PB84-161793
Cost Equations for Small Drinking Water Systems
(U.S.) Municipal Environmental Research Lab.
Cincinnati, OH
Feb 84
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Technical Information Service
-------
EPA-600/2-84-059
February 1984
COST EQUATIONS FOR SMALL DRINKING WATER SYSTEMS
by
Richard G. Eilers
Drinking Water Research Division
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
Cincinnati, OH 45268
MUNICIPAL ENVIRONMENTAL" RESEARCH LABORATORY
OFFICE OF RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OH 45268
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Intimctions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
EPA-600/2-84-059
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION-NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
Cost Equations for Small Drinking Water Systems
5. REPORT DATE
February 1984
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHOR(S)
Richard G. Eilers
I. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.
N/A
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME ANO AOORESS
U.S. EPA/MERL/DWRD
26 West St. Clair Street
Cincinnati, OH 45268
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
CBNC1A
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
Inhouse
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME ANO AOORESS
Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
Office of Research and Development
U.S.' Environmental Protection Agency
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
- Gin., OH
13. TYPE OF REPORT ANO PERIOD COVERED
Final - 12/83
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
EPA/600/14
15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
Contact: Richard G. Eilers (513)684-7809
16. ABSTRACT
This report presents capital and operation/maintenance cost equations for 33
drinking water treatment processes as applied to small flows (2,500 gpd to 1 mgd).
The equations are based on previous cost data development work performed under
contract to EPA. These equations provide a hand calculation method that can be
easily used to compute preliminary cost estimates for individual unit processes
or for an entire system within the specified size range.
7.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.IDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS c. COSATI Field/Group
Water Treatment
Cost Estimates
Regression Analysis
Economic Analysis
Unit Process Costs
Construction Costs
Operation/Maintenance C<}>sts
Cost Curve Data
13B
3. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
RELEASE UNLIMITED
19. SECURITY CLASS (This Report)
NONE
21. NO. OF PAGES
27
20. SECURITY CLASS (This page I
NONE
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
-------
NOTICE
This document has been reviewed in accordance with
U.S. Environmental. Protection Agency policy and
approved for publication. Mention of trade names
or commercial products does not constitute endorse-
ment or recommendation for use.
11
-------
FOREWORD"
The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency was created because of
public and government concern about the dangers of pollution to the health
and welfare of the American people. Noxious air; foul water, and spoiled
land are tragic testimonies to the deterioration of our natural environ-
ment. The complexity of that environment and the interplay of its components
require a concentrated and integrated attack on the problem.
Research and development is that necessary first step in problem solu-
tion, and it involves defining the problem, measuring its impact, and
searching for solutions. The Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory
develops new and improved technology and systems to prevent, treat, and
manage wastewater and solid and hazardous waste pollutant discharges from
municipal and community sources, to preserve and treat public drinking
water supplies, and to minimize the adverse -economic, social, health, and
aesthetic effects of pollution. This publication is one of the products of.
that research - a most vital communications link Mtween the researcher and
the user community.
The cost of water treatment processes that may be used for the removal
of contaminants included in the National Interim Primary Drinking Water
Regulations is of interest to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,
state and local agencies, and the engineering community in general. The
impact of proposed regulations will impact the small system water producers
and consumers the most significantly with respect to economics. The cost
equations presented in this report will help in analyzing the situation and
providing solutions to the rising cost of water supply.
Francis T. Mayo
Director
Municipal Environmental Protection Agency
iii
-------
ABSTRACT
This report presents capital and operation/maintenance cost equations
for 33 drinking water treatment unit processes as applied to small flows
(2,500 gpd to 1 mgd). The equations are based on previous cost data
development work performed under contract to EPA. These equations provide
a hand calculation method that can be easily used to compute preliminary
cost estimates for individual unit processes or for an entire system within
the specified size range.
IV
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TITLE PAGE NO.
INTRODUCTION 1
PREVIOUS WORK 1
GENERATION OF COST EQUATIONS 5
APPLYING THE EQUATIONS 7
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS 8
REFERENCES 19
"V
-------
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE NO. TITLE PAGE NO.
1 Unit Processes and Design Parameters 9
2 Capital Cost Equations for Small Systems 10
3 Operation/Maintenance Cost Equations
for Small Systems 13
4 Cost Influencing Parameters 1&
5 Package Complete Treatment Plant .1 mgd 17
6 Package Complete Treatment Plant .5 mgd 18
vi
-------
INTRODUCTION
The need to consider the cost of drinking water production when regula-
tions are proposed was established with the passage of the Safe Drinking
Water Act of 1974. Efficient unit process design and its effect on control-
ling the escalating costs of water supply need to be considered. This type
of analysis is most important in the design of small (less than 1 mgd)
water systems for several reasons. Small systems often lack operating
revenues and cannot benefit from economies of scale as do large urban
systems. Another problem is that of providing high quality drinking water.
Studies indicate most waterborn disease outbreaks seem to occur in small
systems and are due primarily to inadequancy of treatment technology.
Future proposed standards will likely compound these problems for the small
utilities when they are forced to install additional technology in order
to meet new quality requirements. Substantial or even prohibitive cost
increases could result. In order to help measure the economic impact of
regulation in advance, the cost information presented in this report can be
of value .in performing preliminary studies to estimate the cost effective-
ness of alternate designs for small systems. Although these cost equations
cannot be used for extremely detailed design purposes, they can be a useful
tool for the consulting engineer or planner.
r '
PREVIOUS WORK
The Drinking Water Research Division (DWRD) of the USEPA's Municipal
Environmental Research Laboratory (MERL) has conducted research to develop
cost data associated with unit treatment processes for water supply.
-------
In 1979 a significant piece of work entitled "Estimating Water Treatment
Costs'^1) was completed and published. This was an EPA sponsored project
that was performed by Culp/Wesner/Culp Consulting Engineers of Santa Ana,
California (CWC). The resulting four-volume series of reports presents
construction and operation/maintenance costs for 131 unit process modules
(98 applicable to large systems greater than 1 mgd, and 33 applicable to
small systems less than 1 mgd) which are useful for removing contaminants
included in the National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations.
Volume 1 of the series is a summary which discusses the cost estimat-
ing approaches that were utilized to develop the cos^t curves, presents the
treatment techniques that are applicable to contaminant removal, and gives
a series of examples demonstrating the use of the cost curves. Volume 2
presents cost curves applicable to large water supply systems with treatment
capabilities between 1 and 200 mgd, and also contains information on virus
and asbestos removal. Volume 3 includes cost curves for flows of 2,500 gpd
to 1 mgd. Volume 4 is a computer user's manual and contains documentation
for a computer program that cdn be used for retrieving and updating all
cost data contained in the reports.
For each unit process, conceptual designs were formulated, and con-
struction costs were then developed using the conceptual designs. The
construction costs that were developed are presented in tabular form by
eight categories: excavation and sitework; manufactured equipment;
concrete; steel; labor; pipe and valves; electrical and instrumentation;
and housing. The construction cost curves were checked for accuracy by a
second consulting engineering firm, Zurheide-Herrmann, Inc., using cost-
estimating techniques similar to those used by general contractors in
-------
preparing their bids. Construction costs are also shown graphically,
plotted versus the most appropriate design parameter for the process (such
as square feet of surface area for a filter). This type of plot allows the
data to be used with varying design criteria and designers' preferences.
Operation/maintenance requirements were determined individually for three
categories: energy, maintenance material, and labor. Energy requirements
for the building and the process are presented separately.
All costs were given in terms of October 1978 dollars, and a discussion
is included on cost updating. For construction cost, either of two methods
may be used. One is the use of indices that are specific to each of the
eight categories used to determine construction cost. The second is use of
an all-encompassing index, such as the ENR Construction Cost Index. Opera-
tion/maintenance requirements may be readily updated or adjusted to local ,
conditions, since labor requirements are expressed in hours per year,
electrical requirements are in kilowatt-hours per year, diesel fuel is in
gallons per year, and natural gas is in standard cubic feet per year.
It will be helpful for the user of the small system cost equations
presented later in this report to use Volume 3 -of the CWC series as a
reference source for explaining all of the design and operating assumptions
which are associated with the individual unit processes. All costs are a
function of a specific design parameter related to a particular unit process,
r *
Examples of some design parameters would be flow, area, volume, etc.
The CWC cost data base in its original form was not simple to use for
determining costs of specific systems. Calculating costs by hand using the
graphical or tabular data is laborious and prone to errors. Use of
the computer program requires a medium size computer system with FORTRAN
-------
capability and some knowledge of computer programming. Therefore, an
attempt was made to simplify the cost estimating technique through an
inhouse EPA project. (2) in order to improve the usefulness of the cost data
to a point where cost estimates could be made quicky and accurately using a
hand calculator, a series of analytic equations were developed for each of
the 98 unit treatment process that were applicable to the large scale
systems. Regression estimates were calculated based on the general equation
of the form:
Y = a Xb Xc X_r (1)
"V
1 2 n
where Y = either capital or annual operating cost; a, b, ..., r = constants
determined from a regression analysis; and X^, X£, ..., Xn = significant
variables,influencing cost. Capital costs in general -were found t.o be a
function of process design parameter, Engineering News Record Construction
Cost Index, number of separate units in the process, total dynamic head,
sludge hauling distances, and energy gradient. Annual operation/maintenance
costs in general were found to be a function of process operating parameter,
power cost, Producers Price Index, direct hourly wage rate, cost of natural
gas, cost of diesel fuel, number of separate units in the process, total
dynamic head, hauling distances, and energy gradient. The equation co-
efficients and exponents were determined and presented in tabular form for
each unit process. At this point the cost engineer has a relatively
simple method for estimating the same costs that are normally calculated
from the CWC cost data base by means of a computer program or directly from
graphs. The need to'do the same thing for small systems still remained.
-------
GENERATION OF COST EQUATIONS
With the use of the CWC computer program, a random number generator,
and multiple regression analysis, cost estimates based on Equation I were
computed for the 33 small system unit processes. A capital cost equation
of the form:
CC = KL USRTa CCIb MIC (2)
and an operation/maintenance cost equation of the form:
OM = K2 USRTd PPIe PRf DHRS NTGh DSL1 MI3 (3)
were generated, where CC = capital cost for construction in dollars; OM =
"V
annual operation/maintenance cost in dollars/year; USRT = either design
parameter for CC or operating parameter for OM; CGI = Engineering News
Record Construction Cost Index; MI = sludge hauling distance in miles; PPI
= Producers Price Index; PR = electric power cost in dollars/kilowatt hr;
DHR = direct hourly wage rate in dollars/hr; NTG = natural gas cost in
dollars/standard cu ft; DSL = dissel fuel cost in dollars/gal; and K^, K.2,
a, b, ..., j = constants estimated from the regression analysis.
Note that CC is capital cost which is defined as the construction cost
plus the costs of sitework, subsurface considerations, standby power,
general contractor overhead, engineering, land, legal-fiscal-administrative
expenses, and interest during construction. Examination of the CWC data
base shows that the capital cost obtained from Equation 2 is about 1.35 to
1.40 times the construction cost. Therefore, an estimate of the construc-
tion cost for a unit process can be obtained by dividing CC with a factor of
1.35 to 1.40. The annualized capital cost in dollars/year can be easily
calculated by multiplying CC with an amortization factor given by:
-------
1(1
AF =
(1 + i)n - 1
where i is the annual fractional rate of interest and n is the number of
years over which the investment is financed.
Equations 2 and 3 are compact and allow a direct analysis of the
sensitivity of cost to certain cost influencing variables. Other variables
not included in the equations could also influence cost, but only those
variables having a significant impact on cost were considered. The CWC
computer program was run 100 times with randomly changing values within
specified ranges for the variables influencing cos (^..thereby generating
100 data points for capital cost and annual operation/maintenance cost as a
function of the cost factor variables. A multiple regression analysis was
then performed on the 100 data sets to evaluate the coefficients and expon-
ents of Equations 2 and 3. This procedure was performed for each of the 33
unit process for small systems.
Table 1 is a listing of the unit processes for small systems along
with their respective design/operating parameters. Table 2 gives the
capital cost equations, and Table 3 gives the operation/maintenance cost
equations. Note that it was necessary to generate two cost curves for some
unit processes. The reason for this was to provide a more accurate cost
estimate within the specified design parameter range, because some of the
cost curves change slope at lower levels of the design paramter. This
phenomenon is a reflection of economies of scale, and the limitation is
inherent in sizing technological components. Below a given use level, the
size of a process component often remains constant; therefore the cost
curve no longer changes with the level of the design parameter. When two
-------
cost curves are given for an individual unit process, there will be a
discontinuity where the two curves meet, but the difference should be
negligible in all cases. The discontinuity from one curve to the next is
relatively insignificant in terms of the entire cost but would cause slight
inconsistencies at the intersection of the two curves. An important point
to remember is that the operation/maintenance cost equations in Table 3
do not include the cost of any chemicals that are to be used. The amount
of chemicals (if any) to be used by a unit process must be estimated and
their cost added to the operation/maintenance cost calculated from Table 3.
"V
APPLYING THE EQUATIONS
To illustrate the use of the cost equations given in Tables 2 and 3,
it would be helpful to look at several examples. Table 4 shows some typical
values for the various cost influencing variables based on 1983 levels and
approximate costs for various chemicals used for drinking water treatment.
Table 5 gives the details of a cost calculation for a .1 mgd (70 gpm) package
complete treatment' system. Volume 3 of the CWC reports gives the explanation
for the design assumptions built into the cost-data, such as pumping head,
application rate, output pressure, etc. These "fixed" values limit the
flexibility of the cost data, but the cost equations can still be used
effectively for preliminary design purposes. Table 6 constains the cost
analysis'for a .5 mgd system. All of the cost calculations are based on
the cost influencing parameter values and the chemical costs listed in
Table 4.
-------
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
Preliminary design cost estimates can be used to compare the economics
of several treatment systems with similar water treatment goals and to
identify the most cost-effective alternative. A series of equations for
estimating the capital and operation/maintenance costs of small systems in
the range of 2500 gpd to 1.0 mgd has been developed which can be easily
used to make a quick cost analysis for a proposed design. These equations
could be easily incorporated into a simple computer program that could
operate on a microcomputer system, if the user would prefer that approach
over the hand calculation procedure outlined in this report.
-------
TABLE 1
UNIT PROCESSES AND DESIGN PARAMETERS
Unit Process
Design Parameter (USRT)
Package Complete Treatment
Package Gravity Filtration
Package Pressure Filtration
Filter Media - Rapid Sand
Filter Media - Dual Media
Filter Media - Mixed Media
Filter Media - Mixed Media/Supervised Installation
Package Pressure Diatomite Filtration
Package Vacuum Diatomite Filtration
Package Ultrafiltration Plants
Package Granular Activated Carbon Column "V
Potassium Permanganate Feed System
Polymer Feed Systems
Powdered Activated Carbon Feed System
Direct Feed Gas Chlorination
Sodium Hypochlorite Solution Feed System
Ozone Generation and Feed System
Ozone Contact Chamber
Chlorine Dioxide Generation and Feed System
Ultraviolet Light Disinfection
Reverse Osmosis
Pressure Ion Exchange - Softening
Pressure Ion Exchange - Nitrate Removal
Activated Alumina - Fluoride Removal
Bone Char - Fluoride Removal
Package Raw Water Pumping
Package High Service Pumping ~
Steel Backwash/Clearwell.Tanks
Liquid Sludge Hauling
Dewatered Sludge Hauling
Sludge Disposal - Sanitary Sewer
Sludge Dewatering Lagoons
Sand Drying Beds
gpm
gpm
gpm
sq ft
sq ft
sq ft
sq ft
gpd
gpm
gpd
gpd
Ib/day
Ib/day
Ib/hr
Ib/day
Ib/day
Ib/day
gal
Ib/day
gpm
gpd
gpd
gpd
gpd
gpm
gpm
gal
cu yd/yr
gpd
cu ft (capital)
cu ft/yr (O&M)
sq ft
-------
TABLE 2
CAPITAL COST EQUATIONS FOR SMALL SYSTEMS
CC = Kj USRTa CCIb MIC
Unit Process
Package Complete Treatment
Package Gravity Filtration
Package Pressure Filtration
£ Filter Media-Rapid Sand
Filter Media-Dual Media
Filter Media-Mixed Media
Filter Media-Mixed Media/Si -
Package Pressure Diatomite Filtration
Package Vacuum Diatomite Filtration
USRT Range
4-1000 gpm
100-1400 gpm
80-300 gpm
300-1400 gpm
.7-10 gpm
10-350 gpm
4-280 sq ft
4-280 sq ft
4-280 sq ft
4-280 sq ft
28,000-100,000 gpd
100,000-1,000,000 gpd
30-100 gpm
100-720 gpm
n
170.3
17.59
148.7
1.742
108.8
73.39
.5529
.5584
.7415
1.849
68.39
.2668
112.8
38.48
a
.3359
.7798
.3747
1.116
.3045
.4922
.7617
.8463
.8520
.6892
.1208
.5824
.2505
.4674
b
.9840
1.005
1.001
1.025
.9801
.9844
.9895
.9768
.9928
.9987
1.000
1.001
1.001
1.002
c
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-------
TABLE 2 (Cont'd)
Unit Process
Package Ultraf iltration Plants
Package Granular Activated Carbon Columns
Potassium Permanganate Feed System
Polymer Feed System
Powdered Activated Carbon Feed System
Direct Feed Gas Chlorination
Sodium HypochJ.orite Solution Feed System
Ozone Generation and Feed System
"t
Ozone Contact Chamber
Chlorine-Dioxide Generation & Feed System
Ultraviolet Light Disinfection
Reverse Osmosis
USRT Range
2,500-10,000 gpd
10,000-1,000,000 gpd
2,500-;0,000 gpd
10,000-500,000 gpd
.1-10 Ib/day
.1-10 Ib/day
.1-10 Ib/hr
.1-100 Ib/day
.1-100 Ib/day
.5-10 Ib/day
850-13,500 gal
.1-50 Ib/day
10-100 gpm
100-780 gpm
2,500-10,000 gpd
10,000-1,000,000 gpd
n
3.693
.0634
12.41
1.158
37.50
96.80
18.70
22.00
23.70
113.1
.0035
49'. 30
9.685
.8958
2.349
.1590
a
.3487
.7763
.1783
.4333
0.
0.
.1639
0.
0.
.2684
1.047
0.
.2786
.7728
.4241
.7252
b
.9988
1.001
.9936
.9986
1.0
1.0
.9842
1.0
1.0
1.004
.9845
1.0
.9889
.9982
1.004
1.005
c
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Pressure Ion Exchange-Softening
70,000-860,000 gpd
7.471
.3247
1.012
0.
-------
TABLE 2 (Cont'd)
Unit Process
Pressure Ion Exchange-Nitrate Removal
Activated Alumina-Fluoride Removal
Bone Char-Fluoride Removal
'Package Raw Water Pumping
Package High Service Pumping
Steel Backwash/Clearwell Tanks
Liquid Sludge Hauling
Dewatered Sludge Hauling
Sludge Disposal-Sanitary Sewer
Sludge Dewatering Lagoons
Sand Drying Beds
USRT Range
70,000-830,000 gpd
12,700-910,000 gpd
16,300-800,000 gpd
20-700 gpm
30-1,100 gpm
50-30,000 gal
68-1,000 gpd
1,000-41,000 gpd
100-1,000 cu yd/yr
1,000-50,000 cu yd/yr
50-25,000 gpd
1,500-30,000 cu ft
200-800 sq ft
Kl
2.618
9.513
5.655
25.24
18.97
.0684
1405.
5.109
.8196
.1438
-r
.5418
.3406
a
.4258
.3035
.3656
.2536
.2483
.7417
.0716
.4107
.1598
.4044
-
.3735
.6729
b
1.003
.9964
1.003
.9996
.9977
.9853
.9987
1.050
.9743
.9054
-
1.010
.9772
c
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
.0220
.2221
1.257
1.366
-
0.
0.
-------
TABLE 3
OPERATION/MAINTENANCE COST FOR SMALL SYSTEMS
OM = K2 USRTd PPIe PRf
NTGh DSL1
Unit Process '
Package Complete Treatment
Package Gravity Filtration
Package Pressure Filtration
Filter-Media-Rapid Sand
i-1
w Filter Media-Dual Media
Filter Media-Mixed Media
Filter Media-Mixed Media/ SI
Package Pressure Diatomite
Filtration
Package Vacuum Diatomite
Filtration
Package Ultraf iltration
Plants
Package Granular Activated
Carbon Columns
USRT Range
4-1,400 gpm
80-300 gpm
300-1,400 gpm
.7-10 gpm
10-350 gpm
4-280 sq ft
4-280 sq ft
4-280 sq ft
' i
1
4-280 sq ft
28,000-100,000 gpd
100,000-1,000,000 gpd
30-100 gpm
100-720 gpm
2,500-10,000 gpd
10,000-1,000,000 gpd
2,500-10,000 gpd
10,000-500,000 gpd
K2
5660.
11717.
3234.
3698.
8233.
-
-
-
-
351.9
2.414
2560.
460.0
301.0
.0719
154.6
2.972
d
.3096
.1947
.5434
.0806
.3253
-
-
-
-
.1925
.6067
.2180
.5838
.1359
.8225
.1635
.5594
e
.0260
-.0016
.0365
-.0149
.0206
-
-
-
-
'.0237
.0050
.0230
.0401
.1073
.6008
.1033
.3284
f
.4449
.3411
.4414
.3401
.6273
-
-
-
-
.2290
.2319
.2649
.2920-
.2116
.2122
.3279
.4050
g
.4705
.5772
.4614
.6099
.2942
-
-
-
-
.7025
.6845
.6593
.6392
.6338
.0619
.5544
.2581
h
-.0972
-.0030
.0634
.0093
.0255
-
-
-
-
-.0209
-.0358
.0527
.0609
-.0347
-.0148
-.0077
.0357
i
.2468
-.0591
.1864
-.0454
-.1049
-
-
-
-
-.0049
-.0987
-.0542
-.0408
.0369
-.1143
.0224
-.0714
j
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
-------
TABLE 3 (Cont'd)
Unit Process
Potassium Permanganate Feed
System
Polymer Feed System
Powered Activated Carbon Feed
System
Direct Feed Gas Chlorination
Sodium Hypochlorite Solution
USRT Range
.1-10 Ib/day
.1-10 Ib/day
1-10 Ib/hr
.1-100 Ib/day
.1-100 Ib/day
K2
6.051
15.33
253.6
10.26
19.28
d e
0. 1.0
0. 1.0
.4257 .0284
0. 1.0
0. 1.0
f g h i j
0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
.0534 .9256 .0083 .0470 0.
0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
0. 0. 0. 0. 0.
Feed System
_ Ozone Generation and Feed
_£L System
Ozone Contact Chamber
Chlorine Dioxide Generation
and Feed System.
Ultraviolet Light Disin-
fection
Reverse Osmosis
Pressure Ion Exchange —
Softening
.5-10 Ib/day 1191.
.2573 .0755 .2581 .6790 -.0289 -.0337 0.
850-13,500 gal
1-50 Ib/day
20.05 0.
1.0
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
10-100 gpm 741.19
100-780 gpm 25.17
2,500-10,000 gpd 411.4
10,000-1,000,000 gpd 6.967
70,000-860,000 gpd 36.84
.2324 .1779 .5826 .1744 .0059 .0078 0.
.6923 .3824 .4520 .1010 .0111 .0134 0.
.1922 .0464 .1811 .7075 -.0333 .0299 0.
.7860 .2231 .4943 .1207 .0693 -.1108 0.
.3401 .1284 .1120 .7234 .0272 -.0178 0.
-------
TABLE 3 (Cont'd)
Unit Process
USRT Range
K2
Pressure Ion Exchange -
Nitrate Removal
Activated Alumina -
Fluoride Removal
Bone Char - Fluoride
Removal
Package Raw Water
Pumping
Package High Service
Pumping
Steel Backwash/Clearwell
Tanks
Liquid Sludge Hauling
Dewatered Sludge Hauling
Sludge Disposal -
Sanitary Sewer
Sludge Dewatering Lagoons
Sand Drying Beds
70,000-830,000 god
3.546 .4729 .3423 .0933 .5179 -.0181 .0255 0.
12,700-910,000 gpd 101.5 .2531 .0645 .0898 '.7979 .0011 .0183 0.
16,.300-800,000 gpd
20-700 gpm
30-1,100 gpm
500-30,000 gal
68-1,000 gpd
1,000-41,100 gpd
100-1,000 cu yd/yr
1,000-50,000 cu yd/yr
50-25,000 gpd
59.86 .3337 .1039 .1639 .6778 .0097 .0030 0.
246.2 .7528 .0075 .6896 .2227 .0670 .1975 0.
142.5 .8767 .0387 .7474 .1293 -.0341 -.0219 0.
2.552 .4336 .2285 .0265 .4922 .0661 .2232 .6813
0.0204 1.059 .26^3 .0145 .4170 -.0192 .1117 .7037
T
.4064 .4673 .4413 -.0269 .3224 -.0.284 .1547 .7768
.1087 .8225 .2748 -.0139 .4131 .0233 .3396 .7190
.0002 1.0 1.0 0.
0. 0.
0. 0.
1,500-30,000 cu ft .1152 .7271 .1717 -.0063 .7617 .0537 .2184 0.
200-800 sq ft
3.148 ;6676 .0338 -.0097 .9601 -.0410 -.0814 0.
-------
TABLE 4
COST INFLUENCING PARAMETERS
Equation Input Variables
Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index 366.00 CCI
Producer Price Index 284.00 PPI
Electric Power Cost, $/kw-hr .06 PR
Labor Wage Rate, $/hr 10.00 DHR
Cost of Natural Gas, $/std cu ft .005 NTG
Cost of Diesel Fuel, $/gallon 1.25 DSL
Sludge Hauling Distance - One Way, miles 10.0 MI
Cost of Chemicals
Chlorine, $/ton 300.
Polymer, $/ton 4000.
Alum, $/ton 140.
Sodium Hydroxide, $/ton 200.
16
-------
TABLE 5
PACKAGE COMPLETE TREATMENT PLANT (.1 MGD)
Cost Analysis
- 1983 Dollars -
Unit Process
Package Raw Water Pumping
(Pumping Head = 50 ft)
Package Complete Treatment
(2 gpm/sq ft)
Alum - 2.2 tons/yr
Polymer - 55 Ib/yr
Chlorine - .33 tons/yr
Steel Backwash/ Clearwell Tank
Package High Service Pumping
(Output Pressure = 70 psi)
Sand Drying Beds
TOTALS
Design
Parameter
105 gpm
70 gpm
15,000 gal
105 gpm
500 ft2
Capital
Cost,
$
30,000
236,333
28,725
21,753
7,135
323,946
Operating Operating Cost, $/yr
Parameter Excluding Chemicals
50 gpm 859
50 gpm 32,891
0.
50 gpm 1,073
500 ft2> 2,762
37,585
Chemical
Costs, $/yr
0
308
110
100
0
0
0
518
Construction Cost, $ = 323,946/1.35 = 239,960
Amortization Factor (10%, 20 yrs) = .1175 (Equation 4)
Amortized Capital Cost, $/yr = 323,946 (.1175) = 38,063
Total Treatment Cost, $/yr = Amortized Capital Cost + Operating Cost + Chemical Costs
= 38,063 + 37,585 + 518 = 76,166
Total Unit Treatment Cost, $/1000 gal = 76.166/.072 mgd/3650/100 = 2.90 (Based on 50 gpm =
.072 mgd)
-------
00
TABLE 6
PACKAGE COMPLETE TREATMENT PLANT (.5 MGD)
Cost Analysis
- 1983 Dollars -
Des ign
Unit Process Parameter
Package Raw Water Pumping 500 gpm
(Pumping Head = 50 ft)
Package Complete Treatment 350 gpm
(2 gpm/sq ft)
Alum - 11 tons/yr
Polymer - 264 Ib/yr
Chlorine - 1.6 tons/yr
Steel Backwash/Clearwell Tank 90,000 gal
(three 30,000 gal tanks) ;
Package High Service Pumping 500 gpm
(Output Pressure = 70 psi)
Sludge Dewatering Lagoon 15,000 sq ft
TOTALS
Capital
Cost,
$
44,566
637,025
144,097
32,048
7,634
865,370
Operating Operating Cost, $/yr
Parameter Excluding Chemicals
245 gpm 2,840
245 gpm 53,798
0.
245 gpm 4,323
i
12,000 sq ft 1,305
62,266
Chemical
Costs, $/yr
0
1,540
528
480
0
0
0
2,548
Construction Cost, $ = 865,370/1.35 = 641,015
Amortization Factor (10%, 20 yrs) = .1175 (Equation 4)
Amortized Capital Cost, $/yr = 865,370 (.1175) = 101,681
Total Treatment Cost, $/yr = Amortized Capital Cost + Operating Cost + Chemical Costs
= 101,681 + 62,266 + 2,548 = 166,495
Total Unit Treatment Cost, $/1000 gal = 166,495/.353 mgd/3650/100 = 1.29 (Based on 245 gpm
.353 mgd)
-------
REFERENCES
1. Gumerman, R. C.; Gulp, R. L.; and Hansen, S. P., "Estimating Water
Treatment Costs" Vol. 1, 2, 3 & 4, EPA Report EPA-600/2/79-162
a, b, c, d, MERL, USEPA, Cincinnati, Ohio (August 1979).
2. Clark, R. M.; Dorsey, P.; "A Model of Costs for Treating Drinking
Water", Management and Operations, Journal AWWA (December 1983),
pp. 618-627.
19
------- |