Laserfiche WebLink
<br />the water conv~rsion costs. These cost distributions are based on the <br /> <br />study ground rules. Other ground rules will shift the percentages, but <br /> <br />the above values serve to identify the major cost areas in the VTE-MSF <br /> <br />I-" <br />CD <br />OJ <br />c;:; <br /> <br />process. <br /> <br />It is interesting to contrast the tube requirements for an MSF plant <br /> <br />with that for a VTE-MSF combination plant. The following assumes that <br /> <br />smooth tubes would be used in both MSF sections and that double fluted <br /> <br />tubes would be used in the VTE section: <br /> <br />Tube <br />for <br /> <br />Tubing Cost <br />for 50-mgd Plant, <br />106 $ <br /> <br />Area Required <br />50-mgd Plant, <br />106 ft2 <br /> <br />MSF Plant <br /> <br />5.3 <br /> <br />14.6 <br /> <br />VTE-MSF Combination Plant <br />VTE Tubes <br />MSF Tubes <br /> <br />1.7 <br />0.7 <br /> <br />6.1 <br />1.9 <br /> <br />Total <br /> <br />2.4 <br /> <br />8.0 <br /> <br />The same interrelationship between steam costs, fixed costs, and <br /> <br />performance ratio holds for the VTE-MSF combination plant as for the <br /> <br />MSF plant. Since the VTE-MSF process is largely a conceptual design at <br /> <br />this point, there have not been the extensive number of optimization <br /> <br />studies made over a wide range of ground rules that have been completed <br /> <br />for the MSF process. A parametric study was made in reference 23 for <br /> <br />relatively large plants and low unit steam costs. This information was <br /> <br />used to estimate the optimum PR for a 50-mgd plant under the study <br /> <br />ground rules, ~nd the results are shown in Fig. 8. The generalized <br /> <br />effect of changes in some of the key economic factors on PR are also <br /> <br />shown. Time did not permit a study of 10-mgd plant PR, and a PR of <br /> <br />35 <br /> <br />,t, __,~ <,'<,.;<', "-,, _ ; <br /> <br />