Seawater Desalination: A review of ecological impacts and prospective technology aiming to minimize negative environmental effects

Brian McKee
BI-314 Marine Biology 4/15/14

Introduction.
Freshwater resources account for a small portion (~2.5%) of the total water volume on earth. Over one third of the global human population faces freshwater shortage because the available water is not distributed evenly (WWAP 2009). Seawater desalination refers to the process of removing salts and minerals from seawater. The desalinated product may then be suitable for human consumption or irrigation. The saline byproduct may, however, cause losses of forage species and habitat. This would result in changes to the food web, negatively impacting the local ecological communities. The impacts of desalination plants on the adjacent marine environment depend both on the physico-chemical properties of the reject streams and the hydrographical and biological features of the receiving environment (Lattemann and Hpner 2008). This valuation does not, however, consider pretreatment impacts such as the indirect effects of plant operation or direct biological fouling (biofouling) of seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) membranes. SWRO is currently the most efficient method of desalination. Advances in higher-permeability membranes, installation of energy recovery devices, and the use of more efficient pumps have driven energy consumption prices down over the past 40 years (Elimelech and Phillip 2011). Liu et al. (2013) provide recommendations for the improvement of existing environmental impact assessment (EIA) within the concept of integrated coastal management (ICM). Species, quantity, diversity, distribution, dominant

species, indicator organisms, and special ecosystems are evaluated under the EIA aquatic ecosystems ecology category. Additional ICM principles of ecosystem based management are also applied to emphasize the dynamic inter-relationships in the ecosystem. Despite the largely destructive impacts of desalination on local marine environments, current interest is predominantly focused on developing cost-effective ways to produce fresh water.

Methodology.
Literature employed in this review was located via Google Scholar. The defining criteria was that cited journal articles substantiating the body of this review must apply to seawater desalination and the ensuing ecological effects on marine life. Effects resulting from the construction and input demand of desalination plants are included within the pre-treatment subdivision. Effects pertaining to processing, as well as those resulting from expelled output concentrate byproduct, are within the post-treatment section. An additional focus on potential future technological advancement aiming to minimize ecological impacts is subsequently presented. Overlap between the sections did occur but was presented in a logical fashion. Zotero Standalone application was employed to organize references.

Ecological Impacts Literature Review.

Pre-treatment:
Though the major effects of desalination plant construction and pre-treatment affect the surrounding environment indirectly, the overall impacts are noteworthy regardless. For example, seawater desalination is an energy intensive process; the energy requirements may thus cause indirect air pollution as a result of the consumption of fossil fuels for operation

(AEPA 2003). Even still, ecological environment impacts are not well defined and more

information is thus required (Figure 1).

Figure 1| indicator system and criteria for the environmental aspect of integrated impact assessment of seawater desalination plant development. Impacts are denoted as having overall negative (-), positive (+), and both positive and negative () effects. Note: there are no solely positive (+) environmental effects. doi: 10.1016/j.desal.2013.07.003 Suspended particulates, greenhouse gases, and acid rain gases such as SOx and NOx are possible indirect emission byproducts. More so, coastal development has the potential to increase suspended particulates, which may resultantly impact the local living environment (Lee et al. 2010). Sediment generated during construction may cover the habitat of the benthos and result in negative impacts like suffocation and death of organisms. Beyond this, biofouling
3

refers to the accumulation of organisms on wet surfaces. These accumulating organisms can include algae, plants, animals, and microorganisms. Biofouling is widely regarded as the most important area for future research regarding SWRO membranes as organisms can be incredibly difficult to remove and can significantly hinder desalination plant performance (Weinrich et al. 2013).

Post-treatment:
Processing and post-treatment impacts overwhelmingly dominate the direct myriad impacts of desalination on marine ecosystems; most show hampering effects on marine life. The major effluence caused by the operation of seawater desalination plants is due to the discharge of brine and chemical substances. Heavy metals, chlorine, nutrients, and acidic solutions in the discharged byproduct can inflict negative impacts (UNCSD 1992). Areiquat and Mohamed (2005) supplement with information that temperature, dissolved oxygen, and unionized ammonia have additional negative effects on marine life. Long-term discharging and pumping in coastal waters and the process of building coastal infrastructures impact the features of local waves and currents. Changes in the waves disturb natural deposition and indirectly impact the surrounding habitat structures, likely introducing negative impacts to the local environment. Outflow may also contribute to erosion of the coastline (TWC 2006). Noise from construction (piling) and operation activities (high-pressure pumps and energy recovery systems) may cause organisms to move, cause separation of groups, or even cause hearing damage and other abnormal behaviors in cetaceans (Nowacek et al. 2007).
4

Specific marine life may benefit from the undersea structures in that habitat may be provided which can shelter some fish and shellfish. Despite undersea plant structures exhibiting positive impacts by providing spawning ground and shelter for larval species, the negative impacts of the other factors may outweigh the relatively nominal positive impacts on local marine ecology. Water quality is another topic which is largely impacted negatively. Rapid increase of desalination in many parts of the world is due to scarcity of customary resources of water, high concentration of human populations in coastal areas, and improvement of SWRO desalination technology. The most significant ecological and environmental impacts have occurred as a result of less-efficient multi-stage flash (MSF) desalination plants which discharge the saline byproduct into bodies of water with little mixing. Discharge scenarios like this can lead to considerable increases in salinity and temperature. Metals, hydrocarbons, and noxious antifouling compounds can also accumulate in receiving waters. Many reviewed articles suggest that selection of the discharge site is the primary factor in determining the extent of ecological impacts. Environmental effects of desalination plants tend to dissipate outside 10m of outfalls (van der Merwe et al. 2014). It has been revealed that microbial abundance changes as a function of distance away from the location of discharge. While ecological monitoring studies have found diverse effects ranging from no noted significant impacts in benthic communities, others reveal extensive alterations to community structure in coral reef, seagrass, and softsediment ecosystems (Roberts et al. 2010).

Future technology minimizing ecological impact:

While traditional desalination processes included thermal multi-stage flash (MSF), multieffect distillation (MED), and electrodialysis (ED), these systems were either driven obsolete or incorporated, in part, to more efficient SWRO systems (Van der Bruggen and Vandecasteele 2002). For example, low-temperature thermal desalination (LTTD) was adopted from MSF. The incorporation of LTTD, which uses vacuums to boil water at lower temperatures due to increased pressure, highlighted a grand step forward in terms of hybrid efficiency. All desalination processes aim to get as close as possible to the minimum amount of energy required to separate pure water from seawater. This theoretical minimum energy is independent of the desalination method employed, and is realized when the separation of freshwater and saline occurs as a reversible thermodynamic process. The energy for separation

would be equal in magnitude but opposite in sign to the free energy of mixing (Stoughton and Lietzke 1965). As a means to greater improve efficiency, industrial waste heat can be implemented as an energy source for desalination by forward osmosis (Figure 2). Figure 2| Waste heat as an energy source for desalination by forward osmosis. A draw solution with relatively higher osmotic pressure than seawater is used to extract waster from seawater (Thermolytic draw solution). The diluted draw solution is then passed to a draw solution recovery unit which uses waste heat to separate the water product from the draw solutes. The separated draw solutes may then be recovered and recycled. doi: 10.1126/science.1200488
6

Liu et al. (2013) suggest that the dynamic and multidisciplinary process of ICM which promotes sustainable coastal development should be implemented alongside EIA practices. Upon exploring the ecological impacts of seawater desalination plants under ICM framework, interaction between species and environment, preypredator dynamics, and food web relationships must be discussed under a framework of ecosystem based management (EBM). Decision making should also be open and transparent for public participation under this view. Plant placement is integral and site location should be thoroughly evaluated. Earthquakes and substrate changes under the plant can compromise structural integrity. Fault zones should obviously be avoided to better assure structural integrity. Some methods of desalination that do not discharge brine also exist. These solar desalination techniques include evaporation ponds, solar stills, and condensation traps. Further, they do not cause toxic waste because they do not work with chemicals, fossil fuels, membranes, or heavy metals. Not all of these methods are feasible on an industrial scale but the Integrated Biotectural System (IBS) does show promise. This integrated system operates on just 0.45 kWh per cubic meter of distilled water. It thus performs 10x better than records which have been set by desalination plants in Dubai and Perth. Additionally, this system converts the entire amount of saltwater into distilled water and is even feasible inland. It is a holistic superstructure which relies on systems integration and a closed cycle design. There is no air pollution and no temperature increase from cooling-water discharge. Finally, sea salt can be harvested for other uses (Heinrich 2013) Conclusion.

The construction and operation of modern seawater desalination plants is expensive, energy intensive, and may deteriorate the local natural environment and habitat of coastal species, fishes, marine mammals, birds and amphibians, forcing the populations to move out and change their distribution. Immobile epifauna, such as corals, may be the most hindered because they are unable to migrate away from the outfall and often perish as a result. The major pollution caused by the operation of a seawater desalination plant is the discharge of brine and chemical substances that increase the salinity. Regarding future prospects, it is proposed that recommendations for the improvement of existing environmental impact assessment (EIA) be integrated within the concept of integrated coastal management (ICM). Therefore, the existing pollutants and its sources should be investigated, and the tolerable total maximum load should be established for subsequent pollution control. In addition, possible groundwater contamination due to the leakage of the seawater and brine pipelines should also be evaluated. It should be duly noted that a large proportion of the published work on this topic is descriptive and provides little quantitative data that could be assessed independently. That is, true impacts are dependent on the local features of a location. Further, many case studies suggest that the potential environmental and resulting ecological impacts are largely destructive to marine habitat, though conclusive widespread results are difficult to unveil. Overall, ecological impacts are not well defined and more information is thus required. Many of the monitoring studies lacked sufficient detail regarding study design and statistical analyses, making conclusive interpretation of results challenging. Greater clarity and improved methodologies are required for the thorough assessment of the ecological impacts of
8

desalination plants. It is important to employ Control-Impact monitoring designs with ample replication before and after, and multiple independent reference locations to assess probable impacts adequately. References. (AEPA), Australia Environmental Protection Agency. 2003. Perth Seawater Desalination Plant Environmental Protection Statement, Aus. Environ. Prot. Age., Perth. Areiqat, A., and Mohamed, K.A. 2005. Optimization of the Negative Impact of Power and Desalination Plants on the Ecosystem. Desalination and the Environment Desalination and the Environment: Desal. 185, no. 13. 95103. doi:10.1016/j.desal.2005.04.038. Elimelech, M., and Phillip, W.A. 2011. The Future of Seawater Desalination: Energy, Technology, and the Environment. Sci. 333, no. 6043: 71217. doi:10.1126/science.1200488. Heinrich, F. 2013. Waste and wastewater management in African countries Challenges, Experiences and Solutions Regarding the Fulfillment of the Right to Water, 5 th Water Round Table. http://www.frankheinrich.de/fileadmin/Dokumente/Wasser/Wassermaterialen/201303-18_5_Round_Table_Water_Frank_Heinrich_Summary_EN-FR.pdf Lattemann, S. and Hpner, T. 2008. Environmental Impact and Impact Assessment of Seawater Desalination. Desalination 220, no. 13: 115. doi:10.1016/j.desal.2007.03.009. Lee, D.I., Eom, K.H., Kim, G.Y., Baeck, G.W. 2010. Scoping the effective marine environmental assessment of dredging and ocean disposal of coastal sediments in Korea, Mar. Policy 34:1082 1092. Liu, T.K., Haw-Yang S., and Chung-Ning T. 2013. Environmental Impact Assessment of Seawater Desalination Plant under the Framework of Integrated Coastal Management. Desal. 326: 10 18. doi:10.1016/j.desal.2013.07.003. Nowacek, D.P., Thorne, L.H., Johnston, D.W., Tyack, P.L. 2007. Responses of cetaceans to anthropogenic noise, Mammal Rev. 37:81115. Roberts, D.A., Johnston, E.L., Knott, N.A. 2010. Impacts of desalination plant discharges on the marine environment: a critical review of published studies, Water Res. 44:5117 5128. Stoughton, R.W., Lietzke, M.H. 1965. J. Chem. Eng. Data 10:254. (TWC) Taiwan Water Corporation. 2006. The Environmental Impact Report for the Expansion of Wukan Seawater Desalination Plant, Taiwan Water Co., Kaohsiung.
9

(UNCSD) United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development. 1992. Ch. 17 of Agenda 21: Protection of the Oceans, All Kinds of Seas and Coastal Areas. Van der Bruggen, B., and Vandecasteele, C. 2002. Distillation vs. Membrane Filtration: Overview of Process Evolutions in Seawater Desalination. Desal. 143, no. 3: 20718. doi:10.1016/S00119164(02)00259-X. Van der Merwe, R., Hammes, F., Lattemann, S., and Amy, G. 2014. Flow Cytometric Assessment of Microbial Abundance in the near-Field Area of Seawater Reverse Osmosis Concentrate Discharge. Desal. doi:10.1016/j.desal.2014.01.017. Weinrich, L., Haas, C.N., and LeChevallier, M.W. 2013. Recent Advances in Measuring and Modeling Reverse Osmosis Membrane Fouling in Seawater Desalination: A Review. J. of Water Reuse and Desal. 3, no. 2: 85. doi:10.2166/wrd.2013.056. (WWAP) World Water Assessment Programme. 2009. U.N. World Water Development Rpt. 3: Water in a Changing World, Earthscan, Paris: UNESCO, Paris, and Earthscan, London.

10