DES-12042; No of Pages 16

Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Desalination
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/desal

A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water

treatment and desalination plants
Wei Lun Ang a, Abdul Wahab Mohammad a,b,⁎, Nidal Hilal c, Choe Peng Leo d
a
Department of Chemical and Process Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 UKM Bangi, Selangor DE, Malaysia
b
Research Centre for Sustainable Process Technology (CESPRO), Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 UKM Bangi, Selangor DE, Malaysia
c
Centre for Water Advanced Technologies and Environmental Research (CWATER), College of Engineering, Swansea University, Swansea SA2 8PP, UK
d
School of Chemical Engineering, Engineering Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia Seri Ampangan, 14300 NibongTebal, Penang, Malaysia

H I G H L I G H T S

• Today, conventional water treatment process encounters more and tougher challenges.
• Membranes have been widely deemed as the alternative process in water industry.
• Integrated/hybrid processes could help in reducing the problems of water scarcity.
• Marked improvements and benefits could be obtained by this membrane process.
• Integrated/hybrid processes could lead to a breakthrough in solving water scarcity.

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Conventional processes involved in water treatment, either in water treatment plants or reverse osmosis desali-
Received 23 September 2013 nation plants, have encountered several obstacles that have severely affected their performances and efficiencies.
Received in revised form 6 March 2014 Pollution of natural water resources, increasing demand and overuse of clean water have all put critical stress on
Accepted 8 March 2014
currently available conventional water treatment/desalination plants. Due to these problems, integrated/hybrid
Available online xxxx
membrane processes have attracted much interest. An integrated/hybrid membrane system is a process which
Keywords:
combines a membrane filtration unit (microfiltration/ultrafiltration/nanofiltration) with other processes such
Integrated/hybrid membrane process as coagulation, adsorption and ion exchange. Alternatively, it can be a combination of different membranes in
Water treatment the same system with a conventional process. The purpose of this paper is to review the applicability of integrat-
Desalination ed/hybrid membrane systems in water treatment plants and reverse osmosis desalination plants. The literature
Membrane pretreatment shows that many benefits and marked improvements could be achieved with integrated/hybrid membrane pro-
cesses, such as enhanced quality of the water produced, energy savings, environmental friendliness, and reduc-
tions in the capital and operating costs of the plants. The implications of the integrated membrane system prove
that it has huge potential to be widely applied and can lead to a breakthrough in solving the problem of water
scarcity.
© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction pollution of water resources, improper management of water, climate

Water is one of the vital commodities that sustains and nurtures our
life on earth and can be easily obtained from our surrounding. Fresh
water is consumed daily for many purposes. The three largest consum-
ing sectors worldwide are agriculture (70%), industry (19%) and domes-
tic use (11%) [1]. Several factors such as overuse/misuse of water,
⁎ Corresponding author at: Department of Chemical and Process Engineering, Faculty of
Engineering and Built Environment, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 UKM Bangi,
Selangor DE, Malaysia. Tel.: +60 3 8921 6410; fax: +60 3 8921 6148.
E-mail address: wahabm@eng.ukm.my (A.W. Mohammad).
change and population growth have led to a water scarcity crisis.
According to the United Nations [2], around 1.2 billion people live in
areas of physical scarcity, another 500 million people approach this sit-
uation and 1.6 billion people (one quarter of the world's population)
are facing economic water shortage. The effects of water scarcity or
water shortage are very severe and actions should be taken to defuse
the resulting tensions and solve the problems. Some of the obvious neg-
ative effects of water scarcity can be seen from the figures provided by
WHO [3], where more than 3.4 million people die each year from
water-hygiene related causes. Besides that, water shortage also serious-
ly threatens agriculture activities, which in turn reduce the food supply

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
0011-9164/© 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
2 W.L. Ang et al. / Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

and cause starvation in some countries [4]. The situation is worsened by III) Water hardness
the high population growth rate, by 80 million a year, which indicates In addition, water produced from traditional treatment plants
that the demand for fresh water will only continue to increase in the may be too hard and need to be softened further [20]. Traditional
near future [5]. softening processes such as cold and hot lime softening and pel-
In anticipation of the negative consequences that have arisen, solu- let softening require intensive consumption of lime and acids and
tions such as water recycling, water reuse, desalination and improve- will produce large quantities of sludge [21,22].
ment of currently available water treatment plants have been IV) Disinfection by-products
suggested. Desalination and improvements in water treatment plants In order to remove viruses and bacteria, chlorination has been
will be the focus of this paper. Desalination is a technology that utilizes applied as a disinfection method. However, this will create
brackish and seawater by rejecting the contaminants and minerals in another adverse problem, which is the formation of disinfection-
the water to produce potable water. This technology has become by-products that are carcinogenic and difficult to remove [23].
more popular and applicable due to the inexhaustible source of seawa-
Aforementioned are some of the major disadvantages and weak-
ter [6]. For water treatment plants, stringent regulations on drinking
nesses of traditional drinking water treatment methods. Hence, the lim-
water quality by governments and worsening qualities of feed water
itations of conventional treatment plants have driven various
due to pollution are the two main contributing factors leading to the
researchers to improve on or recommend alternative processes for
need for modifications and improvements to the plants to enhance
water treatment plants. In this paper we will show that the integration
their efficiency in treating groundwater and surface water [7].
of conventional and membrane technologies appears to be one of the
best alternatives to overcoming these limitations. An integrated/hybrid
1.1. Conventional drinking water treatment plants
membrane system would be able to cope with the increasing demand
for fresh water of better quality despite the deteriorating quality of
Most current drinking water treatment plants use conventional
water resources. This will be further discussed in more detail in
treatment methods like coagulation–flocculation, sedimentation, sand
Section 2.
filtration, disinfection and ozonation [8] to produce fresh potable
water. Raw water as feed to water treatment plants might come from
1.2. Reverse osmosis desalination plant with conventional pretreatment
groundwater, a well, or surface water such as rivers, lakes, ponds and
reservoir systems [9]. However, due to human activities such as dispos-
The water sources for reverse osmosis desalination plants are usual-
ing of industrial wastes and contamination of water resources, conven-
ly seawater or brackish water (mostly from bays, harbors and estuaries)
tional treatment plants are having difficulty producing potable water
[24]. Seawater often contains various types of contaminants such as col-
effectively. This is mainly due to a significant drop in feed water quality.
loidal particulates, microorganisms, high concentrations of mineral
This is happening especially in developing and underdeveloped coun-
salts, natural organic material, oil and grease (O&G) and hydrocarbons
tries as they do not have proper protection plans in place to preserve
that require extensive pretreatment to get rid of possible foulants [25].
the quality of water resources and lawful regulations to prevent the
Without a proper pretreatment process, contaminants such as
dumping of industrial wastes into the waterway. Hence, conventional
suspended and dissolved solids will block the RO membrane and reduce
water treatment plants will only be able to remove either some or
the permeate flow through the membrane as well as the rejection rate
none of the emerging industrial pollutants in the water.
of foulants [26]. Conventional pretreatment processes have been widely
Several shortcomings of traditional water treatment plants will be
applied in seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) plants, which usually con-
briefly discussed below:
sist of coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation, pH adjustment, chlori-
nation, scale inhibition, dual media filter and dissolved air flotation
I) Pollution of water resources
[27]. A conventional pretreatment system may produce feed water to
Water resources which have been seriously polluted require ad-
a RO system with acceptable quality when the system is operated
vanced treatment facilities in order for conventional water treat-
properly and with a consistent quality of seawater. However, there are
ment plants to produce safe drinking water [10]. Traditional
a few shortcomings in conventional pretreatment processes that have
treatment has been shown to be unable to remove toxins, pesti-
resulted in the deterioration of RO systems.
cides, pharmaceutical residues, arsenic and herbicides from pol-
A few examples of the problems encountered by SWRO plants with
luted water resources [8,11–14]. More advanced treatment for
conventional pretreatment processes will be briefly explained below:
pesticides such as oxidation with ozone and filtration by granular
activated carbon (GAC) has been considered effective in pesticide I) Fluctuations in performance
removal but problems related to the process still arise. Some of Experiences from the Doha research plant showed that conven-
these problems are due to the saturation of the activated carbon tional pretreatment produced instability in SDI value as well as
and the formation of toxic chemical by-products which may de- frequent backwashing, a high rate of chemical consumption
velop in the GAC filters [15–17]. These weaknesses have driven (for coagulant and pH adjustment) and media filters faced with
the use of membrane technology, which can compete economi- clogging trouble [28]. Another SWRO plant at Jeddah showed
cally with those advanced treatment processes and also provide that the conventional pretreatment process was susceptible to
multifunctional capabilities. changes in the quality of the raw seawater [29]. It was observed
II) Vulnerability towards microorganism attack that when seasonal variation occurred due to climatic conditions
It was reported that the biological treatment applied to the Mery- such as dust storms and wind, the filtration system had to be par-
sur-Oise water treatment plant in France failed to prevent the tially or completely shut down because it was unable to convert
growth of bacteria in the distribution system due to a high level the high SDI of the raw seawater into filtered water with accept-
of organic matter from the Oise river which prevented the treat- able SDI. This phenomenon has also been reported at the Addur
ment system from removing all the organic materials [18]. This SWRO desalination plant [30]. Seasonal changes in the SDI of
same phenomenon has been observed at the Cheng Ching Lake the raw seawater caused stress to the dual media filter, which
Water Works conventional water treatment plant, where algae was unable to produce filtered water with SDI less than 2.7.
and other microorganisms could not be completely removed by This failure caused severe deterioration of the RO membranes.
the system [19]. Complaints were received from customers re- Efforts have been made to modify the conventional pretreatment
garding the disagreeable taste and odor of the treated water. section in order to anticipate the seasonal change in seawater
This is another weakness of conventional treatment methods. quality, mostly in terms of the dose of coagulant, adjusting the

Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
 W.L. Ang et al. / Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
pH and fine tuning the backwash procedure [6]. These changes
may slightly improve the performance of the system but it is
quite difficult to control it, especially when the dosing schedule
is dependent on the quality of the feed water. The optimal dosage
of coagulant depends on the quality of the feed water, which in-
cludes its pH, temperature, alkalinity, natural organic matter and
turbidity. Since it is affected by multiple parameters, the optimal
dosage is difficult to predict, especially when there is a fluctua-
tion in the raw water quality. This gives rise to the problem of
underdosing or overdosing. Traditional (jar test) and automatic
(modeling) methods may not be able to make a prompt predic-
tion when there is a fluctuation in raw water quality. There are
other major disadvantages to conventional pretreatment, such
as a low removal rate of particles smaller than 10–15 μm, possi-
bility of breakthrough during filter backwash, carryover of high
concentrations of colloidal particles immediately following a fil-
ter backwash and the impact of additives such as coagulant and
antiscalant on RO membranes [31].
II) Susceptibility to biofouling attack
Biofouling is another serious problem for RO desalination plants.
The failure of conventional pretreatment to lower the SDI value
indicates the existence of nutrients in the water that become
food for bacteria and microorganisms. The efficiency of each
unit in the operation of the RO plant at Alberto Pasqualini oil re-
finery in Southern Brazil was investigated [32]. It was found that
the conventional pretreatment system failed to remove major
parameters that contributed to biofouling and none of the treat-
ment stages achieved a significant reduction in microbial num-
bers. In one of the pretreatment sections, granular activated
carbon (GAC) filters were found to be the major source of micro-
bial contamination and chlorination, with the disinfectant being
the major contributor to the assimilable organic carbon (AOC)
content in the plant. Fig. 1 shows the fouling analysis of the RO
Fig. 1. Fouled membrane element. (A) Frontal view of spiral wound RO element. (B) Macroscopic view of fouling layer (C and D). High magnification electron micrographs of fouling layer
surface.
Source: Schneider et al. [32].
Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
3
membrane. Membrane and feed channel spacer surfaces were
covered by a thick fouling layer (Fig. 1A and B) and electron mi-
croscopy revealed that the fouling films consisted of bacteria em-
bedded in the matrix (Fig. 1C and D).
III) Scaling
Scaling is another issue frequently encountered in RO desalina-
tion plants. It occurs when the concentration of salts exceeds
their solubility limit and crystallizes onto the membrane surface.
Several types of scales that are often encountered on RO mem-
branes are calcium carbonate, calcium sulfate, barium sulfate
and silicates. Fig. 2 shows SEM–EDS images of silica fouling on
RO membranes operated with (A) paper mill effluent and
(B) groundwater [33]. Several scale mitigating techniques have
been applied in industry and can be categorized into three
major groups, which are (i) alteration of feed water characteris-
tics, (ii) addition of antiscalant and (iii) optimization of operating
parameters and system design. Acidification is the most common
method used to alter the feed water's characteristics, adjusting
the pH of the water and thus adjusting the solubility of scale in
the water. However, the use of acids such as sulfuric acid may
potentially promote the formation of sulfate scales [33]. Fig. 3
shows the formation of barium sulfate scale on a RO membrane
surface. Besides this approach, ion-exchange softening might be
a good approach to scale control [34]. However, due to the signif-
icant capital and operational expense involved with this tech-
nique, other alternatives appear to be more attractive and
acceptable. To optimize the operating parameters, the risk of
scaling is reduced by lowering product recovery. Unfortunately,
this will have economic impacts for the operating efficiency of
the plant due to reduced productivity. These shortcomings have
led to the popular application of antiscalant as a preventive
method for scale formation. Commercially available antiscalants
can be divided into three groups, which are phosphates,
4 W.L. Ang et al. / Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

Fig. 2. Silica fouling on RO membranes operated with (A) papermill effluent and (B) groundwater.
Source: Antony et al. [33].

phosphonates and polycarboxylates [35]. Though antiscalants
can perform well in preventing the formation of scale, some
limitations have been reported regarding the use of antiscalants
in RO desalination plants. Some antiscalants were shown to
enhance biofouling potential in RO systems by accelerating the
normal biological growth up to 10-fold [36], while the correct
dosage of antiscalants is very important because too much of
the agent will turn it into a foulant [37,38].
Due to the unsatisfactory performances of conventional pretreat-
ment systems, various studies have been reported on alternative pre-
treatment technologies, especially the potential of membrane and
integrated/hybrid membrane systems to be used as a pretreatment.
This will be discussed in the next section.
1.3. Definition of an integrated/hybrid membrane process
Generally, hybrid membrane processes have been described as pro-
cesses where one or more membrane processes are coupled with other
unit process such as coagulation, adsorption and ion exchange [39,40].
All these processes will be integrated into a single system to carry out
specific task. The main purpose of this integrated/hybrid membrane
system is to achieve better performance than any of the component
parts. Weaknesses in certain processes can be reduced by other process-
es in the integrated system. Membrane fouling has long been known to
be the main obstacle in membrane operation. For instance, by coupling a
coagulation process with a membrane unit in water treatment of inland
water resources, the fouling problem could be reduced significantly.
However, the performance still depends on the quality of the feed
water. In developed countries, most water resources are protected but
in developing and underdeveloped countries this is not the case. Some
of the major water resources may be contaminated with industrial dis-
charge, and improper deforestation can cause additional soil/mud to be
released into the waterway. Hence, the conventional water treatment
plants in those countries will have problems dealing with such feed
water. This is the context where an integrated/hybrid membrane
system can come into play to reduce and solve these problems. This is
applicable to SWRO desalination plants as well. Conventional pretreat-
ment methods are not effective in preventing RO membrane fouling
and incapable of producing a consistent feed to the RO system. With
the incorporation of an integrated/hybrid membrane system as a
pretreatment process, these problems can be minimized. Details about
integrated/hybrid membrane processes in the context of drinking
water treatment and reverse osmosis desalination plants will be
discussed in the following sections.
2. Integrated/hybrid membrane processes in drinking water
treatment plants
Due to the advances and improvements in membrane technology,
they have been suggested for use in the water industry to replace con-
ventional treatment plants that may be less capable of removing trace
organic contaminants such as arsenic, herbicides and pesticides to

Fig. 3. SEM–EDS images of barium sulfate scale on RO membrane surface.

Source: Antony et al. [33].

Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
 W.L. Ang et al. / Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
meet the standards in WHO Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality 2008
[41]. Currently, membrane filtration has been proven to be a good alter-
native to conventional water treatment plants.
Membrane filtration offers several advantages such as little or no re-
quirement for chemicals, a higher quality of water produced, reduced
sludge production and a smaller plant footprint [10]. In addition,
another important benefit of membrane filtration is that it can reject
various pollutants simultaneously, which cannot be achieved using
many conventional processes. For example, the use of a nanofiltration
membrane can reject and reduce hardness, color and pesticides in the
feed water [19,42]. This is economically feasible since many different
conventional treatment processes can be replaced by a single mem-
brane treatment.
Basically, membrane water treatment can be divided into two cate-
gories: (i) standalone membrane processes and (ii) integrated/hybrid
membrane processes. A standalone membrane process is treating
water utilizing only membranes, such as microfiltration (MF), ultrafil-
tration (UF) and nanofiltration (NF) membranes, while with an
integrated/hybrid process, a pretreatment will be applied prior to the
membrane filtration unit. This pretreatment process may consist of con-
ventional methods (such as coagulation, flocculation, sedimentation) or
a membrane pretreatment method [43]. Nowadays, a number of
integrated/hybrid membrane systems for water treatment have been
established to produce drinking water. The reason behind this develop-
ment trend is because membrane fouling is a major obstacle for mem-
brane filtration processes, especially when the raw water contains
high concentrations of natural organic matter (NOM) [44]. When
there is a high load of organic content in the feed water, neither of the
membranes can guarantee high water quality and at the same time
the risk of fouling will increase significantly [45]. Hence, to secure
good water quality and the performance of the membrane, it has to be
combined with other processes such as coagulation, adsorption or
even coupled with another membrane. With the presence of an inte-
grated/hybrid system, a pretreatment prior to the membrane filtration
unit can provide another barrier to the contaminants in the raw water
and thus reduce the chance of membrane fouling. Detailed information
about water treatment plants with integrated/hybrid membrane
systems will be elaborated in the following section.
2.1. Microfiltration/ultrafiltration membranes
Membrane filtration with microfiltration (MF) and ultrafiltration
(UF) membranes has become widely used in drinking water treatment
plants. Several large scale UF plants for drinking water production are
already being installed worldwide. However, several major problems
have impeded the widespread use of UF/MF for drinking water produc-
tion. Among these problems are fouling of UF/MF and the poor rejection
efficiency of contaminants. A MF/UF alone was found to have poor re-
moval of dissolved organic solutes (DOM), disinfection by-products
(DBP) and precursors, biopolymers such as algal organic matter
(AOM) and effluent organic matter (EfOM) [46–48]. It is undeniable
that a single UF/MF membrane unit can produce water of sufficient
quality for drinking provided the water resources are of a good grade
(free from contamination by wastes from human activities), i.e. where
water resources have been properly conserved. But where the impuri-
ties mentioned above are present in the raw water, a standalone mem-
brane process may not be so feasible for producing drinking water of the
quality recommended by WHO. This gives rise to the concept of inte-
grated/hybrid membrane processes in treating water with the impuri-
ties mentioned above as well as water contaminated with wastes that
standalone membrane and conventional processes find hard to remove.
Many studies have been carried out combining different conventional
treatment methods for use as a pretreatment for a membrane filtration
process, and the outcomes showed that overall performance had been
increased not only in terms of the production flux and membrane
lifespan (reduction in membrane fouling) but also in terms of the
Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
5
removal efficiency of the contaminants. Examples of lab scale studies
and pilot/full scale hybrid drinking water production plants will be
briefly discussed below.
Natural organic matter (NOM) is the main obstacle for UF/MF mem-
brane systems for it cannot be removed effectively and thus causes foul-
ing problems. Many studies have been carried out to investigate the best
combination of hybrid membrane processes for water treatment plants.
A pilot plant study was carried out at Heemskerk water treatment plant
using a combination of coagulation–sedimentation–filtration (CSF) and
UF as a pretreatment for this reverse osmosis (RO) based water treat-
ment plant [49]. The study showed that CSF pretreatment led to severe
colloidal fouling of the RO membrane while the use of UF as a pretreat-
ment showed a superior level of the removal of colloidal substances
from the raw lake water. Furthermore, a combined CSF–UF pretreat-
ment process reduced the risk of biofouling significantly by reducing
key biological parameters. This showed that the hybrid process had a
better ability to cope with the membrane fouling problem.
Another large scale UF water treatment plant was installed and test-
ed for treatment of the highly turbid raw water from the Taihu River,
China to produce drinking water [48]. In that study, coagulation was
the pretreatment for the UF membrane unit. The operating results
showed that with an optimum dose of ferric chloride (coagulant),
water that fulfilled the drinking water regulations applicable in China
could be produced. This proved that coagulation can enhance the
removal of natural organic matter in the water and increase a UF
membrane's lifespan by reducing the fouling tendency. This kind of im-
provement can be seen in other studies as well. A pilot test in the Gueui
drinking water plant, Korea had been done to evaluate the feasibility of
a hybrid UF system in treating the river water [50]. The performance of
the whole system was observed to improve when a coagulation pre-
treatment was carried out. The fouling propensity of the immersed UF
hollow fiber module was reduced by the coagulation pretreatment.
Several other studies have also justified that coagulation pretreatment
can enhance the removal rates of NOM and dissolved organic materials
by UF membranes that otherwise could not be removed without pre-
treatment [7,47,51–53].
Apart from coagulation, several other types of pretreatment have
been tested, such as adsorption, peroxidation, MIEX resin and biological
treatment [54]. In a study about controlling NOM fouling, it was report-
ed that the addition of a powdered activated carbon (PAC) adsorbent
enhanced the removal of organic matter and membrane fouling was
controlled, which resulted in less need for rigorous membrane cleaning
[55]. Peroxidation is a process that uses oxidants such as ozone, chlorine
and permanganate to suppress the growth of microorganisms. It may
alter the properties of NOM as well. The effect of ozone on the perfor-
mance of a hybrid ozonation–UF system was investigated and the
study showed that membrane fouling was reduced and the quality of
the permeate improved via the reduction in total organic carbon
(TOC) in the system [56]. Similar findings were also reported for an
integrated MIEX resin–UF system [57]. However, the use of MIEX has
not been studied extensively due to its higher cost compared to
coagulation.
The pretreatment section not only is restricted to a single process,
but also can be a combination of several processes, such as an ozona-
tion–adsorption–UF system [58]. However, an example of such an inte-
grated system performed only slightly better than without ozonation.
Thus, an integrated pretreatment system must be designed and studied
properly or else it may cause adverse effects to the system. Though a
hybrid process can enhance the performance of a UF process, dissolved
organic matter (DOM), especially in the low molecular weight (MW)
range, is difficult to remove from water and thus can severely foul UF
membranes [59].
In addition to UF, MF has also found greater acceptance as an alter-
nate method for use in conventional water treatment plants. The fouling
due to NOM and dissolved organic matter (DOM) has also plagued MF
membranes in water treatment processes. Thus, hybrid MF systems
6 W.L. Ang et al. / Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
seem to be a solution to this problem. Several studies have been con-
ducted to investigate the performance of MF membranes incorporating
a pretreatment such as a coagulation process. In a pilot plant built in
Korea, coagulation with an aluminum-based coagulant as a pretreat-
ment enhanced the water quality and the permeate flux compared to
direct MF filtration without any pretreatment [60]. This pilot plant
was also tested for its ability to deal with sudden loading of extremely
turbid feed water. It was shown that the hybrid MF system could
improve DOM removal and was able to cope with shock solid loading.
Coagulation increased the retention of water soluble substances and
contaminants that were responsible for the colloidal fouling [61].
Thus, pretreatment prior to membrane filtration can protect the mem-
brane from severe fouling caused by contaminants in the water. In addi-
tion, a hybrid coagulation–MF/UF system was shown to enable the
removal of viruses, which could not have been done by MF or UF
alone [62]. This indicates that a MF membrane combined with an appro-
priate pretreatment process can be a potential technology for removing
viruses from drinking water. The choice of pretreatment is not only re-
stricted to coagulation. Instead, several other types of pretreatments
have been studied and all led to good performance for the whole sys-
tem. Super-powdered activated carbon and chitosan have been tested
in place of a conventional coagulant [63,64]. With activated carbon,
the caked fouling layer formed on the membrane surface was more per-
meable and thus a more stable filtration performance was achieved
[63]. Chitosan also appeared to improve the quality of the treated
water compared to the water treated by MF alone [64]. Some pretreat-
ments may include a combination of several chemicals such as MIEX,
powdered activated carbon and coagulant [65]. Such combinations of
hybrid MF systems can reduce the levels of a wide range of dissolved or-
ganic carbons (DOC) and colloidal substances over a wide molecular
weight range in the water and thus successfully prevent short-term
fouling in MF.
2.2. Nanofiltration membranes
From the previous section, it can be seen that MF/UF is mostly used
to treat groundwater and surface water, which mainly are of good
quality and only low levels of chemical contaminants. However, with
the reduction in the number of such clean water resources all over the
world, UF/MF might not be so capable in treating low grade waters
that are polluted with pesticides and high levels of low MW organic ma-
terial [66] or the by-products of chlorination disinfection processes such
as trihalomethane (THM) precursors [45]. Furthermore, UF/MF is un-
able to soften the raw water, which has more dissolved ions in it.
Thus, some of this effort has been transferred to NF membranes,
which show the potential to retain pollutants and dissolved organic
matter and require a lower operating pressure than RO membranes.
However, NF water treatment plants still face the same problem that
has haunted membrane systems, which is membrane fouling caused
by the NOM and sub-micron particulates in the water [67]. In order to
mitigate and reduce membrane fouling, hybrid membrane systems
where conventional physical/chemical processes are combined with a
membrane filtration system have been widely adopted [68]. The follow-
ing are a few examples of applications of hybrid NF system in drinking
water treatment processes.
Nanofiltration (NF) membranes have found useful applications in
water softening since the 1990s. As noted in the previous section, tradi-
tional treatment methods are often unable to reduce the hardness of
groundwater to a sufficiently low level but this can be achieved with a
NF membrane. According to projects carried out by the Intermunicipal
Water Company of Veurne Ambacht, NF can remove hardness from
groundwater quite effectively, with retentions higher than 90% for mul-
tivalent ions (hardness is mostly due to multivalent ions such as calcium
and magnesium) and around 60–70% for monovalent ions [20]. An ex-
ample of a successful application of NF in a water treatment plant is
Mery-sur-Oise in France [18]. This NF water treatment plant has been
Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
in operation for several years treating the surface water from the river
Oise. The river water contains such high concentrations of organic mat-
ter and pesticides that the traditional water treatment method faced dif-
ficulties reducing the contaminants to an acceptable level. With the
application of a NF membrane and pretreatment of the feed water
prior to membrane filtration by coagulation, flocculation, settling and
sand filtration, product water quality has been improved with improved
removal efficiency of organic matter and pesticides from the raw water.
Another study on NF of groundwater with high levels of hardness and
natural organic matter (NOM) content was carried out in a German
water treatment plant [69]. The treatment process consisted of a pre-
treatment (deferrization, demanganization and rapid sand filtration)
system before the water was fed to a NF membrane. The rejection of
NOM was nearly complete (N95%) and the rejection of calcium and
magnesium was very high as well (N74% and N 86%, respectively). The
combination of a conventional with a NF process reduced the fouling
problem and required less use of chemicals. From the above cases, it
can be seen that the performance of hybrid conventional-NF membrane
processes is satisfactory. This is further proven by a study carried out
with a coagulation-NF hybrid to remove humic acid (NOM), bromide
and bromate (carcinogenic substances) [70]. From the study, it was
found that those contaminants could not be removed effectively by co-
agulation or NF alone. But with the hybrid coagulation-NF process the
contaminants could be removed effectively while the permeate flux
was improved at the same time.
In a nutshell, pretreatment prior to membrane filtration can increase
the permeate quality and reduce membrane fouling. However, caution
should be taken when designing and choosing a combination hybrid
membrane process for a plant because the extent of treatment required
depends on the quality of the feed water. A good grade of feed water re-
quires very little treatment but low grade feed water requires a more
extensive treatment process. In addition, the balance between capital/
operating cost and quality of water produced should be taken into con-
sideration since a profitless plant would not be desired even though it
could produce a superior quality of potable water.
3. Integrated/hybrid membranes as a pretreatment in RO
desalination plants
As previously described, conventional pretreatment processes have
been widely applied to SWRO desalination plants despite their vulnera-
bility to variations in the quality of the feed water. However, with the
emergence and advancement of membrane technology there is a new
trend in trying to utilize membranes as pretreatments for SWRO plants.
Installations and pilot scale testing of membrane pretreatments have re-
portedly increased. The outcomes from those trials are encouraging and
promising. Fig. 4 shows a comparison between conventional and mem-
brane pretreatment prior to RO desalination [71]. Though membrane
based pretreatment (MF/UF/NF) for a reverse osmosis desalination
plant with seawater/brackish water as feed is an attractive alternative
to conventional pretreatment methods, it is still a relatively new appli-
cation and not many desalination plants worldwide are using it. The ex-
periences from a few pilot and real plants that utilized membrane-based
pretreatments will be described below. It can be seen that most of the
membrane pretreatments were combined with other treatments such
as coagulation to boost their overall performance. The use of integrat-
ed/hybrid membrane systems not only is popular in water treatment
plants, but also is being utilized in RO desalination plants. The reason
behind this trend is mostly due to the low quality of sea and brackish
water, which require more intensive pretreatment before being fed to
a RO system.
3.1. Microfiltration/ultrafiltration membranes
A research project on the applicability of MF as a pretreatment for a
SWRO system had been carried out as early as 1997 [72]. The study
 W.L. Ang et al. / Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
Fig. 4. Comparison between conventional and membrane pretreatment prior to RO desalination.
Source: Hasson & Shemer [71].
showed that the MF system was capable of supplying a good quality of
water to the RO system continually. However, fouling was observed and
to overcome this problem chlorination and an additional strainer were
installed to reduce the biofouling propensity. A comparison between
the MF system with conventional pretreatment was also made [28].
The physical and chemical analyses of the filtrate from the MF system
were superior to the conventional pretreatment. An assessment study
showed that the total unit water cost was lower for the MF system
and this indicated that the membrane-based system was economically
competitive. Several other studies were also carried out on the integrat-
ed/hybrid MF process due to the observed fouling problems.
A study combining coagulation–dual media filtration–MF as a pre-
treatment for a SWRO plant was also carried out [73]. It was reported
that the combination of deep bed filtration with flocculation can be an
attractive pretreatment prior to MF for its good efficiency in removing
different MW ranges of organic matters. A hybrid ozone-MF process
was also tested and the results showed that ozonation of seawater
could significantly reduce fouling of the hydrophobic MF membrane
[74]. Biofouling is a troublesome issue for membrane applications. In
order to reduce the biofouling propensity, a hybrid chlorination–MF
system was evaluated [75]. It was reported that this combination can re-
move a number of bacteria but eventually, after 24 h, bacteria were seen
to regrow due to the food source produced as by-products of the
chlorination and the presence of bacteria in the MF permeate. Recently,
there have been some pilot studies about the use of submerged MF
membranes as a pretreatment for a SWRO plant [76–78]. A submerged
membrane system was combined with coagulation and adsorption pro-
cesses. This combination enabled up to 70% of dissolved organic carbon
(DOC) to be removed from the seawater with low doses of flocculant
and adsorbent.
MF membranes might show some attractive performance as pre-
treatments in SWRO plants; however, UF membranes have found
wider acceptance in this role due to their ability to reject suspended or-
ganics, silt, pathogens and viruses (MF is unable to remove viruses) with
greater efficiency compared to MF [79]. This is due to the fact that UF
membranes can provide a better barrier to contaminants since their
pore size is much smaller than that of MF membrane [80]. Many inves-
tigations on the performances of MF and UF have been carried out and
the outcomes showed that UF was better than MF for use as a
Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
7
pretreatment for SWRO plants. MF and UF membranes were tested at
the SWRO pilot plant in Singapore [81,82]. The findings from the testing
showed that the SDI value of the filtrate produced by the UF membrane
was superior to that produced by the MF membrane, and the operation
of the membrane pretreatment system was easier compared to a con-
ventional pretreatment system. The effect of coagulation on the perfor-
mance of MF and UF membranes was studied and it was found that a
hybrid UF process could produce lower SDI15 values compared to a hy-
brid MF process [83]. Currently, most membrane-based pretreatments
in SWRO desalination plants are using integrated/hybrid UF membrane
processes.
A pilot plant was constructed at the desalination plant of ONDEO
Services in Gibraltar to study the potential of UF to be used as a pretreat-
ment prior to the SWRO system [84]. The study showed that UF com-
bined with coagulation managed to reduce the SDI of the seawater
from 13 to 25 to less than 0.8, while the conventional dual media filtra-
tion failed to reach the required SDI, which was below 2.5. Another field
testing program was conducted at Ashdod, on the Mediterranean, to
compare the efficiency of conventional and UF membranes as pretreat-
ments for a SWRO plant [85]. During periods of normal weather both
systems had the same performance but the advantage of the hybrid
UF system prevailed during stormy periods when there were high con-
centrations of suspended solids and large fluctuations in the quality of
the seawater. Despite the fluctuation of seawater quality, the hybrid
coagulation–UF system still managed to produce a consistently good
quality of feed water to the RO system.
Periodic quality changes in seawater during storms and algal blooms
also affected the performance of the Kindasa SWRO plant with conven-
tional pretreatment [86]. After utilizing a trial where UF was combined
with ferric chloride coagulation as a pretreatment for the SWRO plant,
the feed quality to the RO system was stable and consistent with an
SDI of around 2.2, which was 2 units better than the conventional
pretreatment yielded. Even during algal blooms, the UF pretreatment
filtrate still maintained the SDI below 3, a prerequisite for proper oper-
ation of a RO desalination plant. This again proved that hybrid
membrane-based pretreatment is a reliable technology for SWRO
plant pretreatment. Another pilot test was carried out on outside–in
hollow fiber UF as a pretreatment for seawater desalination [87]. The
performance of the UF system was satisfactory in terms of the stability
8 W.L. Ang et al. / Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
of operation and filtrate quality. It was reported that with the addition
of polyferric sulfate coagulant, the flux of the UF filtrate could be in-
creased from 65 lmh to 80 lmh. This showed that with a proper combi-
nation of pretreatments, the performance of the whole system can be
enhanced.
Not only coagulation was combined with UF membrane as a pre-
treatment process, but also the performances of ion exchange–UF and
lime–UF were tested out as well. According to the results obtained
from the Corso desalination plant, coupled treatment of ion exchange–
UF with amberlite IR 120 as the resin gave the best result with 98%
turbidity removal, reduced from 8.4 NTU to 0.13 NTU [88]. Pilot scale
hybrid electrocoagulation–UF and coagulation–UF systems to pretreat
seawater were also carried out to determine which combination is bet-
ter [89,90]. It was shown that in-line electrocoagulation resulted in
lower resistance to filtration and the flux recovery was improved after
UF membrane cleaning compared to an equivalent dose of ferric chlo-
ride. However, further study is required to optimize the practicality
and sustainability of this system.
Hybrid UF membrane systems not only are capable of reducing the
turbidity of the raw water, but also can be designed to remove other
contaminants such as silica. Silica removal by an in-line coagulation–
UF system was tested using brackish water containing 30 mg/L of
SiO2. Silica was successfully removed with an optimum removal rate
of 65% with an alum (coagulant) dosage of 30 mg/L as Al2O3 [91].
There have been several other pilot studies of UF as a pretreatment in
a SWRO desalination plant, at the Kalealo desalination pilot plant, Ewe
Beach, Hawai and NFESC, Port Hueneme, CA [92], the Aquaculture
farm of Ifremer (French Institute of Marine Research) at Palavas-les-
flots, France [93] and the SWRO desalination plant in Qingdao Jiaozhou
Bay, China [94]. All those tests confirmed the benefits of hybrid UF
systems as pretreatments for SWRO plants.
Outcomes from these trials showed that a variety of hybrid mem-
brane systems can be developed, as long as it is suitable to pretreat
the feed water, and will produce the required filtrate water quality. It
should be noted that the hybrid system must be designed in such a
way that the additional pretreatment process will not be redundant. A
study on the removal of organic microconstituents by a RO membrane
was carried out with three types of pretreatment processes, a UF mem-
brane, magnetic ion exchange (MIEX)–UF, and MIEX–coagulation–UF
[95]. From the results it was shown that the UF pretreatment effectively
removed high MW NOM while the integration with other pretreatment
processes (MIEX and coagulation) did not provide additional reductions
in membrane fouling. Thus, the design of the hybrid system is very
important in order to achieve the best performance at the least cost.
Miscellaneous, Seawater supply,
1.80% 4.50%
Product transfer
pumps, 6.70%
High pressure
pumps, 2nd
pass, 3.80%
Fig. 5. Power usage in RO seawater plant with a partial second stage.
Source: Wilf [96].
Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
3.2. Nanofiltration membranes
Even though MF/UF promises a good alternative pretreatment pro-
cess to conventional methods, there is still room for improvement in
the pretreatment section of SWRO desalination plants. From the experi-
ences with membrane water treatment plants, it is known that MF/UF
membranes do not reject all organic materials in the water, especially
dissolved organic matter and NOM. Furthermore, scaling is another
problem for SWRO desalination plants, which MF/UF is utterly unable
to help resolve because neither type of membrane rejects mineral
salts (ions). In addition, the operating costs of RO systems are consid-
ered high due to the fouling problem and high operating pressure. It
has been reported that usually around 85% of energy consumption
goes to the high pressure pumps and around 44% of the cost of the
water produced come from the energy used in SWRO plants, as shown
in Figs. 5 and 6 [96]. The energy costs of desalination plants are strongly
related to the salinity of the feed water [97]. When the salinity
(dissolved minerals) of the feed water is high, much higher pressure
has to be applied for the reverse osmosis process to occur. Hence, the
studies of pretreatment sections for SWRO desalination plants should
focus on the processes that can reduce fouling problems as well as the
cost and energy consumption of the plant (by reducing the salinity of
the feed water).
Recently, nanofiltration (NF) membrane technology has been grow-
ing by leaps and bounds. Not only the field of NF membrane modifica-
tion/fabrication has gained a lot of attention from researchers and
developers, but also new applications of NF membranes are also being
discovered and investigated actively. NF has shown some potential to
reduce RO membrane fouling as well as reduce the costs of SWRO
plant due to its ability to reject multivalent ions and partial monovalent
ions in the water [98]. The introduction of NF as a pretreatment in desa-
lination will not only impact on the quality of the feed water (removal of
turbidity, microorganisms and hardness) to the RO unit, but the desali-
nation process will also benefit from it [99]. When the ionic salts in sea-
water are reduced by a NF membrane, the osmotic pressure is reduced
significantly and hence the RO unit can be operated at a lower pressure
(lesser energy required for the pump) and a higher recovery rate [100].
Below are some examples of trial applications of NF as a pretreatment
for desalination plants.
NF has been tested as a pretreatment for seawater desalination by
the Saline Water Conversion Corporation (SWCC) dating back to the
year 1990 onward. The integrated desalination pilot plants consist of
dual and fine sand media filtration–NF membrane–SWRO, dual
media–fine sand media filtration–NF membrane–MSF (multistage
Pretreatment
system, 2.60%
High pressure
pumps, 1st pass,
80.60%
 W.L. Ang et al. / Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 9

Maintenance &
Labor, 4% parts, 7% Consumables, 3%

Membrane
replacement, 5%

Electric power, 44%

Fixed charges, 37%

Fig. 6. Total water cost distribution.

Source: Wilf [96].

flash distiller) and dual media–fine sand media filtration–NF mem-
brane–SWROreject–MSF [100]. From the results obtained, NF reduced
−
the levels of Ca2+, Mg2+, SO2−
4 , and HCO3 ions by 89.6%, 94.0%, 97.8%
and 76.6%, respectively, and reduced total hardness by 93.3%.
Implementing NF as a pretreatment also reduced the levels of Cl−,
Na+ and K+ by 40.3% each and overall seawater total dissolved solids
(TDS) by 57.7%. The integration of NF with the MSF process enabled
the MSF plant to be operated on NF filtrate or NF–SWROreject filtrate at
a high distillation temperature of 120 °C and a high distillate recovery
rate even without chemical additions such as antifoam [101]. The use
of NF as a pretreatment enhanced the production of water by more
than 60% and led to a cost reduction of about 30% at both the SWRO
and MSF desalination pilot plants [102]. Afterward, encouraged by the
performance of the pilot plants, a demonstration plant was established.
The results obtained from the demonstration unit confirmed the
findings from the pilot plant studies and the tested operating conditions
from the demonstration plant will be utilized in the real NF–SWRO plant
at Umm Lujj, Saudi Arabia [103]. A clearer schematic flow diagram of
these hybrid NF/RO/MSF systems can be referenced in Fig. 7 [104].
From the previous section, the performance of NF was best when the
raw seawater was first passed through dual media and fine sand media
filtration units. However, the effect of direct filtration of seawater by NF
membranes is not well studied, especially the rejection of contaminants
and fouling mechanism. The effects of various pretreatments for partic-
ulates and to control inorganic fouling were studied on a SWRO [105]. It
was shown that the RO membrane flux was the highest with NF as a
pretreatment, for NF removed not only inorganic scale matter but also
colloidal particles. Besides combining NF with a conventional pretreat-
ment process, an integrated membrane–membrane system has also
been tested. An integrated UF–NF membrane system was studied to

Fig. 7. Schematic flow diagram of trihybrid NF/RO/MSF desalination system.

Source: Hamed [104].

Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
10 W.L. Ang et al. / Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
determine the performance of NF in seawater desalination pretreat-
ment [106]. The UF–NF system produced better effluent with 96.3%
TOC removal for long term operation, with the final TOC concentration
in the range of 0.06–0.35 mg/L. This indicated that NF membranes
could produce very good quality filtrate. However, membrane fouling
was gradually observed, especially after chemical cleaning. This shows
that the system needs to be improved and studied more in depth to
identify the factors contributing to fouling.
NF is not only being tested in RO desalination plants, but also is being
tried in different integrated plants where RO desalination is combined
with different processes. For example, an integrated system where re-
verse osmosis and membrane distillation were combined with NF as
the feed pretreatment for the units was proposed and studied [107].
The introduction of NF in the pretreatment section raised the perfor-
mance of the plant and at the same time kept the energy requirement
almost constant. The water production cost of the same integrated sys-
tem was estimated to be 0.92 $/m3 with a recovery factor of 76.2% [108].
The potential of integrated membrane desalination with a membrane
crystallizer was also investigated [109]. By using NF as a pretreatment
for the seawater, the recovery of the RO unit can be up to 50%, and
with the introduction of a membrane crystallizer to treat the disposed
brine the overall recovery can be up to 100%. In addition, another inte-
grated MF–NF–RO system with membrane distillation (MD)/membrane
crystallizer (MCr) units operating on the NF/RO retentate was consid-
ered. There were, accordingly, five different configurations [110]. The
presence of MF removed particulates and microorganisms, which re-
duced the membrane-fouling propensity of the successive steps. NF
was found to be able to reduce the water hardness and thus the osmotic
pressure of the RO feed could be reduced, which allowed the recovery
rate to be increased. It was reported that the fifth configuration, where
two MCr operated on the NF and RO retentate, achieved a water recov-
ery up to 92.8%. This again demonstrated the potential of NF as a pre-
treatment option for desalination plants. An interesting study about
combining different membrane operations in desalination processes
was also carried out. RO desalination was combined with membrane
distillation with the hope of further increasing the recovery rate of the
whole desalination plant [111]. By introducing NF as a pretreatment
prior to the RO unit, it was possible to remove hardness, turbidity and
microorganisms, and reduce energy and chemical consumption as
well, leading to a 30% reduction in overall water costs. Seawater con-
tains a variety of types of dissolved salts and attempts to exploit those
components economically have already been made [112]. This concept
was proposed to combine membrane filtration such as MF/UF/NF/RO,
a membrane crystallizer, adsorption and precipitator. It was also report-
ed that NF should be used to separate sulfate ions from seawater, be-
cause if the scale components are not separated then scale deposition
on the membrane surface of the following unit can occur.
From the above examples it can be seen that NF is able to remove
contaminants and impurities in seawater and thus reduce the operating
pressure of the following RO unit. Operating at a lower pressure allows
power consumption to be reduced. This, combined with the lower foul-
ing propensity of the membranes, further decreases the production cost
of the water.
4. Desalination of brackish/seawater by integrated/hybrid
nanofiltration processes
RO desalination has long been recognized to be a huge energy-
consuming unit in the overall desalination plant. This drives research to-
wards the study of alternative processes to replace the RO membrane. A
combined process concept consisting of hybrid ion exchange–NF to de-
salinate brackish and seawater has been proposed [113]. In the first
study attempt with simple salt solutions, monovalent chloride ion
was passed through an anion exchanger and exchanged with divalent
sulfate ion which led to a reduction in the osmotic pressure of the
feed water. In terms of divalent ion rejection, the NF membrane
Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
required less than 50% the energy needed by the RO membrane in addi-
tion to providing higher permeability. However, this concept is still new
and thus requires extensive investigations with real seawater.
The quality of brackish water is usually better than that of seawater.
Hence, in some cases, a desalination plant will replace the RO mem-
brane with a NF membrane since it requires lower operating pressure
and yet is still able to produce acceptable potable water. In Jordan, the
desalination of brackish water by NF was investigated [114]. The pilot
plant was a hybrid plant with a MF membrane as a pretreatment for
the brackish water prior to reaching the NF unit. It was observed that
the desalination process was efficient, judging from the removal of or-
ganic and inorganic contents from the feed water. A bench scale test
of NF for seawater desalination was also carried out by the Long Beach
Water Department utilizing a dual-stage NF process to replace the RO
desalination process [115]. The primary goal of this system was to re-
duce energy consumption while producing potable water at an accept-
able recovery rate. From the bench scale testing, it was determined that
the NF system could desalinate the seawater to potable water. Hence,
this showed that NF has bright prospects in the desalination field and
further investigations and fabrications of better NF should be carried
out to discover the possible application of NF to desalination. Fig. 8
shows the number of desalination plants using NF membrane technolo-
gy for municipal drinking water treatment [116]. It can be seen that
most of the raw water was categorized as low salinity water (brackish
and river water) and the waters produced were used as drinking water.
The approach to pretreatment in SWRO desalination plants has un-
dergone gradual changes and improvements, from the conventional
chemical/physical pretreatment process to membrane-based pretreat-
ment and finally integrated/hybrid membrane systems. The effective-
ness of the pretreatment system is usually accessed through its
performance, which includes the quality of the permeate, membrane
lifespan, membrane fouling tendency and cost. However, other consider-
ations should be taken into account when evaluating the pretreatment
section, such as whether the fouled membrane can be backwashed/
chemically cleaned to regain its function, the efficiency of the cleaned
membrane, the effect of chemical additives on the membrane and foul-
ing propensity. Some integrated/hybrid systems might produce a better
Seawater, 1, 6%
Pure water, 2,
13%
River water, 5, 31%
Brackish water, 8,
50%
Fig. 8. Total NF plants by type of raw water for municipal drinking water purposes.
Source: DesalData.com.
 W.L. Ang et al. / Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
quality of permeate but the operating time and consumption cost will be
higher. Thus, thorough testing and studies have to be carried out to verify
the applicability of the integrated/hybrid pretreatment system in the real
plant.
5. Issues of energy, cost and environmental impact related to
integrated/hybrid membrane systems
The cost related to integrated/hybrid membrane systems is one cru-
cial and important factor for determining whether this process is eco-
nomically feasible or not in water treatment and desalination plants.
However, to our concern, very little or no information about the cost
of integrated/hybrid membrane systems in the water industry has
been reported in the literature. This might be because the concept of in-
tegrated/hybrid membrane systems is considered new compared to
well established conventional and standalone membrane processes. As
a result, most cost comparisons have been done on conventional and
standalone membrane processes. And a comparison done on one partic-
ular section might not be a complete study that reveals the true benefits.
For instance, though the cost of a membrane pretreatment for a desali-
nation plant might be a bit higher than a conventional pretreatment
process, its benefit will be realized in the RO unit as higher flux (produc-
tion) and reduced cleaning frequency (shorter system downtime and
prolonged element life) could be achieved. Table 1 shows one case of
economic comparison between UF and conventional pretreatment pro-
cesses for SWRO [31]. It can be seen that the specific investment cost for
UF pretreatment system is 40% higher than conventional system. But
this is offset by the lower cost of investment in desalination system
which constitutes more than half of the total specific investment costs.
It ends up with the UF pretreatment SWRO which has a competitive
specific investment costs over conventional based SWRO. Though
power consumption and replacement of UF are higher compared to
conventional process, the ratio of operational costs for cleaning and
RO replacement is much lower for UF pretreatment system. This proved
that membrane pretreatment has obvious benefits onto the down-
stream RO process. Thus, comparisons between a particular section
would not be sufficient to conclude which process will be the best in
terms of cost analysis. Instead, more thorough cost analysis should be
carried out to investigate which process could cut total operating and
capital costs rather than a particular section's cost.
As the development of membrane technology is expected to grow in
the future, it can be predicted that the cost and fouling problems related
to membrane processes will be reduced and minimized [117,118].
Based on the above statements and with some full-scale applications
of integrated/hybrid membrane systems in drinking water treatment
and desalination plants (as discussed in the main content), it is rational
Table 1
Economic comparison between UF and conventional pretreatment processes for SWRO.
Source: Adapted from Wolf et al. [31].
Costs
Specific investment costs⁎⁎
Infrastructures
Pretreatment system
Desalination system
Operational costs⁎⁎⁎
Manpower
Spare parts
Power consumption
Process and cleaning
Replacement of RO membrane
Replacement for UF/sand filter material
⁎ Ratio = cost of UF pretreatment / cost of conventional pretreatment.
⁎⁎ Costs do not include land acquisition.
⁎⁎⁎ Costs do not include land acquisition and do not consider any penalties for alternative
water supply in case of plant underperformance caused by pretreatment.
Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
11
to predict that the cost of integrated/hybrid membrane systems will be-
come competitive with either conventional or standalone membrane pro-
cesses. This assumption is also based on the advantages of integrated/
hybrid membrane systems, where a membrane section will have the
same benefits as a standalone membrane unit but, with the integration
of other pretreatment processes upstream, membrane fouling problems
could be minimized. Thus, more cost analysis studies for integrated/
hybrid membrane systems need to be carried out in order to truly real-
ize the potential of this process.
Another issue related to integrated/hybrid membrane systems is
their energy consumption. The use of a membrane might require
pumping water through the membrane, which results in the use of en-
ergy (depending on the quality of the raw water and type of mem-
brane). However, the increment in energy consumption for that
particular section might impact on the following section's energy con-
sumption. It was discussed in Section 3 that the use of integrated/hybrid
NF membrane systems as pretreatments for desalination plants was
able to reduce the energy consumption of the downstream RO unit
due to the partial removal of dissolved solids from the water. From
this report it can be seen that the extra energy spent on a NF membrane
can be covered by the reduced energy consumption in the other unit.
This again proves that a simple comparison between particular sections
is not an appropriate method to finalize which type of pretreatment is
better in terms of cost and energy consumption. Due to the scarcity of
information on cost and energy consumption for integrated/hybrid
membrane systems in the water industry, it is difficult to claim that in-
tegrated/hybrid membrane systems are cheaper than conventional/
standalone membrane processes. But from the few case studies shown
in the main text, it is not unreasonable to assume that an integrated/
hybrid membrane system is cost competitive and might consume less
energy in reality (though it depends on the quality of the raw water
and the design of the integration process). In addition, few studies
have been carried out to investigate possibilities for using renewable
energy as part of the power supply for desalination plants. This could
be an additional strength for membrane related processes, since the
successful implementation of a renewable energy supply will result in
reduced power consumption from a non-renewable source. In the
end, the energy cost and environmental pollution due to non-
renewable energy consumption could be reduced.
Waste discharge from integrated/hybrid membrane systems has not
been well studied. It has been reported that conventional water treat-
ment processes consume large amounts of chemicals, especially in co-
agulation/flocculation/sedimentation processes [119]. As a result, a
huge quantity of sludge will be produced that needs to be treated before
being discharged to the environment. The costs for sludge treatment
and disposal may represent a large percentage of the total operating
costs for water treatment plants if the raw water contains a large quan-
tity of suspended particles. Membrane processes require less chemical
consumption but, for the most severe fouling processes, chemical
cleaning might be required to restore membrane performance [120].
The brine discharge may contain chemical residues from pretreatment
and cleaning processes which pose a threat to living organisms if it is re-
Ratio⁎ leased into the environment [121,122]. More details about the environ-
1.01 mental impacts of desalination processes could be obtained by referring
1.01 to the reference cited. Chemical consumption and waste (brine) dispos-
1.41
al for integrated/hybrid membrane systems have not been well studied
0.92
0.98 and no comparison between conventional/standalone membrane units
0.79 has been carried out yet. It is predicted that neither cost will be too high
0.93 because the use of a membrane results in reduced chemical consump-
1.04 tion in the pretreatment section (as the removal of contaminants/
0.84
0.59
impurities does not depend solely on conventional processes) and the
9.00 pretreatment section would reduce the frequency of membrane
cleaning (the membrane fouling propensity decreases as the foulants
in the water are reduced by the pretreatment section) [123]. The foot-
print required for the membrane pretreatment is significantly smaller
than conventional system with reported values between 30 and 60%
12 W.L. Ang et al. / Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

smaller [31,120]. Theoretically, the use of integrated/hybrid membrane
systems should have a positive impact to our environment.
Overall, it can be seen that the improvements in performance pro-
vided by integrated/hybrid membrane processes in terms of fouling
propensity have been studied, and it is expected that more full-scale re-
search applications can be carried out in the future. However, there is an
information gap in terms of the economic and environmental feasibility
of integrated/hybrid membrane systems in the water industry as not
much study of the issue has been carried out or reported. Looking at
the positive feedback from the few cases available, the potential of inte-
grated/hybrid membrane systems in terms of both economic and envi-
ronmental considerations should be realized and studied more
thoroughly, so that a clear choice can be made between this integration
process with conventional and standalone membrane processes.
6. Summary and benefits of integrated/hybrid membrane processes
Figs. 9 and 10 show the development paths of integrated/hybrid
membrane processes in drinking water treatment and reverse osmosis
desalination plants. From the figures it can be seen that various types
of hybrid membrane systems have been established for different
qualities of feed water and to overcome problems encountered in con-
ventional plants. The shortcomings of certain integrated/hybrid mem-
brane systems have been discussed and possible solutions also
suggested that involve using a better hybrid system. Generally, the
obvious benefits of integrated/hybrid membrane systems are the en-
hanced quality of the water produced, which cannot be successfully
produced by a standalone process, energy savings due to lower energy
consumption, environmental friendliness due to reduced waste dispos-
al, and reduced capital and operating costs due to the higher efficiency
and productivity of the plants. In a nutshell, the design and types of
integrated/hybrid membrane systems in the water industry are very
flexible, yet the potential of other possible combinations has not been
discovered completely and is not well understood. It is hoped that this
research trend will keep expanding to discover the best alternative hy-
brid membrane systems for the water industry in order to cope with the
problem of water scarcity.
7. Recommendations/discussion
Despite the encouraging outcomes from the use of hybrid/integrated
membrane systems in water treatment plants and RO desalination
plants, integrated/hybrid membrane systems still have some shortcom-
ings/unknown areas that require further detailed study. Coagulation has
been shown to be one of the best candidates for fouling reduction. How-
ever, coagulant residuals from pretreatment processes using either
aluminum sulfate (alum) or ferric chloride may also have negative
effects on membrane performance [124]. Furthermore, excessive use
of PACl coagulant and PAC adsorbent dose showed the possibility of ad-
verse effects on membrane performance as well as membrane perme-
ability [50,125]. The effects of excessive use of additives have not been
well studied. Recently, carbon nanotube adsorption technology has
drawn special attention from researcher due to its capability to
remove bacterial pathogens, natural organic matter (NOM) and
cyanobacterial toxins from polluted water [27,126]. However, the pro-
duction costs of carbon nanotubes are quite high, and it has potentially

Fig. 9. Development paths of integrated/hybrid membrane process in drinking water treatment plant.

Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
 W.L. Ang et al. / Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx 13

Fig. 10. Development paths of integrated/hybrid membrane process as pretreatment for SWRO plant.

significant safety and environmental impacts on the ecosystem if the
adsorbent media are inadvertently released from the filter. Thus, further
work should include investigating the effects of type and dose of addi-
tive on membrane fouling, performance, economic and environmental
aspects so that the applicability of integrated membrane systems can
be thoroughly accessed.
Antiscalants are widely used in the water industry to prevent the
formation of scale. However, maintaining the correct dosage level is
an important task because an increase in dosage does not guarantee
minimum precipitation, since the presence of certain precipitates can
alter the effectiveness of an applied antiscalant [37,38]. As mentioned
previously, certain antiscalants have been shown to enhance the bio-
fouling potential of RO systems. Moreover, coagulant and antiscalant
are usually opposite in charge and so in a mixture will tend to form com-
plexes, which will be problematic membrane foulants [127]. Hence, the
interactions of different types of additives need to be studied in order to
avoid the formation of new foulants that will cause difficulties for the
membrane filtration unit.
Membrane biofouling is another stubborn problem encountered in
many water treatment plants. Integrated/hybrid membrane systems
tend to rely on biocides such as chlorine, ozone and UV irradiation to
curb this problem. However, biocide application may have some
drawbacks for the membrane filtration unit. As strong oxidants, chlo-
rine and ozone will tend to break down the amide functional groups
in polyamide membranes and thus degrade membrane performance
[128]. As mentioned earlier, chlorination will also generate carcinogenic
by-products such as trihalomethanes (THMs) and halo acetic acids
(HAA) [129]. On the other hand, ozonation has been found to generate
bromine compounds, which are carcinogenic and will deteriorate the
membrane surface [130]. In a study involving MF, ozone caused the
breakdown of larger molecular weight organic matter, favoring micro-
organism growth and thus accelerating biofouling [131]. UV irradiation
seems to be effective in inactivating microorganisms but its disadvan-
tage is scale formation [132]. Thus, when designing an integrated/
hybrid system, care should be taken about the compatibility of a biocide
with the membrane unit. Further studies should also be conducted to
discover new preventive additives or pretreatment methods to head
off biofouling.
Water scarcity is not the only issue that will plague our daily lives.
The growing energy crisis seems to be another issue that will have a
major impact on us. Water and energy have a close relationship and
both are essential commodities for the wellbeing of humankind. These
two issues should not be treated in isolation. Instead, integrated solu-
tions are necessary in order to tackle water–energy nexus issues [133].
Desalination plants record high power consumption mainly due to
their pumping systems. In order to reduce stress on the energy sector,
research on the use of alternative energy sources should also be consid-
ered [134]. By utilizing green and renewable energy or reusing the
waste heat from the power plant, it is likely that electric power costs
can be reduced. Another possible way to reduce the energy consump-
tion of the plant is by inventing new devices that can recover energy
from concentrated brine and have high energy conversion efficiency
[97]. The final aim will be to cut the cost of the water produced from
membrane desalination plants and at the same time reduce their energy
consumption or energy cost. Hence, this innovative integrated solution
should be investigated for a long term sustainable solution to reduce the
stress on water-energy nexus issues.
In addition, the discharged brine from desalination plants also needs
to be treated properly before being released to the environment. Im-
proper brine disposal might have severe impacts upon our ecosystem.

Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
14 W.L. Ang et al. / Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx

For problems related to the environment and to cost, the following

suggestions can be considered:
i) The promotion of renewable and sustainable energy sources that
can reduce dependence on non-renewable energy sources and at
the same time are friendly to the environment (less pollution).
With government policies to encourage the use of renewable en-
ergy sources, it is likely that the energy costs will be reduced and
thus the cost of the water will be cut.
ii) The use of innovative new devices in the plant should be investi-
gated. Devices that can recover the energy from the concentrated
brine can be used to avoid wasting energy. In addition, devices
that have high energy conversion rates can reduce energy
waste and at the same time provide similar or greater efficiency
(reducing energy consumption and the cost of the whole plant).
iii) Concentrated brine contains useful minerals that can be extract-
ed for use. Advanced technologies that can extract useful min-
erals and at the same time treat the deleterious components in
the waste before it is discharged to the environment should be
studied and discovered.
Overall, the design process of integrated/hybrid membrane systems
and membrane modification/fabrication should be in sync with each
other so that the weaknesses of one can be compensated using other
techniques. The design of integrated/hybrid processes should not be re-
stricted to currently available treatment processes, but new innovative
methods should be tried to discover the potential of new integrated/
hybrid membrane systems that can overcome the problems faced by
water treatment plants. The combination of defect-free integrated/
hybrid membrane systems coupled with improved membrane module
design for plants will definitely lead to better solutions to water scarcity.

8. Conclusion

Fig. 11. Possible improvement measures for integrated/hybrid membrane water treat-
Integrated/hybrid membrane systems have been shown to be better
ment plant.
than conventional systems for water treatment and desalination. How-
ever, each water treatment/RO desalination plant might require a differ-
It has been suggested that high salinity might threaten the growth of
ent type of combination and pretreatment. This is because the efficiency
flora and fauna. Some studies also found that the brine might be con-
and complexity of an integrated/hybrid membrane system depends
taminated with chemical additives in the course of the desalination pro-
mainly on the quality of the feed water and the specifications of the
cess that have the potential to impair biological communities [135].
water to be produced. From the examples of integrated/hybrid mem-
Thus, in order to reduce the impact of brine disposal from desalination
brane systems presented above it can be seen that a good grade of
plants, some recommendations have been made such as implementing
groundwater only requires a simple coagulation–NF system to produce
a zero-discharge concept in desalination plants and relying on mineral
potable water, while poor quality seawater requires more extensive
extraction from the high salinity rejected brine [136]. These sustainable
pretreatment prior to reaching the RO system. Thus the study and un-
practices and technologies will be more environmentally friendly with
derstanding of membrane fouling mechanisms are very important for
minimal impact on the ecosystem.
the design of integrated/hybrid membrane systems. In most cases, the
Fig. 11 shows current and future efforts that can be undertaken to
interactions between foulants or contaminants in the water, the mem-
further promote the acceptance of membrane processes in the drinking
brane and additives such as coagulants and antiscalants are not well un-
water production industry. These can be divided into two major prob-
derstood. Extensive research and advanced analysis should be carried
lem areas. The first is related to membrane fouling and the second is
out to study and investigate mechanisms of fouling caused by reactions
the cost due to energy consumption and the impact on the environ-
among the three substrates mentioned above. Overcoming the fouling
ment. To deal with the problem of membrane fouling, there are several
issue will lead to a more precise and effective integrated/hybrid mem-
lines of research that can be pursued to reduce it, such as:
brane system for each specific application in the water industry. This
i) the use and discovery of new additives that not only reduce the in turn will not only cut the overall expense of the plant, but will also
contaminants/impurities in the feed water, but also are harmless help to reduce energy consumption and minimize the disposal of con-
to the membrane or at least would not cause negative effects on centrated waste. Further improvements in the systems will require in-
the membranes. novative solutions in which energy and environment are major factors
ii) membrane fabrication and modification to discover new genera- to be considered in designing a plant that will achieve sustainable
tions of membranes that have a higher capability to reject con- growth.
taminants/impurities, high resistance to any possible fouling
processes, high resistivity towards chemical additives and can Acknowledgments
be operated at lower pressure without sacrificing the high flux
rate. The authors wish to gratefully acknowledge the financial support for
iii) the design of highly efficient integrated/hybrid systems that have this work by grant NPRP 5-1425-2-607. The authors also wish to ac-
high production output, reduced energy consumption and fewer knowledge the Ministry of Education Malaysia for sponsoring W.L.
problems with fouling. Ang's postgraduate study via MyBrain.

Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
 W.L. Ang et al. / Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
References
[1] Aquastat, Water Uses, Food Agric. Organ. United Nations, 2013.
[2] UN-Water, International Decade for Action “Water for Life” 2005–2015, United
Nations Dep. Econ. Soc. Aff., 2013
[3] Annette Prüss-Üstün, Robert Bos, Fiona Gore, Jamie Bartram, Safer Water, Better
Health: Costs, Benefits and Sustainability of Interventions to Protect and Promote
Health, 2008.
[4] UN-Water, World Water Day 2007, 2007.
[5] R.F. Service, Desalination Freshens Up, Science 313 (2006) 1088–1090.
[6] N. Prihasto, Q.-F. Liu, S.-H. Kim, Pre-treatment strategies for seawater desalination
by reverse osmosis system, Desalination 249 (2009) 308–316.
[7] S. Xia, X. Li, Q. Zhang, B. Xu, G. Li, Ultrafiltration of surface water with coagulation
pretreatment by streaming current control, Desalination 204 (2007) 351–358.
[8] B. Sarkar, N. Venkateshwarlu, R. Nageswara Rao, C. Bhattacharjee, V. Kale, Potable
water production from pesticide contaminated surface water—a membrane
based approach, Desalination 204 (2007) 368–373.
[9] D.J. Flynn, The Nalco Water Handbook, third ed. McGraw-Hill, 2009.
[10] S. Xia, X. Li, R. Liu, G. Li, Study of reservoir water treatment by ultrafiltration for
drinking water production, Desalination 167 (2004) 23–26.
[11] R.S. Harisha, K.M. Hosamani, R.S. Keri, S.K. Nataraj, T.M. Aminabhavi, Arsenic re-
moval from drinking water using thin film composite nanofiltration membrane,
Desalination 252 (2010) 75–80.
[12] H. Saitúa, F. Giannini, A.P. Padilla, Drinking water obtaining by nanofiltration from
waters contaminated with glyphosate formulations: process evaluation by means
of toxicity tests and studies on operating parameters, J. Hazard. Mater. 227–228
(2012) 204–210.
[13] J. Gibs, P.E. Stackelberg, E.T. Furlong, M. Meyer, S.D. Zaugg, R.L. Lippincott, Persis-
tence of pharmaceuticals and other organic compounds in chlorinated drinking
water as a function of time, Sci. Total Environ. 373 (2007) 240–249.
[14] J. Radjenović, M. Petrović, F. Ventura, D. Barceló, Rejection of pharmaceuticals in
nanofiltration and reverse osmosis membrane drinking water treatment, Water
Res. 42 (2008) 3601–3610.
[15] K.V. Plakas, A.J. Karabelas, Removal of pesticides from water by NF and RO mem-
branes — a review, Desalination 287 (2012) 255–265.
[16] M.P. Ormad, N. Miguel, a Claver, J.M. Matesanz, J.L. Ovelleiro, Pesticides removal in
the process of drinking water production, Chemosphere 71 (2008) 97–106.
[17] H. Jiang, C. Adams, Treatability of chloro-s-triazines by conventional drinking
water treatment technologies, Water Res. 40 (2006) 1657–1667.
[18] B. Cyna, G. Chagneau, G. Bablon, N. Tanghe, Two years of nanofiltration at the
Mery-sur-Oise plant, France, Desalination 147 (2002) 69–75.
[19] H. Yeh, I. Tseng, S. Kao, W. Lai, J. Chen, G.T. Wang, et al., Comparison of the finished
water quality among an integrated membrane process, conventional and other ad-
vanced treatment processes, Desalination 131 (2000) 237–244.
[20] J. Schaep, B. Van der Bruggen, S. Uytterhoeven, R. Croux, C. Vandecasteele, D.
Wilms, et al., Removal of hardness from groundwater by nanofiltration, Desalina-
tion 119 (1998) 295–301.
[21] H.D.M. Sombekke, D.K. Voorhoeve, P. Hiemstra, Environmental impact assessment
of groundwater treatment with nanofiltration, Desalination 113 (1997) 293–296.
[22] R.A. Bergman, Membrane softening versus lime softening in Florida: a cost com-
parison update, Desalination 102 (1995) 11–24.
[23] B. Van der Bruggen, C. Vandecasteele, Removal of pollutants from surface water
and groundwater by nanofiltration: overview of possible applications in the drink-
ing water industry, Environ. Pollut. 122 (2003) 435–445.
[24] S. Chilekar, Applied Water Chemistry, 2013.
[25] J.K. Edzwald, J. Haarhoff, Seawater pretreatment for reverse osmosis: chemistry,
contaminants, and coagulation, Water Res. 45 (2011) 5428–5440.
[26] M.C. Amiri, M. Samiei, Enhancing permeate flux in a RO plant by controlling mem-
brane fouling, Desalination 207 (2007) 361–369.
[27] R. Valavala, J.-S. Sohn, J.-H. Han, N.-G. Her, Y.-M. Yoon, Pretreatment in reverse
osmosis seawater desalination: a short review, Environ. Eng. Res. 16 (2011)
205–212.
[28] S. Ebrahim, M. Safar, S. Bou-Hamad, M. Abdel-Jawad, Fifteen years of R & D
program in seawater desalination at KISR. Part I. Pretreatment technologies for
RO systems, Desalination 135 (2001) 141–153.
[29] A.H.H. Al-Sheikh, Seawater reverse osmosis pretreatment with an emphasis on the
Jeddah plant operation experience, Desalination 110 (1997) 183–192.
[30] A.R. Hussain, A.H. Ahmed, The Addur SWRO desalination plant towards a full plant
production, Desalination 120 (1998) 143–152.
[31] P.H. Wolf, S. Siverns, S. Monti, UF membranes for RO desalination pretreatment,
Desalination 182 (2005) 293–300.
[32] R. Schneider, L. Ferreira, P. Binder, E. Bejarano, K. Goes, E. Slongo, et al., Dynamics of or-
ganic carbon and of bacterial populations in a conventional pretreatment train of a re-
verse osmosis unit experiencing severe biofouling, J. Membr. Sci. 266 (2005) 18–29.
[33] A. Antony, J.H. Low, S. Gray, A.E. Childress, P. Le-Clech, G. Leslie, Scale formation
and control in high pressure membrane water treatment systems: a review, J.
Membr. Sci. 383 (2011) 1–16.
[34] E.H. Kelle Zeiher, B. Ho, K.D. Williams, Novel antiscalant dosing control, Desalina-
tion 157 (2003) 209–216.
[35] E.G. Darton, Membrane chemical research: centuries apart, Desalination 9164
(2000).
[36] J.S. Vrouwenvelder, S.A. Manolarakis, H.R. Veenendaal, D. Van Der Kooij, Biofouling
potential of chemicals used for scale control in RO and NF membranes, Desalination
132 (2000) 1–10.
[37] R. Semiat, I. Sutzkover, D. Hasson, Characterization of the effectiveness of silica
anti-sealants, Desalination 159 (2003) 11–19.
Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
15
[38] E.E.A. Ghafour, Enhancing RO system performance utilizing antiscalants, Desalina-
tion 153 (2002) 149–153.
[39] A.G. Fane, Membranes for water production and wastewater reuse, Desalination
106 (1996) 1–9.
[40] C. Stoquart, P. Servais, P.R. Bérubé, B. Barbeau, Hybrid membrane processes using
activated carbon treatment for drinking water: a review, J. Membr. Sci. 411–412
(2012) 1–12.
[41] WHO, Guidelines for drinking-water quality, WHO Chron. 38 (2008).
[42] P. Berg, G. Hagmeyer, R. Gimbel, Removal of pesticides and other micropollutants
by nanofiltration, Desalination 113 (1997) 205–208.
[43] B. Van der Bruggen, I. Hawrijk, E. Cornelissen, C. Vandecasteele, Direct
nanofiltration of surface water using capillary membranes: comparison with flat
sheet membranes, Sep. Purif. Technol. 31 (2003) 193–201.
[44] A.I. Schafer, A. Fane, T.D. Waite, Nanofiltration of natural organic matter: removal,
fouling and the influence of multivalent ions, Desalination 118 (1998) 109–122.
[45] N.N. Li, A.G. Fane, W.S.W. Ho, T. Matsuura, Advanced Membrane Technology and
Applications, John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2008
[46] N. Lee, G. Amy, J.-P. Croué, Low-pressure membrane (MF/UF) fouling associated
with allochthonous versus autochthonous natural organic matter, Water Res. 40
(2006) 2357–2368.
[47] C.-W. Jung, H.-J. Son, L.-S. Kang, Effects of membrane material and pretreatment
coagulation on membrane fouling: fouling mechanism and NOM removal, Desali-
nation 197 (2006) 154–164.
[48] Q. Xiangli, Z. Zhenjia, W. Nongcun, V. Wee, M. Low, C.S. Loh, et al., Coagulation
pretreatment for a large-scale ultrafiltration process treating water from the
Taihu River, Desalination 230 (2008) 305–313.
[49] P.C. Kampa, J.C. Kruithofb, H.C. Folmer, UF/RO treatment plant Heemskerk: from
challenge to full scale application, Desalination 1 (2000) 27–35.
[50] J.H. Kweon, H.-W. Hur, G.-T. Seo, T.-R. Jang, J.-H. Park, K.Y. Choi, et al., Evaluation of
coagulation and PAC adsorption pretreatments on membrane filtration for a
surface water in Korea: a pilot study, Desalination 249 (2009) 212–216.
[51] K. Konieczny, D. Sąkol, J. Płonka, M. Rajca, M. Bodzek, Coagulation–ultrafiltration
system for river water treatment, Desalination 240 (2009) 151–159.
[52] Y. Chen, B.Z. Dong, N.Y. Gao, J.C. Fan, Effect of coagulation pretreatment on fouling
of an ultrafiltration membrane, Desalination 204 (2007) 181–188.
[53] R. Bergamasco, L.C. Konradt-Moraes, M.F. Vieira, M.R. Fagundes-Klen, A.M.S. Vieira,
Performance of a coagulation–ultrafiltration hybrid process for water supply treat-
ment, Chem. Eng. J. 166 (2011) 483–489.
[54] W. Gao, H. Liang, J. Ma, M. Han, Z. Chen, Z. Han, et al., Membrane fouling control in
ultrafiltration technology for drinking water production: a review, Desalination
272 (2011) 1–8.
[55] M. Campinas, M.J. Rosa, Assessing PAC contribution to the NOM fouling control in
PAC/UF systems, Water Res. 44 (2010) 1636–1644.
[56] J. Kim, S.H.R. Davies, M.J. Baumann, V.V. Tarabara, S.J. Masten, Effect of ozone dos-
age and hydrodynamic conditions on the permeate flux in a hybrid ozonation–
ceramic ultrafiltration system treating natural waters, J. Membr. Sci. 311 (2008)
165–172.
[57] M. Kabsch-Korbutowicz, K. Majewska-Nowak, T. Winnicki, Water treatment using
MIEX®DOC/ultrafiltration process, Desalination 221 (2008) 338–344.
[58] R. Treguer, R. Tatin, A. Couvert, D. Wolbert, A. Tazi-Pain, Ozonation effect on natural
organic matter adsorption and biodegradation — application to a membrane biore-
actor containing activated carbon for drinking water production, Water Res. 44
(2010) 781–788.
[59] X. Guo, Z. Zhang, L. Fang, L. Su, Study on ultrafiltration for surface water by a
polyvinylchloride hollow fiber membrane, Desalination 238 (2009) 183–191.
[60] J. Moon, M.-S. Kang, J.-L. Lim, C.-H. Kim, H.-D. Park, Evaluation of a low-pressure
membrane filtration for drinking water treatment: pretreatment by coagulation/
sedimentation for the MF membrane, Desalination 247 (2009) 271–284.
[61] D. Sakol, K. Konieczny, Application of coagulation and conventional filtration in
raw water pretreatment before microfiltration membranes, Desalination 162
(2004) 61–73.
[62] L. Fiksdal, T. Leiknes, The effect of coagulation with MF/UF membrane filtration for
the removal of virus in drinking water, J. Membr. Sci. 279 (2006) 364–371.
[63] Y. Matsui, H. Hasegawa, K. Ohno, T. Matsushita, S. Mima, Y. Kawase, et al., Effects
of super-powdered activated carbon pretreatment on coagulation and trans-
membrane pressure buildup during microfiltration, Water Res. 43 (2009)
5160–5170.
[64] R. Bergamasco, C. Bouchard, F.V. da Silva, M.H.M. Reis, M.R. Fagundes-Klen, An
application of chitosan as a coagulant/flocculant in a microfiltration process of
natural water, Desalination 245 (2009) 205–213.
[65] R. Fabris, E.K. Lee, C.W.K. Chow, V. Chen, M. Drikas, Pre-treatments to reduce foul-
ing of low pressure micro-filtration (MF) membranes, J. Membr. Sci. 289 (2007)
231–240.
[66] E.K. Lee, V. Chen, a.G. Fane, Natural organic matter (NOM) fouling in low pressure
membrane filtration — effect of membranes and operation modes, Desalination
218 (2008) 257–270.
[67] T. Leiknes, H. Ødegaard, H. Myklebust, Removal of natural organic matter (NOM) in
drinking water treatment by coagulation–microfiltration using metal membranes,
J. Membr. Sci. 242 (2004) 47–55.
[68] S.-R. Chae, H. Yamamura, B. Choi, Y. Watanabe, Fouling characteristics of pressur-
ized and submerged PVDF (polyvinylidene fluoride) microfiltration membranes
in a pilot-scale drinking water treatment system under low and high turbidity
conditions, Desalination 244 (2009) 215–226.
[69] A. Gorenflo, F.H. Frimmel, D. Velazquez-Padron, Nanofiltration of a German
groundwater of high hardness and NOM content: performance and costs, Desali-
nation 1 (2002) 253–265.
16 W.L. Ang et al. / Desalination xxx (2014) xxx–xxx
[70] K. Listiarini, J.T. Tor, D.D. Sun, J.O. Leckie, Hybrid coagulation–nanofiltration mem-
brane for removal of bromate and humic acid in water, J. Membr. Sci. 365 (2010)
154–159.
[71] D. Hasson, H. Shemer, Hybrid-membrane systems, 1st Int. Conf. Desalin. Using
Membr. Technol, 2013.
[72] S. Ebrahim, N. Burney, Microfiltration system as a pretreatment for RO units:
technical and economic assessment, Desalination 109 (1997) 165–175.
[73] K. Chinu, a.H. Johir, S. Vigneswaran, H.K. Shon, J. Kandasamy, Assessment of
pretreatment to microfiltration for desalination in terms of fouling index and mo-
lecular weight distribution, Desalination 250 (2010) 644–647.
[74] B.S. Oh, H.Y. Jang, J. Cho, S. Lee, E. Lee, I.S. Kim, et al., Effect of ozone on
microfiltration as a pretreatment of seawater reverse osmosis, Desalination 238
(2009) 90–97.
[75] J. Lee, B.S. Oh, S. Kim, S.-J. Kim, S.K. Hong, I.S. Kim, Fate of Bacillus sp. and
Pseudomonas sp. isolated from seawater during chlorination and microfiltration
as pretreatments of a desalination plant, J. Membr. Sci. 349 (2010) 208–216.
[76] S. Jeong, S.-J. Kim, C. Min Kim, S. Vigneswaran, T. Vinh Nguyen, H.-K. Shon, et al., A
detailed organic matter characterization of pretreated seawater using low pressure
microfiltration hybrid systems, J. Membr. Sci. 428 (2013) 290–300.
[77] S. Jeong, Y.J. Choi, T.V. Nguyen, S. Vigneswaran, T.M. Hwang, Submerged
membrane hybrid systems as pretreatment in seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO):
optimisation and fouling mechanism determination, J. Membr. Sci. 411–412
(2012) 173–181.
[78] S. Jeong, Y. Park, S. Lee, J. Kim, K. Lee, J. Lee, et al., Pre-treatment of SWRO pilot plant
for desalination using submerged MF membrane process: trouble shooting and
optimization, Desalination 279 (2011) 86–95.
[79] N. Voutchkov, Considerations for selection of seawater filtration pretreatment
system, Desalination 261 (2010) 354–364.
[80] G.K. Pearce, The case for UF/MF pretreatment to RO in seawater applications, Desa-
lination 203 (2007) 286–295.
[81] K.T. Chua, M.N.A. Hawlader, A. Malekb, Pretreatment of seawater: results of pilot
trials in Singapore, Desalination 159 (2003) 225–243.
[82] C.K. Teng, M.N.a. Hawlader, a. Malek, An experiment with different pretreatment
methods, Desalination 156 (2003) 51–58.
[83] H.-J. Yang, H.-S. Kim, Effect of coagulation on MF/UF for removal of particles as a
pretreatment in seawater desalination, Desalination 247 (2009) 45–52.
[84] A. Brehant, V. Bonnelye, M. Perez, Comparison of MF/UF pretreatment with
conventional filtration prior to RO membranes for surface seawater desalination,
Desalination 144 (2002) 353–360.
[85] P. Glueckstern, M. Priel, M. Wilr, Field evaluation of capillary UF technology as a
pretreatment for large seawater RO systems, Desalination 147 (2002) 55–62.
[86] G. Pearce, S. Talo, K. Chida, A. Basha, A. Gulamhusein, Pretreatment options for
large scale SWRO plants: case studies of UF trials at Kindasa, Saudi Arabia, and con-
ventional pretreatment in Spain, Desalination 167 (2004) 175–189.
[87] J.D. Zhang, Y.W. Liu, S.M. Gao, C.Z. Li, F. Zhang, H.M. Zen, et al., Pilot testing of out-
side–in UF pretreatment prior to RO for high turbidity seawater desalination, Desa-
lination 189 (2006) 269–277.
[88] D. Abdessemed, G. Nezzal, Coupling softening — ultrafiltration like pretreatment of
sea water case study of the Corso plant desalination (Algiers), Desalination 221
(2008) 107–113.
[89] T.C. Timmes, H.-C. Kim, B.a. Dempsey, Electrocoagulation pretreatment of seawater
prior to ultrafiltration: bench-scale applications for military water purification
systems, Desalination 249 (2009) 895–901.
[90] T.C. Timmes, H.-C. Kim, B.a. Dempsey, Electrocoagulation pretreatment of seawater
prior to ultrafiltration: pilot-scale applications for military water purification sys-
tems, Desalination 250 (2010) 6–13.
[91] H.-H. Cheng, S.-S. Chen, S.-R. Yang, In-line coagulation/ultrafiltration for silica re-
moval from brackish water as RO membrane pretreatment, Sep. Purif. Technol.
70 (2009) 112–117.
[92] D.F. Halpern, J. Mcardle, B. Antrim, UF pretreatment for SWRO: pilot studies, Desa-
lination 182 (2005) 323–332.
[93] O. Lorain, B. Hersant, F. Persin, A. Grasmick, N. Brunard, J.M. Espenan, Ultrafiltration
membrane pre-treatment benefits for reverse osmosis process in seawater
desalting. Quantification in terms of capital investment cost and operating cost re-
duction, Desalination 203 (2007) 277–285.
[94] J. Xu, G. Ruan, X. Chu, Y. Yao, B. Su, C. Gao, A pilot study of UF pretreatment without
any chemicals for SWRO desalination in China, Desalination 207 (2007) 216–226.
[95] H. Huang, H. Cho, K. Schwab, J.G. Jacangelo, Effects of feedwater pretreatment on
the removal of organic microconstituents by a low fouling reverse osmosis
membrane, Desalination 281 (2011) 446–454.
[96] M. Wilf, International Conference on Desalination Costing, Fundam. RO-NF
Technol, 2004, pp. 18–31.
[97] T. Pankratz, Desalination Technology Trends, 2004.
[98] H. Kim, J. Choi, S. Takizawa, Comparison of initial filtration resistance by pretreat-
ment processes in the nanofiltration for drinking water treatment, Sep. Purif.
Technol. 56 (2007) 354–362.
[99] B. Van Der Bruggen, C. Vandecasteele, Distillation vs. membrane filtration: over-
view of process evolutions in seawater desalination, Desalination 143 (2002).
[100] A.M. Hassan, A.T.M. Jamaluddin, A.M. Farooque, A. Rowaili, A.G.I. Dalvi, N.M. Kither,
et al., A new approach to membrane and thermal seawater desalination processes
using nanofiltration membranes (part 1), Desalination 118 (1998) 35–51.
[101] M.K.M. Al-Sofi, A. Hassan, G. Mustafa, A. Dalvi, Nanofiltration as a means of achieving
higher TBT of ≥120 °C in MSF, Desalination 118 (1998) 123–129.
Please cite this article as: W.L. Ang, et al., A review on the applicability of integrated/hybrid membrane processes in water treatment and
desalination plants, Desalination (2014), http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2014.03.008
[102] M.A. Al-Sofi, Seawater desalination SWCC experience and vision, Desalination 135
(2001) 121–139.
[103] A.M. Hassan, A.M. Farooque, N.M. Kither, A. Rowaili, A demonstration plant based
on the new NF–SWRO process, Desalination 131 (2000) 157–171.
[104] O.A. Hamed, Overview of hybrid desalination systems — current status and future
prospects, Desalination 186 (2005) 207–214.
[105] Y.H. Choi, J.H. Kweon, D.I. Kim, S. Lee, Evaluation of various pretreatment for parti-
cle and inorganic fouling control on performance of SWRO, Desalination 247
(2009) 137–147.
[106] Y. Song, B. Su, X. Gao, C. Gao, The performance of polyamide nanofiltration mem-
brane for long-term operation in an integrated membrane seawater pretreatment
system, Desalination 296 (2012) 30–36.
[107] A. Criscuoli, E. Drioli, Energetic and exergetic analysis of an integrated membrane
desalination system, Desalination 124 (1999) 243–249.
[108] E. El-Zanati, K.M. El-Khatib, Integrated membrane-based desalination, system, 205
(2007) 15–25.
[109] E. Drioll, A. Criscuoli, E. Curcioa, Integrated membrane operations for seawater
desalination, Desalination 147 (2002) 77–81.
[110] E. Drioli, E. Curcio, G. Di Profio, F. Macedonio, a. Criscuoli, Integrating membrane
contactors technology and pressure-driven membrane operations for seawater
desalination, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 84 (2006) 209–220.
[111] E. Drioli, F. Laganh, A. Crlscuoh, G. Barbieri, Integrated membrane operations in
desalination processes, Desalination 122 (1999) 141–145.
[112] H. Ohya, T. Suzuki, S. Nakao, Integrated system for complete usage of components
in seawater: a proposal of inorganic chemical combination on seawater, Desalina-
tion 134 (2001) 29–36.
[113] S. Sarkar, A.K. SenGupta, A new hybrid ion exchange–nanofiltration (HIX–NF) sep-
aration process for energy-efficient desalination: process concept and laboratory
evaluation, J. Membr. Sci. 324 (2008) 76–84.
[114] M.S. Mohsen, J.O. Jaber, M. Din, Desalination of brackish water by nanofiltration
and reverse osmosis, Desalination 157 (2003) 167.
[115] C.J. Harrison, Y.A. Le Gouellec, R.C. Cheng, A.E. Childress, Bench-scale testing of
nanofiltration for seawater desalination, J. Environ. Eng. (2007) 1004–1014.
[116] GWI, DesalData, Glob. Water Intell. Water Desalin. Rep. 2013.
[117] T. Mezher, H. Fath, Z. Abbas, A. Khaled, Techno-economic assessment and environ-
mental impacts of desalination technologies, Desalination 266 (2011) 263–273.
[118] N. Ghaffour, T.M. Missimer, G.L. Amy, Technical review and evaluation of the
economics of water desalination: current and future challenges for better water
supply sustainability, Desalination 309 (2013) 197–207.
[119] J. Keeley, P. Jarvis, S.J. Judd, An economic assessment of coagulant recovery from
water treatment residuals, Desalination 287 (2012) 132–137.
[120] Y.M. Kim, S.J. Kim, Y.S. Kim, S. Lee, I.S. Kim, J.H. Kim, Overview of systems engineer-
ing approaches for a large-scale seawater desalination plant with a reverse osmosis
network, Desalination 238 (2009) 312–332.
[121] J.J. Sadhwani, J.M. Veza, C. Santana, Case studies on environmental impact of
seawater desalination, Desalination 185 (2005) 1–8.
[122] S. Lattemann, T. Höpner, Environmental impact and impact assessment of seawa-
ter desalination, Desalination 220 (2008) 1–15.
[123] C.V. Vedavyasan, Pretreatment trends — an overview, Desalination 203 (2007)
296–299.
[124] C.J. Gabelicha, T.I. Yuna, B.M. Coffey, I.H.M. Sueetb, Effects of aluminum sulfate and
ferric chloride coagulant residuals on polyamide membrane performance, Desali-
nation 150 (2002) 15–30.
[125] B.-B. Lee, K.-H. Choo, D. Chang, S.-J. Choi, Optimizing the coagulant dose to control
membrane fouling in combined coagulation/ultrafiltration systems for textile
wastewater reclamation, Chem. Eng. J. 155 (2009) 101–107.
[126] V.K.K. Upadhyayula, S. Deng, M.C. Mitchell, G.B. Smith, Application of carbon nano-
tube technology for removal of contaminants in drinking water: a review, Sci. Total
Environ. 408 (2009) 1–13.
[127] Hydranautics, Chemical Pretreatment For RO and NF, 2008.
[128] Y. Kwon, J. Leckie, Hypochlorite degradation of crosslinked polyamide membranes:
II. Changes in hydrogen bonding behavior and performance, J. Membr. Sci. 282
(2006) 456–464.
[129] S. Sorlini, C. Collivignarelli, Trihalomethane formation during chemical oxidation
with chlorine, chlorine dioxide and ozone of ten Italian natural waters, Desalina-
tion 176 (2005) 103–111.
[130] K. Tyrovola, E. Diamadopoulos, Bromate formation during ozonation of groundwa-
ter in coastal areas in Greece, Desalination 176 (2005) 201–209.
[131] B.S. Oh, H.Y. Jang, Y.J. Jung, J.-W. Kang, Microfiltration of MS2 bacteriophage: effect
of ozone on membrane fouling, J. Membr. Sci. 306 (2007) 244–252.
[132] A. Matin, Z. Khan, S.M.J. Zaidi, M.C. Boyce, Biofouling in reverse osmosis mem-
branes for seawater desalination: phenomena and prevention, Desalination 281
(2011) 1–16.
[133] G. Olsson, The demand for holistic solutions, Asian Water, 2013. 13–17.
[134] V.G. Gude, N. Nirmalakhandan, S. Deng, Renewable and sustainable approaches for
desalination, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 14 (2010) 2641–2654.
[135] J. Zhou, V.W.-C. Chang, A.G. Fane, An improved life cycle impact assessment (LCIA)
approach for assessing aquatic eco-toxic impact of brine disposal from seawater
desalination plants, Desalination 308 (2013) 233–241.
[136] a.M.O. Mohamed, M. Maraqa, J. Al Handhaly, Impact of land disposal of reject brine
from desalination plants on soil and groundwater, Desalination 182 (2005)
411–433