Laserfiche WebLink
<br />;i <br /> <br />.,! <br /> <br />l\.) <br />~ <br />l\) <br />en <br /> <br />product water to the East Highline Canal, and evaporate the plant <br />reject in solar ponds, Colorado River diversions to the All-Americal1 <br />Canal, which supplies the East Highline Canal, would be reduced by <br />the aDlount of product water produced by the desalting plant, Design <br />capacity of' the plant is approximately 33,3 million gallons per day <br />with $ 90 percent product water recovery rate, A lime-soda ash <br />pretreiltment process and a !lpiral wound reverse osmosi!l desalting <br />procell;s were selected, The plant could produce 46,000 acre-feet of <br />replac~ent water per year at a salinity of 865 milligram!l per liter, <br /> <br />~! <br /> <br />San O~ofre Desating Facility <br />This desalting plant would desalt Pacific Ocean water on the <br />southern California coast at a site, next to the San ,Onofre, NUclear <br />Powerplant, The plant could be either a single-purpose or dual- <br />purpo~e plant, or could use waste heat from the nuclear powerplant, <br />Plant product water could be exchanged with water normally delivered <br />to the' Tri-Cities Municipal Water District and the nuclear powerplant, <br />or it could be delivered to the proposed cross-base aqueduct which <br />will s~pply water to Camp Pendleton, A distillation desalting proceslS <br />would 'be ulSed to produce 46,000 acre-feet of replacement water per <br />year at a salinity of 500 milligrams per liter, <br /> <br /> <br />High Ftecovery at the Yuma Desalting Plant <br />Increasing the recovery rate of the Yuma Desalting Plant to !lome <br />figure above the design rate of 70 percent (70 'percent of the plant, <br />, ' , <br />feed water will be recovered as product water) would reduce the ", <br />amount' of reject from thl! plant, The most feasible high recovery <br />proces$ would involve adding a third desalting stage to the plant, <br />thereby increasing the overall plant recovery rate to 85 percent, <br />This would have the effect of reducing the reject stream from 46,000 <br />acre-f~et per year to about 22,000 acre-feet per year, Replacemerit <br />of the' 2~,000 acre-feet per year of reject would then have to be <br />provided by another alternative, <br /> <br /> , <br /> 1 <br /> , <br /> -i <br /> , <br /> , <br /> ,I <br /> "1 <br /> Ji <br /> <i <br /> Ji <br /> 1 <br /> l <br />. 1 <br />,. . <br /> <br />"-. <br /> <br />4 <br /> <br />", ,...-~-- , <br />