the efficiency of the plant and can reduce
operational costs. A range of chemical treatment methods have been reviewed to
investigate the alternatives currently available and recommend those for used in
Bahrain.
Chemicals are used for a range of functions within water treatment, including:
 Control of bio-fouling of seawater intakes
 Coagulation and flocculation
 Anti-scalants
 Remineralisation
 Disinfection
These processes are discussed in the following sections. The chemicals used at existing plants in Bahrain
are discussed in Section 5.
4.1 Pre-Treatment
4.1.1 Control of Bio-Fouling of Seawater Intakes
Biofouling can reduce the throughput by reducing the capacity of the intake pipes and pre-treatment units
by the growth of marine organisms. The control of bio-fouling of seawater intakes is a widely debated
matter and is often found to be very site-specific. Some sites have found that they have to do little or no
bio-fouling control, whilst for others it can be a particular issue. A number of approaches have been tried
to control bio-fouling with different results.
Shock chlorination is commonly used, although this has varying levels of success at different sites. If
marine growth, such as mussels, should become established within the system, shock chlorination is often
insufficient to remove it.
Pulse chlorination has been adopted at some sites. With this system, chlorine is applied in comparatively
small doses at a defined time interval. The time interval is carefully worked out based on laboratory
experiments based on the time it takes for mussels and other marine organisms to return to feeding after
experiencing chlorine. Typically, marine organisms ‘close up’ if they detect chlorine in the water. They
then wait a certain amount of time to let the chlorine pass before opening up again.
If they should then detect chlorine they will close up again. By timing the pulses of chlorine it can be
arranged so they are always closed and are unable to feed.
29 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Chlorine dioxide treatment has also been investigated at some sites. However, chlorine dioxide is more
expensive and more complex to produce than chlorine and can produce chlorate and chlorite as
breakdown products.
Facilities can be provided to allow “pigs” to be launched down the pipelines to physically clean the
pipelines. Pigging facilities are available for a wide range of sizes, although may not be available for very
large pipelines. Provision for pigging of the pipelines provides a safe and reliable alternative to putting
divers into the pipelines to clean them. Regular pigging of the pipelines should effectively prevent
significant bio-growth.
Where chlorine is used for bio-fouling control this is typically either generated on site either from brine
produced from salt or seawater, or from sodium hypochlorite solution or less commonly now chlorine gas.
Any of these systems are considered suitable provided adequate safety precautions are in place.
4.1.1.1 Recommendation
For the control of bio-fouling in seawater intakes, it is therefore recommended to implement a programme
of shock chlorination to prevent the establishment of marine organisms. If these have already become
established, or the treatment is not effective, pulse chlorination should be trialled. Subsequently, regular
pigging of the pipelines could be undertaken to physically remove the bio-growth.
4.1.2 Control of Bio-Fouling of Membranes
A challenge of membrane desalination technologies such as RO is the prevention of fouling of the

membranes themselves. High levels of suspended solids can overload the plants resulting in fouling of the
membranes and reduced plant throughput. This can particularly occur when algal blooms occur, as has
been observed in the Arabian Gulf.
In order to control this, a number of pre-treatment steps are used, typically including bio-fouling control of
the intake pipe and structures followed by:
 Particle removal –Coagulation and sand filtration are commonly used to remove particles from the
water which could clog or foul the membranes. Increasingly more advanced pre-treatment systems,
such as dissolved air flotation or membrane filtration (ultra or micro filtration) are being used; and
 Chemical conditioning – Anti-scalant, acids and alkali can be added to prevent, control or reduce
chemical scaling and fouling on the membranes.
These are addressed as follows.
4.1.2.1 Coagulation, Flocculation and Sedimentation
Coagulation is the process whereby small suspended particles in the water are caused to clump together
(coagulate) which can then be removed by settlement, flotation or filtration. Chemical agents are added to
aid this process. Typically iron, ferrous (Fe2+) or ferric (Fe3+) ions, or aluminium (Al3+) are used.
30 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Commonly in the Middle East, ferric chloride (FeCl3) is used and is currently used in the dissolved air
flotation (DAF) plant at Al Dur.
Generally it has been found that different coagulants can be used with only minor differences in
performance and dose. The biggest difference is commonly found to be a result of the cost of the
chemicals, rather than the effectiveness of the chemical.
Organic polyelectrolytes can be used as flocculants or, in some cases, coagulants. Typically only very low
doses of flocculent are required and care needs to be taken as overdosing of flocculent can result in filter
media becoming clogged together if the backwashing of the filters is not very effective.
Selecting the right coagulant is process dependent and selection should be assessed at the time selecting
treatment technology. New coagulants are being developed regularly and for any new application a review
of the market should be undertaken.
4.1.2.2 Dissolved Air Floatation (DAF)
Dissolved air floatation (DAF) is a membrane desalination pre-treatment step that can be tailored to the
particular requirements of a desalination plant and is therefore discussed here.
Commonly these are:

 Dissolved air flotation (DAF) plus Dual Media Filtration
 Micro or Ultra Membrane Filtration
 Dissolved air flotation (DAF) plus Micro or Ultra Membrane Filtration
Over recent years a number of major plants have been constructed using DAF and Dual media filters,
including Al Dur in Bahrain and Fujairah 2 in the UAE. It is understood that, to date, these plants have
been able to operate satisfactorily regardless of the seawater quality. However, there are no example
plants in the region that have been operating for many years with DAF to fully prove this technology.
There are relatively few large scale plants that have utilised micro or ultrafiltration before SWRO. This is
generally considered an un-proven pre-treatment system and operators have been reluctant to install it for
large scale installations.
A few plants are being installed that utilise both DAF and micro/ultra membrane filtration. These include Al
Zawra in Ajman (UAE), Ghalilah in Ras al Khaimah (UAE) and Shuwaik in Kuwait.
Experience has shown that in many cases the traditional pre-treatment of dual media filtration is sufficient
for most of the time but is inadequate during times of poor water quality, such as if a storm should lead to
higher levels of turbidity or if an algal bloom should occur. In many cases operators are now requiring the
provision of a DAF system to treat the water at these times.
31 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Figure 4.1: Al Dur Dissolved Air Floatation Process
Source: Mott MacDonald
4.1.2.3 Recommendations
In our experience, coagulation, flocculation, and the use of dissolved air floatation is the most suitable pre-
treatment technology for membrane desalination plants. The DAF process followed by filtration is a robust
treatment that is able to handle a wide range of source water turbidities and other contaminants to protect
the downstream RO.
New RO plants or future expansions should give consideration to Dissolved Air Floatation Filtration (DAFF)
technology with a view to reducing footprint and overall Net Present Value costs. The benefit of a DAFF
system is that the sand filter is integrated within the DAF chamber which results in a lower plant footprint,
lower overall capital costs and can potentially provide pumping efficiencies.
4.1.3 Anti-Scalants
Anti-scalant treatment is required in both membrane and desalination plants. Various different types of
anti-scalants are used for different uses. Common uses are:
 Prevent scale formation on heating elements in MED plants
 Control scaling in MSF plants
 Prevent scale formation in SWRO / BWRO plants
The selection of the appropriate anti-scalant is a complex process and normally requires the specialist
advice of the chemical supplier. New chemicals are being developed and a regular review of the
32 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

chemicals used and the chemical supplier should be undertaken to ensure that the best chemical is being
used and that the best value for money is being achieved.
4.2 Hydrocarbons
Petroleum contamination is understood to be an issue in some isolated wells in the aquifers in Bahrain. Oil
spills also present a risk in the Gulf region. Typical treatment technologies used in Bahrain involve
activated carbon contactors, which have a high adsorption capacity for hydrocarbons. Spent activated
carbon can be regenerated by thermal reactivation or be replaced with “fresh” activated carbon.
4.2.1 Recommendation
Although activated carbon is a proven substance for the adsorption of hydrocarbons, it is recommended to
investigate alternative new hydrocarbon adsorbers that could have lower maintenance requirements in
comparison to the existing system. Identifying media that can be more easily regenerated onsite, have a
longer life, and lower maintenance costs will provide benefits over the existing system. Such examples in
the market are zeolites, nano-clays and polymers.
4.3 Remineralisation
Remineralisation is common with all desalination technologies and is the process whereby the water is
stabilised with respect to pH, hardness and alkalinity. Without remineralisation the water would be
corrosive to many of the materials used within the water distribution system, such as cement mortar linings
of pipelines, and would be subject to significant changes in pH.
There are four main parameters of concern when considering remineralisation. These are:
 Alkalinity – This is a measure of the pH buffering of the water. Commonly the presence of carbon
dioxide, bicarbonate and carbonate ions act to buffer the effect of acid or alkali addition on the pH of
the water.
 pH – This is a measure of the acidity or alkalinity of the water.
 Hardness – This is a measure of the concentration of the hardness (metal) ions, particularly calcium
and magnesium.
 Langelier Saturation Index – This is a measure of the potential of the water to dissolve or precipitate
calcium carbonate - the most common form of scale encountered in water. Slight scale deposition
provides a protective coating on surfaces which should reduce the rate of corrosion.
The following sections provide a summary of calcium carbonate precipitation theory, the use of the
Langelier Saturation Index, and chemicals used to control precipitation and corrosion.
33 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

4.3.1 Calcium Carbonate Precipitation
A number of indices have been developed to show whether calcium carbonate precipitation will occur.
These include:
 Langelier Saturation Index
 Ryznar Index
 Saturation Ratio
Of these, the Langelier Saturation Index (LSI) is used throughout Bahrain and the Gulf. The calculation and
interpretation of the LSI are described below.
4.3.1.1 Langelier Saturation Index
This is defined as:
Langelier Saturation Index  pH - pHs

where pH  pH of the raw water
and pHs  pH at which the water would theoretically start precipitating scale
There are a number of ways of calculating this index. A commonly used quick method was published by
Palin in 1978. The water quality characteristics are looked up in the data table provided, and the factors
added together. Palin then provided a table to add in the interpretation of the Langelier Saturation Index
(LSI), which is reproduced below.
Table 4.1: Classification of Water by Langelier Saturation Index

LSI Condition of Water
-1.5 to -0.6 Potentially scale dissolving
-0.5 to -0.2 Acceptable balance
-0.1 to +0.1 Ideal balance
0.2 to 0.5 Acceptable balance
0.6 to 1.5 Potentially scale forming
As can be seen above is Langelier Saturation Index of -0.1 to +0.1 is an ideal range. However, more
conservative values have been selected to ensure stabilised, potabilised water is delivered to customers.
Selecting a range that is +0.1 – +0.3 is also easier to achieve and more suited Bahrain.
4.3.2 Chemicals Used for Remineralisation
In order to remineralise the water it is normally necessary to:

 Increase the alkalinity
 Increase the hardness
34 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

 Maintain the pH within an acceptable range

 Maintain the LSI within an acceptable range
Typical target values (from the Al Dur IWPP) would be:

 Alkalinity 70-200 mg/L as CaCO3
 Calcium Hardness 70-200 mg/L as CaCO3
 pH between 7.0 and 8.0
 LSI between +0.1 and +0.3
A wide range of chemicals are used to remineralise the water. The effects of the various chemicals are
summarised in the following table.
Table 4.2: Summary of the Effect of Various Remineralisation Chemicals
Total
Inorganic
Chemical pH Hardness Alkalinity LSI Carbon
Acid
Sulphuric Acid   
Carbon Dioxide    
Alkali
Sodium Hydroxide (Caustic Soda)   
Calcium Hydroxide (Hydrated Lime)    
Sodium Carbonate    
Sodium Bicarbonate    
Calcium Carbonate (Limestone)     
In addition to chemical dosing, water remineralisation is also being achieved through groundwater blending
of produced water at dedicated blending stations in Bahrain. Due to increasing salinity levels and taste
concerns, MM have recommended in its Groundwater Study that EWA consider moving away completely
from groundwater blending and performing potabilisation at the plants.
In order to satisfactorily meet the remineralisation targets for pH, hardness, alkalinity and LSI in Table 2.2,
it is necessary to add a combination of an acid and an alkali. This is because it is found that just the
addition of an alkali is insufficient to achieve compliance with all four of the parameters, commonly
because the pH is too high.
Typically the following arrangements are used:

 Calcium hydroxide + carbon dioxide
 Calcium carbonate + carbon dioxide
 Calcium carbonate + sulphuric acid
 Calcium chloride + sodium hydroxide + carbon dioxide
35 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

The first three arrangements have the advantage of only requiring two chemical dosing systems. The main
constraint of this, though, is that only certain combinations of pH, alkalinity and hardness can be obtained,
as the calcium hydroxide/carbonate are providing both the hardness and alkalinity in the water.
The last arrangement requires three chemical dosing systems. It offers the advantage of allowing the
hardness, alkalinity and pH to be adjusted largely independently of each other. However, this additional
flexibility is not normally required as the stipulated alkalinity, hardness and pH values are normally
minimum values and slight overdosing of one or other chemical does not represent a problem.
The review of the sites presented in Section 5 shows that both Al Dur and Ras Abu Jarjur use lime and
carbon dioxide for remineralisation. It should be noted that:
 The maximum pH of 8.0 effectively imposes a very narrow control band on the system if the LSI value
is to be achieved.
 A more practical limit of 8.5 has been selected by EWA for the distribution system but they have
retained the previous limit of 8.0 at the treatment plant.
 Limestone plus carbon dioxide gives a wider control range of acceptable values than lime plus carbon
dioxide. This is because there is a greater concentration of Carbonate/bicarbonate/carbon dioxide in
the system, which provides buffering.
 The total chemical dose (limestone plus carbon dioxide or lime plus carbon dioxide) is similar for the
two systems to achieve a pH of 8.0, but the limestone system has a much lower carbon dioxide
concentration.
It is recommended that future desalination plants use calcium carbonate + carbon dioxide or calcium
hydroxide + carbon dioxide combinations for potabilisation.
4.4 Disinfection
In order to produce safe drinking water, it is vital that effective disinfection of the water and provision of a
free chlorine residual to the final customer is achieved. Free chlorine is the most common form of
disinfection treatment at desalination plants across Bahrain and the Gulf. Alternative chemicals and
methods can be used, including:
 Ozone
 Ultraviolet light
 Chlorine dioxide
 Chlorine gas
 Sodium hypochlorite
 Onsite electrically generated sodium hypochlorite
The following sections review the alternative disinfectants that are available, to determine whether there is
a practical and cost effective alternative to free chlorine for the disinfection of the water.
36 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

4.4.1 Ozone
Ozone is a powerful disinfectant. In order to achieve a 4 log destruction of viruses, a common standard, it
would be necessary to maintain an ozone concentration of 0.5 mg/L for 36 seconds (at a water
temperature of 25°C). Ozone is also a powerful oxidising agent that will rapidly oxidise any iron or
manganese in the water.
However, because of this high reactivity it can often prove to be difficult to maintain an ozone concentration
in the water for significant lengths of time.
Ozone is much less soluble in water than chlorine and as a result more complex systems are required to
dissolve it in the water. Often this will involve a large specially-designed contact chamber with diffusers in
the bottom of the tank to bubble ozone through the water. Some modern installations utilise a static mixer-
based system to provide the contact between the ozone and the water.
Significantly, ozone is a toxic gas and so should not be allowed to vent from the top of the contact
chamber. Instead, it is necessary to provide an air extraction system that will extract the air and pass it
through a special ozone destruction system prior to releasing gases to the atmosphere.
It is not possible to store and transport ozone, instead it needs to be produced on site. The technology for
ozone production at water treatment works is well developed and has a proven track record for reliability.
The main issue relates to the feed gas used for generating ozone. There are two principal sources of the
necessary oxygen, namely either liquid oxygen or a specially processed air.
The production of ozone from air is complex, and requires that the air be processed to achieve a dew point
of -70°C. One way of achieving this is to pass the air through refrigerant and desiccant dryers. All the
alternative air preparation systems are complex and require frequent maintenance. Failure of these
systems can cause significant damage to the ozone generators leading to significant costs to replace the
damaged components.
In the UK, the use of liquid oxygen is generally now preferred. The infrastructure for the production and
distribution of liquid oxygen is well established and the safety issues are well understood, with mechanisms
and procedures in place to address its issues. If this approach were to be adopted in Bahrain it would be
necessary to have regular deliveries of high quality liquid oxygen.
In theory ozone could be dosed at all of the points where chlorine is currently dosed. Each dosing point
has potential advantages and disadvantages, namely:
 Seawater – Ozone is reported to enhance coagulation and so may improve the coagulation process,
but because of the seawater quality it is likely that it would be very difficult to establish a sufficient
concentration of ozone for the required time to disinfect the water.
 Post-treatment – This dosing point would provide a low turbidity water which can be effectively
disinfected. A contact chamber could be constructed to treat the water.
37 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Ozone does not establish a disinfection residual so another chemical, such as chlorine or monochloramine
would need to be dosed following ozonation.
Ozone can react with bromide in the seawater which can lead to the formation of suspected carcinogenic
disinfection by-products such as bromate. WHO guidelines have established a value of 0.010 mg/L for
Bromate. Significant levels of bromide exist in sea waters and as such there is much potential for the
oxidation of bromide to bromate with ozonation of sea water.
Further, ozone only provides immediate disinfection, which is not required as the desalination process
removes all microbes. Ozone does not provide residual disinfection which is required at all Bahrain water
production facilities.
On this basis, ozone is not recommended as a disinfectant for Bahrain desalination facilities.
4.4.2 Ultraviolet Light
Ultraviolet (UV) light is widely used in the UK for the disinfection of effluent from sewage works prior to
discharge to bathing beaches. There are small scale installations for the disinfection of drinking water, but
these are mainly limited to the treatment of water from boreholes. Whilst MM is not aware of any
installations treating desalinated drinking water that compare to the works in Bahrain, the systems are
scalable so this should not present a significant barrier to implementing such a scheme.
There are two main configurations of UV light that are used. With one arrangement, the lamps are
arranged in a grid pattern and placed in a channel. In the other arrangement, the lamps are placed inside
pipes and the water is then pumped through the pipes.
In order to get effective disinfection of the water using UV light, the UV transmittance of the water (how far
the light travels) is critical to the sizing of the system, and the practicality of the system. The main factor
that affects the UV transmittance of the water is its turbidity. As a result, UV treatment of the seawater is
not considered to be beneficial unless pre-treated.
It is considered that if a system were to be implemented the preferred location would be the final water. At
this location the UV transmittance of the water will be the highest and hence the capital and operating
costs of the system are likely to be lowest and disinfection is likely to be most effective.
As with ozone, UV only provides immediate disinfection at the point of use. It does not provide residual
disinfection which is required at all Bahrain water production facilities.
Given the above, it is advised that UV disinfection is not a suitable disinfection treatment for application in
Bahraini desalination plants.
38 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

4.4.3 Chlorine Dioxide
Chlorine dioxide is an effective disinfectant. Unlike ozone, chlorine dioxide is relatively stable in water and
it is possible to establish a chlorine dioxide residual in the water supply system. However, unlike chlorine
which once dissolved in water reacts to form the hypochlorite ion and hypochlorous acid, chlorine dioxide
remains as a gas. In warm waters such as those found in Bahrain, chlorine dioxide will be released from
the water over time, and hence a residual may not last very long in the distribution system.
The main problem with using chlorine dioxide is that once it has reacted it will produce the chlorite ion.
Chlorite ion is widely regulated and a WHO guideline figure of 0.7 mg/L has been established. This
effectively limits the dose of chlorine dioxide to 0.7 mg/L.
Chlorine dioxide will oxidise iron and manganese but does not react with ammonia or organic matter in the
water. In order to achieve a 3 log kill of viruses it would be necessary to achieve a CT value1 of 12 at a
temperature of 25°C.
This would mean that a concentration of chlorine dioxide of 0.5 mg/L would need to be maintained for 16.8
minutes.
Therefore, in light of the high doses required and concerns regarding chlorite formation, this technology is
not recommended.
4.4.4 Chlorine
Chlorine can be used in three common ways. These are:

 Chlorine gas,
 Sodium hypochlorite liquid, and
 Onsite electrically generated sodium hypochlorite.
These are briefly described below.
Chlorine Gas
Chlorine gas is delivered in three types, namely:

 Cylinders,
 Drums (typically 1 tonne), or
 In bulk, where the liquefied gas is delivered in a tanker and off-loaded to onsite holding vessels.
Chlorine drum systems are probably the most common, while cylinder systems are commonly used for
smaller installations.
1
CT = concentration (mg/L) x contact time (minutes)
39 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Use of chlorine gas has somewhat fallen out of favour recently because of concerns about the safety
aspects of transporting, handling and storing a hazardous gas. Chlorine is a toxic hazardous gas and
needs to be handled carefully. However, with appropriate use of safety equipment and proper procedures,
chlorine can be safely handled and is widely used throughout the global water industry.
Chlorine is withdrawn from the drums either as a gas under vacuum or as liquid chlorine under pressure
which then passes through an external evaporator. Evaporators are used when large quantities of gas are
required. Gas is commonly removed from the storage under below-atmospheric pressure; such that any
leak in the pipework will result in air being sucked into the system rather than chlorine escaping from the
system. The chlorine is then inducted into solution water to form hypochlorous acid/hypochlorite which is
then dosed into the treatment stream.
Chlorine drums can be easily transported, although clearly proper security and handling procedures need
to be in place. Chlorine gas does not deteriorate with storage, but does need to be stored safely and in a
cool area away from direct sunlight.
Chlorine gas should be considered for Bahrain’s desalination plants.
Sodium Hypochlorite Liquid
Sodium hypochlorite liquid is commercially available as a solution of around 11 to 13%. Sodium

hypochlorite liquid can be delivered, stored and dosed in a similar manner to other liquid chemicals and the
handling, maintenance and safety requirements are also comparable to those for other liquid chemicals.
Sodium hypochlorite can be easily transported and stored. However, the solution will lose strength
overtime, especially in warm climates, so extended storage is not recommended. As the solution is
relatively weak, larger volumes of solution need to be transported and stored in comparison to chlorine
gas.
Use of liquid sodium hypochlorite should be considered for Bahrain’s desalination plants.
Onsite Generation of Sodium Hypochlorite
Onsite electrical generation of sodium hypochlorite is becoming more common. For example, in Qatar, a
large number of potable water pump stations have on-site generators. Sodium hypochlorite can be
produced onsite by the electrolysis of a solution of sodium chloride (brine). However, the equipment is
often expensive and hydrogen gas is produced as a by-product of the electro-chlorination process, which is
an explosion risk.
It is becoming increasingly common to use a brine solution produced by dissolving dried and purified salt in
water to produce a saturated brine solution, which is then fed to the electrolysers. Electrolysing a brine
solution produces hypochlorite ions at one electrode and hydrogen gas from the other electrode. Typical
concentration of hypochlorite generated by the system is 0.8%, much less than that available from bulk
sodium hypochlorite. This can result in large solution feed lines for large production plants.
40 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Seawater can be used as the solution, but this can cause problems. The system is less efficient with
seawater (because of the lower salt concentration) and as seawater contains a moderate level of bromine,
can lead to unacceptable levels of bromate, a suspected carcinogen, in the hypochlorite solution produced
and, in turn, in the treated water. This is not a concern if the chlorine is used for shock chlorination of
intakes as the desalination process will reduce the levels of bromate in the water.
For these reasons, on-site generation of sodium hypochlorite is not recommended for Bahrain’s
desalination facilities.
Disinfection By-Products
A significant disadvantage to the use of chlorine is the formation of disinfection by-products that occur
when chlorine reacts in the presence of naturally occurring organic matter which can form suspected
carcinogenic compounds. These can include chloroforms, trihalomethanes, bromoforms, haloacetic acids
and others. Of the technologies considered, only ultraviolet disinfection is considered to not have any
known disinfection by-products. However, post-desalination water contains limited organic matter and so
disinfection by-products in this case would be small and well within limits from current guidelines.
Therefore, the use of chlorine for desalinated water disinfection is acceptable.
4.4.5 Comparison of Disinfectant Chemicals
The principal aspects of the various alternative disinfectants evaluated are considered in the table below:
Table 4.3: Comparison of Disinfectant Chemicals
Reacts Provides
with Residual
Disinfectant Organics Disinfection Comments
Ozone   Complex generation and dosing system. Disinfection by-
product concerns.
Ultraviolet Light   Limited use in desalination disinfection.
Chlorine Dioxide   Dose would be limited by chlorite production and so is not
practical.
Chlorine gas   Common but involves handling a hazardous gas.
Sodium hypochlorite liquid   Simple chemical storage and dosing systems.
Solution deteriorates if stored for a long time.
Onsite electrochlorination   Complex system.
Explosive risk from the generation of hydrogen. Not
typically used for residual disinfection as produces low
concentration chlorine.
General experience has shown that the whole-life cost (capital plus operating costs) for liquid sodium
hypochlorite, chlorine gas and onsite electrochlorination are comparable, although this analysis is sensitive
to the local prices of chlorine gas, sodium hypochlorite liquid and electricity (for the onsite electro-
chlorination systems).
41 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Chlorine gas and onsite electrochlorination systems can have significant health and safety risks associated
with them; however, with proper design, operation and maintenance of the systems they have been proven
to be safe and effective systems.
Based on the review that has been carried out and as summarised in the table above it is considered that
the identified alternative disinfectants do not offer significant advantages over the use of free chlorine.
Chlorine gas provides an effective method for both primary and secondary disinfection and can be stored
easily and does not break down with exposure to heat. It also requires less maintenance than
electrochlorination. In addition, a new disinfection method would generally require a system-wide change
to the disinfection regime as there can be issues with mixing water from different sources with different
types of disinfection. This could have consequential knock-on effects elsewhere in the water supply system
and would be an additional consideration.
As such, it is recommended that free chlorine is maintained as the disinfection method in Bahrain.
4.5 Summary
This section has reviewed state-of-the-art chemical treatment procedures and the options available for use
at modern desalination plants.
New RO plants or future expansions should give consideration to Dissolved Air Flotation Filtration (DAFF)
technology. Coagulation, flocculation and the use of dissolved air floatation provides the most suitable pre-
treatment technology for membrane desalination plants.
It is recommended to investigate alternative new hydrocarbon adsorbers that could have lower
maintenance requirements than activated carbon.
In terms of remineralisation for potabilisation of water supplies, the processes advocated for Bahrain are
lime or limestone and carbon dioxide. For disinfection, especially in the network, maintaining free chlorine
residual is recommended using either chlorine gas or sodium hypochlorite.
42 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

5 Review of Existing Desalination

Treatment Sites
This section discusses the treatment processes employed at existing desalination

water treatment sites in Bahrain and the quality of the water leaving the plants. It
provides recommendations for where improvements and efficiencies can be made
in the technologies being currently implemented at these plants.
5.1 Overview of Existing Sites
Table 5.1 presents a summary of the water production sites in Bahrain. These processes are discussed
and evaluated further in the following sections.
Table 5.1: Summary of Water Production Facilities in Bahrain
Site Operator Water Source Capacity Desalination

x 1000 m3/d (migd)
Al Dur IWPP AEPC Seawater 218 (48) SWRO + DAF+ DMF
ALBA Coke Alba Seawater 23.3 (5.2) MED
Hidd IWPP HPC Seawater 409 (90) 60 migd MED
30 migd MSF
Ras Abu Jarjur EWA Groundwater 75 (16.5) BWRO
Sitra Forwarding Station EWA Seawater 113.5 (25) MSF
Various Groundwater Boreholes EWA Groundwater 12.5 None
BWRO = Brackish Water Reverse Osmosis

DAF = Dissolved Air Flotation
DMF = Dual Media Filtration
IWPP = Independent Water and Power Producer
MED = Multi-Effect Distillation
MSF = Multi-Stage Flash
RO = Reverse Osmosis
From the above list it can be seen that both membrane and thermal desalination processes are being
used:
 Seawater Reverse Osmosis (SWRO) at Al Dur (with Dissolved Air Floatation and Dual Media Filtration
pre-treatment)
 Brackish Water Reverse Osmosis (BWRO) at Ras Abu Jarjur
 Multi-Effect Distillation (MED) at Alba Coke and Hidd
 Multi-Stage Flash (MSF) distillation at Hidd and Sitra
EWA is currently responsible for the operations at the Ras Abu Jarjur BWRO plant, the Sitra plant and at a
number of boreholes. The others sites are operated by private operators under contract to EWA.
43 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Table 5.2 summarises the chemicals used at the different desalination plants within Bahrain, which are
further discussed in the following sections.
44 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

45

Table 5.2: Summary of Chemicals Used at Existing Bahrain Water Treatment Plants
Sodium hypochlorite
Polymer for sludge

Poly acrylic Acid
Carbon Dioxide
Ferric Chloride
Sulphuric Acid
Coagulant aid
Anti-Scalant -
Chlorine Gas
Caustic soda
Limestone
Anti-foam
handling
Lime
Site
State Liquid Liquid Liquid Liquid Solid Gas Liquid Gas
Concentration >98% ~35% 98% 99% 13% 99%
(1%)*
Ras Abu Jarjur     
Hidd     
ALBA     
Al Dur         
Sitra    
*Onsite generation
Source: MML
5.2 Thermal Desalination Plants
Table 5.3 presents a summary of the performance characteristics for the three thermal desalination plants
in Bahrain.
It can be seen that a mix of technologies have been adopted, with one plant (Sitra) using Multi-Stage Flash
(MSF), one plant (Alba) using Multi-Effect Distillation (MED) and one plant (Hidd) using both MSF and
MED.
Table 5.3: Summary of Performance Characteristics for Thermal Desalination Plants

Treatment Plant
Hidd Sitra ALBA
Operator Hidd Power and Water EWA ALBA Coke
Company
Process MED + MSF MSF MED
Water Production (m3/d) 400,000 122,730 43,642
No. Units – MED - 10 - 27,277 Phase 1 – 2 – 11,500 4 – 10,910
Unit Capacity (m3/d) MSF - 4 - 37,000 Phase 2 – 1 – 22,730
Phase 3 – 3 – 22,730
Unit Performance ratio MSF – 9 Phase 1 – 5.9 7.6
MED – 8.9 Phase 2 – 9
Phase 3 - 9
No. Effects/Stages MSF – 21 Phase 1 – 15 4
MED - 7 Phase 2 - 16
Phase 3 - 21
Geometry Cross Flow Cross Flow Cross Flow
Distillate Quality (micro 50 23.4
Siemens/cm)
Top Brine Temperature MSF - 112°C 90°C 63°C
MED - 65°C
Fuel Used Natural Gas Natural Gas Diesel oil
Date of Commissioning Phase 1 (1999) Phase 1 (1976) 1999
Phase 2 (2004) Phase 2 (1985)
Phase 3 (2006) Phase 3 (1985)
5.2.1 Al Hidd IWPP
The Hidd Power Company (HPC) own and operate the Hidd Power and Water Plant. As presented in
Table 5.1, the total plant capacity for the Hidd Power and Water plant is 90 migd of water and 1000 MW of

power. The plant has a combination of MED and MSF processes; as such it provides a good opportunity
to compare the two processes.
The MED process produces 60 migd of desalinated water and the MSF process produces 30 migd. The
exhaust gas from the gas turbines provides the heat source to generate steam for the desalination units.
When power demand is low, the auxiliary boilers are brought online to supplement any reduction in steam
supply from the turbines.
The plant was constructed in three phases. Phase I was constructed in the year 2000 and includes two
Gas Turbine (GT) units with a power capacity of 272 MW, one auxiliary boiler, and four MSF units for a
total capacity of 30 migd. Phase II increased power capacity by adding an additional 720 MW. It was
constructed in 2003 and added three additional GTs and one Steam Turbine (ST) to the power capacity.
Phase III increased water production capacity by 60 migd with the installation of 10 MED units. It was
constructed in 2007 and included three auxiliary boilers and 10 MED units. A detailed description and
evaluation of the MED and MSF processes can be found in Section 3.
The top brine temperature for the MED plant only reaches a maximum of 65ºC, whereas for the MSF
process reaches 107ºC. One disadvantage of the MED process at Hidd is that it requires more
maintenance compared to the MSF plants. On average 50 to 100 tubes per year require replacement.
However, as there are several thousand of tubes per unit this is a low percentage overall. Based on
information obtained from other plants, e.g. Sitra, the frequency of tube failures is expected to increase
with age.
In terms of chemical consumption, the MED process requires slightly more than twice the anti-scalant
compared to the MSF process and one additional chemical. Refer to Table 3.2 for a chemical
consumption comparison of MED and MSF processes.
Carbon dioxide for alkalinity is generated onsite through the combustion of natural gas. It is significantly
more cost effective to produce it onsite compared to purchasing it. At the time of writing this report, carbon
dioxide costs are about $400 per tonne. Up to 14 limestone contactors are used to remineralise the
desalinated water after the carbon dioxide addition. This is followed by caustic soda for pH correction. The
dosing regime allows Hidd to more easily achieve the target remineralisation parameters discussed in
Section 4.
There are typically two GT faults per month. Any drop in steam supply is supplemented by onsite boilers.
The plant operation is meeting its Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for availability and reliability for over
95% of the time. However, as is common in the winter months, the use of onsite boilers to supplement the
steam supply increases the cost of final treated water.
5.2.1.1 Water Quality
The Hidd Terms of Reference (ToR) requires that treatment and potabilisation are provided for the
combined Hidd I and III distiller outputs of 410,000 m3/d (90 migd). The plant has full onsite potabilisation
capability from carbon dioxide, limestone, and caustic soda.

A review of the treated water quality leaving the plant shows compliance with the Hidd Phase III IWPP
especially in terms of alkalinity, hardness, pH, and LSI (refer to Table 2.1). TDS and LSI are marginally
below the Hidd Phase III IWPP lower limits of 200mg/L and 0.1 respectively, although this will have no
impact on the aesthetic or heath-based quality of the water. Furthermore, potable water quality for the last
12 months shows a positive LSI.
The use of limestone contactors at the plant allows for greater flexibility in achieving final water quality
parameter values. Although the Hidd Phase III IWPP has no limit for boron, it is consistently below the
detection limit.
5.2.1.2 Site Issues
The MED and MSF distillers at the Hidd Power and Water plant are relatively new with acceptable
operational abilities that are expected to be maintained over the next 25 to 30 years. We do, however,
note the following issues that should be considered for future plants and upgrades.
It was noted on a site visit that one issue with the desalination plant is the impact the power plant has on
the water production facility. When power demand drops this affects the amount of water production due
to the lack of steam from the GT. This is particularly true during the winter months when power demand is
lower but water demand does not fall proportionately. It requires operation of the boilers to provide
supplementary heat to the distillers and is a typical problem with combined power and water plants. The
heavy reliance of the water system on the IWPP power production is identified as a disadvantage of the
combined power generation and distillation systems.
Limestone is stored onsite in bags on pallets. The vessels are topped up manually by operations staff in a
labour intensive manner, using a combination of fork-hoists and loading equipment. Further, pallet storage
takes up large area on the site.
Treatment diversification
The plant contract ends in the year 2027 and no further expansions are planned. Although upgrades or
improvements to the desalination plant are not expected for another 10 to 15 years, it is recommended to
give consideration to RO technology for any future upgrade in order to alleviate the production swings due
to power demand in winter months and provide some diversification in desalination technology. It is noted
that space may be available to the east and south-east for additional plant expansion for a similar sized
desalination facility. The land use plans for the empty space need to be confirmed with the appropriate
authorities.

Kingdom
Water Tre
eatment Review
Storage and
a loading of
o limestone
With rega ards to the sto

oring and loa
ading of lime
estone, for futture plant im
mprovements and future innstallations
it is recom
mmended to consider insttallation of sttorage silos that
t can be automatically
a y loaded via delivery
d
tankers. T This would immprove site health
h and saafety and effficiency.
5.2.2 Sitra Plant
Sitra desa nd operated by EWA. Th

alination and power plantt is owned an he desalinatio
on plant com
mprises of
the following MSF unitts:
 Phase e 1 - Units 1A
A and 1B eacch with a cap
pacity 5 migd
d
 Phase e 2 - Units 2, 3 and 4 of combined
c capacity 15 mig
gd
 Phase o capacity 5 migd
e 3 - Unit 5 of
The follow
wing figure prresents a sim
mplified proce
ess schemattic for the pla
ant.
Figure 5.1: Simplified Process

P Sche
ematic for Sitra
a Power and Water
W Plant
Source: EW
WA Sitra Leafle
et
There is n
no potabilisattion onsite att the plant.
There aree three distilla

ate headers, one serving each of the three phase es. Caustic soda
s is dosedd into the
headers oof Phases 1 anda 2 to raise the pH of the
t distillate ffrom about 6.0
6 to 8.5, bu ut not to the header
h of
Phase 3. Parts of the distillate heaaders from Phases
P 1 and
d 2 are steel lined with cu
upro-nickel cladding
c with
buried secctions of cemment mortar llined ductile iron. Caustic soda is dossed to provid
de protection n to this
lining. Th t Phase 3 plant is steel lined with cupro-nickel
he distillate header from the c c
cladding and
d does not
need protection.
49 33
35975/MEU/MW WE/0002/B 23 December
D 2014
n/13365683
No water quality data was available for the Sitra plant. A review of the likely water quality has been
undertaken based on experience and expert judgement.
No chemicals are currently being added for potabilisation at Sitra. The distillate is likely to have very low
alkalinity and hardness (as these will have been removed by the desalination process). The caustic soda
dosed to provide protection for the cement-mortar lining only increases pH and marginally increases
alkalinity.
The water from the three distiller headers is blended and dosed with sodium carbonate to achieve a pH of
9.5 in the transmission main to the forwarding pumping station. No calcium is added to the water, meaning
that the hardness of the water remains very low. As such, the final water leaving the plant will not comply
with the GS, WHO or proposed standards in terms of pH, TDS, and LSI. All other parameters will be
below their limits.
5.2.2.2 Site Issues
According to 2013 Annual Report (EWA, 2013) the condition of distillers 1A and 1B (originally installed in
1974) has deteriorated, particularly the rotating mechanical equipment and the pipework, leading to
frequent outages. The report also notes that the condition of the tubes in distillers 2, 3 and 4 has
deteriorated affecting the plant’s production.
The availability of the units is reported in the annual report as being 59% for units 1A and 1B, 86% for units
2, 3 and 4 and 84% for unit 5. This loss of availability has mainly been as a result of planned outages but
distillers 1A and 1B have also had significant forced outages (12% of the year).
The main issue for the plant is tube failure rates, which can be expected for 30 to 40 year old distillers.
Tube failure is predominantly occurring in Phase II distillers. The root cause of tube failures is when carbon
dioxide volatises off from seawater in the flashing process. This re-dissolves into the water during
condensation forming an acidic solution that slowly attacks the carbon steel tubes.
It is often difficult to detect a damaged tube. Conductivity sample results monitor tube leakage and are
regularly taken for each stage; however, there are 4,000 tubes in each stage and identifying potential leaks
is labour intensive and takes longer than is desired.
There are spare tubes onsite to replace badly damaged pipes that were provided from the original
installation, and suppliers are still manufacturing the same tubes. However, tube failures do result in
significant down time. It can take up to 48 hours to identify and repair a tube and requires an entire distiller
to be down. In some cases complete tube replacements are required. This can require a distiller to be out
for a month, which is why it is typically done during planned maintenance outages. As tube thickness has
been decreasing over time tube failure rates are expected to increase resulting in more forced and planned
outages.

The discharge of cooling water and brine occurs via a common channel. Temperature of the discharge
water is higher than environmental limits. This is a common issue associated with thermal desalination
plants.
We make the following recommendations for expansion and improvement of the Sitra desalination plant:
Install full potabilisation at the site
With the on-going objective of reduction in the reliance of groundwater blending and to improve the stability
and potabilisation of the supplied water from Sitra, it is recommended to implement a full potabilisation
system. Identification of the most feasible option for Sitra must consider the following:
 Initial capital investment,
 Available footprint,
 Lifecycle costs, and
 Limits for alkalinity, pH, LSI, hardness.
As a result of the lack of carbonate/bicarbonate buffering at Sitra, even small changes in the caustic soda
dose could result in significant pH variations, making accurate control of the treated water pH very difficult.
Moreover, caustic soda will not increase the hardness of the water and will result in only a small increase
in the alkalinity of the water. This means that the LSI is likely to remain relatively low even at high pH
values, and is unlikely to be positive at the maximum pH of 8.5.
As discussed in the remineralisation section (Section 4.3), in order to achieve a neutral LSI at an
acceptable pH it is necessary to add some calcium, normally either in the form of limestone (calcium
carbonate (CaCO3)) or hydrated lime (Ca(OH)2). Additionally, in order to avoid an unacceptably high pH it
is necessary to add an acid, typically either carbon dioxide (carbonic acid) or sulphuric acid. For a full
potabilisation system at Sitra, it is recommended that lime plus carbon dioxide or limestone plus carbon
dioxide is used.
The use of limestone contactors requires significantly a larger footprint than lime dosing but uses half as
much carbon dioxide. For the lime dosing system, 300 to 400m2 of available area would be required. For
the limestone contactor system, similar to that installed at Hidd, it is estimated that a footprint of 600 to
800m2 would be required. We understand that space may be available at the forwarding station. Footprint
could also be made available from dis-used buildings or plant onsite. For example, if distillers 1A and 1B
were to be decommissioned in the future when they reach the end of their operating life, potential footprint
could be made available.
There are several options available for the supply of carbon dioxide to the site. Harvesting the carbon
dioxide from the vented stream from the MSF units has been an established practice in thermal
desalination. Although this is a good option for a freely available source of carbon dioxide, the low
quantities that could potentially be extracted will make it difficult to warrant investment in a new carbon
dioxide collection system. Other options are to generate onsite by burning natural gas or to deliver and

store onsite. In terms of lifecycle costs onsite generation of carbon dioxide is the best option. Onsite
storage of carbon dioxide will require less footprint and initial capital investment.
There is also the issue of dosing prior to the buried ductile iron lined with a cement-mortar pipe for
protection. This will impact the cost to extend dosing lines for lime and carbon dioxide from the forwarding
station. These additional costs must be compared with the cost to replace the buried ductile iron, cement-
mortar lined pipe or to appropriately protect it.
A new lime plus carbon dioxide dosing system being located at the forwarding station appears to be the
most suitable option for the potabilisation of the Sitra water supply. To thoroughly evaluate all options, it is
recommended that a separate investigation in undertaken, taking into consideration all the factors listed
above.
Rehabilitation and replacement work
The plant is in need of significant civil, structural, mechanical and electrical rehabilitation.
We understand contractors are in the process of being engaged to undertake the civil rehabilitation work.
In order to improve reliability of the plant it is recommended to undertake the planed electro-mechanical
work as soon as practicable.
Treatment diversification
RO should be considered for desalination for plant replacement. It is recommended to investigate the
installation of an RO plant with associated pre-treatment for the site. The site is constrained and space will
only become available once an MSF unit is decommissioned and removed offsite. For the duration of any
upgrade, supply capacity would be expected to be lower than current supply capacity. This drop in supply
would need to be managed with the other plants.
5.2.3 ALBA Coke Plant
The ALBA desalination plant was commissioned in 2001 and uses MED technology. Flue gas from the
calcining process is used to generate steam to supply the MED plant. Boilers are available onsite to
supplement the steam demand although they are seldom used. The plant is operated by Alba and
produces 5.2 migd; 80% of which is sold to EWA under a 25 year supply contract with the remaining sold
to nearby industry. The contract to supply water to EWA ends in August 2027.
There is full potabilisation capability onsite with lime, carbon dioxide and caustic soda. Chlorine gas is
dosed for residual disinfection. Lime is stored in three silos with a full storage capacity of 90 tonnes,
providing 24 days’ storage. Carbon dioxide is delivered to site.
Potabilised water is stored onsite in a 20,000m3 storage tank. EWA is responsible for its transmission
beyond this point.

The Alba desalination plant uses the Gulf Standards (GSO) for water quality compliance. As shown in the
data in Appendix A, the potable water quality appears to achieve acceptable water quality with reference to
the standards adopted. Alkalinity is lower than expected at times (below 50mg/L CaCO3) but there is no
limit for alkalinity in the GSO guidelines and the LSI has been consistently in the range of 0.1 to 0.16,
which is the ideal range for minor scale formation. TDS and pH readings have frequently been outside of
the required ranges. TDS has been lower than the 100mg/L low limit on several occasions and pH is at
times higher than 8.0. These exceedances do not, however, affect the quality of the water from a health
and water stability perspective. All other parameters (including boron) meet the GSO requirements and
the proposed new quality standard limits (shown in Table 2.2).
5.2.3.2 Site Issues
There do not appear to be any serious operational issues at Alba. There are planned maintenance
shutdowns of 2 or 3 days per month due to excess scale formation in the evaporators which affects the
plant production capability. However, with the onsite storage providing approximately one day’s worth of
buffer, disruption would be minimised.
Potabilisation
Our modelling shows that lime is dosed at a maximum of 40mg/L and carbon dioxide is dosed at a
maximum of 15mg/L. To comply with the GSO or proposed standards (Table 2.2) it is recommended to
change the water potabilisation dose rates for lime, carbon dioxide and caustic in order to increase
alkalinity to above 50mg/L CaCO3 and the TDS to above 100mg/L (without increasing the pH above 8.5).
This will likely require a reduction of caustic soda dose and increase in carbon dioxide and lime dose rates.
Increasing lime dose rate to 50mg/L while maintaining carbon dioxide at 25mg/L will achieve this. The
onsite dosing systems have additional capacity to manage such increased dose requirements.
Plant expansion
While a future expansion to the water production system is planned, the entire planned expansion has
been dedicated to private industry. Given that Alba is a relatively small and somewhat remote facility, it is
recommended that further production for this area be sourced from other sites. Any future expansion for
this site should consider RO technology.

5.3 Membrane Based Plants
5.3.1 Al Dur IWPP
The Al Dur IWPP is a 218,000 m3/d (48 migd) plant operated under a water purchase agreement with
AEPC that runs for 25 years (2010 to 2035). Operation and maintenance is the responsibility of the Al Dur
Water and Power Company. The desalination plant is relatively new, having been constructed in 2012 and
the plant is currently operating at only 30% capacity. EWA is in the process of constructing new
transmission mains that will be able convey the entire capacity of the plant, as a part of the Kingdom of
Bahrain Water Transmission Programme 2009-2012.
The plant utilises the following treatment processes:

 Dissolved air flotation (DAF) using ferric chloride as a coagulant
 Dual Media Filtration
 Cartridge filtration
 1st Stage Reverse Osmosis
 2nd Stage Reverse Osmosis
 Remineralisation with:
– Onsite generated Carbon Dioxide, and
– Limewater (saturated solution of calcium hydroxide)
 Chlorine Disinfection.
The plant has two streams. This is illustrated in the following process flow diagram.

Figure 5.2: Simplified Process Diagram for the SWRO plant at Al Dur IWPP
Source: IDA Yearbook 2012-2013
The seawater intake is shock dosed once per week with sodium hypochlorite at 0.8% (generated onsite)
and sulphuric acid to reduce the pH. Ferric chloride and a coagulant aid are dosed into the DAF tank
flocculation chamber to remove particulate and some dissolved solids. DAF effluent then flows to clarified
water tanks where water is pumped through multi-media pressure filters to remove carryover solids. This
is followed by 5µm cartridge filters prior to pumping through the first pass RO which runs at 65 bar and
42% recovery. A Pelton wheel connected to the first pass pump is used as an Energy Recovery Device
(ERD) to provide additional power input to the pump. Permeate from the first pass is then dosed with
caustic soda to raise the pH to convert boron to borate and facilitate its removal in the second RO pass.
Anti-scalant is dosed prior to each RO stage. A second pass, second stage, RO unit is used on the
second pass RO brine reject. Permeate is then stored in two 2,100m3 desalinated water tanks. Citric acid
and caustic soda have been used for RO membrane cleaning, although we understand the plant may now
be moving to a proprietary cleaning chemical called Genesis.
Limewater and carbon dioxide are dosed in the final water line for potabilisation, and sodium hypochlorite
is used for residual disinfection. DAF float solids are thickened and dewatered onsite and then trucked
offsite.

The operation of the desalination plant is flexible as it does not rely on the output of the power plant the
same way a thermal desalination plant would. The plant is capable of operating at full capacity even if the
power plant is not operating. Additionally, all heat is currently recovered in the power plant.
The Al Dur desalination plant must contractually meet the limits stipulated in the Al Dur IWPP (Table 2.1).
Generally, the plant is achieving the required treated water quality (as shown in Appendix A), although
there have been issues with the control of the dosing systems and instrumentation, leading to some
occasions when the water has been temporarily outside the required standards.
Remineralisation of the water is achieved by the addition of limewater and carbon dioxide. This is a typical
chemical dosing arrangement and should be able to achieve the required balance of alkalinity, hardness,
pH and LSI. Limewater is a saturated solution of Ca(OH)2 and is typically used at plants that have to meet
stringent final water turbidity limits.
5.3.1.2 Site Issues
The plant is relatively new as such there have been no significant issues. There were temporary problems
with a leak in the brine header and lime scale formation during start-up, although these have now been
resolved.
It is noted that ferric chloride is not delivered and stored in bulk. International Bulk Containers (IBCs) are
1m3 containers used to store ferric chloride onsite as the coagulant is delivered from India.
The operation of coagulant can be automated and controlled on raw water characterisation parameters
such as turbidity, total organic carbon, dissolved organic carbon, to reduce the risk of solids getting through
to the RO units.
Potential to increase capacity
A second Al Dur plant is planned to be constructed in the future, although this may only involve power
initially. No expansion is expected for the plant. There is existing infrastructure for the new plant such as
pump station wet well, inlet channel and seawater intake.
In terms of space availability within the boundary of the existing site, there does not appear to be space for
large plant such as additional tanks and buildings. There does appear to be space available within the
SWRO building for additional RO racks, which may be all that is required to increase the capacity of the
plant.

Optimising the coagulant dosing regime
It is recommended to investigate the option of turning off ferric chloride dosing when seawater quality is
acceptable. It was observed at the DAF plant that DAF float is predominantly ferric sludge with little solids.
Ferric chloride may not be required all the time. This will not only eliminate unnecessary chemical
consumption, it will also reduce the potential of ferric carryover to the RO. Savings could be had in
coagulant and coagulant aid, and the chemical and power costs associated with operating the solids
handling facility. Additional benefits could include extended pressure filter run time and longer service life
from the cartridge filters.
Increasing efficiencies in lime dosing
If the final turbidity limit was relaxed for post lime dosing, lime slurry could be used which would result in
less water being used for limewater make-up. This would provide the benefit of increasing liquid lime
storage durations and lime pumping capacities. Whilst this currently may not be an option, it is worth
considering this efficiency as a future plant improvement opportunity.
Improving ferric chloride storage
The current arrangement for ferric chloride storage is not ideal for a plant that would use up to 3 IBCs per
day, as potential health and safety issues would undoubtedly arise, associated with transferring the
chemical and storing many IBCs onsite. It is recommended to investigate the option of sourcing bulk ferric
chloride for delivery and storage onsite.
5.3.2 Ras Abu Jarjur (RAJ) Plant
The RAJ plant employs Brackish Water Reverse Osmosis (BWRO) treatment that was first commissioned
in 1984. It is fed by 19 wells that draw from an aquifer at a depth of 170m. The well water TDS is 13,000
to 19,000 ppm. The plant went through an upgrade in 2005 increasing the plant capacity from 10mgd to
16.1mgd. This upgrade involved the installation of two additional RO racks supplied by Toray (TM820-
400) to the existing eight Du Pont (B-10) RO racks.
Pre-treatment of the water involves passing through 22 Activated Carbon filters for the adsorption of
soluble hydrocarbons. From discussions with site staff, the carbon filters also act as mechanical filters for
solids. The existing media filters that are located before the carbon filters are not in use as they do not
provide any treatment. The water is then dosed with sulphuric acid and scale inhibitor to prevent
carbonate and sulphate scaling. Water is then passed through 11 and 5µm filters before the RO.
The RO treatment involves the pumping of pre-treated water using 10 high pressure pumps each feeding
one RO block. There are three RO stages at RAJ, with a total recovery of 70%. The permeate stream is
fed into Drawback Tanks while the reject passed through an energy recovery turbine.
Post-treatment at RAJ involves removing hydrogen sulphide gas through six stripping towers followed by
lime and carbon dioxide for potabilisation and chlorine gas for disinfection.

The 2013 Annual Report states that the water quality objectives at RAJ are to meet the limits of the GS
standards and the WHO standards.
Average monthly results obtained for the period June 2013 to June 2014 show results are within limits for
most parameters apart from pH which marginally exceeded 8.0 on occasions. Additionally, average LSI is
low at -0.35, although there is no limit for LSI in the GS.
5.3.2.2 Site Issues
The plant is mostly achieving its stipulated requirements.
The hollow fibre Du Pont B-10 modules used at RAJ have been out of production for the last 18 years.
Hydrocarbon contamination is currently present in Well 9 at the RAJ desalination plant. The well is taken
off-line despite the fact that the plant has onsite activated carbon contactors prior to the RO plant.
However, the regeneration facility is old and is in need of replacement.
It is understood that the media filters prior to the activated carbon filters are currently being by-passed as it
was found that there was no difference in the quality before and after the filters. The onsite regeneration
system for activated carbon has had significant problems. Site staff have stated that it can only be
operated once per year without there being serious maintenance issues. In a separate investigation
carried out by the designer and supplier of the plant, it was recommended that the system be completely
replaced.
The existing lime dosing system at RAJ is old and labour intensive and maintaining accurate pH is also
difficult. We understand that the milk of lime concentration being maintained in the mixing tank is variable
and control is manual and reactionary.
Although civil/structural plans typically have a design life of 50 to 80 years, it was observed onsite that
significant plant infrastructure requires refurbishment. Pipe corrosion has been observed on
uncovered/exposed pipework as shown in Figure 5.3 below. The plant is almost 30 years old and
mechanical equipment is nearing the end of its service life. We understand that the asset condition of the
plant is covered in the Production Plant Asset Condition Report and that plans for refurbishment are
currently underway.

Kingdom
Water Tre
eatment Review
Figure 5.3: Pipe Corro

osion Observed at the Ras Abu
A Jarjur Plant.
Source: Mott MacDonald
5.3.2.3 Recommend
dations
ment of Du Po
Replacem ont B-10 mod
dules with To
oray spiral w
wound modules
There are
e currently pla
ans to upgra ade the existing hollow fibbre Du Pont RO
R racks to Toray spiral wound
modules. MM believe es this is a po
ositive step in
n the right direction.
A replacement plan foor these modules is currently underwa ay. Most RO sites around d the world h
have already
d to spiral wo
converted ound membra anes. There are ongoing advances in n the design of spiral wou
und
membranes. Although h Toray moduules are currrently being trialled,
t and results
r have been pleasinng, it is
recommended to ensu gh review of available tecchnologies has been und
ure a thoroug dertaken prioor to the full
replacemeent of the Du
u Pont memb branes.
Refurbishment of filterr media
As noted earlier, the fiilter media iss being bypasssed. Although this configuration doe es not appea
ar to be
causing a
any problemss with the pla ant it is not ideal to use th
he carbon filte
ers as both mechanical
m f
filters and
59 33
35975/MEU/MW WE/0002/B 23 December
D 2014
n/13365683
for adsorption. It is recommended to review the need for this filtration process, and if needed, to refurbish
and replace the filter media to provide treatment.
Upgrade to activated carbon facility
With the ongoing issues regarding the onsite regeneration system for activated carbon, an upgrade should
be considered.
As discussed in Section 4, although activated carbon is a proven substance for the adsorption of
hydrocarbons, it is recommended to investigate alternative new hydrocarbon adsorbers that could have
lower maintenance requirements. Identifying media that can be more easily regenerated onsite or have a
longer life may provide additional benefits to the existing system. Such examples in the market are
zeolites, nano-clays and polymers.
An alternative option in the short term is to periodically replace activated carbon after it has been spent.
This will require regular testing of the media to determine remaining adsorption capacity.
Increasing efficiency in lime dosing
Similar to the Al Dur plant, for future upgrades it is recommended to receive lime powder in bulk and to
automatically load onsite silos. It is also recommended to review the control functionality for the lime
make-up system and to modify it to ensure consistent concentration is being maintained. These
improvements will markedly improve site health and safety and final water potabilisation.
Alternatively, the option of using limestone contactors could be investigated. This option provides potential
savings for RAJ as only half the carbon dioxide quantity would be required. At a carbon dioxide cost of
US$400 per tonne, the potential savings estimated for the plant would be up to US$23,000 per month. This
option would need to be evaluated as part of a life cycle cost analysis.
Improving energy recovery
We believe that future upgrades should consider alternative energy recovery options. Some RO plants
have found greater efficiencies from pressure exchangers for BWRO applications. It is recommended to
compare the efficiency of turbo charger or pressure exchanger. Project payback should consider optimum
plant recovery versus potential energy savings. A life cycle assessment should be undertaken considering
the following:
 Initial costs, purchase cost (pump, system, pipe, auxiliary services)
 Installation and commissioning cost, including training
 Energy costs reflecting predicted cost for system operation, including pump driver, controls, and any
auxiliary services
 Operation costs including(labour cost of normal system supervision
 Maintenance and repair costs including routine and predicted repairs
 Down time costs including loss of production
 Environmental costs including contamination from pumped liquid and auxiliary equipment

 Decommissioning/disposal costs including restoration of the local environment and disposal of auxiliary
services
Improving potabilisation
As per Hidd Phase III and Al Dur IWPP, it is recommended to target an LSI of +0.0 to +0.3. To achieve
this, our modelling shows that this will require a relaxation of the upper pH limit to 8.5, requiring more lime
to be dosed. A proposed dosing regime for the RAJ plant is given in the table below.
Table 5.4: Proposed dose regime for RAJ

Proposed limits Current dose Proposed dose
Parameter (refer to Table 2.2) (mg/L) (mg/L)
Dose
Lime - 60
Carbon dioxide - 40
Parameter Target
pH 7.0 – 8.0 7.6 – 8.2 8.0
Alkalinity 70 (min) 33 – 55 100
LSI +0.0 – +0.3 -0.7 – 0.0 +0.1
Source: MML
The availability of space for improvements
In terms of space availability for the proposed modifications it was observed that there is space available
within the site boundary. Furthermore, space can be made available by decommissioning and removing
old, disused plant, and replacing existing plant with more efficient layouts. For example, for the lime dosing
system, there is sufficient footprint available that is currently occupied by the lime bag storage and loading
facility. Bulk lime storage and loading facility could quite easily be located within this existing building.
In terms of RO desalination capacity, there is no space available for expansion within the building where
the BWRO modules are all located. However, replacing the old Du Pont modules with newer modules will
undoubtedly provide additional desalination capacity. Space is available onsite for additional tanks and
buildings to house membranes and cartridge filters; although thought must be given as to whether existing
trains are to be upgraded in a modular fashion or new trains are required all together.

5.4 Summary
A number of desalination treatment plants are in operation in Bahrain, adopting a range of different
desalination technologies. These have been reviewed in terms of their operation, effectiveness and
reliability. Areas for development and improvement have been highlighted and recommendations given.
Establishing standalone potabilisation facilities at each site is one of the key recommendations from this
review. It would reduce the reliance on groundwater mixing for potabilisation and should be a key
consideration in the development of the Kingdom of Bahrain Electricity and Water Master Plan 2015-2030.

6 Conclusions and Recommendations
Proposed and updated potable water quality guideline values have been
developed in line with current regional and international standards. Water
treatment technologies and chemicals have been reviewed, with reverse osmosis
being advocated as the most appropriate process for desalination water treatment
in Bahrain. A list of recommendations has been compiled for the existing
treatment plants in Bahrain, highlighting areas of potential efficiencies and
improvements.
6.1 Water Quality Standards
Bahrain adopts the Gulf Standards Organisation (GSO) Standard for Unbottled Drinking Water
(GS/149/2008) which only contains a limited number of parameters compared to those adopted by other
GCC states (Oman, Qatar and Abu Dhabi).
It is recommended that Bahrain revises its standards in accordance with recent developments in
international guidelines and in line with other GCC states. This has been discussed with representatives of
EWA and they have provided a new set of standards which have been incorporated into this report as
Tables 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5.
6.2 Water Treatment Technologies and Chemicals
Both widely-used and newer technologies were reviewed for their suitability for use at desalination plants in
Bahrain. A comparison was made between MED, MSF, and RO technologies that included production
yield, power consumption, chemical consumption and process robustness. The MED and MSF thermal
desalination processes are robust process with low maintenance requirements; however forced outages
become common towards the end of their service life and their operation is tied to power plant output
limiting their ability to meet demand.
On a volumetric basis, while RO uses more chemicals, the technology also uses less power and has a
greater production yield. The additional cost of chemicals is a fraction of the potential savings in power. RO
plants are standalone and can be upgraded and updated in a modular fashion throughout their lives. Of
particular importance is the fact that they operate independently of power demands and therefore are not
constrained by seasonal power changes.
Whilst it is beneficial to maintain a diversification of desalination technologies, for future plant upgrades in
Bahrain it is recommended to consider RO processes as the primary desalination technology. If thermal
desalination is selected for combined power water plants, it is recommended to consider a hybrid MED/RO
process for improved power efficiency and reliability.

New RO plants or future expansions should give consideration to a pretreatment system comprised of
coagulation, flocculation followed by Dissolved Air Flotation Filtration (DAFF) as the preferred method of
pretreatment.
Hydrocarbon adsorbers should be provided as part of any RO pretreatment system as a safety barrier
against oil contamination and damage to membranes. New hydrocarbon adsorbers should consider
alternative new technologies in this area including zeolites, nano-clays and polymers.
Remineralisation systems should be included at the plant. Two alternative systems are recommended,
one involving lime and the other a combination of limestone and carbon dioxide.
Several disinfection systems were reviewed for application in Bahrain including ozonation, UV, and
chlorine dioxide, chlorine gas, sodium hypochlorite, and on-site electrochlorination. It is proposed to
continue the practice of chlorination using either sodium hypochlorite (13%) or chlorine gas. Chlorine
disinfection is a well proven cost effective method for achieving residual disinfection of the network, and is
ideally suited to desalination processes due to the low organic content of the produce water and therefore
minimum risk of disinfection by-product formation.
6.3 Recommendations for Existing Bahraini Desalination Plants
Bahrain water desalination facilities use a range of technologies including multi-stage flash (MSF), multi-
effect distillation (MED), seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) and brackish water reverse osmosis (BWRO).
Existing Bahraini desalination plants have been evaluated and a series of recommendations made to
improve resilience, increase efficiencies and reduce costs. The following was noted:
6.3.1 Hidd
The final water quality meets the limits stipulated in the IWPP, but with the exception of total dissolved
solids (TDS) and LSI which have been marginally below the target levels.
The impact of the power plant on potable water production was highlighted as a problem, which is more
noticeable during the winter months. It was recommended to give consideration to RO technology for any
future upgrade at Hidd in order to alleviate the production swings due to power and provide some
diversification in desalination technology. Potential improvements to the storing and loading of limestone
were also highlighted.
6.3.2 Sitra
The final water leaving the Sitra plant does not comply with the GS, WHO or proposed standards in terms
of pH, TDS, and LSI.

The thermal desalination plants are between 30 and 40 years old and are subject to frequent outages,
mainly due to tube failure rates. The plant is in need of significant civil, structural, mechanical and electrical
rehabilitation. It is recommended that RO with associated pre-treatment is strongly considered for any
plant replacement.
There is no potabilisation onsite at the plant. With the on-going objective of reduction in the reliance of
groundwater blending and to improve the stability and potabilisation of the supplied water from Sitra, it is
recommended to implement a full potabilisation system.
6.3.3 Alba
The potable water quality from the Alba MED plant appears to be achieving acceptable water quality in
accordance with the Gulf Standards (GS) with the exception of TDS and pH. To improve TDS and pH
values and comply with the GSO or the proposed standards (Table 2.2), revised dosing rates for lime and
carbon dioxide have been provided.
6.3.4 Al Dur
Al Dur is a relatively new plant that incorporates much of the technologies being recommended in this
report especially in terms of pre-treatment, desalination, and potabilisation. The plant operates well and
produces a high quality product water. As it is not coupled to power generation, water can be produced on
demand and is not dependent on seasonal changes in power production. In addition, it is designed with
redundant feeds so that it can produce water even during the power plant shut down and is therefore
highly reliable. This system should be considered as a model for reference in the design of new
desalination plants.
Recommendations made for this plant are minor.
It is recommended to investigate optimising ferric chloride dosing by automating and controlling it based on
sea water characteristics. Savings could be had in coagulant and coagulant aid, and chemical and power
costs. Additional benefits could include extended pressure filter run time and longer service life from the
cartridge filters.
The plant currently uses ferric chloride brought in bags. Given the quantity of ferric chloride consumption,
a bulk delivery and onsite storage system would increase efficiency and should be promoted.
The current turbidity rate is very stringent and it is unclear whether such a stringent limit is needed. If the
final turbidity limit was relaxed for post lime dosing, lime slurry could be used which would result in less
water being used for limewater make-up. This would provide the benefit of increasing liquid lime storage
durations and lime pumping capacities. Whilst this currently may not be an option, it is worth considering
this efficiency as a future plant improvement opportunity.

6.3.5 Ras Abu Jarjur (RAJ)
The RAJ BWRO plant is old and in need of significant civil, structural and mechanical upgrade. There are
currently plans to upgrade the existing hollow fibre Du Pont RO racks to Toray spiral wound modules. We
believe this is a positive step in the right direction but that a thorough review of available technologies
should be undertaken prior to the full replacement of the Du Pont membranes. In addition, future upgrades
should consider alternative energy recovery options.
The hydrocarbon adsorption regeneration system requires a full replacement. As an alternative, it is

recommended to investigate other newer technology hydrocarbon adsorption systems with longer lives
such as zeolites, nano-clays and polymers.
The pH of the final water marginally exceeds 8.0 on occasions and on average the LSI is low at -0.35.
Potabilisation dosing recommendations were made as to how to achieve this. Efficiencies can also be
made in the lime dosing process through improvements in the control functionality and storage. These
improvements would markedly improve site health and safety as well as final water potabilisation.

7 References
Desal Data (2014) http://desaldata.com/
Emirate of Abu Dhabi Regulation & Supervision Bureau (RSB) (2014) The Water Quality Regulation,
Fourth Edition.
EWA (2013) Sitra Annual Report.
Gulf Standards Organisation (GSO) (2008) Standard for Unbottled Drinking Water (GS/149/2008).
International Desalination Association (IDA) IDA Desalination Yearbook 2012-2013.
Mahbuba, F., Hawlader, M. and Mujumdar, A. (2009) Combined water and power plant (CWPP) – a novel
desalination technology. Desalination and Water Treatment. Volume 5. Pages 172-177.
SNC Lavalin International and Black and Veatch (2006), Electricity and Water 15 Year Master Plan 2006-
2020, Final Report, Volume 6 Part A, Water Treatment Study Report.
Sultanate of Oman Ministry of Commerce and Industry (2006) Omani Standard Nr 8/2006: Unbottled
Drinking Water.
World Health Organization (2011) Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality, Fourth Edition.

Appendices
Appendix A. Water Quality Data __________________________________________________________________ 69

Appendix B. Meeting Minutes ____________________________________________________________________ 70

Appendix A. Water Quality Data

Water Qaulity of Sitra Power & Water Station
Sitra
Parameter Unit
01/06/2013 01/07/2013 01/08/2013 01/09/2013 01/10/2013 01/11/2013 01/12/2013 01/01/2014 01/02/2014 01/03/2014 01/04/2014 01/06/2014
Colour PtCO scale

Turbidity NTU
Temperature oC
pH
Dissolved Oxygen mg/l
TDS mg/l
Total Hardness in mg/L CaCO3 mg/l
Calcium mg/l
Magnesium mg/l
Alkalinity as mg/L CaCO3 mg/l
Langlier Saturation Index
Aluminium ppm
Arsenic ppm
Barium ppm
Boron ppm
Cadmium ppm
Chloride ppm
Chromium (total) ppm
Copper ppm
Fluoride ppm
Iodine ppm
Iron ppm
Lead ppm
Manganese ppm
Mercury ppm
Molybendenum ppm
Potassium ppm
Nickel ppm
Selenium ppm
Sodium ppm
Zinc ppm
Bromate ppm
Cynanide ppm
Nitrate ppm
Phosphate ppm
Sulphide ppm
Silica ppm
Petroleum Indicatator (present or not present) ppm
Total Organic Carbon ppm
Chlorine Residual ppm
Trihalomethanes (total) ppm
Readings of 12:00 are required for each day in the above table.
Water Quality of RAJ RO Plant
RAJ
Parameter Unit
01/06/2013 01/07/2013 01/08/2013 01/09/2013 01/10/2013 01/11/2013 01/12/2013 01/01/2014 01/02/2014 01/03/2014 01/04/2014 01/06/2014
Colour PtCO scale N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Turbidity NTU 0.57 1.14 0.67 0.74 0.68 0.88 0.67 0.7 0.76 0.52 1.72 1.03
Temperature oC 31.3 31.4 31.4 31.3 30.7 30.6 30.1 30.1 30.4 30 30.7 31.3
pH 8.1 8.03 7.91 7.93 7.99 7.62 7.98 8.05 7.7 7.7 8.15 7.7
Dissolved Oxygen mg/l N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
TDS mg/l 235 245 248 241 232 210 231 231 246 208 204 268
Total Hardness in mg/L CaCO3 mg/l 59 71 66 67 63 63 63 61 67 57 61 73
Calcium mg/l 21 25 23 23 22 22 22 21 22 18 21 26
Magnesium mg/l 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 2
Alkalinity as mg/L CaCO3 mg/l 33 45 42 41 41 43 48 46 47 39 55 53
Langlier Saturation Index -0.37 -0.23 -0.42 -0.41 -0.35 -0.44 -0.2 -0.29 -0.48 -0.65 -0.01 -0.38
Aluminium ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Arsenic ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Barium ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Boron ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cadmium ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Chloride ppm 95 105 96 94 86 82 95 94 107 90 81 111
Chromium (total) ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Copper ppm 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Fluoride ppm 0.11 0.1 0.07 0.07 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Iodine ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Iron ppm - - - 0.1 0.02 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.09 0.09 0.06 0.09
Lead ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Manganese ppm 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Mercury ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Molybendenum ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Potassium ppm 3.7 4.2 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Nickel ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Selenium ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sodium ppm 54 64 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60
Zinc ppm 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03
Bromate ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cynanide ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Nitrate ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Phosphate ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sulphide ppm < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.11 < 0.05 0.5 < 0.05 < 0.05 0.2 < 0.05
Silica ppm 0.24 0.44 0.48 0.3 0.21 0.41 0.46 0.5 0.48 0.34 0.33 0.35
Petroleum Indicatator (present or not present) ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total Organic Carbon ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Chlorine Residual ppm 0.8 0.74 0.74 0.74 0.76 0.75 0.7 0.7 0.76 0.78 0.6 0.65
Trihalomethanes (total) ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
* Na, K, Zn, Mn and Cu kept the same srtarting from Sep. 2013 t0 May 2014 due to faulty AA400.
Water Quality of Alba Calcining Plant
Alba
Parameter Unit
01/06/2013 01/07/2013 01/08/2013 01/09/2013 01/10/2013 01/11/2013 01/12/2013 01/01/2014 01/02/2014 01/03/2014 01/04/2014 01/06/2014
Colour PtCO scale N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Turbidity NTU 0.44 0.76 0.71 0.48 0.6 0.37 0.7 0.34 0.51 0.72 0.24 0.57
Temperature oC 39 39 39 40 38 38 34 33 31 33 34 38
pH 8 8.08 8.18 8 8.16 7.93 8.36 8.18 8.21 8.11 8.12 8.25
TDS mg/l 61 124 46 130 120 76 130 57 68 45 51 42
Calcium mg/l 25 24 28 20 21 22 24 26 26 24 25 26
Magnesium mg/l N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Langlier Saturation Index 0.15 0.16 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.11 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.15
Aluminium ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Arsenic ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Barium ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Boron ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cadmium ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Chloride ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Chromium (total) ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Copper ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Fluoride ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Iron ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Lead ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Manganese ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Mercury ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Potassium ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Nickel ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Selenium ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sodium ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Zinc ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Bromate ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Cynanide ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Nitrate ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Sulphide ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Silica ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Petroleum Indicatator (present or not present) ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Total Organic Carbon ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Trihalomethanes (total) ppm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Water Quality of Hidd Power Co.
HPC
Parameter Unit
01/06/2013 01/07/2013 01/08/2013 01/09/2013 01/10/2013 01/11/2013 01/12/2013 01/01/2014 01/02/2014 01/03/2014 01/04/2014 01/06/2014
Colour PtCO scale 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

Turbidity NTU 0.16 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.19 0.19 0.2 0.16 0.23 0.18 0.18 0.19
Temperature oC 34 37.6 37.1 39 36.3 34.8 33.1 34.4 33.6 38 35.2 37.3
pH 7.65 7.58 7.6 7.61 7.58 7.59 7.67 7.61 7.56 7.58 7.57 7.51
TDS mg/l 158 168 163 163 185 170 193 188 176 177 188 184
Calcium mg/l 103 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 102 100 100 100
Magnesium mg/l 1.708 2.6 2.44 1.7 2.68 1.46 2.19 2.19 1.9 2.44 2.6 1.22
Aluminium ppm 0.033 0.011 0.01 <0.001 0.009 0.008 0.012 0.012 0.016 0.22 0.013 0.031
Arsenic ppm 0.0018 0.0012 0.0012 0.00084 0.00048 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.00058 0.0009 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001
Barium ppm 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 <0.0001 0.0009 0.0003 0.0003 0.0007 0.0009 0.0001 0.0008 0.0008
Boron ppm <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Cadmium ppm 0.0008 0.0001 0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001
Chloride ppm 29.8 29.24 26 31.11 38.85 32.35 51.34 38.65 39 42.24 46.47 44
Chromium (total) ppm 0.0003 0.00017 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0003 0.0002 <0.0001 0.0002 0.0001 0.0001
Copper ppm 0.047 0.072 0.033 0.045 0.051 0.038 0.041 0.065 0.055 0.049 0.041 0.037
Iron ppm 0.004 0.009 0.005 0.002 0.02 0.001 0.005 0.009 0.04 0.008 0.002 0.015
Lead ppm 0.0009 0.0005 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0003 0.0006 0.0006
Manganese ppm 0.002 0.007 0.002 <0.001 0.005 <0.001 0.001 0.007 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.004
Mercury ppm 0.00007 0.00002 <0.00001 0.00001 0.00004 0.00009 0.00009 0.00007 <0.00001 <0.00001 <0.00001 0.0003
Potassium ppm <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Nickel ppm 0.002 0.0058 0.0005 0.0032 0.0025 0.0035 0.0004 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0002 <0.0001
Selenium ppm 0.0003 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0015 0.00024 <0.0001 0.00022 <0.0001 <0.0001 <0.0001 0.0008 <0.0001
Sodium ppm 17.1 17.84 21.96 22.6 27 27.7 33.1 26.7 33.1 29 32.2 26.6
Zinc ppm 0.019 0.0003 0.014 0.0015 0.013 0.014 0.016 0.018 0.043 0.012 0.019 0.012
Bromate ppm <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Cynanide ppm <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Nitrate ppm 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Petroleum Indicatator (present or not present) ppm <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Total Organic Carbon ppm 0.122 0.106 0.11 0.137 0.123 0.124 0.143 0.143 0.161 0.145 0.136 0.172
Trihalomethanes (total) ppm 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.0009 0.01 0.013 0.014 0.016 0.011 0.009 0.02 0.008
Water Quality of Al Dur Power & Water Co.
ADPWC
Parameter Unit
01/06/2013 01/07/2013 01/08/2013 01/09/2013 01/10/2013 01/11/2013 01/12/2013 01/01/2014 01/02/2014 01/03/2014 01/04/2014 01/06/2014
Colour mg/l (Pt/Co scale) 0.52 0.45 0.51 0.48 0.49 0.51 0.51 0.5 0.45 0.5 0.47 0.48
Turbidity NTU 0.04 0.037 0.0474 0.044 0.0453 0.0379 0.0399 0.0363 0.0445 0.0376 0.0417 0.0446
Temperature Deg C 30.9 35.58 34.47 37.12 33.61 30.41 26.42 19.54 21.03 23.02 24.7 33.82
pH pH 7.85 7.817 7.826 7.814 7.86 7.835 7.866 7.87 7.864 7.804 7.822 7.834
TDS (Conductivity) us/cm 335 382.1 404.3 367.9 308.3 363.4 360.5 366.2 411.7 349.1 330.3 390.2
Total Hardness in mg/L CaCO3 mg/l CaCO3 120 125.1 110.1 100.2 114.2 119.1 121.1 146.1 139.2 142.1 136.2 109.8
Calcium mg/l N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Magnesium mg/l as Mg <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5
Alkalinity as mg/L CaCO3 mg/l CaCO3 100 99.6 104.9 101.7 103.3 110.3 114.2 146.3 136.8 133.7 131.7 111
Aluminium mg/l as Al <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Arsenic µg/l as As <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20
Barium µg/l as Ba <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100 <100
Boron µg/l as B 695 849 750 840 840 647 702 610 280 280 580 580
Cadmium µg/l as Cd <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Chloride mg/l as Cl 45 49.31 48.4 47.5 43.7 47 36.7 32.9 32.5 28.18 26.9 48.43
Chromium (total) µg/l as Cr <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 <5
Copper mg/l as Cu <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Iron mg/l as Fe <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Lead µg/l as Pb <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10
Manganese mg/l as Mn <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Mercury µg/ as Hg <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1 <1
Potassium mg/l as K 1.36 1.95 1.14 1.08 1.33 1 0.99 0.89 1.24 0.725 0.73 1.37
Nickel mg/l as Ni <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Selenium µg/ as Se <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10
Sodium mg/l as Na 21.3 33.53 31.2 31.8 28.6 27.3 26.5 22.1 28.1 18.45 17.4 32.67
Zinc mg/l as Zn <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Bromate µg/l as BrO3 <2 <2 <2 2.639 1.037 1.752 1.8 1.3 1.84 2.07 1.35 1.43
Cynanide µg/l as CN <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20 <20
Nitrate mg/l as NO3 0.018 0.16 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Petroleum Indicatator (present or not present) ppm <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
Total Organic Carbon mg/l as C 0.01 0.001 0.032 0.04 0.001 0.089 0.124 0.142 0.093 0.086 0.039 0.038
Chlorine Residual mg/l as Cl2 0.54 0.519 0.476 0.546 0.495 0.524 0.471 0.546 0.5 0.521 0.486 0.495
Trihalomethanes (total) µg/l 1.6 2.7 <5 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25 <25
Appendix B. Meeting Minutes

Record of meeting/discussion 

Project Title EWA Master Plan 2015 - 2030 Division MWE

Subject Ras Abu Jarjur Site Visit Project No. 335975
Location RAJ Plant Date of Meeting 16 July 2014
Present
RAJ Staff
Mohammed Jaffar Head of Department

Leo Sagun Shift Charge
Fadhel Abbas Chemical Engineer
Hassan Abbas Senior Chemist
Ali Alarrayed Senior Mechanical Engineer
Ali AlFardan Head of Maintenance
Fadhel Alkhuzaei Electronics Engineer
Fadheela Al Haddad Senior Chemical Engineer
Mohammed Ali Hassan SEEE
Hussein Mohsen SPE
Mott MacDonald
Brent Start Water Lead

Kuteiba Hussein Water Process Engineer
Recorded Distribution
by
KT/BIS Attendees
Item Text Action on
1 Introduction
1.1 All participants introduced themselves. MML provided an overview

of the agenda with all participants.
2. Background
2.1 MML provided a background to the project and explained the

desalination study for EWA.
3. Discussion
3.1 Leo Sagun provided a brief explanation of the process:
MMF011 Jul 2009 - PM/108/01 Page 1 of 3 © Mott MacDonald 2009

Continuation sheet
Project No. 335975 Date of Meeting 23 March 2014
The plant was commissioned in 1984. It is fed by 19 wells that draw

from an aquifer at a depth of 170m. The well water TDS is 13000
ppm. Plant capacity is 16.1 mgd and currently running at around 10
mgd.
EWA stated that the dual media filters are by-passed as they have
been found to not remove solids. The carbon filter is instead being
used as a mechanical filter.
MML enquired about the chemicals being dosed. Sulphuric acid and
polymer based anti-scalant is dosed prior to micro guard filters.
There are 10 RO module racks: 2 are spiral wound Toray, 8 are

DuPont (B-10) RO racks. DuPont discontinued this RO module
more than a decade ago. EWA have been planning for the full
replacement of the DuPont (B-10) RO racks.
EWA commented that in 2006 the plant was expanded to allow for 2
additional RO membrane racks. New modules are Toray spiral
wound. Existing racks are old (18 years) however they are quite
sturdy. New tubes cost less and operate at a lower pressure. The
Toray modules are 9 years old.
They trialled Tyoba CTS membrane – had constant problems with

this.
It is needed to replace DuPont modules as the racks and modules

are no longer manufactured. The plan is to replace all DuPont
modules with Toray modules.
EWA stated that overall Recovery is about 70%
Note: this is a risk as any failure in modules cannot be replaced with

like for like this is more of a concern as modules are nearing the end
of the service life
MML enquired if there were any other problems around the plant.
EWA commented that civil structures are deteriorating. Tenders are
currently out to refurbish old deteriorating structure.
EWA indicated that hydrocarbons have been detected at Well 9.

The well is currently not operating pending the outcome of
investigations to remove the hydrocarbon contamination
EWA indicated there currently no problems with nitrates.
The plant does not have standby power for production of permeate
only to run critical systems. However, the plant seems to have had
only one critical power outage (2003).

Continuation sheet
EWA provided a tour of the facility. The carbon regenerator is old

and is only operated once or twice a year. An investigation
undertaken by the original Japanese design company
recommended a complete replacement.
Lime dosing is variable and it is difficult to achieve the right pH.

Lime concentration in make-up tanks varies and causes variable
final pH. Original control system for pH is cascading control however
this is not currently operating.
Storage at the plant consists of 3 large (15,000 cu.m each) tanks

and 2 small (5000 cu.m each) tanks.
Many of the civil structures appeared to be deteriorating including

concrete and steel.
4 Conclusion
4.1 The meeting was concluded.



Subject Al Hidd Thermal Desalination Review Project No. 335975
Location Al Hidd Power Station Date of Meeting 17 July 2014
Present
Al Hiss Staff
Aqeel Jaffar Operations & Chemistry Manager

Mott MacDonald

by
BIS Attendees
Item Text Action on
1 Introduction

2. Background
2.1 MML provided a background to the project and explained the water
treatment study for EWA.
3. Discussion
Mr. Aqeel gave a brief overview of the plant. The total supply
capacity is 90 migd of water and 1000 MW of power. The MED
process produces 60 migd and the MSF process produces 30 migd.
The MSF process was described followed by the MED process.
The plant was constructed in 3 phases. Phase I was constructed in

the year 2000 and includes 2 x Gas Turbine (GT) units with a
power capacity of 272 MW, 1 x auxiliary boiler, and 4 x MSF units
for a total capacity of 30 migd.
Phase II increased power capacity by adding an additional 720 MW.

It was constructed in 2003 adding 3 x additional GTs and 1 x Steam
Turbine (ST) to the power capacity.
Phase III increased water production capacity by 60 migd. It was

constructed in 2007 and included 3 x auxiliary boilers and 10 x MED
Continuation sheet
Project No. 335975 Date of Meeting 16 July 2014
units.
The exhaust heat from the gas turbines is used for the thermal
processes. Auxiliary boilers are used when the gas turbines are not
in operation or insufficient to produce required water. This occurs in
the winter when power demand is lower.
MML asked about the main reason why the MED process was
selected for the Phase III upgrade and MSF processes. Mr. Aqeel
commented that the MED process is more efficient where the top
brine temperature only reaches 65ºC whereas for the MSF process
it reaches 107ºC.
Disadvantages with the MED process are that it requires more

maintenance and chemicals. On average 50 to 100 tubes per year
require replacement although this is a low percentage overall. It
takes 5 x more anti-scalant and an additional chemical tri-sodium
phosphate.
A summary of chemical consumption figures was provided by Mr.

Aqeel.
Carbone dioxide is generated onsite through the combustion of

natural gas. It is significantly more cost effective to produce onsite
compared to purchasing which costs $400 BD per tonne.
Mr. Aqeel reiterated the fact that an issue with the plant is the
impact the power plant has on the water production facility. When
power demand drops this affects the amount of water production
due to the lack of steam from GT. This is particularly true during
the winter months when power demand is lower but water demand
does not fall proportionately.
There are typically 2 x GT trips per month. Although plant operation

is meeting its KPIs for availability and reliability for >95% of the time.
During the summer months, the standby steam turbines run.
Mr. Aqeel mentioned that the plant contract ends in the year 2027
and no further expansions are planned.
A site visit was undertaken around the chemistry lab and thermal
desalination facilities.
There are 14 x limestone contactors producing 3 x potable water

streams.
Limestone is consumption is high and loading method into vessels

is labour intensive.
Mr. Aqeel mentioned that boilers for MED process provide 60 – 70%

Continuation sheet
of the steam demand.
4 Conclusion



Subject Treatment Study - Site Visit Project No. 335975
Location Al Dur Water Desalination Plant Date of Meeting 20 July 2014
Present
Al Dur WPP Staff
Rajesh Dubey Operation Manager

Mott MacDonald

by
KH/BIS Attendees
Item Text Action on
1 Introduction

2. Background
2.1 MML provided a background to the project and explained the

desalination study for EWA.
3. Discussion
3.1 Rajesh discussed the plant process and provided a detailed process
flow diagram for our reference. The plant is both power and water
desalination and utilises pre-treatment and RO for the desalination
process.
The plant is relatively new with a February 2012 commissioning

date. Plant capacity is 48 mig/d (218,000m3/d), it is currently
producing approximately 15 migd.
There are two streams with a capacity of 24 migd each. The

process for each of the two streams consists of the following:
 Sea water is fed through a deep intake that extends

approximately 5km off-shore.
 Raw water pumping
 7 x DAF units per stream

Continuation sheet
 Clarifier Tank
 22 x Dual media filters/stream
 12 x cartridge filter housing (360 cartridges per housing) –

filters are 5 micron
 13 x HP RO feed pumps for SWRO (first pass) – a Pelton

Turbine is coupled with these pumps for energy recovery.
 6 x Pumps and 6 BWRO units (second pass – first stage) for

(second pass – second stage)
 1 x 2100 m3 permeate storage tank
Chemicals used:
 Raw water pipe is shock dosed with sodium hypochlorite
Pre-treatment chemicals:
 Degremont specified chemicals
 Sulphuric acid
 Ferric chloride
 Coagulant A
For RO Use:
 Citric acid and caustic soda for cleaning
 Now going to Genesis proprietary cleaning chemical
 Caustic soda dosed to raise pH to form borate to allow for

removability of Boron. Boron has a 1 ppm limit.
 Anti-scalant is Nalco 1020T
 Sodium bisulfite
Final water:
 Lime, caustic soda, and carbon dioxide is dosed in the final

water line for potablisation.
Process control of chemical dosing is flow paced.

Continuation sheet
RO reject is discharged to the sea via an outfall.
Hydrated lime is stored onsite in silos and loaded by bulk chemical

delivery tankers (loaded by air compressor). All automated.
RO modules are Torey.
The plant has for the most part been operating without an outage
since commissioning. There were some temporary issues at start-
up that have since been resolved.
The contract with Al Ezzel O&M started in 2011 and has duration of
25 years.
Power supply for the water treatment / desal plant is from the onsite
power plant and the national grid. This allows for flexibility in
operation if the power plant is not operating.
In addition, the process train includes redundant units and is

equipped to provide flexibility.
All heat is currently recovered in the power plant.
A second identical power and water plant is planned for the future
(Al Dur Phase 2) with a capacity of 48 migd. Land, seawater
intakes and pump suction headers are all in place for the expansion.
4 Conclusion



Subject Sitra Project No. 335975
Location Sitra Date of Meeting 21 July 2014
Present
Sitra Staff
S.Abdulla Mahdi Senior Chemist

Ameena Moosa
Nellaiappan Chemist
Mott MacDonald

by
BIS Attendees
Item Text Action on
1 Introduction

2. Background
3. Discussion
S.Abdulla provided a brief description of the process. The total

capacity of the system is 12.5 MiG/d. He also provided a technical
data sheet showing the plant construction phases, commissioning
date and size of each upgrade phase. Phase I was commissioned in
1976, Phase II in 1984, and Phase III in 1985.
MML asked what the main issues at the plan were. S.Abdulla and
Ameena both discussed tube failure as a key concern.
When CO2 volatises off in the flashing process it re-dissolved into

the water vapour forming an acidic solution that slowly attacks the
Continuation sheet
carbon steel tubes.
Tube failure is predominantly occurring in the same flashing stages

of the process. The number of tube failures is increasing over time.
It is often difficult to detect a damaged tube. S.Abdulla showed a

table with conductivity sample results showing how a leak is
detected. Conductivity results are taken for each stage, however
there are 4000 tubes in each stage and identifying holes is time
consuming.
There are spares onsite from the original installation, and suppliers
are still manufacturing the same tubes. However tube failures do
result in significant down time.
Ameena mentioned that if there are 10% of tube failures in 1 desal

unit it is taken off-line.
The tube thickness is decreasing over time and will result in tube
failures.
S.Abdulla – majority of tube failures seen in stages 2, 3, 4. Putting

inserts into tubes where there is likely failure was trailed but did not
fix the problem.
There is a tube lugging process that is used to fix the holes. This is
high impact and can affect the integrity of nearby tubes.
Low conductivity water is used for the boiler system.
Boiler system also requires tube repairs but not as frequently.
Annual maintenance period required over low demand period of

October to March where one unit is taken offline at a time for
maintenance checks and regular cleans such as for demisters etc.
CO2 volatilisation can be controlled in the system by increasing the

ventilation however this then affects the TBT therefore can affect
capacity.
S.Abdulla and Ameena provided process flow diagrams for our

reference and to help explain the process.
There is no potabilisation onsite apart from pH adjustment using

caustic soda. The transmission team are responsible for soda ash
dosing to increase water stability prior to the water entering the
blending station.
S.Abdulla and Ameena took MML on a site tour.
The seawater intake is via an inlet channel through rotary screens,

Continuation sheet
which have cathodic protection.
The discharge of cooling water and brine occurs via a common

channel, temperature of discharge water is higher than
environmental limits.
Chlorine is generated onsite using electrolysers to make 1.5%

solution.
Caustic is used at 10%.
Civil structures are deteriorating and are in dire need of

rehabilitation. This is especially the case for units 2, 3 & 4. There
are plans to undertake the rehabilitation.
S.Abdulla and Ameena stated that they are looking to undertake a

site wide mechanical and electrical rehabilitation however this has
not been budgeted for. The civil/structural rehabilitation is more of a
priority.
Ameena explained the process in detail and provides further

information on the operation of the MSF desalination units. She
explained the use of anti-scalants in reducing temporary hardness
scale deposits and antifoaming agents for the prevention of salt
carryover.
4 Conclusion



Subject Alba Thermal Desalination Review Project No. 335975
Location Alba Calcining Plant Date of Meeting 23 July 2014
Present
Alba Staff
A. Qader Mohammed Supervisor Water Desalination Calciner & Marine

Ali A. Hasan Mohammed Head of Quality Assurance
Mott MacDonald

by
BIS Attendees
Item Text Action on
1 Introduction

2. Background
3. The Alba desalination plant was commissioned in 2001 and uses

MED technology. Flue gas from the calcining process is used to
generate steam to supply the MED plant.
Boilers are available onsite to supplement the steam demand

although they are seldom used. The plant is operated by Alba and
produces 5.2 migd; 80% of which is sold to EWA under a 25 year
supply contract with the remaining sold to nearby industry. The
contract to supply water to EWA ends in August 2027.
There is full potabilisation capability onsite with lime, carbon dioxide

and caustic soda. Sodium hypochlorite is dosed for residual
disinfection. Lime is stored in three silos with a full storage capacity
of 90 tonnes, providing 24 days’ storage. Carbon dioxide is
delivered to site.
Potabilised water is stored onsite in a 20,000m3 storage tank. EWA

Continuation sheet
is responsible for its transmission beyond this point.
The Alba desalination plant uses the Gulf Standards (GSO) for
water quality compliance.
There are planned maintenance shutdowns of 2 or 3 days per

month due to excess scale formation in the evaporators which
affects the plant production capability. However, with the onsite
storage providing approximately one day’s worth of buffer,
disruption would be minimised.
A future expansion to the water production system is planned, the

entire planned expansion has been dedicated to private industry.
4 Conclusion

Glossary
BWRO Brackish Water Reverse Osmosis

CWPP Combined Power Water Plant
DAF Dissolved Air Floatation
DAFF Dissolved Air Floatation Filtration
DMF Dual Media Filtration
GCC Gulf Cooperation Council
GSO Gulf Standards Organisation
GT Gas Turbine
HPC Hidd Power Company
IWPP Independent Water and Power Producer
LSI Langelier Saturation Index
MED Multi-Effect Distillation
MIGD Million Imperial Gallons per Day
MSF Multi-Flash Distillation
NTU Nephelometric Turbidity Units
RO Reverse Osmosis
RSB Regulation and Supervision Bureau
ST Steam Turbine
SWRO Seawater Reverse Osmosis
TCU Total Colour Units
TDS Total Dissolved Solids
UV Ultra Violet
WHO World Health Organization


Bahrain Master Plan Water Treatment Review

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bahrain Master Plan Water Treatment Review

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Kingdom of Bahrain

Electricity and Water Authority

Water Treatment Review

Electricity and Water Authority

Electricity and Water Authority

Chapter Title Page

2 Water Quality Requirements 8

3 Review of Desalination Water Treatment Technologies 16

4 Review of Desalination Water Treatment Chemicals 29

335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 23 December 2014

5 Review of Existing Desalination Treatment Sites 43

6 Conclusions and Recommendations 63

335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 23 December 2014

6.3 Recommendations for Existing Bahraini Desalination Plants _________________________________ 64

335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 23 December 2014

Water Quality Standards

It is recommended that Bahrain revises its standards in accordance with recent

335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 23 December 2014

Bahrain water desalination facilities use a range of technologies including multi-

Alternative desalination technologies were reviewed including Forward Osmosis,

A comparison was made between MED, MSF, and RO technologies, utilising

Whilst it is beneficial to maintain a diversification of desalination technologies, for

335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 23 December 2014

Recommendations for Existing Bahraini Desalination Plants

With the on-going objective of reduction in the reliance of groundwater blending

In the long-term, for any future plant replacement or expansion, it is recommended

335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 23 December 2014

Ras Abu Jarjur (RAJ)

335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 23 December 2014

The hydrocarbon adsorption regeneration system requires a full replacement. As

335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 23 December 2014

1.1 Objectives and Scope of Work

6 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 23 December 2014

1.4 Structure of This Report

7 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 23 December 2014

2 Water Quality Requirements

2.1 Water Quality Standards

Those of particular note for Bahrain are summarised below.

World Health Organization (WHO)

Gulf Standards Organisation

8 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 23 December 2014

United Arab Emirates (UAE)

2.2 Comparison of Water Quality Standards

9 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 23 December 2014

Source: See References Section.

335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 23 December 2014

2.3 Recommended Water Quality Standards for Bahrain

11 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Table 2.2: Key Water Quality Parameters (Maximum permitted values)

12 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Table 2.3: Additional Parameters (Maximum permitted values)

13 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Table 2.4: Organic Chemicals (Maximum permitted values)

14 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Table 2.5: Micro-biological Parameters (Maximum permitted values)

15 335975/MEU/MWE/0002/B 28 July 2015

Water inn Bahrain is derived d from twoo main so

3.1.1 Reverse Osmosis

3.1.1.1 Overview of Process

Reverse oosmosis (RO O) is a membrane desalin nation processs, where pre

Figure 3.1: Simplified Schematic

As can bee seen from the

The treatment steps include: