Solar Energy Vol. 46, No. 6, pp. 389-399, 1991 00384)92X/91 $3.00 + .

00
Printed in the U.S.A, Copyright 1991 Pergamon Press plc
SIMULATION AND ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF A
SOLAR EVAPORATION SYSTEM FOR CONCENTRATING
SODIUM CHLORIDE BRINES
M. K. SMITH and T. A. NEWELL
Department of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801, U.S.A.
Abst ract - - An hourly simulation program has been developed for detailed modeling of an evaporation
surface (ES) and an evaporation pond (EP) for reconcentration of a solar pond's (SP's) surface brine. The
results are relevant to other systems in which it is desirable to concentrate a brine. The simulation results
are used in three ways: first, for a general comparison of brine reconcentration performance for a variety of
locations; second, development of an ES design method based on long term monthly averaged weather data;
and third, an economic comparison between ESs and EPs. The results show that regions with moderate to
high precipitation favor ESs over EPs. Dry climates will generally favor EPs for brine reconcentration.
1. I N T R O D U C T I O N
The University of Illinois (UI) at Urbana-Champaign
constructed a 2000 m: salt gradient SP during the
summer of 1987. Details of the SP facility are described
elsewhere [1,2]. A significant feature of the facility is
a brine reconcentration system. The purpose of the
facility is to recycle salt from the upper convective zone
(UCZ) for reuse in the lower convective zone (LCZ)
of the SP (or elsewhere as needed within the gradient
zone) in order to avoid surface flushing. Although sur-
face flushing may have a minimal environmental im-
pact for relatively small, isolated SPs such as the re-
search ponds that have been built to date, surface
flushing with most candidate SP salts would be envi-
ronmentally unacceptable on a widespread basis.
Figure 1 is a schematic of the UI SP/brine recon-
centration facility. The brine reconcentration system
is the south berm of the SP and has an approximate
surface area of 1000 m 2 and a l0 southward slope.
The berm, which is used both as an unloading surface
for initial salt charging of the SP and for brine recon-
centration, is lined with l-mm-thick high-density
polyethylene. A submersible pump in the pond extracts
UCZ brine for reconcentration. The brine drains to
the southwest corner of the berm into a buried plastic
septic tank. A second submersible pump in the drainage
tank recirculates the brine on the berm surface until
the brine concentration has reached a specified level.
The brine is sprayed over the berm surface by rotating
lawn-type sprinklers. The concentrated brine (usually
set at 23% weight concentration) is then reinjected into
the LCZ of the SP. The system shuts down whenever
the relative humidity indicates low potential for evap-
oration. Upon system shutdown, the recirculating brine
drains into the septic tank. Precipitation on the surface
flows over the drainage tank once the tank is filled.
This is the primary mechanism that allows the system
to operate in climates with moderate to high precipi-
tation. Details on salt loss from the system, parasitic
power requirements, automatic controls and other as-
pects of the system's operational characteristics are
contained in references [ 3,4 ].
An extensive series of experimental data was col-
lected on the brine reconcentration facility's perfor-
mance during the summer of 1988. The data has been
compared to a computer simulation program and
shows good agreement with the physical model as-
sumed for the process. References 3 and 4 contain the
details on these experiments. The purpose of this paper
is threefold. First, the performance of the ES system
is compared to the more common EP system for a
variety of locations. These results show that in dry cli-
mates, both systems have acceptable performance. In
regions with moderate to high precipitation, the ES
system significantly outperforms an EP.
The second area addressed is that of ES design. De-
tailed hourly weather data is often difficult to find but
long term monthly averaged weather data is quite
common. Correlations between detailed hourly and
long term monthly averaged weather data simulations
show that one can formulate a simple design method
based on long term monthly averaged weather data.
A set of design charts are presented based on these
correlations.
Lastly, the economic performance of both systems
is examined. Both are generally more economically
feasible than surface flushing in regions where salt must
be purchased. An EP in a dry climate has an economic
advantage over an ES; however, in climates with mod-
erate to high precipitation levels, an ES economically
outperforms an EP.
2. B R I NE R E C O N C E N T R A T I O N S I MU L A T I O N
C O MP A R I S O N S
A detailed comparison between the experiment and
a simulation model is described in a previous paper[ 3 ].
The effects of solar radiation, wind speed, relative hu-
midity and ambient temperature have been analyzed.
The present paper uses the numerical simulation al-
gorithm from that study to explore the performance
of the ES at a variety of geographical locations.
One of the interesting characteristics of the evap-
oration system is the high evaporation rate. Meteo-
389
390
M. K. SMITH and T. A. NEWELL
Sur n e r d Ne
P ump (F_xt-a~on)
Solar Po n d
m
D ~s e t
B~I
Evapora~ Surface
Shed Submetailde Drainage Tank
Pump (Oto~a~ ~)
Fig. 1. Schematic of the University of Illinois SP/brine
reconcentration facility.
rol ogi cal dat a for Springfield, Illinois, for exampl e, re-
por t s an annual evapor at i on pot ent i al somewhat less
t han one met er. Si mul at i on and exper i ment al results
for t he ES show t hat evapor at i on rat es appr oxi mat el y
twice t hi s a mount can be achi eved [ 3 ]. The difference
occurs because s t andar d evapor at i on meas ur ement i n-
s t r ument at i on consi st s of a shal l ow met al pan t hat
l argel y reflects i ncomi ng sol ar r adi at i on. The pan is
rai sed t o a specified hei ght above t he gr ound whi ch
al l ows significant convect i ve cool i ng of t he wat er from
t he bot t om and sides of t he pan. Refl ect i on of sol ar
r adi at i on and bot t om/ s i de cool i ng effects si gni fi cant l y
r educe t he pan wat er ' s vapor pressure whi ch resul t s i n
l ow evapor at i on rates. The br i ne r econcent r at i on fa-
ci l i t y at t he UI sol ar pond facility does not have t he
side and bot t om losses of a weat her st at i on evaporat i on
pan. In addi t i on, t he ES surface is bl ack due t o a car bon
bl ack st abi l i zer added for ul t ravi ol et r adi at i on prot ec-
t i on of t he plastic liner. Thi s leads t o significantly higher
sol ar r adi at i on i nput s i nt o t he bri ne. Previ ous resul t s
t hat c ompa r e d exper i ment wi t h si mul at i on results [ 3 ]
i ndi cat ed t hat as much as 80% of t he i nci dent sol ar
r adi at i on is conver t ed i nt o phase change energy for t he
evapor at i on process.
Six l ocat i ons have been si mul at ed wi t h det ai l ed
hour l y weat her da t a for ES a nd EP per for mance. The
fol l owi ng l ocat i ons were st udi ed: Al bany, NY; Hous-
t on, TX; New Orl eans, LA; Salt Lake City, UT;
Springfield, IL; and Tucson, AZ. These six ci t i es were
chosen because of t he vari et y of l ocat i on and weat her
condi t i ons. Ci t i es wi t h ext r eme weat her vari abl es as
well as ci t i es wi t h average weat her vari abl es were cho-
sen. For exampl e, Al bany is general l y cold, wet, and
has l ow i nsol at i on whereas Tucson is hot, dry, and has
high i nsol at i on. New Or l eans was chosen for its high
humi di t y and rai nfal l and its sout her n l ocat i on near a
large body of wat er (Gul f of Mexi co) .
The ES model i ncl udes a si mul at ed cont r ol ci rcui t
t o shut down t he syst em i n t he event of high humi di t y
levels (l ow evapor at i on pot ent i al ) or low t emper at ur es
(ne a r freezi ng). Fi gur e 2 is a pl ot t hat shows why i t is
desi rabl e t o not oper at e t he syst em for all humi di t y
levels. The pl ot shows t he percent age of t he ES evap-
or at i on pot ent i al l ost due t o t he effect of an 85% hu-
mi di t y cont r ol l er shut off (t he level used at t he UI fa-
ci l i t y) versus t he average mont hl y rel at i ve humi di t y
for t hr ee salinities, 0%, 10%, and 20%. I f t he ES were
t o onl y evaporat e pure wat er (0% sal i ni t y), a significant
fract i on of t he evapor at i on pot ent i al woul d be l ost be-
cause t he syst em woul d be shut down for humi di t y
levels above 85%. A relatively large amount of negative
evapor at i on (t hat is, wat er condenses back ont o t he
ES) occurs at hi gher sal i ni t y levels. Thi s condensat i on
is caused by t he sal t ' s vapor pressure depressi on of t he
water. Fi gure 2 i ndi cat es t hat a humi di t y s hut of f poi nt
of 85% is appr opr i at e for r econcent r at i on of sodi um
chl or i de br i ne for a sol ar pond because i t s average sa-
l i ni t y is 15%. Ot her salts as well as processes oper at i ng
over di fferent sal i ni t y ranges woul d need t o exami ne
appr opr i at e humi di t y shut off levels.
Evapor at i on pot ent i al is t he a mount of wat er t hat
woul d i deal l y evapor at e negl ect i ng rainfall, low t em-
perat ures (freezing or near freezing) and high humi di t y
(for ES onl y) . It was assumed t hat no evaporat i on takes
pl ace dur i ng a per i od of rain. The loss of evapor at i on
pot ent i al for an EP occurs when i t rai ns or when t he
t emper at ur e dr ops so l ow t hat t he surface freezes over.
Wet t er cl i mat es show t hat appr oxi mat el y 90% of t he
evapor at i on from an ES occurs dur i ng t he dayt i me
(6 a. m. t o 6 p. m. ); therefore, t he most significant energy
i nput t o t he ES is sol ar r adi at i on. For dr yer cl i mat es,
appr oxi mat el y 85% of t he evapor at i on from t he ES
0
>~
p
3 0 , , ,
= % LOSt tO Humidity Controller for 0% Salinity I
% Lost to Humidity Controller for 10% Salinity
I
+ % Lost to Humidity Controller for 20% Salinity
2 0 '
a ID
! =
+ +
1 0 44 dr~
4
- 2 0
- 3 0 +
-40
20 40 6O 80 100
Average Monthly Relative Humidity ( %)
Fig. 2. Plot of ES evaporation potential percentage loss for
an 85% humidity controller shut off with 0% 10% and 20%
salinity water.
A solar evaporation system for concentrating sodium chloride brines 391
c A l b a n y N . Y . - 1 9 6 9
200
- - 1 0 0
= =
"6 "6
< - 2 0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Mo n t h
N e w O r l e a n s , L a . - 1 9 5 8
c 3 0 0
-."11
' , , , i l t l , ,
o L " EPw"I
- l OO
., II
< -200
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 12
Mo n t h
Fig. 3. Actual evaporation amount for Albany, NY (1969),
for a 0% salinity ES, 0.25-m-deep EP and EPWR.
Fig. 5. Actual evaporation amount for New Orleans, LA
(1958), for a 0% salinity ES, 0.25-m-deep EP ard EPWR.
occurs duri ng the day. In the dryer climates the relative
humi di t y is not as great duri ng the night; therefore,
more evaporat i on can take place at night due to the
lower water cont ent i n the air. For an EP i n either
climate, approxi mat el y 60% to 70% of the evaporat i on
occurs dur i ng the day (6 a.m. to 6 p. m. ). This is due
to the fact t hat the pond is able to store energy and
shift the evaporative process to the ni ght t i me hours.
The evaporative results from the si mul at i on pro-
gram, Figs. 3 through 8, show the actual (i ncl udi ng
cont rol l er effect) evaporat i on amount s from an ES, an
EP wi t hout rain and an EP with rain (EPWR-based
on recorded rainfall amount s ) on a mont hl y basis for
0% salinity and a 0.25 m deep EP. Figure 9 gives the
yearly evaporative results for the six locations for three
salinities 0%, 10%, and 20%. The vapor pressure
depression effect caused by the increased salinity makes
the evaporat i on amount s decrease in a predictable
manner .
In all cases the EPWR evaporat i on a mount was
less t han that of the ES. The most extreme example
was Al bany. The least extreme case by percentage was
Tucson. The effect of the humi di t y controller can be
seen i n compar i ng the results for New Orleans or
Houst on with Tucson or Salt Lake City. The high rel-
ative humi di t y for New Orleans and Houst on keeps
the ES system shut down a greater percentage of the
time.
Compar i ng the ES performance against an EP 0.25
m deep causes the compari son to be conservative. The
shallower the EP, the more evaporat i on occurs. A de-
crease in the thermal storage (a shallower pond) causes
a decrease i n the response t i me of the body of water.
The mass is able to respond more readily to the energy
i nput of the sun, heating up the water and allowing
increased evaporation. For a larger mass of water, the
energy i nput is shifted to the aft ernoon hours. This
means the body of water is reaching its maxi mum
t emperat ure close to the time the sun sets. At night the
ambi ent temperature drops and the body of water loses
energy to the sur r oundi ng envi r onment by convect i on
and radi at i on; thus more of the energy supplied by the
sun is lost to modes other t han evaporation.
An overall goal of the ES project was to demonstrate
the effectiveness of the ES for bri ne reconcent rat i on i n
areas of relatively high rainfall. The EP without rainfall
is very competitive with the ES but is an idealization
for comparison purposes. The EP has fewer operational
const rai nt s on it compared to the ES. The EP is evap-
orating through all humi di t y and t emperat ure condi -
t i ons (down to freezing). For Salt Lake City and Tuc-
son the ES and EPWR results are very close. To make
an accurate judgement on whether the ES is superior
to an EP i n these areas, an economi c analysis must be
performed.
3. ES DESIGN METHOD
Results from the si mul at i on have been used to de-
velop a set of design graphs for prediction o:~" mont hl y
evaporat i on amount s based on mont hl y average
weather data. To accomplish this, results generated
A A
3 0 0 . . . . .
. . . . oo]
,oo, J i l l , . I - " I i U / I I I K
0 loo L I I lJ
-100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Month Month
Fig. 4. Actual evaporation amount for Houston, TX (1979), Fig. 6. Actual evaporation amount for Salt Laka City, UT
for a 0% salinity ES, 0.25-m-deep EP and EPWR. (1979), for a 0% salinity ES, 0.25-m-deep EP arid EPWR.
392 M. K. SMITH and T. A. NEWELL
A
*~ Spr i ngf i el d, II. - 1 9 7 9
300
&
- - ~ 2oo . m mm _
+ , f I LL, ,
10o ==
0 ; . I , li lli li . . ,
'~ -100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Mont h
Fig. 7. Act ual evaporat i on amount f or Springfield, I L ( 1979) ,
f or a 0% sal i ni t y ES, 0. 25-m-deep EP and EPWR.
[ ] E S ]
[ ] EP
[ ] EPWR
fr om t he hour l y weat her dat a averaged mont hl y mus t
compar e well t o resul t s gener at ed from mont hl y av-
eraged weat her dat a. The t wo t ypes of resul t s were cal-
cul at ed a nd graphed. Fi gur e 10 shows t he pot ent i al
evapor at i on a mount s cal cul at ed each way and pl ot t ed
agai nst each ot her for a range of t hr ee salinities" 0%,
10%, and 20%. The agr eement is good wi t h very l i t t l e
scat t er. Since t he resul t s are not i dent i cal , t he i nverse
of t he sl ope of t he pl ot t ed l i ne is used as a cor r ect i on
fact or when cal cul at i ng pot ent i al evaporat i on amount s
using mont hl y averaged weat her dat a. Exami ni ng t he
rel at i ve humi di t y graph, Fig. 11, t he film sat ur at i on
pressure at a mbi e nt t emper at ur e, Fig. 12, and t he film
t emper at ur e, Fig. 13, t he great est scat t er is seen i n t he
relative humi di t y data. The scat t er is due t o i naccuracy
i n measur i ng rel at i ve humi di t y.
Desi gn graphs (Figs. 14 t hr ough 19) were creat ed
from t he mont hl y averaged weat her dat a for predi ct i ng
pot ent i al evapor at i on rat es for an ES. They are cor-
rect ed for t he er r or i n using mont hl y averaged weat her
vari abl es by usi ng t he curve fit obt ai ned from Fig. 10.
The gr aphs are for 0% and 20% sal i ni t i es and t he t em-
perat ures range from 6 t o 30C in 6-degree i ncrement s
for each graph. Each graph is for a specific wi nd speed
rangi ng from 2.86 m/ s e c t o 6.68 m/ s e c (6 mph t o 14
mp h ) at 1.9 m/ s e c (4 mp h ) i ncrement s. The x- axi s is
a fract i on based on rel at i ve humi di t y (%) and i nsol a-
t i on (MJ / m2 - d a y ) . The y- axi s is a fract i on based on
t he evapor at i on a mount (kg/ mE- mont h) and i nsol a-
t i on. Usi ng t he average mont hl y val ues of i nsol at i on,
4000 I
E P
3001
200,
100
-100
AIba Hous NewO Salt Spri Tucs
Fig. 9. Yearly Evaporation Results for a 0%, 10%, and 20%
salinity ES, 0.25-m-deep EP and EPWR.
y = -1.5743e-2 + .9339x
0.8
0,6
0 . 4
1
c , E
~,.= 0.2
> v
Fig. 8. Actual evaporation amount for Tucson, AZ (1979),
for a 0% salinity ES, 0.25-m-deep EP and EPWR.
+ i
500" - - - -
400'
0.0
300' [ ] ES
[ ] EP
200' [ ] EPWR
I,IJ
' ~ 1 0 0 '
0 -0.2
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 0 1 1 1 2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8
Mont h Fig. 10. Potential evaporation amounts from monthly aver-
aged weather data vs. potential evaporation amounts from
hourly weather data for 0%, 10%, and 20% salinities.
A solar evaporation system for concentrating sodium chloride brines
393
y = -1.5743e-2 + .9339x
[ ]
D
8 0
/
. /
4o
!
,e
/
Z
= ,
20 /
20 40 60 80 100
Rel . Hum. (%)
was greater t han the actual wi nd speed (4.77 m/ sec vs.
4.34 m/ s ec) . This was done to avoid i nt erpol at i ng be-
tween the two charts.
4. ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY OF BRINE
RECONCENTRATION
Selection of a reconcent rat i on facility requires an
economi c compari son between the ES and the EP sys-
tems. Generally, an ES system has higher operating
costs because of active pumpi ng while an EP has higher
i nvest ment cost due to additional excavation activities.
The bal ance between these costs and the effect of
weather on system performance indicate w~ich type
may be economi cal l y preferred.
An ES system can be optimized by mi ni mi zi ng its
life cycle cost. Costs for an ES are due to :initial in-
vestment, mai nt enance and operation. Operation costs
(parasitic power) for the UI facility has been measured
to be 1.1 W/ m2[ 3 ]. Reasonable ranges for in vestment
and mai nt enance costs can be assigned to cover ex-
cavation, liner, pumps, controls, and other costs.
The ES simulation routine used to obtain the results
i n the previous sections (described in ref. 3) is awkward
and inefficient for economi c opt i mi zat i on. An alter-
nat i ve procedure that streamlines the economi c opti-
mi zat i on has been developed. This procedure consists
ofcurvefitting evaporation capacity and operation time
Fig. 1 I. Relative humidity from monthly averaged weather
data vs. relative humidity from hourly weather data for 0%,
10%, and 20% salinities.
wi nd speed, ambi ent t emperat ure and relative humi d-
ity, the mont hl y evaporation potential can be predicted.
The accuracies of the design graphs are within _+ 10%
of the predicted values. The graphs were created by
holding the insolation const ant at 20 MJ /m2-day while
the other weather variables were i ncr ement ed through
a specific range of values. The errors i n the predictions
are due to the fixed value of i nsol at i on and the use of
mont hl y averaged weather variables. Some areas have
i nsol at i on values greater t han or less t han 20 MJ / m 2-
day. The i nsol at i on value selected as the basis for the
design graphs was an average value for the six cities
chosen.
In the following example, the potential fresh water
(0%) evaporat i on based on J une, 1979 weather data
from Springfield, IL will be demonstrated. The mont hl y
averaged relative humi di t y was 67.3%, the wi nd speed,
4.34 m/ sec, the ambi ent t emperat ure, 23.3 C, and the
i nsol at i on, 23.6 MJ / m 2 for J une, 1979. Figure 15 is
the chart to use based on the wi nd speed. Calculating
the x-axis fraction, 1.39, and selecting the appropriate
t emperat ure line, 24C (fourt h one from the bot t om) ,
the y-axis fraction t ur ns out to be approximately 10.
The pot ent i al evaporat i on a mount for the mont h is
236.0 kg / m 2. Referring to results based on hourl y
weather data, the a mount calculated was 232.5 kg/
m 2 , an overprediction of 1.5%. The predicted value is
high because the wi nd speed on which Fig. 17 is based
"r
E
E
.=
o.
E
,'r
10
0'
0
y = -1.5743e-2 + .9339x
10 20 30
Fi l m Sat. Press. ( mm Hg)
4 0
Fig. 12. Film saturation pressure from monthl2 averaged
weather data vs. film saturation pressure from hourly weather
data for 0%, 10%, and 20% salinities.
394 M. K. SMITH and T. A. NEWELL
G
-
_ E
u.
40
30
20
10
/
- 10
- 10
y = - 1 , 5 7 4 3 e - 2 + . 9339x
, /
f
J r '
!
/
= 0 %
. / 1 0 %
2 0 %
/
0 10 20 30 40
F i l m Temp (deg C)
Fig. 13. Film temperature from monthly averaged weather
data vs. film temperature from hourly weather data for 0%,
10%, and 20% salinities.
for a part i cul ar location from the detailed si mul at i on
rout i ne. The operat i on t i me indicates how ma ny ex-
pected hours per day the ES would be activated.
Knowledge of the operat i on hours allows calculation
of parasitic costs. Dur i ng the summer, one woul d gen-
erally expect the system to have longer operation hours
because of favorable evaporat i on condi t i ons. The op-
t i mal system is based on the operat i on t i me and evap-
orat i on performance. These factors decide whether it
is more desirable to have a large surface area system
t hat onl y operates for a few mont hs i n the summer , or
a smaller area system t hat operates over a longer sea-
sonal period.
The equat i on form used to curvefit evaporat i on
amount s and system operat i on t i me as a funct i on of
t i me of year for a part i cul ar location is given i n eqn
(1) .
127rTi \ 127rTi \
f ( Ti ) =C, + C2 s m/ - - - ~) + C3cos/---i-~- )
[2~-Ti \ [ 2r Ti \
+ c , + )
/ 2Ti \ / 2r Ti \
+ C6sin t--~-S-) + C,cos t - ~- )
/ 2r Ti \ f 27rTi \
[21rTi \ / 21rTi \
+ , osInt 1--3-) + C,,cost-TK.9 ) < l)
A salinity of 14% was chosen as an average operating
salinity for an ES. Curvefits usi ng eqn ( 1 ) were t hen
obt ai ned from a " least-squares" method. Equat i on ( 1 )
gives the actual mont hl y evaporat i on a mount i n kg/
m 2 or the operat i on r unt i me i n hours for a part i cul ar
l ocat i on for the mont h Ti ( Ti = 1 for J anuar y) . An
integrated form of eqn ( 1 ) was used for the opt i mi -
zation. The l i mi t s of the i nt egrat i on (Tis and Tie) are
variables to be det ermi ned from the opt i mi zat i on.
The overall capacity for a br i ne reconcent rat i on
process depends on the salt t ransport rate i n the SP
and the concent r at i on levels mai nt ai ned i n the UCZ
and LCZ. The salt transport rate depends on molecular
diffusion and mi xi ng effects caused by wi nd and side-
wall convect i on processes. Li mi t s assumed for the
present study are 12 to 24 kg/m2-year. Sparse data is
available at this t i me t hat allows one to quant i t at i vel y
calculate solar pond salt t ransport rates. Some infor-
mat i on from the Uni versi t y of Texas at E1 Paso has
indicated annual salt t ransport rates as high as 40 kg/
m2-year.
The a mount of salt t ransport ed over a year can be
equat ed with the salt reconcent rat i on capacity of the
ES. The result is a relation between the length of the
operating season and the size of the ES. Combi ni ng
assumed cost for the system with the system' s size and
operat i on t i me yields an expression for the life-cycle
cost per SP surface area:
LCCs
(2)
Equat i on (2) is mi ni mi zed with respect to the start
and end t i me of the evaporat i on season.
The life-cycle cost for the EP is less compl i cat ed
because there is no parasitic power cost t erm assumed:
LCCp ((EEP) (R) ) " (3) Asp = (EPC) D R
The life-cycle cost for the ES and EP are det ermi ned
i ndependent l y and t hen compared. Tables 1 and 2 list
results for Houst on, TX and Springfield, IL over a
range of cost and performance variables. Salt cost,
electric power cost, salt t ransport rate and UCZ con-
cent rat i on have been varied and are listed i n Tables 1
and 2 along with economi c compari son results. All
results have been obt ai ned by assumi ng zero discount,
i nfl at i on and escalation rates.
The Houst on dat a (Tabl e 1 ) represents a warm and
humi d climate. Data for the ES indicates cost feasibility
A solar evaporati on system f or concentrati ng sodi um chlori de bri nes 395
20,0
175
150
A
.l=
c
~ 125 ~----
>,
/
E ">-" 10.0 j j
5.o ~ - - r T
, i i i
2.5 i ]
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 35 4.0 4.5 5.0
(100-RH)/H (%RH-m2-day/MJ)
'30 C
6C
Fi g. 14. Desi gn graph f or evaporati on amount predi cti on f or 2. 86 m/s ec, wi nd speed and 0% sali ni ty.
27.5 '
250
225 I
20.0
17.5 . . . . .
/
15.0 /
1 2 . 5 . / j f
J
10.0 ~ f j
2.5
0.5 1.0 1,5 2.0 2.5 30 3.5
(100-RH)/H (%RH-m2-day/MJ)
]
i
............... 4 ............................ 30C
J ~ ...........
~ ~ 6 c
P ,
i
L
4.0 4.5 5.0
Fi g. 15. Desi gn graph f or evaporati on amount predi cti on f or 4. 77 m/ s ec, wi nd speed and 0% sali ni ty.
396 M. K. SMITH and T. A. NEWELL
32.5
30,0 / / 30 C
27.5 /
/
i A 22.5 * / /
2o.o
/ j
/ ' . . / j
: / I l l / ._.1
#, 1 2 5 /
lOO ~ / J '~" j j
5.0 i ~
2,5 l
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3,5 4.0 4.5 5.0
(100-RH)/H (%RH-m2-day/MJ)
Fi g. 16. Desi gn graph f or evaporati on amount predi cti on f or 6. 68 m/s ec, wi nd speed and 0% sali ni ty.
17.5 1 / 30 C
/
15.0
/ /
/ / , /
,. / / /
, ~ . / . / j
,,', 7.5 / /
5.0 ~ / ~ / ~
2.5
0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
(100~RH)/H (%RH-m2-day/MJ)
Fi g. 17. Desi gn graph f or evaporati on amount predi cti on f or 2. 86 m/ s ee, wi nd speed and 20% sali ni ty.
A solar evaporati on system f or concentrati ng sodi um chlori de bri nes 397
22.5
f ' : I 3 0 c
E
M J
20.0 - - - - . . . .
17. 5 I
z. 10. 0
E / j . . .
, J
o .
6 C
5.0 ~ ~ - ~ ~
2 5 -
0 0
0.5 1.0 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
(100-RH)/H (%RH-m2-day/MJ)
Fi g. 18. Desi gn graph f or evaporati on amount predi cti on f or 4. 77 m/sec, wi nd speed and 20% sali ni ty
27.5
25.0
22.5
200
.
17.5
~
15.0
2 : 1 2 . 5
10.0
7 5 ' - - -
2.5 f
0.0 - - -
0.5 1,0
l
J j
X J ....- J
1.5 2.0 2,5
( I O 0 - R H ) / H
3.0 3.5 4.0 45
(%RH-m2-day/MJ)
~ _ _ _ 30 C
6 C
5. 0
Fi g. 19. Desi gn graph f or evaporati on amount predi cti on f or 6. 68 m/s ec, wi nd speed and 20% sali ni ty
398 M. K. SMITH and T. A. NEWELL
Table 1. Economi c results, Houston, TX (1979)
SS,'As D LCCs/Asp
4. 0 5.0
4. 0 2.1
7.9 5. 0
7.9 2.1
4. 0 7.1
4. 0 3.0
7. 9 7.1
7. 9 3. 0
7. 9 10. 0
7.9 4.2
15. 9 10. 0
15. 9 4.2
7.9 14.1
7. 9 6.0
15. 9 14.1
15. 9 6. 0
SPB LCCp/Asp PPB "Its "lie As / As p Ap/Asp SPH CF~ PC SC UCZ%
25. 2 11. 3 56. 9 1. 0 12. 0 .25 .75 - .9 12 . 05 16. 5 3
10. 7 4.8 24. 2 1. 0 12. 0 .11 .32 - . 7 12 . 05 16. 5 6
12. 6 11. 3 28. 4 1. 0 12. 0 .25 .75 - .9 12 . 05 33. 1 3
5. 3 4.8 12.1 1. 0 12. 0 .11 .32 - .7 12 . 05 33. 1 6
35. 6 11. 3 56. 9 1. 0 12. 0' .25 .75 - . 9 12 . 15 16. 5 3
15. 1 4.8 24. 2 1. 0 12. 0 .11 .32 - . 7 12 . 15 16. 5 6
17, 8 11. 3 28, 4 1. 0 12. 0 .25 .75 - . 9 12 . 15 33. 1 3
7, 6 4.8 12.1 1. 0 12. 0 ,11 .32 - . 7 12 . 15 33. 1 6
25. 2 22. 6 56, 9 1. 0 12. 0 .51 1. 50 - 1. 3 24 . 05 16. 5 3
10. 7 9.6 24. 2 1. 0 12. 0 .22 .64 - . 9 24 . 05 16. 5 6
12. 6 22. 6 28, 4 1. 0 12. 0 .51 1. 50 - 1. 3 24 , 05 33. 1 3
5.3 9.6 12.1 1. 0 12. 0 .22 .64 - .9 24 . 05 33. 1 6
35. 6 22. 6 56. 9 1. 0 12. 0 .51 1. 50 - 1. 3 24 , 15 16. 5 3
15.1 9, 6 24, 2 1, 0 12. 0 .22 .64 - . 9 24 . 15 16. 5 6
17. 8 22. 6 28. 4 1. 0 12. 0 .51 1. 50 -1. 3 24 . 15 33. 1 3
7. 6 9.6 12.1 1. 0 12. 0 .22 .64 - . 9 24 . 15 33. 1 6
Fi xed : ES Main. Cost - 2.6 $/ m 2
EP Cost - 15 $/ m 2
ES Const. Cost - 135/ m 2
Lifetime - 20 years
LCZ - 23%
that generally f avors recycli ng salt over purchasi ng ne w
salt. Ine xpe ns i ve s ources o f salt i n t he regi on as wel l
as t he abi li ty t o surf ace f lush bri ne at coast al l ocat i ons
may f avor replaci ng salt. An i nteresti ng f eature of Table
1 i s t he s ens i t i vi t y o f t he EP's perf ormance t o preci p-
i t at i on and t he ES's relat i ve i ns ens i t i vi t y t o preci pi ta-
t i on. The 1958 data f or Ne w Orleans, LA ( a si mi l ar
c l i mat e ) , whi ch t ended t o be a year wi t h hi gher t han
normal preci pi t at i on, s howe d EP payback peri ods t o
be mu c h larger t han Hous t on' s EP payback peri ods,
whi l e t he ES payback peri ods f or bot h l ocat i ons were
s i mi l a r [ 4] . Theref ore, an ES can hel p t o reduce t he
vari abi li ty of t he s ys t e m' s annual perf ormance.
A mode rat e cl i mat e , as represent ed by Spri ngf i eld,
Il l i noi s i n Tabl e 2, agai n s hows t he ES t o e con omi cal l y
perf orm bet t er than an EP. Tabl e 2 al so i ndi cat es salt
recycl i ng t o be e con omi cal l y advant ageous ove r pur-
chasi ng ne w salt f or mos t of t he cos t ranges as s umed.
The pri ce o f salt and t he concent rat i on mai nt ai ne d i n
t he UCZ are t he mo s t si gni f i cant f actors.
Overall, t he e c o n o mi c result s can best be descri bed
i n t e rms o f regi onal characteri sti cs. Si mul at i on results
f or Al bany ( Ne w Yo r k ) , Salt Lake Ci t y ( Ut a h ) , and
Tucs on ( Ari z ona) wi ll be bri ef ly descri bed. More detai l
i s avai lable i n Smi t h' s t h e s i s [ 4 ] . Al bany represents a
wet , col d regi on. An EP i s not t echni cal l y f easi ble i n
thi s cl i mat e. Bri ne reconcent rat i on wi t h an ES i s pos-
si ble, but t he e c o n o mi c f easi bi li ty depends on t he cos t s
and operat i on practi ces. General l y, payback peri ods
l ess than 20 years ( t he as s ume d l i f e t i me o f t he f aci l i t y)
are obt ai ned whe n salt cos t i s hi gh and t he UCZ con-
cent rat i on i s hi gh. Operati ng the UCZ at 6% i nst ead
of 3% reduces t he requi red evaporat i on capaci t y by a
f actor of t wo. Parasi ti c powe r af f ects t he li f e cycl e cos t
o f t he ES, but not i n a si gni f i cant manner.
Salt Lake Ci t y and Tucs on represent dry, s unny
cl i mat es. Although Salt Lake Ci t y i s si gni f i cantly colder
than Tucs on, bot h l ocat i ons f avor t he EP ove r t he ES.
An i nt erest i ng f eature o f t hese l ocat i ons i s that t he area
o f t he EP t ends t o be s ome what s mal l er than t he area
of t he ES. Thi s i s due t o t he l oss o f evaporat i on caused
by t he 85% relati ve humi di t y s et poi nt on t he ES's con-
trol ci rcui t. In general, one woul d f i nd salt recycl i ng
t o be f avored i n dry regi ons unless there i s a f ree s ource
o f salt.
All l ocat i ons s howe d a pref erence t oward l ong
evaporat i on seasons. The col d l ocat i ons ( Al bany,
Spri ngf i eld, and Salt Lake Ci t y) were al l owed t o operate
f rom Apri l t hrough Se pt e mbe r ( n o wi nt er operat i on
was al l owed t o avoi d f reezi ng probl e ms ) . The opt i -
mi z at i on rout i ne s howe d that one woul d want t o op-
erate as l ong as possi bl e whi ch me ans that decreasi ng
t he s i ze of t he ES s ys t e m i s mor e i mport ant than i ts
operat i ng cos t ( e v e n at 15 cent s per ki l owat t - hour) .
The warmer l ocat i ons were al l owed t o have year-long
operat i on seasons. Onl y Tucs on resulted i n an oper-
at i onal peri od that was less than a year (February
t hrough De c e mb e r ) whe n powe r cos t s were at t he hi gh
value.
Table 2. Economi c results, Spri ngf i eld, IL ( 1979 )
SS/Asp LCCs/ Asp SPB
4. 0 7.2 36. 1
4. 0 3.0 15. 3
7. 9 7.2 1B.1
7. 9 3. 0 7. 7
4. 0 9. 0 45. 4
4. 0 3. 8 19. 3
7. 9 9, 0 22. 7
7. 9 3. 8 9.6
7. 9 14. 3 36. 1
7. 9 6.1 15. 3
15. 9 14. 3 18.1
15. 9 6.1 7.7
7. 9 18. 0 45. 4
7. 9 7. 7 19, 3
15, 9 18. 0 22, 7
15. 9 7. 7 9.6
LCCpfA~ PpB "r~ T=, , ~ V As p 6p/ Asp SP~ ~R PC SC u c z %
12. 2 61. 6 4. 0 10. 0 .40 .82 - .9 12 . 05 16. 5 3
5.2 26. 2 4. 0 10. 0 ,17 ,35 - . 7 12 . 05 16. 5 6
12. 2 30. 8 4. 0 10. 0 .40 .82 - .9 12 . 05 33. 1 3
5.2 13.1 4. 0 10. 0 .17 .35 - . 7 12 . 05 33. 1 6
12. 2 61. 6 4, 0 10. 0 .40 .82 - . 9 12 . 15 16. 5 3
5.2 26. 2 4. 0 10. 0 .17 .35 - . 7 12 . 15 16. 5 6
12. 2 30. 8 4. 0 10. 0 .40 .82 - .9 12 . 15 33. 1 3
5.2 13.1 4. 0 10. 0 .17 .35 - , 7 12 . 15 33. 1 6
24. 5 61. 6 4, 0 10. 0 .80 1. 63 - 1. 2 24 . 05 16, 5 3
10. 4 26. 2 4. 0 10. 0 .34 .69 - . 8 24 . 05 16. 5 6
24. 5 30. 8 4. 0 10. 0 .80 1. 53 - 1. 2 24 . 05 33. 1 3
10. 4 13.1 4. 0 10. 0 ,34 .69 - .8 24 . 05 33. 1 6
24. 5 61. 6 4, 0 10. 0 .80 1. 63 - 1. 2 24 . 15 16. 5 3
10. 4 26. 2 4. 0 10. 0 .34 .69 - . 8 24 . 15 16. 5 6
24, 5 30. 8 4, 0 10. 0 .80 1. 63 - 1. 2 24 . 15 33. 1 3
10. 4 13.1 4. 0 10. 0 .34 .69 - .8 24 . 15 33. 1 6
Fi xed : ES Mai n. Cost - 2.6 $/ m 2 ES Const. Cost - 13 $/ m 2 LCZ - 23%
EP Cost - 15 $/ m 2 Li feti me - 20 years
A solar evaporation system for concentrating sodium chloride brines 399
5. CONCLUSIONS
Re c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f s o d i um chl or i de br i nes for sal t
gr adi ent SPs has been i nves t i gat ed f or a var i et y o f l o-
cat i ons us i ng a st rat egy used at t he UI SP. Th e syst em
consi st s o f a sur face t hat has a t hi n fi l m o f br i ne
p ump e d ove r its sur face wh e n t he we a t he r is f avor abl e
f or e va por a t i on. Sh ut d o wn occur s dur i ng hi gh h umi d -
i t y per i ods a nd t he syst em has t he abi l i t y t o shed a ny
pr eci pi t at i on t hat ma y fall. Hour l y s i mul a t i on resul t s
f or t he ES- t ype syst em ar e c o mp a r e d t o s i mul a t i on
resul t s for EP- t ype syst ems. I n gener al , t he ES wi l l out -
pe r f or m an EP i n l ocat i ons wi t h mo d e r a t e t o heavy
pr eci pi t at i on a mount s . Pe r f or ma nc e o f ESs a nd EPs
ar e s i mi l ar i n dr y cl i mat es wher e t he abi l i t y t o shed
wat er is n o t as i mpor t a nt .
Fi nal l y, t he resul t s have been pr es ent ed i n t he con-
t ext o f recycl i ng salt for a SP facility. It shoul d be not ed,
however , t hat t he resul t s ar e qui t e gener al and t hat
c onc e nt r a t i on o f sal t br i nes f or ot he r t ypes o f processes
(s uch as i n s o me f ood pr ocessi ng pl ant s ) coul d benefi t
f r om ut i l i zi ng an open ai r sol ar e va por a t i on process.
Acknowledgments-The UI SP project has been supported by
a grant from the Illinois Department of Energy and Natural
Resources and with cost sharing from the International Salt
Company (Akzo Salt Company) and Gundle Lining Systems.
T. NeweU gratefully acknowledges summer support from the
U.S. Army Construction Engineering Research Laboratory.
NOMENCLATURE
MJ
H insolation, m2.day
Hr average hours of operation/month for an evaporation
hour
surface, mont h
LC construction cost per unit area for an evaporation
$
surface, ~-i
LCCp life cycle cost for evaporation pond, $
LCCs life cycle cost for evaporation surface, $
LCZ lower convective zone
MC lifetime maintenance cost / unit area for an evap sur-
$
face, m2.1if e
OP facility expected lifetime, years
life
$
PC power cost, - -
kW-hour
PPB evaporation pond pay-back, years
R ratio of mass of salt in solution to ma~s of water
kg salt
evaporated,
kg H20 evap
RH relative humidity, %
$
SC salt cost including transportation, k--~
SP solar pond
SPB evaporation surface payback, years
SPH solar pond depth change per year from evaporation,
m
year
SS salt savings, $
Ti time (month, J an = 1 )
Ti, starting time (month, Jan = l )
Tie ending time (month, Jan = 1 )
UCZ upper convective zone
Ap evaporation pond area, m 2
A, evaporation surface area m 2
Asp solar pond area, m 2
kg salt
DR salt diffusion rate, m:-year
E average monthly day evaporation amounts,
kg H2Oevap
m2-month
EEP evaporation amount per year from an evaporation
pond, kg H20)evap
m2-year
EP evaporation pond
EPC evaporation pond construction cost per unit area,
$
m 2
EPWR evaporation pond with rainfall
ES evaporation surface
REFERENCES
1. J. M. Upper, Studies in the operation and maintenance
of a salt gradient solar pond, MS thesis, Depm'tment of
Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, University of Il-
linois at Urbana-Champaign (July 1989 ).
2. T. A. Newell, R. G. Cowie, J. M. Upper, M. K. Smith,
and G. L. Cler, Construction and operation of the Uni-
versity of Illinois 1/ 2 acre salt gradient solar l~gnd, Solar
Energy 45(4), 231-239 (1990).
3. T. A. Newell, M. K. Smith, R. G. Cowie, J. ]d. Upper,
and G. L. Cler, Characteristics of a solar pond brine re-
concentration system, presented at the ASME Solar En-
ergy Division Conference in San Diego, CA (April 1989).
4. M. K. Smith, Thin film evaporative studies Jbr salt re-
concentration, MS Thesis, Department of Mechanical and
Industrial Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-
Champaign (August 1989 ).