Assessing Alternatives For Disposal of Reject Brine From Inland Desalination Plants PDF

Assessing Alternatives for Disposal of Reject Brine
from Inland Desalination Plants
By
Mohamed Ezzat AbdelMohsen Mahmoud Ammar
B.Sc. in Civil Engineering, Cairo University, 2010
A Thesis Submitted to the
Faculty of Engineering at Cairo University
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of
MASTER OF SCIENCE
In
IRRIGATION AND HYDRAULICS

ENGINEERING
FACULTY OF ENGINEERING CAIRO UNIVERSITY

GIZA EGYPT
2012
ii
By
MASTER OF SCIENCE
In

ENGINEERING
Supervised by
Dr. Ahmed Emam Ahmed Hassan Dr. Hesham Bekhit Mohamed Bekhit
Professor Associate Professor

Irrigation and Hydraulics Department Irrigation and Hydraulics Department
Faculty of Engineering Faculty of Engineering
Cairo University Cairo University

GIZA EGYPT
2012
iii
By
MASTER OF SCIENCE
In

ENGINEERING
Approved by the
Examining Committee:
_____________________________
Prof. Dr. Ahmed Emam Ahmed Hassan, Thesis Main Advisor
_____________________________
Prof. Dr. Ahmad Wagdy Abdel Dayem, Member
_____________________________
Prof. Dr. Ahmad Ali Hassan, Member

GIZA EGYPT
2012
iv
23456275
89

9

9

0 9

!" 0
9
"
"#$

%
" 9

9"

0

%"
9

""

9
#&90

9

%!"'("% )
9

"
0
%""0#8
%

"0" "
0
%"
0
9
" "
%#*
"0
" "
"
" +

" 0 " "
"

"
"

%9
#
,
"
-
.
9

0

#
*
0

(" ("%
" #*"

!"

"

8!
/ %

-
.
#0

%

"
1
0

0

" "

"
0

#2 ("

0 !0 9
9

0
("
%
+#* 9
1
/3$2430
/*5$/."9"
"9.808*
"
0

% 9
9#
0

3457189
1 4550 1 74 744555 7
11
50 1 57579
11575 45 5 9
4515145151455 55 97!91591 945
57
11
51 "#57$45579
17
11
9855%57
"#8 945151 5
1454 1&

151 345055
7
11 57185 950
985 9"'81
1 918557
15757' 54($)8*+$414
57 1575 7
57
11 57185 5145 5 '
1
8,*
34581
971 54514177917445571 51
50 1 75057571105 4555 7
11 45
50 1 575751
4147
11154171

9 57
11 577-555
151 17105

1 1587 17 7
77.17
7 1 4575057458 9
1554591
1&51459954557
11 54

75 85571
5/ 505$4515757
1195 151 17
915
41
15754557

11 77175 995
91
1&1 45151 8177 95 555 57
11

01

3456789

6
11!"#"$1!% $# &
$$1"1!'!$1(1$)10$1&$$01!1"# 11#
!$$$$$1$&$1!11
!11!11!$#$$1!1!$# *
#$1!!!&%$*+# !'!%$*' #
, 1-#1!01$-##1$!$1"$&&$
1$"1!!11# 1$"$##
!10$.1$*
1$!$&#&#1-#&$/"*/00
+!1-##$2&-#1$%1!1&#"$
$$&$1$1$!1*
311!0 11%$*1# !4$/!1
+#5"1!!1$1 !!#!!*+-
!1#"$1!%$*6!61$/!1-$7
#"$&811!11-&$1!$1"&1!011
( $811!/"*9$4"&1%2+3/:*
!1%$*+!,0$-%$*8# +!;!-!
%$*+# !2"!&$1$1!011"&$#&$
$ $!!*1%$*1# !4$&$$1"#
!$1"$1$"&#$$$ $!"1#
$"$&$*!1%$*1# !+1&$1
$!!01*+!&1-$#&$1! $
#1!-' "01-+-8#1-+$&-'#-11$-<!
1"1:!*

1# !/*+##$-=>?=*
011

345679
9373
0
011
0111
!"1
"011
#$%
!%
%%&0'(01') %
%*&'+',(-.$/0'101,2103*
%4&'+',(-.56'-010'+,17'0./7/2/834
%9&.'+1+(8,11:,01/1 ;
#$<
!!= <
*%&'+,211,01/1#1+0/(3,170/2>01/1<
**&.''+,211,01/1"?'(1'1-'1183?0%*
*4&'+,211,01/1,17>0>(''0'2/?@'101183?0%A
*9&0'(01')/B(,-C1+.,0'(1183?0%D
*9%&(,-C1+.,0'(='(+>+,211',0'(%E
*9*&/>(-'+/B(,-C1+.,0'(%E
*94&$('0(',0@'10/B(,-C1+.,0'($(1/(0/'+,211,01/1%<
*99&'+,211,01/1/B(,-C1+.(/>17),0'(1183?0%<
*9;&1'(83/1+>@?01/1/B(,-C1+.,0'('+,211,01/1
FG,173?1-,2'-/0'(3,0'+*%
*9A&$(/52'@+++/-1,0'7)10.(,-C1+.,0'('+,211,01/1 **
*;&'01')/B'+,211,01/1'-.1/2/81'+*4
*;%&2'@'10+B/('+,211,01/1$(/-'++*4
*;*&3?'+/B'+,211,01/1$2,10+*9
*;4&'@5(,1''+,211,01/1$(/-'++'+*;
*;9&.'(@,2'+,211,01/1$(/-'++'+*E
*;;& /1"-.,18''+,211,01/1$(/-'++'+ *<
*;A&#35(17'+,211,01/1$(/-'++'+ *<
*;D&1'(83/1+>@?01/1/B1BB'('10'+,211,01/1
'-.1/2/81'+4H
*;E&'1'),52'1'(83B/('+,211,01/14%
*A&'6'-0(11'1+?/+,2'0./7+44
*A%&0,?/(,01/1$/17+4;
*A*&1+?/+,211>11-1?,2')'(,8'3+0'@+4<
*A4&,20$(/7>-01/19H
*A9&''?'2216'-01/194
0111

34546489

44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
844444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444446
8 88!""!8#
8#8!444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444446
$44!%&'
0&%444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444446
$434(
')"(0*0&%444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444446
$4$4"(0*0&%&+8 ,&%-."0(*&( )(/4444444444444444444444444446
$440&**0%1&- /0%8 ,&%-."0(*&( )(/4444444444462
$4640/
0&%&' 444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444445
$4543%' 4 %44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444456
$454++&+ 0%0)&+0*&0&%(4444444444444444444444444444444444444455
$44(
(%'"0(
((0&%44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444452
$424%(0000)8% )(0(+&.++&+ 0%0)&%.&%'
+&/%4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444456
$4647"0/%(0&%(+&.0*&0&%&%'(+&+"0(*&( 455
$44&(&+.0*&0&%&%'(444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444
884444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444445
88!8#8#8!44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444445
44./0 &' &+"#3&'4444444444444444444444444444444
434./0 &' &+$"&'444444444444444444444444444444444442
4$4./0 &' &+838&'4444444444444444444444444444444444423
8!444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444426
98"38#38"8"#44444444444444444444426
644 "(0*0&%&+
')10&%4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444425
6434 &%*
&7&' 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444442
64$4
/0 &7&' "0 &*/%44444444444444444444444444444444444444422
64$448 %'0 1%44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444422
64$4349&
%'7#0 (%'&0/%444444444444444444444444444444444466
64$4$49&
%'7:
0)44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444446
64$4489
0+)'
0&*0(44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444462
64$464"&/0%*0 "0(0;0&%+&.10&% &' 444446
64$454"&/0%*0 "0(0;0&%+&.#& &' 4444444444
644 4&
%')%'!%00 &%'00&%(%'!/* /%0&%&+
"#34444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444446
6444!%<0&%3 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444445
64434)'
0&%'
000)4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444445
6464 &' 0-0&%444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444445
64644(0/'/(44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444433
6464348((((/%&+ 0-0&%444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444443$
6454 %(*&&' 44444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444435
6454 4((%0&444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444435
8!=444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444432
!>!8!8#8""!8!44444444444444444432
544 9&
%'7 &7(
(&+.4(,( 0-'
&' 4444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444444$6
5434 (
(&+.0(!%<0&%%0&44444444444444444444444444444444444444$
01

2343 6789
8 77 7 7 33333333333333333333333333333333334
233 6789
8 77 7 33333333333333333333333333333333333334
233 77
7!0733333333333333333333333333333333333333334"
2323 7!# $7
%7
7 33333333333333333333333333333333333&
232337!# $7
%7
7777
7 833333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333334
2323'37!# $7
%7
777

787333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333334
23"3 7 8 7 7777
7 833333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333
23(3 7% ) 87% 7
*78 +997!0 +77
,7-79*733333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333(
23.3 7 8 /77/8) 8
0) 8 7% ) 87
1 9-7/7#7
)$7% 7
3333333333333333333333333333333333333333
2*%!6!3!43333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333.
55*66704 04*4/6!055!4/*04+06
+6!,0683333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333.
"33 9$$33333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333.
"3'3
98 833333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333332'
"343 67 $$7 8 +997, 933333333333333333333333333333333333333333324
6!+!6!4!333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333332

0

34568994
5
11!1"#1$%
&'()%*+
1+ !'1,!-1%./0101101
21#0"1.'345+556&"/7
+5568*5
1++ 8911011!-1%&"/7+5568*
1+( 1011!-1%1$%&'1.1.:'
7+55+*(
1+; 1011101--1101$%&$<#=7
+55*;
1+4 >1011!-1101$%13?5<+554&$<
#=7+55*;
1+6 110181.@1:A1.#%0'01$%&:1*+5
1+B C%$'0.1011#%0'&01.1D
''8<800%0'*'1.1.&E0
3?5*+;
1+? !'1,8!-1%./01011
0.>'@'8>-%>'
>-%1-0@$17@#@F!@'8
>-%1-0G97$1$1G10G.-
!91&0'1*!-1%.8
>-10&"/7+5568*+4
1+3 >@-10'.90'010G,090'010
&G9*-000+6
1+5>%1-:'.$-1%010@'80+B
1+G.:1-811%.11..1011
>-101'0.#!-11"
&--'--00D@-7+5+* (5

01

3145679
9 61 764 51 6 7 67
711 61377 766 !47
"# 761 $%#!&9''()
(
3145679
(16151 !77 7* 767 711
"7 417$"+7&9'',)
(
3145679
-."1#./*!06 7
-'
3145679
,6 76 7! 57 67"677 !717
617277670*0767!0711
$.77
&9''9)
-9
314567(
"7#1171517/ 1 77#5
,9
314567(
9 / 53 6"76 17.67 .*3 7711

,9
314567(
( #710761 146 67.*3 7
711
,4
314567(
- "1#61461#571 176#11
$2 51&9'')
,5
314567(
, 6 *#71 76 61
,7
314567(
4 3 6 67.776 7 76 61

4
314567(
5 "7/ 1 73167377 6 41#1 .*
3 7711
4-
314567(
7 # 511 # 7 #1767
"776567$8 &9'',)
45
314567(
9 #1177 76 61 67$3 5&9')
49
314567(
' 76 67 177 73 56 17
57 0676 14$)7 !10&$)
7 .56 61 !7&$)7 #11&
$)7 :6714; 614< 56
59
314567(
76 67566776 11 1767
1757
$) 11 !1
.56 61 &$) 11 !1&
.56 61 #117
6 61 !7&$) 11 !1&
.56 61 &#117 6 61 5-
011

345678 4

6471
56 4
5 1
7
16 6 6 5 56 41
15! "61 16
5 #41451

56

6$4
6 %&
16 ' 4
(55$ )647 4
*6'57 56 46
)56
451+6 *1$6
71
7 56 +4'451

7 %%
16 , 6 54 "75 56 46 )56
451+6 *1$6
71
7
56 +4'451

%-
16 . !'1 4 "77/6 51
56 +4'451

%0
16 &
6$4
6 6 162 *1$6
71
7 6

./3647 351
61 445
456 *6'5 4

465 41
15! #41451
-7
16 % !'1 4 81
1
"77/6 51
56 01751
+4'451

-
16 - "75 81
67 '6 (55$ )64 946 :656 *166
5

*6'57 4
16 '67 -7
16 0 6 54 "75 56 01751
4
56 162 +4'451

7 -,
16 . 6 56
51$651 :4' 56 826 "654 67 )916
215 56 8 451
6 )/:
6456 6 0&
16 . !'1 4 54514'1 6771
1
"6
54 1
41
4;64 18 775 0%
16 . "
57 ' 86+6 56 <''6 "654 67 )916 7
16 ., "
57 (476 86+6 56 <''6 "654 67 )916 7
16 .. "
57 (476 86+6 56 826 "654 67 )916 7,
16 .& 6 56
51$651 :4' 56 <''6 "654 67 )916 7.
16 .% 6 56
51$651 :4' 56 826 "654 67 )916 7&
16 .- 6 7/741
15! "
5 :4' 56 <''6 "654 67
)916 1
1
41 4= 456 1 ! 64$8
00-5 7%
16 .0 6 7/741
15! "
5 :4' 56 826 "654 67
)916 1
1
41 4= 456 1 ! 64$8
00-5 7-

0111

415678
8 1 8 8 1 88 8
851 8
415678
1 7!81 "#8$ 1 8 86
851 8 "7% &' 7% () $ )
415678
( 1 7!81 "!6*7$ 1 8 86
851 8 "6+ , 6+ ,&$ )
415678
) - .18% 1 7!81 "#8
!6*7$ 7 8 8 "8 1 8
1/81 %8 1 % 01 $ 2
415678
2 !818 3+58 !%15 8 1 8 !6 478
8 1 8 *18 8 %11 8 !6
851 &
415678

% -185+8876 78 418 %1 478%87 8
787 %1 !18 486187 876 78 8 !+8 -1
1 8 486187 (
415678
& 1 8 !10 -1 -1 !% 0 8 71567
!+0 8 8 9+1 %1 8 -81+871
1 8 :1576 4 !% 78 8 :0 -
8 #777 418 %1 8 708721 -1
#1+8 7+ 8 1071 -78 7 8 ;87
7886 486187 ((
415678
< 1 8 !10 -1 -1 !% 0 8 +06
!+0 8 8 9+1 %1 8 -81+871
1 8 :1576 4 !% 78 8 :0 -
8 #777 418 %1 8 708721 -1
#1+8 7+ 8 1071 -78 7 8 %87
7886 486187 '
415678
, +71 08%88 8 +68 =8 87
1071 8 708728 =8 7 8 #15
708721 -1 8 ;87 7886 486187 (2
415678
' +71 08%88 8 +68 =8 87
1071 8 708728 =8 7 8 !10
708721 -1 8 %87 7886 486187 (2
415678
( -87858 #777 8 8 #15 !10 708721
68 1 8 8 1071 7 8 ;87 8 %87
7886 86187 (

012

345678
8 8 47464 8 87 7886 6487
7 8 88 !478 "8! #
345678
$ 8 8 67 8 %&87 7886 6487 7
8 88 !478 "8! #
345678
# '(84 )86! 8 347 '(84 *874 &45
8 *! !6+8 47464 87 $, -87 466
'(84 4 .! /48& #$
345678
0 '(84 )86! 8 347 '(84 *874 &45
8 *! !6+8 47464 87 $, -87 466
'(84 8 .7 4 128 7*84!
/48& 8 %&87 .7 4 *637 7*84!
/48& ##
345678
, )8!418 874 6718 4878 48 37+
8 '(84 28!! 7 *874 48 ##
345678

'(84 )86! 8 *8 '(84 *874 &45
8 *! !6+8 47464 87 $, -87 466
'(84 4 .! /48& ##
345678
5 '(84 )86! *8 *874 &45 8 *!
!6+8 47464 87 $, -87 466 '(84
8 .7 4 128 7*84! /48& 8
%&87 .7 4 *637 7*84! /48& #,
345678
6 '(84 )86! 8 47 '(84 *874 &45
8 *! !6+8 47464 87 $, -87 466
'(84 4 .! /48& #

345678
7 '(84 )86! 8 47 '(84 *874 &45
8 *! !6+8 47464 87 $, -87 466
'(84 8 .7 4 128 7*84!
/48& 8 %&87 .7 4 *637 7*84!
/48& #5
345678
8 '(84 )86! 874- 4 !- %-87 8084
&45 8 878 *! !6+8 47464 87 $,
-87 466 '(84 4 .! /48& #6
345678
'(84 )86! 874- 4 !- %-87 1084
&45 8 *! 874 .!6+8 47464 4
.! *68418 ,8 +887 &&7 7+ 8
'(84 98 87 $, -87 466 '(84 #7

01

425678
82 86 872 872 8 25 8
6 8 !272"62 87 # 87 $266
82 %8 % &7 2 '()8 $7(82
*28 + 8 ,87 &7 2 6(-7 $7(82
*28 ./
425678
0 788 8 '08 78+88 8+ 7 $62
8 '127 8 &8 188+ *6 8 .
425678
. 2 $ 2732 )87 !822 2 &
$2 452+76 / 7 .

425678
# %8 $ !2 8 &78+ %788 82
872 .8
425678

%8 % $ 8 !2878 !2 2 #/
425678
8 %8 467 $72872 7 &82 976+87 !818 8 #
425678
: %8 187 8 467 &82 $72872 48 25 7
80788 8 25 82 28 8 +73 7 80788
827 .;
425678
; %8 &78+ 62"8 178 7 976+87
!818 8 .;
425678
/ %8 <8+ $67 8 87 $7886 1=6287 7
8 &78+ &82 '072 + 82 >+8
4%8 78+ 8 + 8 80225 8 78 7888+
"3 +7 #0
425678
%8 <8+ $67 8 ,87 $7886 1=6287 7
8 &78+ &82 '072 + 82 >+8
4%8 78+ 8 + 8 80225 8 78 7888+
"3 +7 #0
425678
82 86 8 87 $7886 1=6287 7 8
&78+ &82 '072 + 82 >+8 4%8
78+ 8 + 8 80225 8 78 7888+
"3 +7 #.
425678
0 %8 $ !2 !2878 187218 2 8
&7+6 )87 ?62 #8

012

45679
74 6
222!"2#2$$$%"2&'(
$$$)$
!*+22,2-
. /1022,22*22-
1 2213*&345,22*22-
- 672&*22682029:
; <072=#09>&'2/#5%?0
($$)$
@ >&'2!#&2*22%?#!6(
$$)
: 2>&'2%02929?#!6
($$)
A 672&<&2&26B#0729>*&0%
($$)
$672&!&16=#9>*&0%(
$$)
B0020<&#2>&'2
22%($$).
. 2"209<&9+2!4#2-.
. 2"209<&9!C&!4#2-.
.. =#90?2#2%AA)B72"
+!21D#0226%E)2!#%'0F6)
;.
.1 8&29G21+"2&*2;1
.- ?12<17722!<20
<172!9G21+"2&*2;1
0122

45678
15275678 52577 55 5 258 52577 8
218 887257 52
45678
!5" # 157!8 5 #8 $
45678
% 48 && 58 2'57 282 785218 8
15'52 (
45678 & 48257 5 )"872 55 *877 2 !"
82 &&
45678 + (5588 252 ,(4- #572652 (5588 5
258 .57!8 5 8 8'5678 /8157 &+

45678
#'52 68088 8 16818 )85 5 8 87
#'!8 )85 8 2''8 #858! 3!28 &+4
45678 4 #'52 68088 8 16818 )85 5 8 87
#'!8 )85 8 508 #858! 3!28 &+
45678 & !5" 8 # 8 /682 *877 8 488
852 &4
45678 + 48 258 # 8 528 15'52 ( 02
288 052 58 &
45678
48 258 # 8 88' *877 /682 2'57
1'2 &

01222

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Overview
Owing to the rapid growth in population, the development expansion in all

aspects in the past decades, and the fixed share Egypt gets from the Nile water
according to the 1959 treaty (i.e., 55.5 billion m3), it is expected that Egypt will
rely more on other supplements to the Nile River water to meet the needs of
different sectors. The combination of continued rapid population growth and
severely constrained fresh water resources confronts Egypt with great
challenges in the pursuit of sustainable development. The total population of
Egypt increased from 22 million in 1950 to 82 million today, and is likely to
increase to above 92 million by 2025, which means a severe drop in the per
capita water share to reach 600 m3/year compared to 1,000 m3/year described
as the international standard of water scarcity (Figure 1.1). Although vast
quantities of groundwater exist in the deserts of Egypt, most of these are non-
renewable and are stored at great distances below land surfaces. In some
places, large amounts of brackish groundwater exist and can be utilized. Where
freshwater availability is limited, desalination of brackish groundwater can be
used as an alternative supply, especially given the lower desalination cost
compared to seawater. Desalination of brackish groundwater in Egypt has a
great potential with respect to the availability of the resource.
1
140 7000
120 6000
Population (million)
100 5000
Per Capita Water share

80 4000
60 3000
40 2000
20 1000
0 0
1800
1900
1950
1961
1965
1970
1975
1979
1980
1985
1990
1994
1998
2000
2005
2012
2025
2050
Year
Water Share Water poverty line Population
Figure 1.1. Population Growth and Per Capita Water Share in Egypt (m3/year)
1.2. Research Potentiality
Desalination of seawater is becoming a reliable and cost effective mean of

providing fresh water especially in arid regions like Egypt. However, the
utilization of desalinated brackish groundwater is not as common, as it has to
go in parallel with designing a disposal system in a way that protects the
environment and be cost effective. Moreover, there is a lack of the information
and knowledge about the environmental impacts of the desalination byproduct
(reject brine) on the soil and groundwater. A need thus exits for assessing the
possible disposal options (i.e., evaporation ponds, well injection in deep
aquifers) from the perspectives of the technical viability, effect on the
environment as well as the economic feasibility.
Brackish groundwater desalination holds promise as a water supply

strategy. It offers opportunities such as providing a viable water resource where
other supply options are not readily available. It can also free up pressure on
freshwater resources that are of vital importance to the environment. However,
a number of important issues should be addressed when considering this as a
2
water supply option. Atop of these issues are the cost, energy requirements, and
disposal of the reject water or brine resulting from the desalination process.
This research focuses on addressing this latter issue. In particular, it aims at

identifying the alternatives of land disposal of reject brine resulting from inland
desalination plants and studying the impacts of disposal on the environment.
The main objective is to assess the different options of reject brine disposal
including evaporation ponds, and deep well injection into deep aquifers. It is
expected that this research will deliver an assessment of the feasibility of each
of the possible disposal options and the long-term impacts on the environment.
1.3. Research Objectives and Methodology
This research will investigate the issue of brackish groundwater

desalination and the associated problems. The main problem that we will focus
on is the disposal of the desalination process by-product (i.e., the reject brine
water). The overall objective is to assess the technical and economic feasibility
and the environmental impacts of different options for inland disposal of the
reject water. To achieve this overall objective, the following specific objectives
are considered and are linked to the selected case study:
Assess the feasibility of each option in terms of sustainability of the

resource, cost of disposal system implementation, and short- and long-
term environmental impacts.
Study the effect of salinity of the reject brine on the evaporation rates
which reflects on the dimensions of the required evaporation ponds.
Evaluate the time-varying effects on groundwater quality in the injection

domain present in the chosen study region.
Suggest the most appropriate disposal system for the desalination

byproduct for the chosen site.
3
Suggest a development scheme for the regional area encompassing the
study region utilizing the brackish groundwater as a source of feed water
for desalination.
The abovementioned research objectives are achieved using the suitable

modeling tools and software such as the utilization of the MODFLOW code,
MT3DMS as well as using SEAWAT for variable density flow simulation. In
addition, routing the reject water into evaporation ponds is addressed using the
appropriate tools (e.g., water and salt balance, rainfall rates, evaporation rates,
and infiltration rates). Previous work and studies-however rare-concerned with
the inland disposal of reject brine and injection into deep saline aquifers are
compiled and integrally used for building a concrete research base for the
current research purpose.
The proposed methodology generally consists of the following tasks:
An extensive background on the desalination technologies and the

typical recovery rates, energy consumption, feasibility, and
environmental impacts.
Literature review of the relevant studies dealing with inland desalination

of brackish groundwater and means of brine disposal
Case study data collection, analysis and compilation of studies related to

the Upper Cretaceous and the Lower Cretaceous aquifers in Central
Sinai where the studied desalination plant is located.
Setting/developing conceptual processes for the different disposal

techniques and converting these conceptual processes into mathematical
models.
Developing a numerical model for the groundwater system taking into

consideration the effect of salinity in simulation as variable density
groundwater flow.
4
Using the developed models to assess the environmental impacts of the
different options on both the short- and the long-term.
1.4. Thesis Organization
Following this chapter which includes the introduction, this thesis contains
six other chapters. Chapter two gives a detailed background on the evolution of
desalination worldwide, in Middle East, and the desalination experience in
Egypt with a brief description for the desalination technologies, typical
desalination energy consumption, problems and environmental concerns
associated with desalination and especially stressing on brackish groundwater
desalination, sources of renewable energy for desalinating water, and the
potential remote areas for development and desalination in Egypt with
identification of the potential saline aquifer systems. Also, this chapter presents
a literature review on the disposal options of reject brine from inland
desalination plants. Design criteria, researches, case studies, and assumptions
made by researchers previously addressing the disposal options of the brine are
discussed in this chapter as well.
The description of the selected case study is presented in Chapter three.

This chapter also included an assessment of the evaporation pond disposal
option. Water and salt balance are utilized for the evaluation of the pond
performance as well as an approximate estimation of the costs.
Chapter four exhibits a brief background on the used software in this study,
GMS (Groundwater Modeling System) developed by Aquaveo. It also presents
a clarification for the codes used to develop the groundwater flow and transport
models to simulate the movement and dispersion of the injected brine into the
aquifer system through MODFLOW for the groundwater flow pattern and
MT3DMS for the transport simulation, which are then coupled with SEAWAT
to account for the variable density in the flow simulation. The chapter includes
an explanation for the mathematical equation used to solve these models.
5
In chapter five, the developed regional flow model is discussed through
describing the model domain and the conceptual model. Model calibration is
performed to estimate the values of the hydraulic conductivity of the model
layers. A local model is extracted from the regional model for local study of the
Al-Monbateh region, with boundary conditions based on the calibrated regional
model. Different cases of injection and sources of uncertainty are considered in
addition to the description of a base case scenario that is benchmarked as a
comparison model.
Chapter six includes the results of the base case scenario of the developed
regional model and the results of the different injection scenarios for the local
model. The results are presented for a time frame of 25 years and a comparison
is made between each case and the base case scenario. It also describes a
suggestion for the potential development areas for the regional study area
utilizing the Lower Cretaceous aquifer in Central Sinai based on the depth to
the aquifer, the salinity of the groundwater, the thickness of the water bearing
formation and the topography of the area. Production and injection well fields
are proposed upon the allowable well extraction rates and minimum
environmental risk of injection for a study period of 25 years. The developed
regional groundwater model is utilized to simulate the proposed future
groundwater extractions and to predict the aquifer response to the different
extraction scenarios and probable changes in groundwater quality over the
foreseen period of exploitation, to assess the optimum, economic and
sustainable groundwater extraction plan.
Chapter seven abridges a summary to the performed work in addition to the

conclusions derived from the analysis and results presented in the study as well
as the recommendations for future work that can complement the current study.
It should be stressed, however, that the conclusions made are specific to the
case study and the scale of the desalination plant considered. Such conclusions
will likely change as the scale of brine production changes and this should be
6
taken into consideration in interpreting the results and conclusions presented
herein.
7
8
CHAPTER TWO
BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Desalination History and Evolution
About 470 million people live in areas with severe water shortages (e.g.,
northern China, northern Africa and the Middle East as well as the western
United States, parts of Mexico and northern India). By 2025, the number of
people living in water stressed regions is expected to reach 3 billion (Cosgrove
and Rijsberman, 2000). This dramatic increase raises the flag lead to a critical
need of more potable water for human uses, which has put more emphasis to
non-conventional water sources (i.e. desalination of seawater and/or brackish
water).
Desalination technologies and their applications have evolved dramatically

over the past half century. The use of desalination processes was very limited
to activities were distilled water was required until the early 1960s. There have
been efforts to identify unconventional water supplements to the traditional
water supplies in order to fulfill the needs of the rapid growth of population and
the development expansion in all aspects in the past three decades and due to
the increased expenses, unavailability or the controversies associated with the
use of traditional sources. These efforts yielded an exponential increase in the
desalination capacity both globally and nationally to overcome the water
scarcity problem faced by many societies as well as to provide fresh water to
localities experiencing rapid population growth with the decreasing or fixation
traditional water supplies as in Egypt.
A total desalination capacity of about 26 million m3/d was installed or

contracted worldwide by the end of 1999, counting only those plants with a
9
capacity more than 100 m3/day (Wangnick, 2000). Global desalination water
production capacity has been increasing exponentially since 1960 to value of
59.5 million m3/d in 2009 with an increase of 6.6 million m3/d in the last year
according to the 22nd GWI/IDA Worldwide Desalting Plant Inventory.
Middle East region has the largest share of desalination, where the leaders
of desalination are found there, followed by North America then Europe. Table
2.1 shows the Desalination in the worlds regions (Wangnick, 2000). Figure 2.1
shows the cumulative capacity of the desalination plants in the United States
and Worldwide until 2006 whereas Figure 2.2 shows the global desalination
capacities by countries (GWI, 2006b).
Table 2.1 Desalination in the Worlds Regions until 2000 (Wagnick, 2000)
Worlds region Desalination in 2000 Seawater
Total capacity million million m3/d (%)
m3/d (%)
Australia & Pacific Islands 0.1 (0.4) Negligible
Asia 3.2 (13.3) 1.2 (8.5)
The Middle East 11.3 (47.1) 9.5 (67.4)
Africa 1.2 (5.0) 0.8 (5.7)
Europe 3.1 (12.9) 1.7 (12.1)
North America 4.3 (17.9) 0.3 (2.1)
Central America & Carribean 0.6 (2.5) 0.5 (3.5)
South America 0.2 (0.9) < 0.1 (0.7)
TOTAL: 24.0 (100) 14.1 (100)
Figure 2.1. Cumulative capacity of installed desalination plants in the United

States and Worldwide from 1950 to 2006 (GWI, 2006b).
10
Figure 2.2. Global online desalination capacity (GWI, 2006b)
11
More than 120 countries are now using desalination of seawater for
domestic uses. More than 90% of water of the Gulf countries (Oman, Qatar,
Bahrain, Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait) is from desalination. The cost of
desalination, especially reverse osmosis (RO) has reached a competitive level.
For instance, in 1948 the desalination cost was over US$1/m3, but now on
average it is about $0.50/m3 (El-Kady and El-Shibini, 2001).
2.2. The Desalination Experience in Egypt
In Egypt, the integrated water policy is based on three main fundamentals

namely: increasing the Nile discharges from the sources, enhancing the water
efficiency and preventing pollution, and finally using non-conventional water
sources (El-Kady and El-Shibini, 2000). One of the most promising non-
conventional water sources is desalting water especially with the current low
price of desalination and the continuous decline in desalination cost.
The desalination experience in Egypt is relatively new compared to other

countries. It began in Helwan (south Cairo) with a large distillation pond for
domestic uses, and then moved to electrodialysis (ED) (described in details in
section 2.5.2) processes in remote areas in the mid-1970s where the real
Egyptian experience began when a number of ED plants were installed in
remote areas, mainly for military and exploration camps, industries, hotels and
resorts. In contrast, recently the reverse osmosis (RO) desalination technology
became more widely spread and more common due to its cost effectiveness. It
was important to start considering more non-conventional water sources as the
conventional sources became already exhausted (El-Kady and El-Shibini,
2001).
Research efforts have moved the cost from being expensive to competitive
allowing the feasibility of desalination in obtaining a reliable source of water.
During the period 1975 to 1982, three different models of ED plants were
installed in Egypt, and their capacities differed from 50 to 1000 m3/d, and with
12
salinity levels between 2000 to 1000 parts per million of feed water (El- Sadek,
2010).
Desalination increased notably in Egypt, where the total installed capacity

has grown to some 228,900 m3/d on 2012 (Moawad). Figure 2.1 shows the
evolution of desalination in Egypt during the past five decades and until 2000.
Most of the plants treat seawater, however lately a growing number of
installations use brackish water and the capacity of these installations ranges
between 500 to 10,000 m3/d (Allam et al., 2002). Nowadays, the amount of
desalinated water in Egypt is in order of 84 million m3/year. Figure 2.2 through
Figure 2.4 show the desalination installation capacities in Egypt.
250000
200000
Capacity, m3/d
150000
100000
50000
0
1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020
Years
Figure 2.3. Desalination Capacity in Egypt (modified after Allam et al., 2002)
13
Figure 2.4. Desalination Installation Capacities in Egypt (El-Sadek, 2010)
Figure 2.5. The Desalination Capacities in Egypt in 1980-2005 (El-Sadek,

2010)
The development of the Red Sea zone led to an increase in water demands
to meet the needs of the tourist, industrial and urban settlements. Table 2.2
shows the Red Sea modern desalination units. The desalination plant sizes for
such application are relatively small due to the nature of the coastline and the
dispersed locations of dwellings (Khalil, 2004).
14
Table 2.2. Red Sea Modern Desalination Units
Capacity, m3/d Technology Activity Location
3 x 1,500 VC* Tourism Abu Soma Bay
4,000 RO Hotel Movenpick, Sharm El-Sheikh
8,500 RO Tourism Hashish Bay
4,000 RO Tourism Hurghada
25 x 500 RO Various Isolated sites
30 x 100 - 200 RO Various Isolated sites
Desalination units can be categorized into two types based on their

ownership: first are government-owned units; and second are the private-
sector-owned units (Abou Rayan et al., 2001). Table 2.3 presents the
government-owned units and the technology used whereas table 2.4 presents
the private sector-owned units. As shown, the major supply of desalinated
water is from the private sector mostly owned by hotels.
Table 2.3. Governmental Desalination Units in Sinai

Sharm Sharm
Place Taba Taba Nuweiba Dahab El- El- Nuweiba
Sheikh Sheikh
System ROa MVCb EDc RO VCDd RO MEDe
Start date 1986 1996 1958 1995 1996 1998 1999
Total area m2 50,000 42,000 23,600 30,000 30,000 30,000
Capacity, m3/day 600 2,000 300 500 500 4,000 2,000
Feed water salinity,
48,000 48,000 2,400 44,000 44,000 44,000 45,000
ppm
Product salinity, ppm 450 30 500 500 30 500 50
Power consumption,
13.5 9 4.3 8.5 9 6.5
Kw/m3
Total coast/m3 , in LE 6.21 6.64 2.78 7.51 4.75 6.43 NA
a b c
Reverse osmosis, Mechanical vapor compression, Electrodialysis
d
Thermal vapor compression, eMultiple effect desalination
Table 2.4. Private-Sector-Owned Units in Sinai

Product
Location Owner Technology Capacity Salinity salinity
(m3/day) (ppm) (ppm)
Golden Coast RO 750 40,000 350
Taba
Maleh Company RO 4000 35,000 400
Helnan RO 240 44,000 400
Nuweiba
Hilton RO 300 44,000 400
Pyramiza RO 2000 44,000 400
Sharm El-
Sheikh
Ramo RO 1000 44,000 400

Metito RO 500 44,000 400
Raga RO 2000 44,000 400
15
Southern Water
Co. RO 7000 44,000 400
Montazah RO 2500 44,000 500
Residence RO 500 44,000 600
Euro Palace RO 500 44,000 400
Meridien RO 500 44,000 400
Aqua Marina RO 2000 44,000 400
Moevenpick RO 1000 44,000 400
Marriott RO 500 44,000 350
Sheiha Zayed RO 2500 44,000 400
Bacha Coast RO 500 44,000 400
Dahab
Ghazala RO 500 44,000 400

Helnan RO 800 44,000 400
Pullman RO 500 44,000 400
2.3. Desalination and Future Development in Egypt

With the increasing population and limited renewable water resources, the
government of Egypt has to develop a solution to overcome the scarcity of
water supply and the desalination is one of the promising solutions. However,
the current practice in Egypt indicates that industrial and tourist sectors
undertook the lead in the desalination in Egypt, resulting that few installations
were operated by public water agencies. The government policy will be
directed to develop remote area where natural resources are present and the
desalination of brackish water may be used as the only source of providing the
basic needs for living, mainly water.
Therefore, desalination is being studied and resulted in ranking the most

prominent remote areas to be selected for research and development according
to priorities based upon water scarcity. A summary of the most prominent
remote areas as reported by El-Sadek, 2010, is as follows.
1. Along the Red Sea coast where tourist potential is present with a
brackish water supply of 1000 ppm;
2. Along the northwest coast where new communities and tourist potential
as well with as a brackish to saline water of salinity ranging between
1000 and 10,000 ppm;
16
3. Sinai coastal zone and wadis where there are nourishing tourism,
agricultural, industrial and new communities are built with a brackish
water of 1000 ppm;
4. The northern desert along the delta fringes (Nubaria and vicinity) as the
over-exploiting of some wells caused salinization of groundwater
As abovementioned, the desalination of brackish water is very promising

water resources in these remote areas. An initiative for using such resources
was implemented in Central Sinai by USAID/Egypt and the North Sinai
governorate, under the LIFE Sinai program. The initiative was aimed at
constructing three desalination RO units in Central Sinai to assist Bedouin
communities in the sub-governorate areas of El-Hasna and Nekhl in developing
and improving their livelihoods by supporting them with their required share of
potable water. The three plants located in Al-Meswateyya, Al-Monbateh and
Bir Beda. The construction of the three plants was finished on September 2011
with a total production of 600 m3 of potable water per day (200m3/day/plant)
benefiting 6000 inhabitants of Central Sinai. Currently, only the Al-Monbateh
desalination plant is running whereas the other two plants are expected to start
operating with full capacity by the end of 2012.
In the following section a review of the available brackish water in Egypt

and its desalination requirements are presented
2.4. Overview of Brackish Water In Egypt

2.4.1. Brackish Water Versus Saline Water
Saline water is defined as the water that contains a significant amount of

total dissolved solids (TDS) and usually expressed in parts per million (ppm) or
milligram per litter (mg/l). The concentration level of the salts classifies saline
water into three main categories. Freshwater mainly covers water with a TDS
up to 1000 mg/l, while brackish water from 1000 to 10,000 and seawater above
35,000 mg/l. Sometimes there exits special cases of brackish water that might
contain 10,000 to 35,000 mg/l TDS and in this case it can be referred as
17
difficult brackish water (Buros, 1980). It is worth mentioning that,
sometimes, saline water contains small amounts of organic matter and
dissolved gasses, however, the majority of dissolved materials are inorganic
salts.
Table 2.5 shows the typical salinity limits of waters, some guide limits for
livestock to salinity in drinking water, and ranges of salinity in some of the
popular seas (modified after Salinity Management Handbook, Second Edition).
Table 2.5. The Typical Salinity Limits of Waters

TDS (ppm)
Distilled Water 0.67
Freshwater 0-1000
Brackish Water 1000-10000
Tolerance of livestock to Beef Cattle 4000-5000
salinity in drinking water (at Dairy cattle 2500-4000
these values, animals may Sheep 5000-10000
have an initial reluctance to Horses 4000-6000
drink, but stock should adapt Pigs 4000-6000
without loss of production) Poultry 2000-3000
Salt water swimming pool 4000-6000
Sea Water 10000-35000
Dead Sea 73700
Mediterranean Sea 38000
Red Sea 40000
Brackish water has a salinity between freshwater and seawater. The typical
salinity of brackish water is between 1000 mg/l to 10,000 mg/l of total
dissolved solids (Buros, 1980). If an appropriate desalination scheme is
adopted, brackish water can present an economic and reliable fresh water
supply for many remote areas lacking conventional water supplies.
2.4.2. Sources of Brackish Water
A brackish aquifer is a main brackish water source. It is a geologic deposit

of water-bearing permeable rock or unconsolidated materials from which
brackish groundwater can be usefully extracted using a well. The processes that
generate brackish groundwater depend on the site-specific hydrogeology and
geochemistry. In some cases, high levels of dissolved solids are derived from
18
the presence of connate water (i.e., seawater trapped at the time of original
deposition), but in most inland brackish water systems these original solutes
have long since been flushed away.
Coastal aquifers form another class of natural brackish water created from
mixing of groundwater that is discharging to the ocean. Under natural
conditions most groundwater in coastal areas discharges directly to the ocean.
Brackish water from irrigation return flows can also be utilized as

desalination source water, although the quantity and quality typically vary by
season and region.
2.4.3. Pretreatment of Brackish Water Prior to Desalination
Unlike seawater desalination, the treatments of brackish water require

minimal pretreatment to remove particulates. This may attributed to the fact
that brackish water typically contains very low concentrations of suspended
solids and organic matter. However, in case of using RO desalination
technology, brackish groundwater may require pretreatment to remove
constituents such as manganese, sulfides and dissolved iron which, if oxidized,
can cause fouling of the RO membranes.
2.4.4. Desalination of Brackish Groundwater in Egypt
Brackish groundwater desalination in Egypt has a great potential with

respect to the availability of the resource. All major aquifer systems in Egypt
contain considerable volumes of brackish groundwater (Allam et al., 2002).
Figure 2.6 shows the distribution of the main aquifer systems in Egypt (Attia).
And Table 2.6 shows location, area, salinity and the exploitable volumes of the
main brackish aquifers (Allam et al., 2002).
19
Figure 2.6. Distribution of the main aquifer systems in Egypt (Attia)
Table 2.6. Exploitable Volumes of Brackish Groundwater (Allam et al., 2002)

Aquifer Location Area Salinity Exploitable
(km2) (mg/l TDS) volume
(billion m3)
Coastal aquifers Coastal dunes 20,000 >2,000 <2
Fluviatil of wadis
Calcarenites
Shallow marine sands
Nile Aquifers Fringes >1,500 4
North coast
El Moghra aquifer West of Nile Delta 10,000 >3,000
Nubian Sandstone Eastern Desert 100,000 1,500-3,500 >100
Sinai
Fissured carbonate Western Desert 500,000 5
aquifer Eastern Desert
Sinai is rich in brackish groundwater through deep seated aquifers. The

thickness of the aquifers varies between 30 to 500 m with a salinity varying
from 2,000 ppm up to 9,000 ppm. The current total deep groundwater
20
extraction from the different aquifer systems in Sinai Peninsula is 3.199 million
m3/year where 1.89 million m3/year is used in agriculture and the rest is used
for domestic and industrial uses. The investigations in south Sinai have
identified several shallow and deep reservoirs but of limited potential for
development (Allam et al., 2002). Table 2.7 shows the brackish water resources
in Sinai and the numbers of wells constructed as well as the range of salinity of
the obtained water. Table 2.8 gives details about the desalination units in Sinai.
Table 2.7. Brackish Water Resources in Sinai (Abou Rayan et al., 2001)
City Number of Approximate Capacity, Salinity
wells depth (m) (m3/d) (mg/l)
El-Arish 50 40-60 52,000 3000-5500
El-Hasana 12 12-1000 6,250 1800-5000
Nakhl 7 17-1200 3,600 1800-3000
El-Quseima Spring - 1,440 1200
Sheikh Zuwayid 25 30-38 5,000 1200-4000
Rafah 35 35-90 10,000 2700-3000
Table 2.8. Desalinated Brackish Water (modified after Abou Rayan et al., 2001)
City No. of Capacity Process
3
units (m /d)
El-Arish 7 2800 ED
El-Hasna 1 300 ED
Nakhl 2 200 RO
El-Kuntilla 1 150 RO
Abu Aweigila 1 100 RO
El-Monbateh 1 200 RO
El-Meswateyya 1 200 RO
Bir-Beda 1 200 RO
2.4.5. Energy Consumption of Brackish Water Desalination (BWD) and

Typical Recovery Rates
The energy consumption is a major concern that must be taken into
consideration when planning and designing of a brackish water desalination
plant. Table 2.9 shows an estimated range of energy consumption for different
desalination technologies. On the other side, system recovery should be
optimized to balance productivity, energy consumption, membrane life, fouling
and cost. Table 2.10 gives the typical values of recovery rates for different
brackish water desalination schemes.
21
Table 2.9. Typical Electicity Consumption for BWD Schemes (Talaat et al., 2002)
Desalination technology Energy consumption
KWh/m3
RO
Low salinity (<1000 mg/l) 0.5-0.6
Medium salinity (1000-3000mg/l) 1.0-1.5
High salinity (3000-5000mg/l) 2.2-2.5
EDR
Low salinity BW 0.4-0.6
Medium salinity BW 0.8-2
High salinity BW 2.2-3.3
IE 0.3-0.4
VC 10.0-12.0
Table 2.10. Typical Recovery Values for BWD Schemes (Talaat et al., 2002)
Desalination technology Recovery rate
%
RO
Low salinity (<1000 mg/l) 80-90
Medium salinity (1000-3000mg/l) 65-75
High salinity (3000-5000mg/l) 50-60
EDR
Low salinity BW 80-90
Medium salinity BW 65-75
High salinity BW 50-60
IE 90-95
VC 30-40
2.4.6. Problems Associated with Brackish Water Desalination
Technological problems should be considered as well when planning for

large-scale brackish water desalination in order to maximize the production of
product water and ensure the sustainability of the production. Table 2.11
suggests the common problems encountered in brackish water desalination
(Talaat et al., 2002).
22
Table 2.11. Common Problems Encountered in Brackish Water Desalination
(Talaat et al., 2002)
Technology Major problems encountered
Reverse Membrane fouling due to improper pretreatment. Fouling materials:
osmosis (RO) organics, iron, manganese, heavy metals, hardness causing salts.
Membrane deterioration by chemical attack (due to improper
pretreatment e.g. attack by chlorine, hydrogen sulphide).
Membrane compaction (improper operation due to frequent
pressurization - depressurization of membrane).
Membrane clogging (improper pretreatment due to hardness causing
salts).
Flux decline with time (loss of productivity).
Produced water quality decline with time (along membrane life-
time).
High pressure pumps failure (improper operation & maintenance).
Electrodailysis Membrane fouling
reversal (EDR) Electrode corrosion
Membrane deterioration due to improper operation
Produced water quality decline (improper operation and membrane
deterioration along membrane life-time)
Clogging by hardness causing salts (improper pretreatment)
Ion-exchange Resin fouling (improper pretreatment by foulants e.g. iron &
(IE) manganese and heavy metals).
Resin deterioration by chemical attacks (e.g. chlorine, hydrogen
sulphide, oxidizing agents).
Loss of resin activity (along resin life-time & hence decline of resin
capacity).
Vapor Clogging by scales (improper pretreatment, insufficient cleaning).
compression Loss of productivity due to fouling of heat transfer surfaces (mainly
(VC) due to scale deposition)
Corrosion problems (improper materials selection/improper
pretreatment)
Failure of mechanical parts (e.g. blower in mechanical vapour
compression systems due to improper maintenance).
2.5. Review of Desalination Technologies

2.5.1. Elements for Desalination Process
Desalination technologies and their applications have evolved greatly

during the past 50 years. There are 5 main key elements for the desalination
process for either seawater or brackish desalination, which can be described as
follows: (Figure 2.7)
Intakes: which are the structures that are used to extract water from the
source whether brackish water or seawater and convey it to the process
system;
Pretreatment: the process of removing suspended solids and control
biological growth, for the preparation of water for further processing;
23
Desalination: the process of removing dissolved solids, mainly salts and
other inorganic constituents from water;
Post-treatment: adding chemicals to the product water to prevent any
downstream piping corrosion; and
Reject brine management and disposal: the handling of the concentrate
or reuse of waste residuals from the desalination system.
Figure 2.7 Key Elements of a Desalination System (shown in figure:

membrane-based system) modified after (Buros et al. 1980).
2.5.2. Types of Desalination Plants

Desalination plants can be categorized into two main types. The first type
involves a phase-change during the process of separation of salts from water;
while the second type of desalination plants do not involve phase change. In
such plants extraction of salts takes place while the solution remains in liquid
phase. The first type is known as thermal desalination or thermal distillation
and the second is known as membrane desalination.
Ion exchange is also another desalination technology which is mainly used

for water softening and demineralization. It is known as chemical approach
technology and usually used as a polishing step following another desalting
process of the two mentioned earlier. Therefore, ion exchange is considered
impractical for desalination of water with high level of dissolved solids.
24
Figure 2.8 shows the global evolution of the two main desalination
technologies (i.e. membrane and thermal technologies) over the past six
decades. A detailed review of the two technologies is presented in the
following sections
Figure 2.8. Cumulative global capacity of installed desalination plants for

thermal and membrane technology. Thermal technology includes MED, MSF
and MVC. Membrane technology includes RO, ED and EDR. Points reflect
current online (or presumed online) capacity of both technologies. (GWI,
2006b)
2.5.3. Membrane Desalination Processes

Membrane technologies can be used not only for desalting brackish water
and seawater sources but also for treating wastewater in reuse and recycling
applications, because of their ability to provide removal of non-salinity
contaminants (e.g., organic contaminants, bacteria, and viruses). Membrane
processes use either pressure-driven or electrical-driven technologies. Pressure-
driven membrane technologies include Reverse Osmosis (RO) whereas
Electrodialysis (ED) and Electrodialysis Reversal (EDR) are electrical-driven
technologies. In recent years, more new membrane desalination capacity is
added annually than distillation capacity as shown in Figure 2.8. Until 2006,
25
membrane desalination accounted for 56 percent of the online capacity for
desalination worldwide.
2.5.3.a. Reverse Osmosis (RO)
Reverse Osmosis (RO) is a physical process that uses the osmosis

phenomenon, i.e., the osmotic pressure difference between the saltwater and
the pure water to remove salts from water. It is the most commonly used
method of membrane desalination. In this process, a pressure greater than the
osmotic pressure is applied on saltwater (feedwater) to reverse the flow, which
results in pure water (freshwater) passing through the synthetic membrane
pores separated from the salt and a concentrated salt solution is retained for
disposal. Figure 2.9 shows a typical schematic diagram for the reverse osmosis
process.
Figure 2.9. The mechanism of the osmosis and the reverse osmosis (RO)
processes
26
2.5.3.b. Electrodialysis (ED) and Electrodialysis Reversal (EDR)
Electrodialysis (ED) processes use ion-selective membranes and an
electrical potential driving force to separate ionic species from water. Ionic
species are driven through cation- and anion-specific membranes in response to
the electrical potential gradient while the ion-depleted water passes between the
membranes. The EDR process is similar to the ED process, except that it also
uses periodic reversal of polarity to effectively reduce and minimize scaling
and fouling, thus allowing the system to operate at comparatively higher
recoveries. By reversing the electrical current and exchanging the fresh
(product) water and the concentrate (brine) streams within the membrane stack
several times per hour, fouling and scaling constituents that build up on the ED
membranes in one cycle are washed out in the next cycle. EDR has a higher
recovery rate (up to 94%) because of the feedwater circulation within the
system and alternating polarity (Younos and Tulou, 2005).
Figure 2.10. Typical arrangement of an electrodialysis membranes
2.5.3.c. Recovery Rates of Membrane Desalination Processes
Typically, 35 to 60 percent of the seawater fed into a membrane process is

recovered as product water. For brackish water desalination, water recovery
can range from 50 to 90 percent, depending on initial salinity and the presence
of sparingly soluble salts and silica, although recovery is typically between 60
and 85 percent (Sethi et al., 2006a).
27
2.5.4. Thermal Desalination Processes
The basic concept of the thermal desalination is to heat the saline solution until
water vapor is generated. As the vapor is allowed to condense on cool surface
and liquid water containing very little of the original salt is produced. The three
major thermal processes are Multi-stage Flash (MSF) distillation, Multiple
Effect Distillation (MED), and Vapor Compression (VC).
2.5.4.a. Multi-stage Flash (MSF) distillation
MSF uses a series of chambers, or stages, each with successively lower

temperature and pressure, to rapidly vaporize (flash) water from the bulk
liquid. The vapor is then condensed by tubes of the inflowing feedwater,
thereby recovering energy from the heat of condensation. MSF units are widely
used in Middle East and they account for over 40% of the world's desalination
capacity (El-Sadek, 2010) It is worth noting that one of the largest thermal
MSF plants in Egypt is located on the northern coast in Marsa Matrouh with a
capacity of 2,000m3/d (Khalil, 2004)
Over the past 50 years, the per unit cost of desalination using multi-stage
flash (MSF), the desalination technology that has been used for centuries and
economically suitable for capacities of more than 3,000m3/d/unit (Khalil, 2004)
and has decreased by an average of 44 percent per decade (El-Sadek, 2010).
2.5.4.b. Multiple Effect Distillation (MED)
MED is a thin-film evaporation approach, where the vapor produced by

one chamber subsequently condenses in the next chamber, which exists at a
lower temperature and pressure, providing additional heat for vaporization.
2.5.4.c. Vapor Compression (VC)
VC is an evaporative process where vapor from the evaporator is

compressed and its heat used for subsequent evaporation of feedwater in the
28
same tank of water that produced it thus allows heat recycling in a single-effect
distillation process.
In Thermal Vapour Compression, the compressor is driven by steam, and

such systems are popular for medium-scale desalination because they are
simple, in comparison to MSF.
In Mechanical Vapour Compression, the compressor is driven by a diesel

engine or electric motor.
2.5.5. Ion Exchange Desalination Processes
The ion-exchange system can be described as the interchange of ions

between a solid phase and a liquid phase surrounding the solid. Chemical resins
(solid phase) are designed to exchange their ions with feedwater (liquid phase)
ions, which purify the water. Resins can be made using naturally-occurring
inorganic materials (such as zeolites) or synthetic materials (Younos and
Tulou, 2005). Ion exchange is mainly used for water softening and
demineralization, and applications of ion exchange at the municipal level are
limited. Compared to other desalination technologies, this process makes
economic sense only where there is a small amount of salt to be removed from
the water. Thus, the main application of ion exchange is the production of
ultrapure water as the removal of 1 pound of salt takes about 1.5 pounds of acid
and 1.5 pounds of base to regenerate the exchangers (Xu, 2005)
2.5.6. Hybrid Desalination Processes
Hybrid desalination configurations include combinations of processes

designed to improve process efficiency or reduce energy costs. Hybrid thermal-
membrane facilities incorporate both thermal and membrane desalting
processes that are typically co-located with a power plant to improve overall
process economics.
29
Hybrid desalination facilities may also integrate multiple processes in
series to increase the separation or concentration capabilities of the facility.
These series hybrids are typically smaller in capacity.
Figure 2.11 gives a range of saline water concentration and the appropriate
desalination method to be used.
Figure 2.11. Range of applicability of different desalination technologies in

terms of salt concentration in water (www.lenntech.com accessed: March,
2012)
2.5.7. Energy Consumption of Different Desalination Technologies
Energy consumption in membrane process (i.e. RO and ED) for brackish
and low salinity water is much lower than in thermal distillation processes.
Recent innovations in RO have reduced the energy consumption further.
However, without detailed information on site conditions and the specific
application, one cannot make a clear general statement that a specific
desalination technology whether membrane or thermal is better than the other.
In general, thermal systems are robust and have high tolerance for variable
feedwater quality, while membrane systems have lower capital and energy
costs but are sensitive to fouling (Kennedy M. D. et al.). Figure 2.12 shows a
comparison of energy consumption for brackish water desalination using RO or
EDR.
30
Figure 2.12 Comparison of Energy Consumption by Process for the
Desalination of Brackish Feedwater across a Range of TDS Concentration
(USBR, 2003).
2.5.8. Renewable Energy for Desalination

The integration of renewable energy and desalination systems holds great
promise for increasing water supplies in water scarce regions. Renewable
energies can power desalination plants through solar or wind energy (Tzen,
2005). Figure 2.13 shows the distribution of renewable energy sources
desalination units.
Figure 2.13. Distribution of renewable-powered desalination technologies

(Tzen, 2005)
An effective integration of these technologies is the combination of

photovoltaics with reverse osmosis (PV-RO). As evidenced in Figure 2.13.
31
photovoltaic-powered RO units make up approximately 32% of total renewable
energy sources desalination facilities. PV is highly reliable and is often chosen
because it offers the lowest life-cycle cost, especially for applications requiring
less than 10 kW (Thomson, 2003).
RO desalination has several advantages in using solar energy (i.e. PV-RO) over
solar MSF desalination (El-Kady and EL-Shibini, 2001):
1. The RO process requires one source of energy (electricity) while MSF

needs two sources of energy electricity for pumping system and
thermal.
2. RO is a one-phase desalination process, while the MSF process has two
phases.
3. RO requires less energy than MSF.
4. An RO plant is made up of modules, which is easy to install, maintain,
operate, and requires little space.
5. The PV cells can be installed on the roof of the RO building, i.e., no
additional area is required for PV panels.
6. PV cells are modular, easy to install, with low maintenance costs.
7. PV cells operate well in arid areas, produce direct current to drive DC
motors, and are independent of the main electricity power supply.
The disadvantages of the PVRO system are replacement of the RO

membrane every 3 years and replacement of batteries in the PV storage system
every 7 years of operation (El-Kady and EL-Shibini, 2001). Battery lifetime in
PV systems in central Europe is typically 3 to 8 years, but in hot countries, this
reduces to typically 2 to 6 years, since high ambient temperature dramatically
increases the rate of internal corrosion (Thomson, 2003). However, Thomson
(2003) presented the design and testing of the batteryless approach of PV-RO
desalination plants and provided estimates of performance and capital costs of
such systems.
32
Assimacopoulos et al. (2001) and, in broad agreement with the
comprehensive studies, states:
PV-RO (Photovoltaic powered-Reverse Osmosis) is clearly the favoured

desalination combination for small stand-alone systems.
2.6. Reject Brine Disposal Methods
Development of desalination has brought to concern the suitable

environmental disposal method of the byproduct of the desalting process. The
disposal of the reject brine is dependable on the location of the desalination
plant, whether the desalination plant is near to the coastal shores or established
in an inland area remote from the coastal areas. Regardless of the desalination
technology used, saline water is separated into two streams after the
desalination process: a freshwater stream with a low salt concentration and
brine or concentrate stream with a high salt concentration that needs to be
disposed.
Desalination plants near the coastal shores usually dispose the concentrate
in the seas or oceans. Accordingly, the effect of the ocean disposal is negligible
because of the minute volume of concentrate compared to the receiving water
bodies. However, the promulgation of more and more stringent environmental
protection regulations will increasingly reduce this opportunity. The negative
influences of the discharged brine may not only damage the environment or
reduce public acceptance, but can also result in financial penalties if toxicity
standards are not met. Macedonio et al. (2011) stated some possible measures
to mitigate the environmental impacts on ocean outfalls:
Lower recovery rates and/or dilution of the brine with seawater prior to
the discharge to reduce its salinity;
Discharge devices, such as multiple port diffusers, spreading the brine
across a larger area and increasing dispersion velocity;
Discharge devices, such as multiple port diffusers, spreading the brine
across a larger area and increasing dispersion velocity;
33
Dilution of the brine with water from other processes, e.g. with cooling
water from power;
Discharge in an area with strong currents and at depths that minimize
impact on benthic life forms.
In cases where the desalination units are installed away from coastal zones
(i.e., inland desalination plants), the design has to take in consideration a safe
option for disposal without harming the environment. Nowadays, the scope is
not only considering the safe disposal of the concentrate but also taking into
account the environmental sustainability of the disposal option and achieving
an economical benefit of the concentrate.
The cost plays an important role in selecting the method of brine disposal.
It could range from 5 to 33 % of the total cost of the desalination plant. The
cost of land disposal is much higher if compared to that discharging brine into
shores (Khordagui, 1997).
There are many options that were identified for the disposal of inland
desalination plants starting with pumping into designed lined evaporation
ponds; disposal into surface water bodies; disposal into any existing municipal
sewerage system; concentration into solid salts; irrigation of plants tolerant to
high salinity levels; and injecting the brine back into deep saline aquifers
(Khordagui, 1997).
The factors that influence the choice of the suitable disposal method were
identified. These factors include the amount of the concentrate (reject brine);
the quality or constituents of concentrate; the geographical and physical
location of the discharge point of the concentrate; the availability of the site,
public acceptance; option permissibility as well as capital and operating cost of
the disposal method (Mickley et al., 1993).
It is worth noting that the chemical characteristics of the reject brine are
function of the feed water quality, desalination technology used, the chemicals
used for pre- and post treatment, and percent recovery (Mickley, 1995).
34
Usually in RO plants, filters need to be backwashed every few days to
clear the accumulation of solids. This filter backwash is not permitted to be
directly discharged to the environment, because it can cause both considerable
discoloration in the water at the discharge site and contamination. However, the
practice may occur in other locations. In addition, anti-scaling substances,
antifoaming additives, oxygen scavengers, and anticorrosion chemicals may be
present in the discharge of the concentrate (Rachid and Abdelwahab, 2005).
2.6.1. Evaporation Ponds
The use of evaporation ponds is considered one of the most widely used
disposal methods. Evaporation ponds comprise the largest portion of disposal
method in countries known for their arid or semi-arid climate conditions. Of
the attractions to use evaporation ponds, presence of high evaporation rates,
ease of construction, low land cost, low maintenance requirements, and the
absence of mechanical equipments except for the pump that conveys the
concentrate to the pond (Mickley et al., 1993).
However, a survey of drinking water desalination plants (membrane plants

of capacity 98 m3/d or more) in the continental US that included 137 plants
showed that 48% of the brine is disposed to surface water, 23% dispose to the
head-works of wastewater treatment plants, 12% utilize a land application
process, 10% dispose through deep well injection, and only 6% use evaporation
ponds (Mickley et al., 1993).
Mickley et al. (1993) also stated that in parallel to the advantages and
attractions to the use of evaporation ponds, there are a lot of disadvantages that
sometimes cause barriers to the utilization of evaporation ponds. For example,
the need of large areas in case of high disposal rate and/or low evaporation
rates, the need of impervious liners of clay or synthetic membrane such as PVS
or Hypalon to avoid any potential of contaminating underlying potable water
aquifers through seepage, and the requirement of level terrain and low land
costs
35
The proper sizing of evaporation pond depends on accurate estimation of
evaporation rate. Pond sizing include two outputs: the surface area of the pond
and the depth. Surface area is determined by the evaporation rate while the
calculation of the depth is based on water storage, storage capacity for salts,
surge capacity, and freeboard for rainfall and wave action (Mickley et al.,
1993).
The pond must be large enough to satisfy needs of the land area being
drained, the volume of subsurface drain water collected, and the rate of
evaporation for the served region. Ponds must have a minimum embankment
top-width of five meters; freeboard of 0.5 m or equal to maximum wave run-
up; an inside slope of 6:1 (h:v) and outside slope of 2:1(h:v); and a foundation
stripped of all vegetation. Internal dikes may be constructed to create cells
within the pond and to allow transfer from cell to cell and disposition of salts in
a progressive evaporation sequence (Tanji et al., 1985).
As the salinity of water affects the evaporation rate, it has been suggested
the use of an evaporation factor of 0.7 for multiplying by the calculated solar
evaporation rate to account for the effect of salinity (Mickley et al., 1993).
The availability of water, salt, solar radiation and flat land open the doors
for the use of solar ponds as an attractive source of renewable energy (Burston
and Akbarzadeh, 1995). The effectiveness for generating electricity for solar
ponds requires: all-year solar exposure, large volumes of brine, as well as an
adequate source of fresher water, low cost flat land of low permeability,
distant from shallow aquifers, relatively low winds, and a consistent electricity
demand (Ahmed et al. 2000). The deserts of Egypt are suitable for using solar
ponds as most of the locations meet the requirements for an effective utilization
of solar ponds.
When designing evaporation ponds it is preferred to use small ponds

connected by pipelines than to design large ponds. Smaller ponds are easy to
manage especially in windy weathers where the generated waves can damage
36
the banks of pond requiring costly maintenance (Ahmed et al., 2000). Also, the
use of smaller ponds allow ease of operation during periods where there is a
decrease in disposal rate, and thus less operators attention is required for the
smaller pond than a large pond.
2.6.1.a. Enhancements of Evaporation Ponds
Evaporation ponds are also taken as a great opportunity to develop

resource recovery measures such as aquaculture, brine shrimp, beta-carotene
production, harvesting of salts, and as a solar ponds for electricity generation
(Ahmed et al., 2000). The use of evaporation bonds as solar ponds will allow
the integrity of the system as using the generated electricity as a supplementary
source of power, thus relieving the pressure on the current distressed power
sources.
To overcome the drawback of the low evaporation rates and increase the
efficiency of evaporation, wet surfaces (capillaries or clothes) exposed to wind
actions can be used where surface density can be high enough to generate a
reasonable evaporation flow. Thus, the surface would be wetted by capillarity
effect and the water evaporates leaving solids of the brine crystallize on the
surfaces. The final solid waste could then be properly managed by an
authorized company or even could be reused (Arnal et al., 2005)
Wind-Aided Intensied eVaporation (WAIV) is an enhanced evaporation

technology particularly used for reverse osmosis (RO) concentrate to increase
natural evaporation. The technology exploits wind energy to evaporate wetted
surfaces which are packed in high density per footprint. These surfaces are
deployed in arrays with large lateral dimensions and significant heights of
about three or four meters (Gilron et al., 2003). Wetting of the surface is
occurred by a pump that brings the rejected brine from a pond or from a storage
tank to a distribution network on top of the vertical surfaces from which the
vertical surfaces are fed by gravity. The driving power of wind drives away
excess humidity from the vertical installed surfaces raising the magnitude of
37
evaporation of a factor of 15-20 times compared to the conventional
evaporation ponds, then excess brine is allowed to return to pond by gravity
through an impervious surfaces (concrete) sloping back to the pond.
There are many advantages for the WAIV technology including

minimizing the land use of evaporation ponds, increasing the efficiency of
evaporation, simple and yet reliable, ideal for inland desalination plants,
reduction of up to 50% in treatment costs of RO rejected waste and it can be
used in minerals harvesting where product is commercially valuable (Lesico
CleanTech).
Mahmoud (2011) introduced the concept of a two-cell evaporation pond

tends to store water in the buffering cell in order to use it in maintaining
minimum water level instead of using supplementary fresh water to feed the
pond. The pond is divided into a buffering cell and an evaporation cell. The
concept was adopted in order to avoid that tight corner of choosing between the
pond area large enough to avoid overtopping and not too large to avoid draught
during hot summers.
He wrote a computer model in BASIC language to simulate the pond

performance. The model calculates the pond water depth, salinity and
efficiency. The output is introduced in both forms of tabulated data and
graphics. The model is run with real data of the closed basin of Toshka
Project in Egypt as a case study. Sensitivity analysis shows that the pond
efficiency is very sensitive to its size and less sensitive to drainage water
salinity, while pond depth has very small effect. The results indicate that there
is significant effect of the salinity increase due to salt accumulation on
evaporation rates and pond size. The pond size is selected with the maximum
efficiency resulting from one hundred year routing. Different scenarios show
that the use of the proposed design of a two-cell pond tends to increase the
overall efficiency from 68-80% for one-cell pond to 97-100% for two-cell
pond.
38
2.6.2. Disposal in Municipal Sewerage Systems
The disposal of brine in municipal sewerage systems is used in many small

RO plants. This process has the advantage of lowering the BOD of the
domestic sewage. Nonetheless, TDS increases and may have some effects on
the microorganisms of the system and may make the treated effluent unsuitable
for irrigation purposes. In addition, the design capacity of the existing sewerage
system may not be able to accommodate the increase in discharge (Ahmed et
al., 2000).
2.6.3. Salt Production
The approach to extract all the salts from the reject brine has been taken
seriously for the advantages of being environmentally friendly and producing
commercial products. Studies have yielded the SAL-PROC technology
introduced by Geo-Processors Pty Limited. SAL-PROC is an integrated
process for sequential extraction of dissolved elements from inorganic saline
waters in the form of valuable chemical products in crystalline, slurry and
liquid forms. The mechanism of the process involves multiple evaporation
and/or cooling, supplemented by mineral and chemical processing adding to
this that no hazardous chemical is used in the process. The technology is based
on simple closed processing and fluids flow circuits which enables utilization
of inorganic saline waters to extract a group of valuable chemicals (Ahmed et
al., 2002).
39
Figure 2.14. A Typical SAL-PROC process
There is a wide range of different product streams that can be produced

from SAL-PROC depending on the chemical composition of the saline waters.
As shown in Figure 2.14, sodium chloride salt is only one of a range of the
chemical products of commercial value which can be processed from using the
technology. The recovered chemical products are of high quality and in
demand by different industries (Ahmed et al., 2002). However, economic
success depends not only on the technology to bring about selective salt
recovery but also on the local salt market and the challenges associated with
marketing each salt (Mickley, 2010).
Application areas for the SAL-PROC products are identified by the market
as follows (Ahmed et al., 2002):
Feedstock, fillers, reagents, coating material and supplements for:

o Animal dietary needs
o Fire retardants
o Manufacture of magnesium metal
o Manufacture of light-weighted and fire-proof plaster boards and
other building products
o Manufacture of salt-tolerant building footing, wall panels and
other construction products
o Application in tanneries
o Production of quality paper products
o Manufacture of plastics, paint, ink, and sealant products
o Soil conditioners for remediation of sodic and acidic soils
o Sealants for irrigation channels and earthen ponds
40
o Stabilizers for road base construction
o Dust suppressant
o Flocculating agents for water/wastewater treatment
Ahmed et al. (2002) performed a desktop pre-feasibility study on reject

brine from Petroleum Development Oman (PDO) desalination plants indicated
that various types of salts including gypsum, sodium chloride, magnesium
hydroxide, calcium carbonate, sodium sulphate and calcium chloride can be
produced. The study showed that by processing 405 ML of reject brine per year
from the PDO desalination plants, it is possible to produce commercial salts
worth US $895,000 annually.
Depending on the chemical composition of the saline feed water the

process route may involve one or more steps of reaction and evaporation and/or
cooling supplemented by conventional mineral and chemical processing steps.
From the studies on the PDO-RO desalination plants, there were three proposed
process routes for the treatment of the rejected brine. Figure 2.15 schematically
shows a comprehensive overview for the three process routes (Ahmed et al.,
2002).
The use of waste effluent as a resource is the main attractiveness of the

SAL-PROC technology as well as the low-value chemicals as the reagents for
the recovery of saleable chemical products which offer higher return from their
sale, surpassing the cost of the operation. Mostly the treatment facility is of low
electricity, where the main usage of electricity would be for the operation of
pumps and agitators in the chemical reactors and fluid transfer circuits (Ahmed
et al., 2002)
41
Figure 2.15. Proposed Process Routes for the Treatment of Reject Brines Generated by PDO-Operated RO Desalination Plants
(Ahmed et al., 2002)
42
2.6.4. Deep Well Injection
Deep well injection is presently applied worldwide for disposal of

industrial, municipal and liquid hazardous wastes. In recent years this
technology has been given serious consideration as an option for brine disposal
from land based desalination plants. For example, for the United States, its
considered the third most used method for brine management comprising 17
percent of the disposal methods. It comes after disposal into surface water
which covers 41 percent and disposal into sewers with 31 percent (Mickley,
2006). Of the extremely important aspects in the design of injection wells, is
the site selection, which is dependent upon geological and hydrogeological
conditions. It is worth noting that injection wells should not be located in areas
vulnerable to earthquakes or regions with mineral resources (Ahmed et al.,
2000).
A typical waste injection well injects the waste liquids at depths ranging
from a few hundred to a few thousand feet. Low cost when compared to the
alternatives of landfilling and chemical treatment (often costing 80% less), and
relatively high success rate are among the reasons for the earlier growth of
deep-well injection as a waste disposal option (Lehr, 1986).
Deep-well injection is typically employed for larger desalination plants

(e.g., > 3,800 m3/day) because the costs for developing deep-injection wells
are relatively high and are not largely reduced for smaller flows. For example,
the typical capital cost of a 3,000-m-deep well is reported at $8.1 million for a
concentrate flow of 3,800 m3/day, which decreases to only about $5.1 million
for a concentrate flow of either 380 or 38 m3/day (Malmrose et al., 2004).
These costs exclude any pretreatment or standby disposal system. While capital
costs for well injection are about average of typical inland concentrate
management methods, the annual operating costs are relatively low as a
percentage of total operating costs (Mickley, 2006).
43
Stephen (1986) made some modifications to the existing techniques for
impact assessment calculations and presented several management tools that
can be useful in assessing the environmental impacts resulting from saltwater
disposal injection wells. He stated the most useful of these tools, which
include: (a) calculations of radius of endangering influence using Cooper-Jacob
method and Theis non-equilibrium equation; (b) potentiometric head contour
maps; (c) formation hydraulic transmitting properties; and (d) water quality.
Whereas his modifications included: (a) estimates of radius of endangering
influence that require observed initial hydrostatic heads and aquifer hydraulic
transmitting properties for the injection interval; and (b) the geochemical
characterization of nearby suspected ground water contamination using all
major ion concentrations in a trilinear diagram of water quality analysis,
instead of using only chloride as a brine tracer.
Once an aquifer is contaminated, these chloride-rich brines are not easily or

inexpensively removed. Stephen (1986)
Underground migration of injection fluids possible pathways have been
discussed by Canter, the Environmental Protection Agency, and Fryberger and
Tinlin. These include: (a) corroded or improperly plugged injection wells
where the intended receiving interval or adjacent saline aquifers are
hydraulically connected to freshwater geological horizons; (b) abandoned
exploration wells located within the radius of endangering influence created
from nearby active injection wells; (c) fracturing of geologic units resulting in
the hydraulic interconnection of the injection horizon, adjacent saline aquifers,
and/or freshwater aquifers; or (d) different combinations of the above.
Saripalli et al. (2000) gave a variety of processes that contribute to the

reduction in permeability of the host formation or the perforations or screens
that are placed in the wells injection interval. These processes include
particle/colloid migration into the formation, bacterial growth, emulsification
of fluids, and precipitation of dissolved matter, flow of unconsolidated sands
into well bores, scale formation and entrapment of gases.
44
He also introduced a measure of the effects of plugging and damage to
subterranean formations on injection well performance. It was expressed by
injectivity (I) which is defined as the ratio of injection rate (q) to the difference
between well flowing pressure (Pwf) and the average formation pressure (Pr)
given by the following equation.
q (2.1)
I
Pwf Pr
Several factors affect the injectivity, which include the physical and
chemical quality of the injected fluid, injection rate and pressure, as well as the
nature and physical properties of subterranean strata. Its worth noting that one
of the most important constraints on stable injectivity is the presence of
suspended solids in the injection fluid. High TSS, low injection rate, low
injection pressure, and low porosity and permeability of the well strata all lead
to rapid well plugging and diminished injectivity (Saripalli et al., 2000).
Saripalli et al. (2000) also introduced the half-life concept of an injection

well which is defined as the time required for its injectivity to decline to half its
initial value. This is a good indicator of the well performance.
Two relevant questions that engineers must answer while designing and
maintaining a deep-well injection facility are: (1) what is the water quality
(TSS) criterion to be imposed on the inuent waste streams to ensure a given
injector half-life, and, conversely (2) given a certain inuent waste stream
quality, what is the expected half-life of the injection well?
He stated that, as the plugging of an injection well occurs and the

formation gets worse, the need of larger injection pressures becomes crucial to
maintain a given flow rate, which can lead to well failure, causing the spread of
contamination and compromising safety. In addition, the build-up of high sub-
surface pressures can cause the fracturing of confining strata and create
pathways for the vertical migration of injected fluid.
45
The tubing-and-packer design considerations were introduced by Shekan
and Kwiatkowski (2000). The tubing and packer assembly is installed inside
the final cemented casing of the injection well. Other design considerations
include compatibility of the concentrate with the tubing material (corrosion
potential), anticipated permeate and concentrate flows, tubing diameter
selection in the retrofit of existing deep injection wells, and annular monitoring
systems for leak detection.
Shahatto (2003) investigated the effect of abstracting brackish water for

desalination and subsequent brine injection into the same coastal aquifer. A 2D
vertical model was built for a cross section perpendicular to the shore line. For
all simulations, the code ROCKFLOW has been used. The results of the
simulation scenarios showed that the injected brine sinks faster than it can be
transported horizontally by the groundwater flow and could form a salty lens at
the aquifer bottom around the injection well or above a low permeability layer.
Also, when the desalination plant is shutdown and in the absence of pumping
and injection, the formed salty plume around the injection well during the
operation of desalination plant is spread to the sea with time. The remediation
could happen by extracting of this brine followed by mixing with less saline
water (dilution) and re-injection in the aquifer or disposal into the sea at an
appropriate distance from the reef.
Williams and Feeney (2003) suggested a hypothetical system of discharge

and recharge wells. The main problem of case study was that disposing reject
brine to the Pacific Ocean was difficult to permit. The marine sanctuary
restricts any discharges into the ocean that may injure a sanctuary resource.
Because a change in seawater salinity may injure plants and animals in the
marine sanctuary, brine disposal is effectively prohibited. So, they took two
actions. First, the desalination plant is operating such that the brine is the same
chemistry as seawater. This was achieved by pumping a mixture of freshwater
from onshore and seawater from offshore as feedwater to the desalination unit.
Second, they designed a system with two production wells and a horizontal
46
brine injection well such that some of the brine is recirculated back into the two
production wells. This system was designed using SEAWAT (Gue and
Langevin, 2002).
Nassar (2007) developed a methodology in assessing the environmental

impacts of desalination plants discharging brine through injection into
underground. He used laboratory and computational methods to simulate the
phenomena of subsurface brine disposal by injection. He prepared a setup for a
seepage tank of dimensions 1.42m long, 0.1m wide, and 0.6m height with two
well configurations to represent to a 2D flow in the vertical plane
experimentally. SEAWAT was used for building the computational model. The
results were used for calibrating the computational model simulated.
Preliminary design charts for the management of the production and injections
well fields for the desalination plants were created in terms of four design
parameters, which are relative salt concentration (RSC); production and
injection rates (Qd, Qr), well spacing (S) and simulation period (T). Also the
study showed that on the long run, the injection well will affect the salinity of
the production well and it was shown through the developed design charts that
assess the time-varying effect for the different design scenarios.
Navarro and Carbonell (2007) have studied the contamination of

groundwater in a specific aquifer in Spain that was caused by the disposal of
some byproducts. These byproducts are resulting from the extraction of dry raw
materials in quarries. The migration of pollutant is resulting from the
fluctuation in the potentiometric head. The hydrogeochemical processes
associated with uncontrolled waste disposal in these landfill areas were studied
along a flow path that crosses the contaminated area. A transport model was
developed to study te reactions associated with the different mineral phases
through inverse modeling. This transport model was used also to simulate the
dilution phenomenon associated with the pollution after the potential removal
of the sources of contamination.
47
Ali (2009) studied the environmental impacts of the disposal of gas
production by-products waste water in deep aquifers. He studied the
sustainability of the proposed option of Mansoura Petroleum Company, a gas
and oil production company with a large concession area in the Nile Delta
around Mansoura city, of using a flooded gas production well for the disposal
of water resulting from the gas extraction process for a timeframe of fifty years.
He used groundwater flow modeling to obtain the flow pattern for the area and
developed a contaminant transport model to predict the extent of contamination
resulting from the disposal of produced water into El-Wastani formation. Ali
(2009) assumed a single injection well with a rate of 220m3/day for 50 years,
and he showed that the 10% relative contamination line will migrate vertically
upward into the main water bearing formation (Meet Ghamr) for a distance of
about 150m while the lateral extent is about 1800 m. He also introduced
multiple future scenarios for a conservative approach for the assessment; these
scenarios indicated negligible impacts on the top 300-400 m of groundwater
aquifer around the disposal well.
He also recommended that such disposal should be accompanied with a

system of monitoring wells that should be placed down gradient and regularly
monitored.
2.6.5. Aquaculture
Aquaculture is a growing industry. Moderately saline effluent can be used

to culture fish though rigorous monitoring is required. Species reported to grow
well in high salinity water in Australia are brine shrimp (Artemia salina),
Barramundi (Lates calcarifer), Black Bream (Acanthopagrux butcheri), Red
napper (Pagrus auratus), Milk Fish (Chanos chanos), Mullet (Mugil cephulux)
and Tilapia (Oreochromis mossambicus). Having brine shrimp production
downstream from finfish culture has advantages in that the brine shrimp utilize
nutrients generated from fish culture, while providing food for fish fry (Ahmed
et al.). It is worth noting that brine shrimp have the ability to live in water of
48
very high salinity levels and can tolerate varying levels of salinity from 5 g/L
up to 250 g/L (Daintith, 1996).
Evaporation basins can also provide a foundation for algae production.

Dunaliella salina grows and produces commercial grades of beta-carotene at
salinities greater than 200 g/L. Other species of salt tolerant algae (more
correctly, a blue green bacteria) may also have commercial application (Ahmed
et al. 2000).
49
50
CHAPTER THREE
ASSESSMENT OF EVAPORATION POND DISPOSAL

ALTERNATIVE
3.1. Introduction
As abovementioned, two main disposal alternatives will be evaluated. The

first alternative is the evaporation pond whereas; the second alternative is
injection in the deep aquifers. In this chapter, the evaporation pond alternaive is
assessed and evaluated.
In order to obtain a faire comparison between the two disposal alternatives,

an existing evaporation pond in Sinai has been selected as a case study. The
data of this evaporation pond were collected and analyzed to be used in the
evaluation of the evaporation pond alternative. The description of the existing
evaporation pond and the details of the evaluation of the pond disposal
alternative are presented below.
3.2. Case Study Description
Three desalination plants were constructed in Central Sinai under the

umbrella of the LIFE Sinai program. The three plants, located in Al-
Meswateya, Al-Monbateh and Bir Beda are now operating and they produce a
total of 600m3 of potable water per day (i.e. 200m3/plant/day) benefiting more
than 6,000 inhabitants of Central Sinai. The locations of the three desalination
plants are shown in Figure 3.1. The plants are named based on their location.
Al-Monbateh was taken as a case study for the simulation of desalination and
the disposal of the byproduct (reject brine) of the desalination process. Figure
3.2 shows a layout for Al-Monbateh desalination plant and the disposal area.
51
Figure 3.1. The Sinai Peninsula with the Location of the Case Study
Figure 3.2. Layout For The Project Area of Al-Monbateh Desalination Plant
52
The desalination plant receives water from Al-Monbateh deep well which
taps the Lower Cretaceous aquifer of Sinai. The plant runs on two identical
reverse osmosis (RO) units with a recovery rate of 70 percent (recovery rate is
described as the percentage of the permeate water produced to the feed water).
Each unit has a production capacity of 10m3/h of fresh water over an operation
period of 10 hours per day to produce a total production of 200 m3/day. Product
water is collected in a product tank with capacity of 200 m3 from where a
product pumps transfer the water to tankers. The produced water quality is
according to the WHO drinking water standards. The reject brine produced
undergoes a further treatment in order to reduce the final brine volume for final
disposal. Two reject RO modules are provided to receive and treat the by-
product of the two main RO units. The design parameters for the main and the
reject RO units are listed in Table 3.1 and Table 3.2
Table 3.1. The Design Parameters for Each of the Main RO Units
Description Unit
Operation period 10 Hours/day
Feed water design temperature 20-30 oC
Feed water quality ~2200 mg/L TDS
Reverse Osmosis recovery 70 %
Feed water flow 14.29 m3/h
Brine flow 4.29 m3/h
RO permeate flow 10 m3/h
Treated water quality 500 mg/L TDS
Table 3.2. The Design Parameters for Each of the Reject RO Units
Description Unit
Operation period 10 Hours/day
Feed water design temperature 20-30 oC
Feed water quality 11176 mg/L TDS
Reverse Osmosis recovery 70 %
Feed water flow 4.29 m3/h
Brine flow 1.29 m3/h
RO permeate flow 3 m3/h
Treated water quality ~173 mg/L TDS
53
The raw water from Al-Monbateh well is branched by pipes connection to a
300m3 raw water tank which collects and stores the water before feeding the
two reverse osmosis (RO) units. The raw water is chlorinated before storage in
the raw water tank as a pretreatment step. Two filter-feed pumps (one per each
RO module) take water from raw water tank and feed it to pretreatment system.
Suspended solids are removed by the manual multimedia filter. Each RO
module has one filter. This filter is operated manually with backwashing
required once per day. One backwash assistance pump is used for
backwashing. A de-chlorination dosing set for dosing sodium meta-bisulphate
is used to remove chlorine before RO membranes.
After filtration, the filtered water complies with the guidelines for feeding
RO membranes, mainly that there shall be no chlorine present, dissolved iron
shall be less than 0.01 mg/l, and the silt density index (SDI) is less than 3. In
addition, antiscalant chemicals are added to prevent scaling of calcium
sulphates where chemical mixing takes place in-line.
Chlorination and pH adjustments dosing sets are used as a post treatment

step for the permeate water produced from each RO unit. The treated product
water is collected in the product tank with a capacity of 200m3 from where a
product pumps transfer the water to tankers to be delivered to the nearby
habitants.
Each main RO module produces 4.29 m3/h of brine (total of 8.58m3/h) at

TDS concentration of about 11,176 mg/L. The reject brine from each main RO
module is collected in a buffer tank from which is treated by a second RO unit
called Reject RO unit. Each reject RO unit produces 3 m3/h of permeate water
at TDS of 173 mg/L and a concentrate with flow of 1.29m3/h at about 35,950
mg/L. The permeate water from both reject RO units (i.e. 6 m3/h) is mixed
with approximately 1 m3/h of the final reject from both reject RO units
resulting a final solution of 7 m3/h at concentration of less than 5,000 mg/L.
This final mixture is pumped to the elevated irrigation tank to be used for
irrigation purposes. The remaining final reject (i.e. 1.6m3/h at 35,950 mg/L) is
54
disposed as final brine and is managed by evaporation using evaporation ponds.
The disposal area is divided into two identical connected lined evaporation
ponds with bottom dimensions of 44.0 m length, 33.0 m wide and 1.25 m depth
and 2:1 horizontal to vertical side slopes.
Figure 3.3 shows a schematic diagram for the operation of the Al-Monbateh
desalination plant.
55
Figure 3.3. Schematic Operation Diagram for the Al-Monbateh Desalination Plant
56
The Al-Monbateh well penetrates two of the most potential aquifers in
Sinai: the Upper Cretaceous and the Lower Cretaceous aquifers. The Lower
Cretaceous, which is the producing aquifer for the Al-Monbateh well, is
considered to be the aquifer with the greatest development potential among the
other aquifer systems in Sinai. The two aquifers are saline aquifers, and
regardless of the spatial salinity variation in both aquifers the Lower
Cretaceous has less groundwater salinity than the Upper Cretaceous in most of
the aquifers extent. Figure 3.4 shows a schematic representation of the
stratigraphic units in Central Sinai.
Figure 3.4. Typical Stratigraphic Succession in Central Sinai (Ghoubachi,

2010)
57
3.3. Description of Al-Monbateh Disposal System
The current disposal system in Al-Monbateh desalination plant consists of

two adjacent connected evaporation ponds with dimensions of 44 m length, 33
m wide and 1.25 m height each and the sides of the ponds are constructed with
a horizontal to vertical slope of 2:1 (Figure 3.5). The ponds are lined to assure
that the concentrate treatment takes place through evaporation only and to
avoid water seepage thus prevent salts from reaching to the underlying
groundwater that might cause contamination to the nearby shallow dug-wells.
The design of the ponds was based on a constant inflow rate of 1.6 m3/hr of
reject brine resulting from the desalination process of the RO units of Al-
Monbateh plant with total daily working hours of 10 hours (i.e. total daily brine
discharge is 16 m3). A constant evaporation rate of 6 mm/day was assumed and
no seepage takes place as the ponds are lined. The provided area should
provide a safe disposal for the current system under the given design criteria
and operation rules. It is worth noting that one of the obvious drawbacks of the
current disposal system is that the system has a limited operation period (e.g.,
no more than 10 hours per day assuming the availability of electric power).
Figure 3.5. Plan and Cross-Section of the Evaporation Ponds
58
3.4. Overtopping Problem in Al-Monbateh Disposal System
During a field visit to the evaporation ponds, the operator of the plant stated
that after five months from the operation of the desalination plant, continuous
overtopping of the water above the safe allowable level was recorded. As a
quick solution, the operator of the plant has to use additional pumping system
to pump out some of the reject from the pond and unsafely dispose it few
meters away from the evaporation pond leaving the brine to spread on the
ground surface to be treated by both evaporation and seepage. This brings the
critic of constructing lined evaporation ponds to avoid contamination of the
underlying groundwater. It also refutes the design environmental requirements
of a safe disposal of the reject brine. In addition to a running cost of the
pumping unit(s) attached to the system.
Accordingly, the data of Al-Monbateh Disposal System with the current

configuration will not provide a fair comparison to the two disposal
alternatives, as the dimension of the evaporation pond was underestimated. To
overcome this issue, an additional task was taken in this research, where we
had to identify the reasons for the overtopping problem in Al-Monbateh and
obtain the proper dimension of the pond to be used in the comparison.
The main cause of overtopping problem could be one or a combination of

the following possible reasons:
1. Assumption of constant evaporation rates along the 12 months of the

year which was taken equal to 6 mm/day.
2. Ignoring the rainfall on the evaporation pond area as an additional
inflow to the ponds.
3. Neglecting the effect of salinity variation of the reject brine inside the
evaporation ponds on the evaporation rates. Further explanation for the
effect of salinity on the evaporation rates is discussed later in section
3.7.
59
4. Increasing the desalination plant operation period per day more the
designed period (i.e. 10 hours per day) resulting in an increased inflow
to the ponds.
For the comparison and assessment of the current disposal system (i.e.,
evaporation ponds) with the other disposal options to be fair and feasible, the
evaporation pond option has to safely dispose the brine alone without any
supplementary units being attached. Since the current pond cannot act solely as
a safe disposal option, there was a need to find the appropriate dimensions of
the pond that comprise a safe option for disposing the reject brine. This can be
done by identifying the main cause(s) of overtopping and taking into account
these causes then hypothetically modify the dimension of the evaporation pond
to assure safe disposal of the reject brine.
For reject brine to be safely disposed, the disposal option has to be

developed and assessed in terms of its technical viability, its effect on the
environment, and its economic feasibility.
An assessment for the current evaporation ponds was performed using a

MATLAB code which comprises both water and salt balance for the pond. The
flowchart of the code is shown Figure 3.6.
60
Figure 3.6. Flow Chart for the Assessment Process of the Evaporation Pond
3.5. Simulation Model
A MATLAB code is written to simulate pond routing that utilizes water and
salt balance. The input data are the simulation routing period in days, the
desalination plant outflow rates as the inflow rates for the ponds, the rainfall
and evaporation rates on a monthly basis, the inflow water salinity, the pond
dimensions, and the pumping characteristic if needed (i.e., if the depth of water
inside the pond increases above the maximum allowed depth inside the pond
that was taken as 1.0 m which is about 80% of the total depth of the pond). The
model outputs are the cumulative water storage, water depth, water salinity at
every time step, number of overtopping occurrence, the maximum cumulative
water storage, maximum water depth, maximum water salinity at different
pumping rates. Also, the pond efficiency which is defined as the ratio of the
summation of the periods of non-overtopping to the overall period of the
61
routing can then be calculated. The time step is chosen to be one day and the
inflow to the ponds is divided equally on both ponds.
The simulation model is used to assess the current pond dimensions taking
into consideration the reasons causing the overtopping as described in section
3.4.
Due to lack of data at Al-Monbateh desalination plant location, the actual

evaporation rates and rainfall on a monthly basis were obtained from the
nearest available five meteorological stations. The Inverse Distance method
was utilized to calculate the estimated rainfall and the evaporation rates at Al-
Monbateh location. The Inverse Distance method is a weighted average
method, where weights for each meteorological stations are inversely
proportionate to its distance from the point being estimated which is Al-
Monbateh location. The formula of the inverse distance may be written as
(Lam, 1983)
N
1 (3.1)
d
i 1
2
pi
Px N
i
1
d
i 1
2
i
Where,
Px: estimate of rainfall/evaporation rate for the ungauged station

Pi: rainfall/evaporation rate values of rain gauges used for estimation
di: distance from each location the point being estimated
N: numbers of surrounding stations
The available data at the five stations are the monthly rainfall and the
reference evapotranspiration rates ET0. An empirical relation between the
evapotranspiration rates ET0 and the pan evaporation rates Ep is introduced as
follows:
ET0 K p E p (3.2)
where, Kp is the pan coefficient.
62
The most widely used table of Kp values to estimate ET0 from Ep is the one
provided by Doorenbos and Pruitt (1977). The table gives the Kp values for
National Weather Service (NWS) class A evaporation pans located over
grass surfaces having a range of upwind grass fetch distances as described in
Doorenbos and Pruitt (1977). More recently, Allen and Pruitt (1991) published
the original Kp values (Table 3.3) used to develop the Doorenbos and Pruitt
(1977) table. The Kp values in the table vary depending on the fetch, wind
speed, and relative humidity (Snyder et al., 2005), a constant value of 0.7 is
assumed for calculation in the current simulation model.
Table 3.3 Kp Values from Allen and Pruitt (1991) Corresponding

to Mean Relative Humidity (%) and Wind Run (km/day) Data
Relative Fetch (m)
Humidity Wind
(%) Run(Km/day) 100 1 10 1,000
30 84 0.74 0.55 0.66 0.77
30 260 0.66 0.5 0.6 0.7
30 465 0.58 0.45 0.52 0.62
30 700 0.5 0.4 0.45 0.55
57 84 0.81 0.64 0.75 0.83
57 260 0.73 0.58 0.68 0.77
57 465 0.66 0.52 0.6 0.7
57 700 0.59 0.45 0.53 0.63
84 84 0.85 0.73 0.82 0.87
84 260 0.78 0.65 0.75 0.81
84 465 0.71 0.59 0.67 0.75
84 700 0.65 0.53 0.61 0.68
The values of pan evaporation rates are multiplied by a pan factor to

convert them to the equivalent lake evaporation values. Usually this
dimensionless factor is equal to 0.7 (Chow et al., 1988), but this value varies by
season and location. It will be assumed equal to 0.75 in this case.
Available Meteorological Stations
As above-mentioned, five meteorological stations are available in the

vicinity of Al-Monbateh plant. The location of these stations are shown in
Table 3.4 and Figure 3.7.
63
Figure 3.7. The Location of the Five Meteorological Stations and Al-
Monbateh Desalination Plant
Table 3.4. Location of the Five Meteorological Stations
Aqaba Aqaba Beer-
Station Port Said Ismailia
Airport Port Sheva
Location Latitude (N) 29.63 29.48 31.28 31.23 30.6
Longitude (E) 35.01 34.98 32.23 34.78 32.25
Distance to Al-Monbateh 137 148 201.5 83 190
plant (km)
Table 3.5 summarizes the available evapotranspiration rates and the

estimated evaporation rates for the five meteorological stations. In addition,
Table 3.6 depicts the recorded rainfall data and estimated rainfall at Al-
Monbateh obtained from the five meteorological stations
Table 3.5. Available Evapotranspiration Rates and Estimated Evaporation

Rates for the Five Meteorological Stations
ET0 (mm/day) Estimated Estimated
ET0 at Al- Evaporatio
Aqaba Aqaba Port Beer Monbateh n Rate
Month airport port Said Sheva Ismailia (mm/day) (mm/day)
January 3.08 2.83 2.06 2.06 2.59 2.41 2.58
February 3.74 3.31 2.83 2.46 3.41 2.94 3.15
March 5.28 4.3 3.29 3.19 4.57 3.87 4.15
April 6.48 5.59 4.1 4.49 6.13 5.14 5.50
64
May 8.93 7.27 4.5 5.91 6.95 6.64 7.12
June 10.46 8.41 5.23 6.07 7.73 7.30 7.83
July 10.12 8.09 5.77 6.06 7.61 7.22 7.74
August 9.96 7.98 5.51 5.53 6.94 6.83 7.32
September 7.96 7.02 5.29 4.59 5.77 5.74 6.15
October 6.32 5.46 3.95 3.72 4.45 4.54 4.87
November 4.88 3.97 2.85 2.89 2.8 3.40 3.65
December 3.38 2.92 2.31 2.12 2.2 2.49 2.67
Table 3.6. Available Rainfall Data and Estimated Rainfall for the Five
Meteorological Stations
Rainfall (mm) Estimated
Aqaba Aqaba Port Beer rainfall at Al-
Month airport port Said Sheva Ismailia Monbateh (mm)
January 5 6 18 45 7 26.01
February 6 11 12 40 6 23.92
March 4 8 10 36 7 21.07
April 3 5 5 10 2 6.81
May 1 3 4 1 2 1.65
June 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
July 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
August 0 0 0 0 0 0.00
September 0 0 3 0 0 0.25
October 2 0 8 3 2 2.68
November 4 6 7 20 6 12.58
December 8 2 16 39 5 22.64
3.6. Water and Salt Balance
The water balance for both inflow to the evaporation pond and its outflow can
be expressed as:
Water inflow = Reject brine discharge + Rainfall (3.3)
Water outflow = Evaporation + Pumped-out water (3.4)
Accordingly, the storage volume and water characteristics inside the
pond can be obtained from the simple mass balance calculations as:
Water storage = Cumulative inflow water Cumulative outflow (3.5)
65
water
Water depth = Storage water / Area of pond (3.6)
On the other hand, salt balance can be expressed as:
Salt inflow = Salt concentration of reject brine discharge

(3.7)
Salt outflow = Salts dissolved in Pumped-out water (3.8)
Salt storage = Cumulative inflow salts Cumulative outflow salts (3.9)
Salinity = Mass of dissolved salts in storage / Pond water mass (3.10)
Salt depth = Un-dissolved salt volume / Area of pond (3.11)
Salt storage is divided into dissolved and un-dissolved salts according to

the solubility of the salt mixture. Solubility is the concentration limit of
dissolved slats after which salts are transformed from a solution state to crystal
state. These crystals deposit on the bed of the pond. It is assumed that the
deposited salts never transfer into solution again.
Figure 3.8 illustrates the solubility of the most common salts at different
temperatures (Volland, 2005). In the case study considered here, the average
temperature is around 20 C. As there are no available data of salt texture
formation, it is assumed that Sodium Chloride (NaCl) is dominant. Hence, a
solubility value of 34 grams of dissolved salts in 100 grams of water is
considered. This value is equivalent to 340,000 part per million (ppm), which is
about ten times the typical sea water salinity
66
Figure 3.8. Solubility of Some Common Salts at Different Temperatures
(Volland, 2005).
3.7. Effect of Salinity on Evaporation Rates
Different studies have been made to find the relation between evaporation
rate and water salinity. According to the water report number 13 of the Food
and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations (Johnston et al.,
1997) a correction factor Y is used to reduce evaporation rate due to the
increase in water electrical conductivity as follows:
Y 1.3234 0.0066 EC for EC up to 60 dS/m (3.12)
Where, Y is a correction factor according FAO's formula [dimensionless]

and EC is the electrical conductivity of water [dS/m]. From the above equation
(3.12), it is clear that the evaporation rate decreases linearly with the increase
of water electrical conductivity, which is a direct measure of water salinity.
Substituting water salinity in parts per million (ppm) instead of electrical
conductivity in dS/m, which is a direct measure to water salinity assuming that
1 dS/m 640 ppm, and using a dimensionless parameter = Y/1.3234 to keep
its value equal to unity with fresh water of zero salinity. Equation (3.12)
becomes:
67
8 10 6 S 1.0 for water salinity up to 38,400 ppm (3.13)
Where, is a correction factor [dimensionless], and S = salinity of water

[ppm]. Another study was made to estimate this relation at Lake Qaroun in
Egypt (Ali, 1998), field measurements led to the following formula:
Where, is s correction factor [dimensionless], and S = salinity of water

[ppm].
Equation (3.13) shows the linear relation of evaporation rate reduction with
the increasing of water salinity. As the salt concentration in evaporation ponds
may go beyond these limitations, equations (3.13) and (3.14) do not satisfy
higher salinity levels. Another study was conducted at the Dead Sea in Jordan
Valley (Niemi et al., 1997). This study depended on field data where
evaporation rates corresponding to 39 different water salinities were measured.
These measured data could be put in the following formula:
Where, is a correction factor [dimensionless], and S is the salinity of water

[ppm].
The advantage of equation (3.15) is its validity for higher water

concentration values than equations (3.13) and (3.14). That makes it more
suitable to be used to simulate the performance of evaporation ponds,
especially for long durations. Figure 3.9 summarizes the three equations and
shows a comparison among them.
68
Figure 3.9. Salinity effect on evaporation rate (Mahmoud, 2011)
3.8. Results and Discussion
The simulation model is run with the plant inflow and the expected rainfall
as the total inflow to the pond while the outflow is the evaporation and the
pumped out volumes, when needed, with a simulation routing period of 25
years (i.e. 300 months) while the area of the evaporation ponds is the actual
constructed area and no seepage is considered due to the lining of the bottom
and sides of the ponds. The pond started operation in late in 2011 in September,
so that its evaporation rates and rainfall were put first in their arrays in the
model.
The pond performance under the native design criteria the outflow rates is
more than the inflow rates and thus continuous drought occurs no flooding
occurs during the age of the pond as both the inflow and outflow rates are
assumed to be constant during the life time of the pond. During operation the
water salinity concentration increases until it reaches its maximum saturation,
which is taken as 340,000 ppm. Once the water solution reaches its maximum
concentration, the dissolved salts is transformed into un-dissolved salts and
deposits on the bed of the pond. This concentration goes very high when water
depth inside the pond becomes very small or becomes zero. At zero level of
water inside the pond, all accumulated dissolved salts become un-dissolved and
69
create a layer of salt at the bottom of the pond. The thickness of this layer
increases as the sequence of zero water levels continues, however, the
simulation results of the exiting pond shows that the water depth is
accumulating and no zero water levels will be witnessed.
To investigate the causes of the problem, different combinations of the four

mentioned causes in section 3.4 are tested and the pond performance is
checked. Each possible cause is identified alone at first and the depth is then
plotted against the simulation period to check the pond performance. Figure
3.10 shows the effect of each cause alone, where Figure 3.10 (a) shows the
effect of rainfall, Figure 3.10 (b) shows the effect of actual evaporation rates,
Figure 3.10 (c) shows the effect of the salinity, and Figure 3.5d shows the
effect of increasing the working hours of the plant to double the designated
working hours. It can be shown that the effect of rainfall only or the actual
evaporation rates only doesnt cause the overtopping of the pond after five
months of operation as reported by the plant operator. However from Figure
3.10 (c) and 3.10 (d) overtopping occurs after 1 year and 3 years respectively
which is also not the claim of the working staff at the Al-Monbateh
desalination plant.
70
71
Figure 3.10. Pond Performance with the Effect of the Four Possible Causes of
Overtopping (a) Effect of Rainfall Only, (b) Effect of Actual Evaporation
Rates, (c) Effect of Salinity, and (d) Effect of Increasing Working Hours
Different combinations of the four possible causes are studied to reach the
most possible reason to the overtopping problem that lead the operator to attach
a pumping unit after the operation of the plant by only five months. Figure 3.11
summarizes three of the considered combinations. From Figure 3.11 (a), it can
be concluded that the combination of both rainfall and the actual evaporation
rates doesnt cause the overtopping of the brine from the pond, however from
Figure 3.11 (b) the combination of rainfall, actual evaporation rates, and
considering the effect of salinity on evaporation rates resulted in overtopping
occurrence after 16 months and 15 days prior to the pond operation date.
Finally, Figure 3.11 (c) depicts the combination of all the four possible causes
of the overtopping problem. In Figure 3.11 (c) in addition to considering the
actual evaporation rates, actual rainfall, and effect of salinity, the desalination
plant is assumed to run for three different operating hours: 16, 18, and 20 hours
per day instead of 10 hours per day. The combination of these four possible
reasons proved a good agreement between the simulated model and the actual
case which properly investigates the cause of that early overtopping.
72
The pond performance curve shows that the water level exceeds the safe
overtopping level after four months and 12 days, 5 months, and 6 months for
16, 18, and 20 operating hours respectively. Also, the pond will flood after the
first five months and 21 days, 7 months, and 12 months and 9 days for 16, 18,
and 20 plant operating hours respectively.
Thus, it is suggested that the problem may occurred because of a

combination of the four possible reasons.
It is worth to mention that Figure 3.11 reflects the importance of

considering the effect of salinity of the reject brine on the evaporation ponds,
however for more investigation on the salinity effect, sensitivity analysis of the
salinity effect and the reduction factor is discussed in section 3.7.
73
Figure 3.11. Pond Performance Curves after Combination of Different
Possible Causes. (a) Combination of Both Rainfall and Actual Evaporation
Ponds, (b) Combination of Rainfall, Actual Evaporation Ponds and Salinity
Effect on Evaporation Rates, and (c) Combination of Rainfall, Actual
Evaporation Ponds, Salinity Effect on Evaporation Rates, and Increasing the
Plant Working Hours.
74
3.9. Sensitivity Analysis for the Effect of Salinity on the Pond
Performance
The correction factor which is calculated using equations 3.13, 3.14 and
3.15 derived based on empirical relationships depends on the coefficient of
salinity term in the equations. Thus a general form for the equation can be
formulated replacing the numerical coefficients of each equation to a constant
C. The equation of the salinity effect on the evaporation rates can then be
expressed as:
C 10 6 S 1.0 (3.16)
Where, is evaporation rates reduction factor [dimensionless], C is the

coefficient of salinity [dimensionless], and S is the water salinity [ppm].
Several attempts were reported in literature to estimate the values of the

coefficient C. A detailed review of these attempts is presented in Mahmoud,
2011. To investigate the importance of the salinity effect on reducing the
evaporation rates and accordingly on the design of evaporation ponds, 4
simulations were conducted with different values for the coefficient C. A
summary of these values are presented in the table below.
Table 3.7. Summary of C Values and Comments

Simulation C Value Comments
No.
1 0 No effect for salinity for comparison
2 2 As estimated from Dead Sea in Jordan Valley
(Niemi et al., 1997).
3 3 As estimated from lake Qaroun study in Egypt
(Ali, 1998)
4 8 As suggested by FAO's formula
Figure 3.12 shows the sensitivity analysis and the evaluation of the effect
of changing the coefficient C on the pond performance. Figure 3.7 shows the
pond performance in case of ignoring the salinity effect on the evaporation
75
rates in solid line for comparison. It is evidence from Figure 3.12 that the
salinity has a major influence on the evaporation pond performance. The
comparison indicates that with ignoring the effect of salinity (i.e., C = 0) the
maximum water depth in the pond did not exceed 0.5m, whereas the maximum
depth could reach a value of 1.8 to 3.4m when the value of C changes between
8 to 2. This not only proves the importance of considering the effect of salinity
on the evaporation rates, but also emphasis the importance of accurately
determine the appropriate value of C.
Figure 3.12. The Effect of the Salinity Coefficient Variation on the Pond
Performance
3.10. New Dimensions for the Evaporation Ponds for Safe Disposal
A large number of trials of changing the bottom dimensions, the depth, and
the side slopes of the pond are carried out to obtain the pond dimensions
needed for the evaporation pond to act independently as a safe disposal option
for the reject brine. Eleven alternatives are identified out of the trials as safe
dimensions. Figure 3.13 presented the top areas, the bottom areas and the
depths of the 11 alternatives. The figure shows that the top required area is a
value near 6000 square meters, while the bottom area varies between 2000 to
3000 square meters and the depths ranges from two to three meters.
76
7000 3.5
6000 3
5000 2.5
Depth (m)
Area (m2)
4000 2
3000 1.5
2000 1
Top Area
1000 Bottom Area 0.5
Depth
0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Alternative
Figure 3.13. Top and Bottom Areas and Depths of the 11 Safe Alternative
Dimensions for the Evaporation Ponds
Table 3.8 lists the dimensions of the 11 alternatives, the depth, bottom
area, side slopes, top area, volume and the relative lining cost compared to the
existing evaporation pond as well as the relative volume.
Since, the 11 alternatives assure that the evaporation pond will act solely
without the need of any supplementary units attached to it (i.e., pumping units),
then the decision on which alternative is the better will be based upon the
economical side through calculating the expected cost of the pond. The cost of
the evaporation ponds are discussed in details in section 3.11. The total cost is
plotted against the 11 alternative in Figure 3.14, it can be seen that the lowest
cost comes from alternative number six with 60m length and 50m wide with
side slopes 6:1 and two meters deep.
The pond performance of the new chosen dimensions is shown through

Figure 3.16 (a) and (b). Figure (a) shows the variation of the water depth along
25-years simulation period. The water inside the pond increases with times to
reach 1.60 m and doesnt flood out of the pond, while Figure (b) illustrates the
salinity variation over time inside the pond. The results of the simulation model
77
show that the solubility is reached 14 times where the salts are separated to
form a salt layer in bottom of the pond.
2.08
Millions
2.02
1.96
Total Cost (EGP)
1.9
1.84
1.78
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Alternative
Figure 3.14. The Total Cost of the 11 Safe Alternative Dimensions of the
Evaporation Pond
78
Table 3.8. The 11 Safe Disposal Dimensions Alternatives of the Evaporation Pond
Bottom Relative Top
Pond Ltop Wtop Volume Relative
L (m) W (m) d (m) S (S:1) Area Lining Area
Number 2 (m) (m) (m3) volume
(m ) Cost (m2)
BaseCase 44 33 1.25 2 1452 1.00 49 38 1862.0 2063.44 1.00
1 60 54 2.5 4 3240 3.17 80 74 5920.0 11200.00 5.43
2 55 55 2.75 4 3025 3.18 77 77 5929.0 11979.00 5.81
3 55 50 3 4 2750 3.15 79 74 5846.0 12462.00 6.04
4 55 50 2.5 5 2750 3.22 80 75 6000.0 10546.88 5.11
5 50 50 2.75 5 2500 3.23 77.5 77.5 6006.3 11176.17 5.42
6 60 50 2 6 3000 3.32 84 74 6216.0 8928.00 4.33
7 55 55 2 6 3025 3.34 79 79 6241.0 8978.00 4.35
8 55 50 2.25 6 2750 3.39 82 77 6314.0 9786.94 4.74
9 50 50 2.5 6 2500 3.55 80 80 6400.0 10562.50 5.12
10 50 50 2.5 6 2500 3.44 80 80 6400.0 10562.50 5.12
11 45 45 2.75 6 2025 3.29 78 78 6084.0 10401.19 5.04
Figure 3.15. Typical Cross-Section of the Evaporation Pond
79
Figure 3.16. Pond Performance For The New Dimensions of The Pond For 25-
Years Routing Period. (a) Pond Water Depth and (b) Salinity Variation
Further researches are recommended for a better estimate for the effect of
salinity on the evaporation rates as the given relationships assume a linear
change with salinity. The lower vapor pressure and lower evaporation rate of
saline water result in a lower energy loss and, thus, a higher equilibrium
temperature than that of freshwater under the same exposure conditions. The
80
increase in temperature of the saline water would tend to increase evaporation,
but the water is less efficient in converting radiant energy into latent heat due to
the exchange of sensible heat and long-wave radiation with the atmosphere.
The net result is that, with the same input of energy, the evaporation rate of
saline water is lower than that of freshwater. However, there is no simple
relationship between salinity and evaporation except those presented earlier in
the section 3.7 which are site dependent and changed from a certain location to
another, and there are always complex interactions among site-specific
variables such as air temperature, wind velocity, relative humidity, barometric
pressure, water surface temperature, heat exchange rate with the atmosphere,
incident solar absorption and reflection, thermal currents in the pond, and depth
of the pond. As a result, there is a need to study in depth the effect of salinity
on evaporation rates and the dependency on the geographical location and In
case of location dependency, field experiments are needed formulate
relationships for the different regions of Egypt.
3.11. Cost of the Evaporation Ponds
Although sizing of an evaporation pond is a relatively straightforward

procedure once appropriate evaporation data and inflows are available, the
costs associated with pond construction are highly site specific and quite
variable. Therefore, generic cost estimating of evaporation ponds from typical
handbook-type and previous studies data is very difficult and subject to a wide
range of accuracy. However, by gathering site-specific data, a reasonably
accurate cost estimate can be made.
In general, it is anticipated that evaporation ponds most likely will be

competitive for relatively small plants in remote, inland locations with high
evaporation rates. The major factors contributing to the cost of an evaporation
pond are: land costs, earthwork, lining, operation and maintenance. The cost of
land can vary greatly from site to site, it can easily vary by a factor of 10 or
more, depending on the exact location near the city. In our case, the cost of a
feddan is assumed EGP 10,000 as an average for rural areas. Its worth noting
81
that in large evaporation ponds, there is a distinction between evaporative area
and total area which is important in determining the land requirements, thus an
area correction factor shall be provided to multiply times the evaporative area
to calculate the total area. Like the cost of land itself, the cost of earthwork is
very site specific, depending on whether the terrain is flat or hilly, rocky or
sandy, forested or clear, etc. In selecting a site for an evaporation pond, such
factors must be considered. The earthwork cost is taken as EGP 20 per cubic
meters. Once it has been constructed, the pond operates essentially
maintenance free. Periodic maintenance is required only for the repair of the
dike or liner, pipe, flow control devices, etc. Operating costs also include
security and damage inspection. A total capital operating costs is assumed to be
5 percent of the total costs.
The costs of installing liners include those for material and construction.
Figure 3.17 illustrates the lining elements of the existing evaporation pond
which is used in calculating the cost of the new evaporation pond. Figure 3.18
shows a group of charts created for estimation of the liners cost based on the
given lining elements and their up-to-date unit costs.
Figure 3.17. Typical Lining Cross-Section for the Existing Evaporation Pond
82
250
Side Slope = 2:1 Depth = 1m
225
Depth = 2m
Lining Cost (EGP/m2) 200 Depth = 3m
175
150
125
100
75
50
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Pond Area (m2)
400
Side Slope = 4:1
Depth = 1m
350
Depth = 2m
Lining Cost (EGP/m2)
300 Depth = 3m
250
200
150
100
50
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Pond Area (m2)
83
650
Side Slope = 6:1
Depth = 1m
550 Depth = 2m
Lining Cost (EGP/m2)
Depth = 3m
450
350
250
150
50
0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000
Pond Area (m2)
Figure 3.18. Cost of Liners per Bottom Area Square Meter for Different Pond
Depths and Side Slopes
For comparing between the current provided disposal option and the other
alternative (i.e., deep well injection) the cost of the option is calculated using
the mentioned above cost elements. For the current evaporation pond, two
other elements are added which are: the cost of the pumping unit and its
operation cost, and the cost of the environmental penalty resulting from the
unmanaged disposal. Figure 3.19 shows the cost of existing evaporation ponds
and the new proposed ponds with the safe dimensions.
Since the frequency of operating the pump, the operating duration and the
operating discharge and head are not known then the cost of the pumping unit
and its associated operation cannot be estimated with the given information.
Soil salinization, loss of crop yield, and contamination of the underlying
groundwater are examples of the environmental penalties resulting from the
unmanaged disposal. The penalties can be expressed by an additional cost
added to the cost of the existing evaporation pond. The two costs along the
lifetime of the ponds are expressed in Figure 3.19 by dashed bars stacked over
84
the cost of the native cost of the pond. These costs are uncertain and can be
more of less than the stacked values on the graph.
The figure shows that the cost of the safe ponds is about 1.885 million
Egyptian pounds while 0.541 for the existing one. An increase of 250% in the
cost proves the significant importance of considering the effect of salinity on
the evaporation ponds design as discussed in the previous section of this
chapter.
2
Millions
1.8 1.885
1.6
Total Cost (EGP x 1,000)
Uncertain
1.4
1.2
1 Uncertain
0.8
0.6
0.4 0.541
0.2
0
Existing Pond New Pond
Figure 3.19. The Total Cost of the Existing and the New Evaporation Ponds
85
86
CHAPTER FOUR
MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION
In order to assess the option of the injection of the reject brine into deep
aquifers and to simulate the transient state flow conditions in this study, the
MODFLOW code is utilized. MODFLOW is the U.S. Geological Surveys
three-dimensional finite-difference groundwater model (McDonald and
Harbaugh 1988; Harbaugh and McDonald 1996). Originally conceived solely
as a groundwater-flow simulation code, MODFLOWs modular structure has
provided a robust framework for integration of additional simulation
capabilities that build on and enhance its original scope. The family of
MODFLOW-related programs now includes capabilities to simulate coupled
groundwater/surface-water systems, solute transport, variable-density and
unsaturated-zone flow, aquifer system compaction and land subsidence,
parameter estimation, and groundwater management. Integrated to this code is
another popular transport code, MT3DMS (Zheng et al., 1990, 1999) that uses
the flow output of MODFLOW and runs solute transport simulation in an
efficient manner. Coupled with these two models is the variable density flow
SEAWAT code. It is a generic MODFLOW/MT3DMS-based computer
program designed to simulate three-dimensional variable-density groundwater
flow coupled with multi-species solute and heat transport. The program has
been used for a wide variety of groundwater studies including those focused on
brine migration in continental aquifers as well as those focused on saltwater
intrusion in coastal aquifers. These three codes are considered reasonable
modeling tools for the current simulation.
87
It is worth noting that MODFLOW was modified to solve the variable-
density flow equation by reformulating the matrix equations in terms of fluid
mass rather than fluid volume and by including the appropriate density terms.
Fluid density is assumed to be solely a function of the concentration of
dissolved constituents; the effects of temperature on fluid density are not
considered. Temporally and spatially varying salt concentrations are simulated
in SEAWAT using routines from the MT3DMS program. SEAWAT uses
either an explicit or implicit procedure to couple the groundwater flow equation
with the solute transport equation.
The flow modeling in this study is conducted using MODFLOW within the
framework of the graphical user interface GMS (Groundwater Modeling
System). GMS is a comprehensive graphical user environment for performing
groundwater simulations. The entire GMS system consists of a graphical user
interface (the GMS program) and a number of analysis codes (MODFLOW,
MT3DMS, SEEP2D, SEAWAT, etc).
This chapter presents the mathematical formulation of MODFLOW code

(used for simulating the flow), MT3D code to simulate the brine transport and
SEAWAT for the variable-density flow simulation of brine.
4.1. Mathematical Model of MODFLOW Code
The following partial differential equation represents the three dimensional

movement of groundwater through the porous medium:
h h h h
Ss ( K xx ) ( K yy ) ( K zz ) q s (4.1)
t x x y y y z
where K xx , K yy , and K zz are values of hydraulic conductivity along the x, y, and z
coordinate axes, which are assumed to be parallel to the major axes of

hydraulic conductivity [LT-1]; h is the potentiometeric head [L]; qs is a
volumetric flux per unit volume and represents sources and/or sinks of water
[T-1]; Ss is the specific storage of the porous material [L-1]; and t is time [t]
88
Equation (4.1) describes groundwater flow in heterogeneous and
anisotropic medium, under the condition that the principal axes of hydraulic
conductivity are aligned with the coordinate directions. It also represents the
unsteady state conditions.
In case of having a homogeneous medium, then equation (4.1) can be written

as:
h 2h 2h 2h
Ss K ( 2 2 2 ) qs (4.2)
t x y z
In case of having a steady state condition, then equation (4.2) becomes:
h h h
0 ( K xx ) ( K yy ) ( K zz ) q s (4.3)
x x y y y z
In case of having a homogeneous medium in addition to a steady state
condition, then equation 4.3 reduces to:
2h 2h 2h
0 K( ) qs (4.4)
x 2 y 2 z 2
The analytical solution of the flow equation is possible only for very simple
systems. In real field applications, however, the aquifer conditions of
heterogeneity and anisotropy and the irregularity and complexity of the
geologic structures and boundary conditions preclude the possibility of using
such analytical solution. Therefore, a numerical method must be developed to
get the approximate solution. One such approach is the finite-difference
method, in which the partial derivatives are replaced by terms calculated from
the differences in head values at these points. The process leads to systems of
simultaneous linear algebraic difference equations; their solution yields values
of head at specific points and times.
4.2. Mathematical Model of MT3DMS Code
Once reject brine produced from the desalination plant is injected in the
disposal well, the solutes associated with this water such as the dissolved
solids, heavy metals, and antiscalant (which are added to the water prior to
89
desalination as well as the backwash water of the membranes of the
desalination plants) start to mitigate in the groundwater system. Two main
mechanisms affect the solute migration: advection and dispersion. The mass
balance equation for a solute species is written as a partial differential equation
in three dimensions and has the form (e.g., Javandel et al., 1984):
C C q N
( Dij ) (Vi C ) s C s Rk (4.5)
t xi x j xi k 1
where C is the concentration of solutes dissolved in groundwater [ML-3]; t is

time [T]; x is the distance along the respective Cartesian coordinate axis [L]; Dij
is the hydrodynamic dispersion coefficient [L2T-1]; V is the seepage or linear
pore water velocity [LT-1]; qs is the volumetric flux of water per unit volume of
the aquifer representing sources (positive) and sinks (negative) [T-1]; Cs is the
concentration of the source or sink [ML-3]; is the porosity of the porous
N
medium [dimensionless]; and R
k 1
k is the chemical reaction term [ML-3T-1].
The first term on the right hand side of equation (4.5) accounts for solute
dispersion (both mechanical dispersion and molecular diffusion) while the
second term accounts for advective transport. The third term gives the effect of
sources or sinks in the system and the last term deals with the chemical
reactions that may be encountered for some solutes. The components of the
dispersion tensor, Dij, are given as (Bear, 1972):
ViV j
Dij ij T V ( L . T ) D * ij (4.6)
V
where ij is the Kroneker delta (ij = 1 for i = j and ij = 0 for i j), L and T are
the longitudinal and transverse local dispersivities, respectively, |V| is the
magnitude of the velocity, and D* is the effective coefficient of molecular
diffusion.
Equation (4.5) is the governing equation underlying the transport model,

and equation (4.6) is an auxiliary equation that relates the dispersion
90
coefficients needed in (4.5) to flow velocity and aquifer dispersivity. The
transport equation is linked to the flow equation through the following
relationship:
K ii h (4.7)
Vi
xi
where Kii is a principal component of the hydraulic conductivity tensor [LT-1],
is the effective porosity, and h is the hydraulic head [L]. The hydraulic head
is obtained from the solution of the three dimensional groundwater flow
equation:
h h (4.8)
( K ij ) qs S s
xi x j t
where Ss is the specific storage of the porous materials [L-1]. It should be noted
that the hydraulic conductivity tensor (K) actually has nine components.
However, it is generally assumed that the principal components of the
hydraulic conductivity tensor (Kii, or Kxx, Kyy, Kzz) are aligned with the x, y and
z coordinate axes so that non-principal components become zero. This
assumption is incorporated in most commonly used flow models, including
MODFLOW.
Several numerical approaches can be used to solve the transport equation;

for example, finite differences, finite elements, method of characteristics, and
random walk particle-tracking methods. In this study, MT3DMS (Zheng and
Wang, 1999; Zheng, 2006) is used for solving the transport equations.
MT3DMS is a model for simulation of advection, dispersion and chemical
reactions of solutes in groundwater flow systems in either two or three
dimension. The model uses a mixed Eulerian-Lagrangian approach to the
solution of the advection-disperive- reactive equation, based on combination of
the method of characteristics and the modified method of characteristics. The
model program uses a modular structure similar to that implemented in
MODFLOW that is being used here for flow solution. The modular structure of
the transport model makes it possible to simulate the advection, dispersion,
91
source/sink mixing, or chemical reactions independently without reserving
computer memory space for unused options.
The MT3DMS transport model was developed for use with any block-
centered finite difference flow model such as MODFLOW and is based on the
assumption that changes in concentration field will not affect the flow field
significantly. After a flow model is developed and calibrated, the information
needed by the transport model can be saved in disk files which are then
retrieved by the transport model.
The transport model can be used to simulate changes in concentration of

single-species miscible salinity in groundwater considering advection,
dispersion and some simple chemical reactions, with various types of boundary
conditions and external sources or sinks. MT3DMS accommodates the
following spatial discretization capabilities and transport boundary conditions:
(1) confined, unconfined or variably confined/unconfined aquifer layers; (2)
inclined model layers and variable cell thickness within the same layer as
present in both modeled aquifers as discussed in Chapter five; (3) specified
concentration or mass flux boundaries; and (4) the solute transport effects of
external sources and sinks such as wells, drains, rivers, areal recharge and
evapotranspiration.
4.3. Mathematical Model of SEAWAT Code
The SEAWAT (Guo and Langevin, 2002) program was developed to

simulate three-dimensional, variable-density, transient groundwater flow in
porous media. The source code for SEAWAT was developed by combining
MODFLOW and MT3DMS into a single program that solves the coupled flow
and solute-transport equations. Since both aquifers being modeled (the
producing aquifer and the injection aquifer) are saline aquifers, use of a code
that solves the variable-density groundwater flow is important and thus it is the
code implemented in this study. The SEAWAT code was tested by simulating
five benchmark problems involving variable-density groundwater flow. These
92
problems include two box problems, the Henry problem, Elder problem, and
HYDROCOIN problem, and it was found that SEAWAT results compare well
with those of SUTRA (a computer model for simulation of variable-density
saturated-unsaturated flow with solute or energy transport developed by Voss,
1984). Also, the SEAWAT code was used by Nassar (2004) to simulate the
unsteady two-dimensional phenomena of subsurface brine disposal and to
verify using the code in solving the variable density flow through an
experimental seepage tank with known extraction and injection rates as well as
known initial and injection salinities. The results of the simulated model using
SEAWAT showed a good agreement with that of the experimental setup, thus
proving the reliability of using the code in simulating the current density-
dependent groundwater flow and the solute migration in this study.
SEAWAT is based on the concept of freshwater head, or equivalent

freshwater head, in a saline groundwater environment as discussed later in
Section 5.5 (Model Calibration). The governing equation for the variable-
density groundwater flow is as follows:
0 h C
. 0 K 0 h0 z S s ,0 0 s q' s , (4.7)
0 h C t
where 0 is the fluid density [ML-3] at the reference concentration and reference
temperature; is dynamic viscosity [ML-1T-1]; K0 is the hydraulic conductivity
tensor of material saturated with the reference fluid [LT-1]; h0 is the hydraulic
head [L] measured in terms of the reference fluid of a specified concentration
and temperature (as the reference fluid is commonly freshwater). Ss,0 is the
specific storage [L-1], defined as the volume of water released from storage per
unit volume per unit decline of h0; t is time [T]; is porosity [-]; C is salt
concentration [ML-3]; and q's is a source or sink [T-1] of fluid with density s.
The associated solute transport equation is defined as:
93
b K dk (C k ) (4.8)
1 .( D.C k ) .(qC k ) q' s C sk ,
t
where, b is the bulk density (mass of the solids divided by the total volume)
[ML-3]; Kdk is the distribution coefficient of species k [L3M-1]; Ck is the
concentration of species k [ML-3]; D is the hydrodynamic dispersion
coefficient tensor [L2T-1]; q is the specific discharge [LT-1]; and Csk is the
source or sink concentration [ML-3] of species k.
0
The viscosity effects were neglected in this study so the term is taken

equal to one, and fluid density was treated as a simple linear function of only
one solute species which is the salt concentration of the reject brine dealt with
in this study.
It is worth noting that under the SEAWAT approach, the two separate
computer programs, MODFLOW and MT3DMS, are modified and combined
into one program. Among these modifications are the conversion of volumetric
fluxes to mass fluxes and the addition of relative density-difference terms and
solute-mass accumulation terms to the basic finite-difference equation solved
by MODFLOW. Additionally, modifications are made to each of the stress
packages of MODFLOW because mass fluxes and freshwater heads are used in
SEAWAT. Modifications of MT3DMS are relatively minor and mainly affect
internal data transfer and manipulation (Guo and Langevin, 2002).
94
CHAPTER FIVE
GROUNDWATER FLOW AND TRANSPORT MODELS
This chapter describes the development of a three-dimensional groundwater
model to simulate groundwater flow in both the Lower and the Upper
Cretaceous aquifers of the study area to simulate the case of the injection of the
reject brine. The model is developed using the following steps:
1. Defining the model domain (i.e., areal and vertical extents of the
model);
2. Defining the boundary conditions;
3. Defining sources and sinks in the studied domain (i.e., wells, recharge
zones, rivers or streams if any, etc); and
4. Calibrating the model by adjusting model parameters (e.g., hydraulic
conductivity) until model performance matches observed field data
A three dimensional domain is selected for flow and transport modeling

around Al-Monbateh desalination plant within which a hypothetical disposal
well is located. To simulate the actual case of the Al-Monbateh production
well, which taps the Lower Cretaceous aquifer in Sinai, and the proposed
injection well with their relatively small production and injection rates, a local
model has to be developed as the salinity plume is not expected to migrate for
long distances. However, the available data and potentiometric maps do not
provide sufficient information to develop a local simulation model. Thus,
creating a regional model and cutting it around the production and injection
wells for locally studying the flow and transport (cake-cutting process) is
adopted for the sake of a better modeling through a finer grid as discussed later
in this chapter.
95
Figure 5.1 shows the location of Al-Monbateh well with respect to the
water contours of the Lower Cretaceous aquifers. It can be seen that the nearest
available contour map is the 50 m above mean sea level (amsl) contour at a
distance of 8 km south of the well while no available data in the other three
directions for a local simulation model.
Figure 5.1. The Potentiometric Map for the Lower Cretaceous Aquifer with the
Location of Al-Monbateh well.
The geometric characteristics of the regional model domain are determined

based on the hydrogeologic framework of the study area and the available
potentiometric maps. The model is composed of four main layers: (1) the upper
conductive aquifer of the Upper Cretaceous formation, (2) the lower
conductive aquifer of the Lower Cretaceous formation, (3) a thin clay layer
separating the two previous aquifers, and (4) an impervious rock layer for the
Jurassic sedimentary rocks underlying the Lower Cretaceous formation. Figure
5.2 shows a typical stratigraphic succession in the studied area. The regional
model dimensions are not uniformly set as discussed in Section 5.3.1. It
96
extends an average of 50 km in the north-south direction and an average of 70
km in the east-west direction.
Figure 5.2. Typical Stratigraphic Succession in Central Sinai (Ghoubachi,

2010)
5.1. Description of Study Region
The study area is located in the central eastern portion of Sinai and is
bounded by longitudes 33 46 34 32 E and latitudes 30 25 30 58 N. It
occupies an area of about 3,000 km2 which encompasses 4.9% of Sinai
Peninsulas total area. Three aquifer systems are bounded by the chosen model
domain: the Eocene, the Upper Cretaceous aquifer and the Lower Cretaceous
aquifer. The domain encompasses about 20% of the total area of the Lower
Cretaceous sandstone aquifer, known as Malha formation, which is the
producing aquifer of Al-Monbateh well. The Eocene forms the mountainous
areas of the study region so it is assumed that the Upper Cretaceous extends in
these areas as no data is available for the Eocene aquifer.
97
The area is an arid area with scarce and irregular seasonal rainfall. The
surroundings are not very well developed and the number of habitants is small
because of the limited availability of fresh water resources, except for some
spots where deep wells penetrate either the Upper Cretaceous or the Lower
Cretaceous aquifer and produce brackish groundwater mainly used for
irrigation and planting of some salt-tolerant plants such as olives. The water
quality of these aquifers is not promising for a domestic use for those habitants,
however, desalination offers a great alternative for freshwater by desalting the
produced brackish water of the aquifers underlying the study area.
Through a field visit to Al-Monbateh well and its present desalination plant,
it was found that the life of people there is very primitive. During surveying the
habitants of the visited site, it was also found that before the construction of the
desalination plant, they depended on buying freshwater for their domestic uses
from Al-Arish city which is about 70 km away, or sometimes from rainfall
harvesting during the rain seasons. It is also important to mention that the area
began to act as an attraction point for other nearby habitants who are to some
extent still depending on buying freshwater from Al-Arish. The area is now
witnessing small local development which has put more pressure on Al-
Monbateh desalination plant, resulting in more demand and probably resulted
in the operation of the plant more than the designated daily working hours (i.e.
10 hours). This has some important implications for the disposal system as was
discussed in Chapter 3.
5.2. Conceptual Flow Model
The modeling domain and the boundary conditions dictate how

groundwater is perceived to flow in the system. As indicated by the head
contours, groundwater of the Upper Cretaceous aquifer moves from the
southeast to the northwest direction while it flows from the south to the
northeast direction in the Lower Cretaceous aquifer. The two aquifers are
assumed to be hydraulically not connected since both the head contours and the
iso-salinity contours do not comply with each other at any point along the
98
domain. A clay layer with very low hydraulic conductivity is then assumed to
separate the two aquifers.
The salinity of the Upper Cretaceous is found to be higher than that of the
Lower Cretaceous aquifer, thus the injection is assumed to be screened in the
upper formation and due to the presence of the clay layer, and the proposed
injection would be isolated from the Lower Cretaceous aquifer, the producing
aquifer for Al-Monbateh well. However, the maps of the aquifers, whether the
heads or the altitudes of the top or the bottom of the layers, are usually
developed based on data from sparse wells which casts some uncertainty as to
whether the two aquifers are totally separated or not. This is evaluated using
different scenarios in the flow and solute transport simulations.
The Upper Cretaceous aquifer is believed to be unconfined aquifer with

variable thickness ranging from 400 m to 800 m, whereas the Lower
Cretaceous aquifer is considered in many studies (Ghoubashi, 2011 and Dames
and Moore, 1985) to be confined except for a narrow outcropping strip along
the southern terminal of the aquifer, which is outreached in the studied area.
Thus, the aquifer is taken as confined in the studied domain. Its thickness
varies from few meters in a small portion of the study domain to about 600 m
towards the east direction.
5.3. Numerical Flow Model Development

5.3.1. Areal and Vertical Extent
The model consists of two main water-bearing formations, the Upper

Cretaceous Carbonate aquifer and the Lower Cretaceous Sandstone aquifer.
The deposition of Upper Cretaceous is assumed to extend from the land surface
downward to the clay inter-beds of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer. The Eocene
formation which overlies the Upper Cretaceous aquifer only appears in the
mountainous areas of the study region.
The top of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer is defined by the lower surface of
the Upper aquifer which is composed of limestone and marl with shale
99
interbeds. The base of the aquifer is also defined by the top of the Upper
Jurassic and no connectivity is expected between the two aquifers, and
therefore, the model is truncated at the base of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer.
Figures 5.3, 5.4 and 5.5 presents the vertical extends of the two aquifers
through the contour maps of the top and the bottom levels of the aquifer.
5.3.2. Groundwater Levels and Movement
The groundwater levels for both the Upper Cretaceous carbonate and the
Lower Cretaceous sandstone (Malha Formation) are obtained from the
Groundwater Sector in the Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation
(MWRI). The potentiometric maps are based on the water levels data collected
from numerous deep wells tapping both aquifers dated back to 2002. The
potentiometric map of the Upper Cretaceous (Figure 5.6) shows that
groundwater flows from the southeast to the northwest with an average
hydraulic gradient of 0.005 till the mid of the modeled area and then moves
with a relatively mild hydraulic gradient of 0.0017 for the rest of the domain.
The map indicates that a highest potentiometric level, within the study area, of
300 m.a.m.s.l. (meters above mean sea level) is observed at the southeastern
part of the model where it starts fluxing into the model domain and terminates
the study area at a potentiometric level of 50 m.a.m.s.l. The recharge to the
Upper Cretaceous aquifer occurs through direct infiltration of rainfall or from
surface flow on its exposed areas where the estimated rate of recharge to the
Upper Cretaceous aquifer is about 190,000 m3/day (Dames and Moore, 1985)
The potentiometric surface map of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer (Figure

5.7) indicates that water moves from the southern part of the model with an
average hydraulic gradient of 0.006 and diverts eastward to exit the eastern
boundary to Wadi Arava Rift in Palestine with a water level of 50 m.a.m.s.l..
The Malha aquifer system is believed to function as an unconfined aquifer only
at a limited zone (1 to 2 km) near its southern outcrops at which recharge to the
aquifer takes place, and is confined elsewhere, being capped by the overlying
Upper Cretaceous complex.
100
The potentiometric maps prove that the two aquifers are not hydraulically
connected where the Lower Cretaceous sandstone aquifer is believed to be
confined over the studied domain while the Upper Cretaceous carbonate
aquifer is considered unconfined.
5.3.3. Groundwater Quality
Figure 5.8 represents the iso-salinity contour map of the Upper Cretaceous
aquifer system. It indicates a general trend of salinity increase towards the
north. The concentration ranges from 3,000 mg/L near the southeastern
boundary to 10,000 mg/L at the northwestern boundary with a mild salinity
gradient in the southeastern northwestern direction till the middle of the study
domain where the slope steeps sharply until the end of studied area. Figure 5.9
represents the iso-salinity contour map of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer. It
shows a general increase of groundwater salinity towards the northwestern
direction. The Lower Cretaceous aquifer within the studied area has a salinity
range of 2,000 to 10,000 mg/L.
It can be shown from the iso-salinity figures that the groundwater quality
of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer is generally better than that of the Upper
Cretaceous aquifer. This supports the presence of more wells tapping the
Lower Cretaceous than the Upper Cretaceous in the study region. For the same
point in a horizontal plane, the average salinity difference between the two
aquifers is about 1,000 mg/L. Thus, the injection of the reject brine will take
place in the Upper Cretaceous aquifer.
101
Figure 5.3. Contours of Top Level of the Upper Cretaceous Aquifer
102
Figure 5.4. Contours of Base Level of the Upper Cretaceous Aquifer
103
Figure 5.5. Contours of Base Level of the Lower Cretaceous Aquifer
104
Figure 5.6. The Potentiometric Map of the Upper Cretaceous Aquifer
105
Figure 5.7. The Potentiometric Map of the Lower Cretaceous Aquifer
106
Figure 5.8. The Iso-salinity Contour Map of the Upper Cretaceous Aquifer in
Sinai (EPIQ Water Policy Team, 1998)
107
Figure 5.9. The Iso-salinity Contour Map of the Lower Cretaceous Aquifer in
Sinai (EPIQ Water Policy Team, 1998)
108
5.3.4. Aquifer Hydraulic Properties
Potentiometeric maps of both the Upper and Lower Cretaceous aquifers

indicate that the two aquifers are not hydraulically connected and are separated
by a clay layer extending between the two aquifers. Thus, three hydrogeologic
units are included in the model and they are defined based on the available data
as follows:
The Upper Cretaceous Carbonate water-bearing formation having a high

hydraulic conductivity
The Lower Cretaceous Sandstone water-bearing formation with a higher
hydraulic conductivity than that of the Upper.
Fine grained thin layer of clay with a very low hydraulic conductivity
which extends in the entire model domain separating the two previous
hydrogeologic units.
The potentiometric maps of both the Upper and the Lower Cretaceous
aquifers are presented in Figures 5.6 and 5.7. It can be seen that the water
levels in the Upper Cretaceous is higher than that of the Lower Cretaceous by
almost 100 meters.
For the Upper Cretaceous carbonate aquifer, a value of 1x10-4 m-1 is

assumed for the specific storage and a specific yield of 0.05. This assumption is
based on the average values for unconfined and carbonates formations. For the
Lower Cretaceous sandstone aquifer, the specific storage is assumed to be
1x10-5 m-1 and a value of 0.15 for the specific yield.
109
5.3.5. Domain Spatial Discretization for the Regional Model
The regional model is divided into a total of nine vertical layers (numerical
layers) of which hydraulic parameters are required to be identified. Six layers
comprise the Upper Cretaceous aquifer and one transition clay layer is assumed
between the Upper Cretaceous and the Lower Cretaceous aquifers with a
thickness of 10 meters. The eighth and the ninth layers comprise the Lower
aquifer. At any location, the thickness of each of these two layers is taken as
half the total thickness of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer at that location. The
first six layers that form the Upper Cretaceous are divided as follows. The
bottom five layers have thickness of 50 meters each while the upper most layer
has a thickness equal to the remaining portion of the aquifer till the top of the
Upper Cretaceous aquifer. In the horizontal direction each of these layers is
divided into grid cells with size of 250m in both X and Y direction. This results
in a total number of model cells of 514,560. However, not all of these cells
contribute in the calculations as some of these cells are inactive cells due to the
irregular geometry of the study region in all directions. These inactive cells are
handled in the MODFLOW environment as an array with certain flags. The
flags are used to indicate whether the cell is active or inactive within each layer
so that it is taken into consideration in the model simulation or not.
A model grid of 268 rows, 320 columns and 9 layers is used to represent the
study area. The study focuses on the salt migration in the host formation of the
injection process which is the Upper Cretaceous aquifer. Therefore, the
discretization is increased in the injection aquifer and the layer thickness is
limited to 50 meters whereas a coarser grid is used in the Lower Cretaceous
aquifer. The nine layers of the model are conceptualized as shown in Figures
5.11 and 5.12. To summarize the model conceptualization:
Layers two to six have a uniform thickness of 50 m each while layer one
is the remaining thickness of the aquifer from the top of layer two to the
top of the Upper Cretaceous aquifer;
110
Layer 7 is a transition clay layer between the two water-bearing
formations which acts as an impervious layer between the Upper and the
Lower Cretaceous aquifers;
Layers 8 and 9 have non-uniform thickness varying from one grid cell to
another with a value equal half the total thickness of the Lower
Cretaceous aquifer.
5.3.6. Domain Spatial Discretization for the Local Model
The local model is extracted from the regional model and is developed to
allow for a finer gird in order to better simulate the salts migration. The salinity
plume migration distance is expected to be small due to the low injection rates
of the Al-Monbateh desalination plant (i.e., 16 m3/day). The local model is
taken 5 km x 5 km (Figure 5.10) where the boundaries are set such that the
southern boundary is 2 km away from the injection well and the western
boundary is 3 km away from the well.
Figure 5.10. The Location of the Local Model With Respect to the Regional
Model
The local model domain is divided into 12 layers, the upper most six layers
comprise the Upper Cretaceous aquifer with the last five layers having a
thickness of 50 meters each while the top layer has a thickness equals to the
111
remaining thickness of the aquifer. The seventh layer is the transition clay layer
separating the two aquifers, and the lower five layers comprise the Lower
Cretaceous aquifer with each layer thickness equal to one fifth the total
thickness of the aquifer. In the horizontal direction each of these layers is
divided into grid cells with size x = 50 m and y = 50 m resulting in a total
number of cells of 10,000. Figure 5.13 shows a plan view and typical cross-
sections (East-West and South-North) for the local model and the suggested
location of the injection well is also shown in the figure.
112
Figure 5.11. Typical Cross-Sections (East-West) in the Conceptual Regional Model (row 169 and row 230)
Figure 5.12. Typical Cross-Sections (South-North) in the Conceptual Regional Model (column 80 and column 186)
113
Figure 5.13. Plan View and Typical Cross-Sections (East-West and South-North) for the Local Model (The location of the injection
well is shown as a black dot)
114
5.4. Boundary and Initial Conditions and Implementation of
MODFLOW
The dependence of head on fluid density has important implications for

assigning boundary heads, particularly when the density of the boundary head
changes during the simulation. In this study, it is initially assumed that there is
no change in salinity concentration at the boundaries as the injection wells are
far from the domain boundaries and thus the plume migration of the injected
reject brine will not reach the boundaries of the model.
Initial conditions represent starting values for the dependent variable, such
as freshwater head for groundwater flow and concentration for solute transport,
at some starting time. Initial conditions for both flow and transport must be
specified for transient simulations. For this study region, the point-water heads
(saline water heads) are converted to freshwater heads and assigned to the
model boundaries.
In the chosen study region, the model boundaries are chosen based on the
hydrologeologic conditions of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer. The upper
(northern) boundary is taken as no-flow boundary as it comprises the terminal
of the Lower Cretaceous, where the aquifer changes into deeply faulted
limestone region towards the north side, therefore, the northern boundary can
be considered as no-flux. The other three boundaries, the south, the west and
the east are considered specified head boundaries and the assigned freshwater
head values are determined at the points where the boundaries intersect with
the saline water contours.
The boundaries of the Upper Cretaceous aquifer have the same extent as
that of the Lower Cretaceous. However, the four boundaries are specified head
boundaries obtained from the intersection of the model boundaries with the
saline water contours of the Upper Cretaceous aquifer which are converted into
equivalent freshwater heads.
115
5.4.1. Injection Well
First a base case scenario representing the current condition is established.

In the base case the calibration parameters are estimated such that model
predicted heads match measured head to a certain degree of tolerance. After
establishing the base case the flow field is updated to account for the presence
of the proposed injection well at a distance of 200 m north Al-Monbateh. This
location is selected downgradient from the production well as the flow moves
in the south-north direction. The well package in MODFLOW is used to
simulate the production and injection wells in the study region. For each cell at
the well location, a negative flow value (m3/day) is assigned to indicate a
volumetric extraction whereas a positive value is assigned for the injection
rates. Based on the data provided from Al-Monbateh desalination plant, the
reject brine volume is estimated to be 16 m3/day.
The regional study area encompasses nine deep production wells, two of
which tap the Upper Cretaceous aquifer while the other seven tap the Lower
Cretaceous aquifer. Figure 5.14 shows the location of the wells with respect to
the model boundaries while Table 5.1 gives the technical and hydrogeologic
data of the wells
Figure 5.14. Satellite Images Showing the Location of the Study Area and the
Location of the Nine Wells within the Study Region
116
Table 5.1. Technical and Hydrogeologic Data of Wells in Study Region
Location
Well Producing Yield Well Type Depth to
Lat. Long. aquifer (m3/hr) and Use Water
(N) (E)
Production /
Gebel Libni 3044' 3353' U. Cr. 11 220
Agriculture
Test
Talaat El
3029' 34 3' U. Cr. - Productive / 163
Badan
Abandoned
Production /
Halal 1 3041' 3410' L. Cr. 10 160
Agriculture
Production /
Halal 2 3041' 34 9' L. Cr. 35 140
Agriculture
Production /
Agriculture
Monbateh 3039' 3413 L. Cr. 30 167
and
desalination
Sabha 3043' 3425' L. Cr. - - -
Hodeibiya 3035' 3413' L. Cr. - - -
Gaifi 3035' 3422' L. Cr. - - -
Garour 3029' 3420' L. Cr. - - -
5.4.2. Hydraulic Conductivity
For better simulation for the aquifers in the study area, the modeled layers
are taken heterogeneous. Thus the values of the hydraulic conductivity for the
Upper Cretaceous aquifer and the Lower Cretaceous aquifer differ spatially,
while a single value (i.e., homogenous conditions) is assigned for the clay layer
separating the two aquifer.
5.5. Model Calibration
Calibration is the process of modifying the input parameters to a

groundwater model (e.g., hydraulic conductivity) until the output resulting
from the numerical simulation model matches an observed set of data (e.g.,
water levels). One of the tools provided in GMS for model calibration is
automated parameter estimation. Automated parameter estimation is supported
in GMS for the MODFLOW simulations using PEST, a general purpose
parameter estimation utility (Doherty, 1994). With automated parameter
estimation, inverse modeling is used to iteratively adjust a set of parameters
117
and repeatedly launch the model until the computed output matches field-
observed values. In this study, the parameter estimation program PEST is used
to calibrate the flow model using the hydraulic conductivity as the calibration
parameter and the water heads as the calibration target. It implements a
nonlinear least squares regression method to estimate model parameters by
minimizing the sum of squared weighted residuals.
Due to variation in the salinity of the groundwater over the area of the two
simulated aquifers, the density varies spatially. Thus, the measured heads,
known as point-water heads which are the heads in terms of the native aquifer
waters, are not the freshwater heads which MODFLOW reads and writes. Since
PEST is supported for the MODFLOW simulations, then the calibration targets
which are the water heads must be read in terms of freshwater heads. To
evaluate the freshwater heads from the point-water heads, the relationship
between salt concentration and fluid density is required as well as the
relationship between the freshwater and point-water heads. For isothermal
conditions, fluid density is predominantly affected by the salt concentration. An
empirical relation between the density of saltwater and concentration was
developed by Baxter and Wallace (1916):
f EC , (5.1)
where is the water density at any concentration level [ML-3], f is the
freshwater density [ML-3], E is a dimensionless constant having an

approximate value of 0.7143 for salt concentrations ranging from zero to that
of seawater, and C is the salt concentration [ML-3].
For two piezometers open to a given point, N, in an aquifer containing

saline water, with piezometer A containing freshwater and piezometer B
containing water identical to that present in the saline aquifer at point N, the
freshwater head at point N is the elevation of the water level in piezometer A
above datum as shown in Figure 5.15, and is given by:
118
PN (5.2)
hf ZN
f g
where h f is the equivalent freshwater head [L], PN is the pressure at point N within
the saline water [ML-1T-2], f is the density of freshwater [ML-3], g is the
gravitational acceleration [LT-2], and Z N is the elevation of point N above an arbitrary
datum [L].
Figure 5.15. Two Piezometers, One Filled with Freshwater and the Other with
Saline Aquifer Water, Open to the Same Point in the Aquifer.
For the Lower Cretaceous aquifer, a set of six points is selected to

represent the observation data. Two of them are the available most recent
measured heads of Al-Monbateh and El-Halal-2 wells obtained from the North
Sinais General Directorate of Groundwater dating back to 2009, while the
other four observation points are chosen at the locations of known head
contours. For the Upper Cretaceous aquifer, a set of eight points is selected to
represent the observed heads. These eight points are chosen at the location of
known head contours. The locations of points for the Upper and the Lower
Cretaceous aquifers are shown in Figures 5.16 and 5.17, respectively.
The calibration process is performed as follows: a set of observed water

heads is provided, the flow model is executed several times, and the model
solution is imported to GMS each time. GMS automatically compares the
119
computed solution to the observation points, and the residual errors are
calculated. The sum of squared weighted residuals, with the weights assigned
based on the reliability and quality of each observation point, is then calculated
and compared to previous iterations. The process is repeated until the minimum
sum of squared weighted residuals is obtained. A plot showing the value of the
objective function (sum of squared weighted residuals) with the number of
model runs (iterations) is prepared and updated each time. This allows the
modeler to observe the calibration process and judge whether the model is
converging or diverging.
After PEST converges to an optimum solution, the solution is imported to

GMS, and a calibration goodness of fit (target bar) which represents the
magnitude of the residual error is displayed next to each observation point as
shown in Figures 5.16 and 5.17. The size of the target bar is based on the
standard deviation of the measurement error which is determined automatically
by assigning the limit intervals of the observation point. A standard deviation
of 0.75 m is considered for both aquifers.
Two parameterization schemes within PEST can be used; either to estimate

a single value for the hydraulic conductivity assuming a homogeneous aquifer
domain or to use different values at scattered points, known as Pilot Points, to
account for the heterogeneity of the aquifer until the objective function is
minimized. A common strategy is adopted to improve the first scheme by
subdividing the model domain into zones of assumed uniform parameter values
based on geological or other information. Unfortunately, such information is
often absent or unreliable. Furthermore, there can be a considerable degree of
variation of hydraulic conductivity within each geologic unit. As a result, the
pilot points methodology is very attractive; where instead of creating a zone
and having the inverse model estimate one value for the entire zone, the value
of the parameter within the zone is interpolated from the pilot points. Using this
technique, PEST is asked to assign hydraulic conductivities to discrete points
within the model domain. The hydraulic conductivity at each cell or node of the
120
numerical groundwater model is then calculated from the hydraulic
conductivities assigned to these pilot points using a spatial interpolation
algorithm such as Kriging or Inverse Distance Weighted (IDW) interpolation.
In this study the pilot points parameterization scheme is adopted with six
scatter points for each of the Lower Cretaceous and the Upper Cretaceous
aquifers and the IDW interpolation is utilized. Many trials were performed for
obtaining the most appropriate locations for the pilot points within the model
domain to obtain a minimum sum of squared residuals. Figure 5.16 shows the
locations of the best six pilot points in the Upper Cretaceous aquifer whereas
Figure 5.17 shows the locations of the best six pilot points in the Lower
Cretaceous aquifer.
Figure 5.16. Location of the Six Pilot Points Shown by the Triangular Symbol
on the Model Domain with the Potentiometric Map in the Background. Also
Shown are the Box Plots of the Errors Associated with each Observation Point
as Estimated from the Calibration Process for the Upper Cretaceous Aquifer.
121
Figure 5.17. Location of the Six Pilot Points Shown by the Rhombus Symbol
on the Model Domain with the Potentiometric Map in the Background. Also
Shown are the Box Plots of the Errors Associated with each Observation Point
as Estimated from the Calibration Process for the Lower Cretaceous Aquifer.
It is worth noting that during extracting the local model from the developed
regional model, the same pilot points sets of the Upper and the Lower
Cretaceous aquifer are used for interpolation for creating the heterogeneity
fields of the aquifers. Calibration targets are created in both aquifers for
validating the extraction process of the local model.
5.5.1. Estimated Parameters
The estimated parameters from the inverse modeling approach are the
horizontal hydraulic conductivities of the Lower Cretaceous and Upper
Cretaceous aquifers. An anisotropy value of 1:3 is assumed for obtaining the
values of the vertical hydraulic conductivities of the modeled aquifers. The
parameter estimation program, PEST, requires specifying an acceptable
interval for the estimated parameter. The lower and upper limits defining this
interval are given in Table 5.2. Also, the estimated hydraulic conductivity
values for the six pilot points for each aquifer obtained through the calibration
process are listed in the table.
122
Table 5.2. Parameter Estimation (PEST) Calibration Parameters and Estimated
Values and the Acceptable Intervals
Estimated Acceptable Interval
Parameter
Value (m/day) Lower limit Upper limit
Point 1 0.136568
Hydraulic Point 2 17.86299
conductivity for Point 3 0.00029
1 1000
the Upper Point 4 1.135464
Cretaceous aquifer Point 5 1.131695
Point 6 0.186727
Hydraulic One 3.26x10-6
conductivity for value for
0.0001 1x10-7
the confining clay the layer
layer
Point 1 0.390443
Hydraulic Point 2 0.28771
conductivity for Point 3 269.2224
1 1000
the Lower Point 4 0.06921
Cretaceous aquifer Point 5 12.67441
Point 6 21.58198
5.5.2. Assessment of Calibration
The results of the calibration are assessed by comparing the simulated and
measured heads as shown in Figures 5.18 and 5.19. The computed water heads
after the calibration process are plotted against the observed heads at the
available observation points for both the Upper Cretaceous and Lower
Cretaceous aquifers. The 45 degree line is also shown which represents the
perfect match between the modeled heads and the observed heads. The figure
shows that the simulated heads are very close to the observed heads. It should
be emphasized that the heads for both aquifers are either obtained from the
observed heads from the wells tapping the aquifers or the available
potentiometric maps as discussed earlier.
Tables 5.3 and 5.4 summarize the comparison between the observed and
the computed heads at the eight points of the Upper Cretaceous aquifer and the
six points of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer.
123
Figure 5.18. Comparison between the Computed Heads after Calibration and
the Observed Heads for the Eight Observation Points of the Upper Cretaceous
Aquifer.
Figure 5.19. Comparison between the Computed Heads after Calibration and
the Observed Heads for the Six Observation Points of the Lower Cretaceous
Aquifer.
Table 5.3. Comparison between the Observed Heads and the Model Computed Heads
for the Upper Cretaceous Aquifer.
Point Observed Computed Residual % of
Head (m) Head (m) (m) Residual
1 50 51.13 -1.13 -2.27
2 100 99.70 0.30 0.30
3 100 100.70 -0.70 -0.70
4 150 149.41 0.59 0.39
5 150 147.84 2.16 1.44
6 200 199.54 0.46 0.23
7 200 200.33 -0.33 -0.16
8 250 248.98 1.02 0.41
124
Table 5.4. Comparison between the Observed Heads and the Model Computed
Heads for the Lower Cretaceous Aquifer.
Point Observed Computed Residual % of
Head (m) Head (m) (m) Residual
1 (Halal-2) 30 32.63 -2.63 -8.76
2 (Monbateh) 34 33.58 0.42 1.23
3 100 100.10 -0.10 -0.10
4 50 48.70 1.30 2.59
5 50 50.68 -0.68 -1.35
6 100 100.19 -0.19 -0.19
To ensure that there is no trend in the errors, the percentage error (residuals
divided by the observed heads) are plotted for observation points of the Upper
and Lower Cretaceous aquifers in Figure 5.20. No correlation appears to exist
between the residuals. Also it can be seen from the figure that the maximum
error does not exceed 9% at one point only whereas all the other points have
errors below 3%.
4.00
2.00
0.00
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
% Residual
-2.00
-4.00
-6.00
-8.00 Lower Cretaceous

Upper Cretaceous
-10.00
Figure 5.20. Percentage Error at each of the Eight and Six Observations used
in the Model Calibration for the Upper and the Lower Cretaceous aquifer.
125
5.6. Transport Model
The transport model utilizes the flow results from MODFLOW and
incorporates advection and dispersive transport processes. Geochemical
reactions that may take place, especially for heavy metals, are not considered as
they are not present in the case of reject brine injection.
The purpose of the transport simulations is to forecast the release and

migration of the salts associated with the injected reject brine from the
proposed injection well located 200 m north Al-Monbateh production well. The
aim is to use these transport simulations to analyze different injection scenarios
and to examine the effects of different geologic interpretations and structures
on the distance traveled by the salt plume and the area impacted by the
contamination. This allows calculating the average salinity change for the
affected domain of the injection zone and thus an evaluation of the
environmental penalty resulting from the injection process in the Upper
Cretaceous aquifer.
The results of the flow model are used as the input for the transport model
along with relevant transport parameters. The used SEAWAT code was
developed by combining MODFLOW and MT3DMS into a single program that
solves the coupled flow and solute-transport through the governing equations
of the three-dimensional, variable-density, transient groundwater flow and
solute transport in porous media.
5.7. Base Case Scenario
The calibrated parameters are used to perform the base case simulations
which represent the current situation. The production rates of the wells in the
study region are taken as listed in Table 5.1. The resulting heads of the Upper
and Lower Cretaceous aquifers in the model domain are presented in Chapter
six.
In the base case, the clay layer is assumed to separate the Upper and the
Lower Cretaceous aquifers. This assumption is driven from the potentiometric
126
maps of the two aquifers. It might not be a conservative assumption because
there is uncertainty about the extent of the clay layer and whether it covers the
modeled region. The injection will take place in the Upper aquifer while the
production aquifer is the bottom aquifer which raises the risk of leakage of the
concentrate to the producing aquifer if that clay layer has a limited extent.
However, the effect of this assumption and the uncertainty associated with the
clay extension will be examined in Chapter six.
The specific storage and the specific yield are also required for the
modeling of the study region. Specific storage values are assumed 0.0001 m-1
and 0.00001 m-1 for the Upper and Lower Cretaceous aquifers, respectively,
whereas the specific yield is taken 0.05 and 0.15 for the Upper and Lower
aquifers, respectively. The assumption is based on the typical ranges for
specific yield for various aquifer materials described by American Society of
Civil Engineers (1996) in the Hydrology Handbook. The values for carbonate
(limestone) units usually range between 0.5 and 5% and for sandstone units;
they range from 5 to 15%.
For the transport simulations, the parameters used are the porosity and the
porous medium dispersivity for the two water-bearing formations. Porosity is a
critical parameter that determines how fast groundwater is moving and thus
how fast any solute dissolved in water will be moving. Usually the values of
the effective porosity for carbonate (limestone) ranges between 0.07 and 0.56
and for sandstone they range from 0.14 to 0.49 (McWorter and Sunada, 1977).
Values of porosity of both the Upper and Lower Cretaceous aquifers are very
limited and not reported in most reports, however, they are taken as 0.35 and
0.30, whereas a value of 0.4 is assumed for the porosity of the clay layer.
Many flow and transport simulation trials are performed for obtaining
reasonable values for both the longitudinal and transverse dispersivities. A
constant value for the ratio between the transverse to the longitudinal
dispersivity is set equal to 0.2 for both the horizontal and vertical transverse
dispersivities. Trials for longitudinal dispersivity of 100, 200, and 500 m for
127
the Upper Cretaceous aquifer and 50, 100, and 200 m for the Lower Cretaceous
aquifer are carried and the chosen longitudinal dispersivities are 200 m and 50
m for the Upper and Lower Cretaceous aquifers, respectively. The initial
salinity of the water of both aquifer are assigned to the model grid based on the
iso-salinity contour maps presented earlier in this chapter.
After establishing the base case, the flow field is updated to account for the
proposed injection well. The same model is used to obtain the transient state
flow field after adding the injection rate (16 m3/day). Different injection
scenarios are studied and the results are presented and discussed in the next
chapter.
128
CHAPTER SIX
INJECTION SCENARIOS RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
This chapter presents the results of the groundwater flow and transport
simulations associated with different injection scenarios. The simulation model
is run for a simulation time frame of 25 years. The base-case calibrated flow
model is first used for transport modeling followed by the modeling of the
different proposed injection scenarios. Some cases are also considered
addressing sensitivity and uncertainty issues as stated in chapter five.
The developed model is then used to simulate the case of extraction of Al-
Monbateh well from the Lower Cretaceous aquifer and the injection of the
reject brine in the Upper Cretaceous aquifer. Although the injection rate might
seem small (i.e., 16 m3/day) but it can result in an environmental deterioration
and economic penalty on a long-term basis. Injection of brine in deeply seated
layers of the Upper Cretaceous aquifer will result in increased concentration of
the salts in the water stored in the aquifer, which will result in an increased cost
of a later desalination of the stored water. This issue is addressed in this chapter
where the affected volume, the corresponding increased water salinity resulting
from the injection, and the economic penalty are calculated from the model
results.
The first case is the simulation of an extraction of 300 m3/day from the
Lower Cretaceous Sandstone aquifer through Al-Monbateh well and an
injection of 16 m3/day of reject brine in the Upper aquifer. The injection well
location is chosen such that the flow in the Upper Cretaceous aquifer moves the
reject brine to the northwest direction away from the domain of extraction,
regardless of the fact that the two aquifers are hydraulically not connected that
was based on the available potentiometric maps. This arrangement ensures that
129
no brine will migrate downwards to the extraction area in case the clay layer is
not present in some areas.
Simulation is run for 25 years to study the extent of the increased salt
concentration plume in both the horizontal and vertical directions around the
injection well. Three injection scenarios are studied:
Scenario one: Injection through a 100 m screen located at the bottom of

the Upper Cretaceous aquifer
Scenario two: Injection through a 50 m screen located at the bottom of
the Upper Cretaceous aquifer
Scenario three: Injection through a 50 m screen the end of which is at a
distance of 50 m from the bottom of the Upper Cretaceous aquifer
6.1. Groundwater Flow Results of the Base-Case Calibrated Model
The calibrated parameters are used to perform the base case simulations
which represent the current situation. The production rates of the wells in the
study region are taken as listed in Table 5.1. The resulting head distribution of
the Upper Cretaceous aquifer in the model domain is shown in Figure 6.1 while
the resulting heads of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer are shown in Figure 6.2.
The same model is used to obtain the transient state flow field after
assigning the injection rate (16 m3/day) for 25-years period. Continuous
injection commonly leads to a buildup of head around the injection well which
can create a strong vertical gradient leading to a vertical movement of the reject
through the clay layer to migrate to the Lower Cretaceous aquifer. However,
due to the small injection rate, the simulation results show an expected small
increase in the heads around the injection well which does not exceed one
meter.
130
Figure 6.1. The Head Distribution of the Upper Cretaceous Aquifer for the
Base-Case Calibrated Model
Figure 6.2. The Head Distribution of the Lower Cretaceous Aquifer for the
Base-Case Calibrated Model
6.2. Results of the First Injection Scenario
The injection takes place in the lowest 100 m of the Upper Cretaceous
aquifer and just above the clay layer separating the two aquifers. Figure 6.3
shows a plan view for the study area and a zoom-in view around the disposal
well to clearly show the concentrated salt plume. It is shown that after 25 years
of continuous injection of the reject brine, the concentrated salt plume with a
131
concentration contour 4.5 kg/m3 (4,500 ppm) migrates a distance of about 225
m west and 150 m north of the injection location while about 100 m east and
south of the injection point. The extent of the plume is more stretched in the
northwest direction which is aligned with the direction of groundwater flow in
this aquifer.
To depict the full three dimensional view of the concentrated salt plume,
two vertical cross sections passing through the well and oriented south-north
and west-east are shown Figure 6.4. It is shown that the plume did not migrate
downward and did not reach the Lower Cretaceous aquifer (i.e., the source of
feed water) because of the presence of the clay layer with the very low
hydraulic conductivity.
Figure 6.5 exhibits the time evolution of the relative concentration at

different distances along the northwest direction from the point of injection. It
can be observed that as we go farther from the injection point, the relative
concentration decreases. At 250 meters away from the injection well, the curve
is almost horizontal and no change in the concentration is witnessed.
Figure 6.3. Injection Results of the First Injection Scenario showing the Salt
Plume Distribution after 25 years of Continuous Injection in Plan View.
132
Figure 6.4. Injection Results of the First Injection Scenario showing the Salt
Plume Distribution after 25 years of Continuous Injection. The Top Part is a
East-West Cross-Sectional View and the Lower Part is a South-North Cross-
Sectional View.
7
Relative Concentration
5
250 m
4 200 m
150 m
3
100 m
2 50 m
1
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (years)
Figure 6.5. Relative Concentration Curves at Different Distances From the

Injection Well for Scenario One.
133
6.3. Results of the Second Injection Scenario
The injection in this scenario is assumed to occur through a 50-m screen

located at the bottom of the Upper Cretaceous aquifer. The resulting plume is
shown in Figures 6.6 and 6.7. After 25 years of continuous injection, the
concentrated salt plume with the concentration contour 4.5 kg/m3 migrates a
distance of about 225 m west and 150 m north of the injection location while
about 100 m east and south of the injection point. The extent of the plume is
more stretched in the northwest direction where the flow of the groundwater
occurs.
The two vertical cross sections passing through the well show that the
plume did not migrate downward and did not reach the Lower Cretaceous
aquifer because of the presence of the clay layer. However an upward
migration of about 75 m above the injection location is observed. The presence
of the clay layer beneath the injection zone bounds the salt migration
downwards in the vertical direction and helps the salt to spread more laterally.
The area impacted by the increased salinity is relatively smaller than that of the
first scenario and so is the volume. This is discussed in details in Section 6.6
6.4. Results of the Third Injection Scenario
Similar to the previous two injection scenarios, the injection takes place in
50 m of the Upper Cretaceous aquifer at a distance of 50 m above the clay layer
separating the two aquifers. Figure 6.8 shows a plan view for the resulting
plume and a zoom-in view around the disposal well to clearly show the plume.
It is seen that after 25 years of continuous injection at a rate of 16 m3/day, the
concentrated salt plume migrates a distance of about 175 m west and 125 m
north of the injection location while about 125 m east and south of the injection
point.
Figure 6.9 depict the full three dimensional view of the concentrated salt
plume. It shows two vertical cross sections where the salt plume migrates
downwards a distance of 75 m to reach the clay layer and migrates 100 m
134
above the injection point. Compared to the second injection scenario, the
absence of the clay layer just below the injection zone gives the plume the
freedom to spread downwards in the vertical direction.
The horizontal extent of the plume is relatively smaller than both the first
and second scenarios. However, the vertical migration is slightly larger which
results in a larger impacted volume. This result and the economic implications
are discussed in the environmental penalty of injection in Section 6.6
Figure 6.6. Injection Results of the Second Injection Scenario showing the Salt
plume Distribution after 25 years of Continuous Injection in Plan View.
135
Figure 6.7. Injection Results of Second Scenario showing the Salt plume
Distribution after 25 years of Continuous Injection. The Top Part is a East-
West Cross-Sectional View and the Lower Part is a South-North Cross-
Sectional View.
Figure 6.8. Injection Results of the Third Injection Scenario showing the Salt
plume Distribution after 25 years of Continuous Injection in Plan View.
136
Figure 6.9. Injection Results of the Third Injection Scenario showing the Salt
plume Distribution after 25 years of Continuous Injection. The Top Part is a
East-West Cross-Sectional View and the Lower Part is a South-North Cross-
Sectional View.
6.5. Uncertainty in the Clay Layer Extent
The clay layer separating the Lower and Upper Cretaceous aquifers is
assumed to extend entirely between the two formations based on the available
potentiometric and iso-salinity maps of both aquifers. However, there is no
guarantee that clay is laterally continuous and forms a complete confining layer
to the Lower Cretaceous aquifer along the full extent of the model domain. If
the clay layer is fully separating the Lower Cretaceous aquifer from the Upper
Cretaceous aquifer, then little or no migration downwards from the injection
zone to the lower aquifer would be expected.
The uncertainty in the lateral extent of the clay layer is addressed by

changing the hydraulic properties (i.e., the hydraulic conductivity) of the clay
layer beneath the injection zone for a distance of 250 m in both x and y
directions to the that of either the Upper or the Lower Cretaceous aquifers. The
transport simulation results of the two cases differ slightly. The case of
137
assigning the hydraulic conductivity values of the Upper Cretaceous aquifer is
discussed with the understanding that the other case yields more of less similar
results.
As the injection takes place in the lowest 50 m of the Upper Cretaceous

aquifer, Figure 6.10 displays the results of addressing the impact of uncertainty
in lateral extent of the clay layer beneath the injection zone located in lowest 50
m of the Upper aquifer. The figure shows the salt plume in the Upper aquifer.
The plume in this case spreads laterally equally in all direction comparing to
the previous three injection scenarios and with almost a distance of 200 m
around the injection point. Figure 6.11 shows the salt concentration plume in
plan view at successive 50 meters downwards from the start of the Lower
Cretaceous aquifer till the bottom of the aquifer. The plume in the Lower
aquifer takes a stretched shape like previous scenarios with elongation in the
direction of groundwater flow to the northwest. The cross-sections shown in
Figure 6.12 indicate that the vertical migration is larger than the previous
injection scenarios and reaches 175 m upwards from the point of injection and
downwards to the Lower Cretaceous aquifer.
Figure 6.10. Injection Results of Uncertainty in Clay Layer extension showing

the Concentrated Salt plume Distribution after 25 years of Continuous Injection
in Plan View.
138
1 2
3 4
Figure 6.11. Injection Results of Uncertainty in Clay Layer Extension showing the
Salts Concentration Plume Distribution in Plan at Successive 50 meters downwards
from the Injection Zone after 25 years of Continuous Injection.
139
Figure 6.12. Injection Results of Uncertainty in Clay Layer Extension showing
the Salt plume Distribution after 25 years of Continuous Injection. The Top
Part is a East-West Cross-Sectional View and the Lower Part is a South-North
Cross-Sectional View.
6.6. The Environmental Penalty of Injection
The injection of reject brine into groundwater aquifers has a number of

environmental implications and undesirable effects. These include changing the
hydraulic properties of the receiving aquifer such as reduction in permeability
of the host formation or the perforations or screens that are placed in the wells
injection interval. This can be caused by particle/colloid migration into the
formation, bacterial growth, emulsification of fluids, and precipitation of
dissolved matter. Another impact is the fracture of the host geologic units
resulting in the hydraulic interconnection of the injection horizon and adjacent
aquifers. Also the build-up of high subsurface pressures can cause the
fracturing of confining strata and create pathways for the vertical migration of
injected fluids. Corroding or plugging of the injection wells are also
environmental penalties which add costs due to required maintenance. If a
plugging of an injection well occurs and the formation gets worse, the need of
140
larger injection pressures becomes crucial to maintain a given flow rate, which
can lead to well failure, causing the spread of concentrated reject brine and
compromising safety.
In this study we only focus on one of these environmental impacts

resulting from the injection of the reject brine in the deep aquifer and translate
it into an equivalent cost. The environmental penalty used here is defined as the
increased cost of desalination of the aquifer water volume that experiences an
adverse increase in salinity after the end of the simulation compared to the
background salinity of the aquifer.
The addressed environmental impact as defined above provides the

convenience of a relative comparison between the different scenarios using this
measure. Another reason behind using it is the possibility of expressing the
impact on the desalination costs where desalination holds a great potential as
a future water resource.
In this environmental penalty approach, a benchmarked change in salinity

of 1,000 ppm is taken as the reference to account for the total volume
estimation. In other words, if a salinity of a certain volume of water has
increased by 1,000 ppm or more in the grid cells then an active flag is assigned
to the cell and this volume is taken in consideration in estimating the total
volume. The water volume is calculated by multiplying the volume of the grid
cells times the porosity of the layer. This volume of the water is then multiplied
by the salinity of each grid cell after the 25-year simulation period to estimate
the mass of the salts of the affected volume. By summation of the mass salts of
the total affected grid cells and dividing by their total volume, an average
salinity can then be estimated.
Using the same active flag array of the affected grid cells, and with the
same approach used above, the average salinity is calculated for the native
water of the aquifer. It should be noted that the background and the increased
141
salt concentrations vary from one cell to another in the model grid cells. In
summary, the equations used to obtain the average salinity are written as:
Vw nVg (6.1)
ik1 SiVgi (6.2)

S avg
ik1 Vgi
where Vw is the water volume [m3], n is the aquifer effective porosity

[dimensionless], Vg is the grid cell volume [m3], Savg is the average salinity
[kg/m3], S is the salinity [kg/m3], and K is the number of active flagged cells
(the cells with a salinity increase of 1 kg/m3 or more)
Without regard to the injection taking place in the Upper Cretaceous

aquifer and the production is from the Lower Cretaceous aquifer, the increase
in salinity of the Upper Cretaceous will reflect in an increased cost of
desalination in case of a future utilization of the aquifer. The environmental
penalty is the increased cost of desalination due to the salinity change that the
native aquifer water has experienced.
Excel spreadsheet is used to perform the calculation and MATLAB is used

for preparing and handling the output data of the GMS software to be input for
the spreadsheet. Figure 6.13 shows a screenshot of the Excel spreadsheet
developed.
Figure 6.13. Screenshot of the Excel Spreadsheet Used for Calculation of the
Environmental Penalty Affected Volume.
142
6.6.1. The Environmental Penalty of the Three Injection Scenarios
The injection of the reject brine in the Upper Cretaceous aquifer will
negatively impact a volume of water and change its average salinity. The
simulation of a 25-year period of continuous injection using the first injection
scenario has affected a water volume of about 2.625 million cubic meters of the
Upper Cretaceous. The average salinity of the affected volume has increased by
164 % reaching a value of 9,680 ppm whereas the native average salinity of the
affected volume is 3,660 ppm.
For the second injection scenario, the affected volume of water of the
Upper Cretaceous aquifer reaches 2,143,750 cubic meters where its average
salinity increases to reach 9,790 ppm with a percentage increase of 167% after
25-years of continuous injection.
The third injection scenario involves the injection takes place at distance
50 meters above the bottom of the Upper Cretaceous aquifer and the screen
length is 50 meters. For this scenario, the average salinity of a total affected
water volume of 2,712,500 m3 changes from 3,660 ppm to 8,800 ppm. In other
words the average salinity has increased by 140% after continuous injection of
the reject brine for 25-years.
For the three addressed scenarios, there is no effect on the Lower

Cretaceous aquifer due to the presence of the confining clay layer between the
two aquifers which separates the injection host formation from the extraction
aquifer.
6.6.2. The Environmental Penalty for the Uncertainty in the Clay Layer
Case
Figures 6.11 through 6.12 give a three dimensional perspective for the
injection transport results over 25-years of continuous injection. It is shown
that the salt plume migration in the Lower Cretaceous aquifer is significant
comparing to the first three injection scenarios. Also the vertical migration of
the salts in the Upper aquifer is significantly larger than that of the three
143
injection scenarios. Thus it is expected that a high environmental penalty will
result.
For the Upper Cretaceous, the affected water volume is about 5.95 million
cubic meters and its salinity increases by 75 % reaching a value of 6,410 ppm.
For the Lower Cretaceous, the water volume affected is in the order of 16.9
million cubic meters and its average salinity has increased by 130 % to reach a
value of 4,750 ppm instead of a native average salinity of 2,070 mg/L.
6.7. The Cost of Injection for the Three Injection Scenarios
The costs associated with injection wells are highly site specific and quite
variable. Therefore, generic cost estimates of injection wells from typical
handbook-type data is very difficult and subject to a wide range of uncertainty.
However, by gathering site-specific data, a reasonably accurate cost estimate
can be made. The major factors contributing to the cost of an injection well are:
pretreatment, pumps, site tests (i.e., logging, surveying, and testing), injection
well components, drilling, monitoring, maintenance and operating costs.
For the pretreatment, the rejected water may require pretreatment in an

above-surface facility to prevent plugging in the receiving formation. When
significant suspended solids are present, such as when concentrate is mixed
with membrane pre-filter backwash and periodic cleaning waste, typical
pretreatment consists of total suspended solid removal is required. Also pH
adjustment may be necessary. Pumps are used in above-surface facilities to
inject the concentrate. The flow and pressure requirements are site specific.
The discharge head will vary depending upon the geologic conditions and
depth of the injection zone. In this study, the injected volume is very small,
thus the required head from the simulation did not exceed one meters and the
injection can take place by free-fall of the concentrate.
Deep injection wells are normally multi-cased. Usually the use of more
than one casing to provide transition zones and isolate contaminated aquifers
from water contained in shallower or deeper aquifers is adopted. It is not
144
common to inject water in an aquifer where the source of water is seated in
deeper than the injection aquifer so the contaminated water does not seep
downwards to the source aquifer. However, in this study since the iso-salinity
maps shows that the Upper Cretaceous aquifer has higher salinity values than
that of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer and Al-Monbateh is extracting from the
Lower Cretaceous aquifer, the injection takes place in the Upper Cretaceous
aquifer.
The monitoring is required to ensure compliance with environmental

regulations. Also periodic samples can be taken and analyzed to determine if
there has been any leakage of the concentrate to the feed water aquifer. In
general, the most critical areas are that around the injection location in the
Lower Cretaceous aquifer. The operating costs for disposal wells are generally
low. Well maintenance consists of periodically checking the casing and
repairing it if required. In this study, an inclusive cost for the injection well of
EGP 4,000 per meter are assumed based on surveys of recent deep injection
well costs.
The total cost of the injection wells considered here is the cost of well
installation, operation, and maintenance in addition to the cost of the
environmental penalty which is the difference between the desalination cost of
the total affected water volume before and after the injection. The depths of the
injection well are 611 m, 611 m, and 561 m for the three scenarios,
respectively. Thus the inclusive cost of the injection well is calculated.
Future extraction and utilization of the saline water of the Upper

Cretaceous aquifer in desalination is expected and of a possible choice since
the great achievements in desalination technology have now moved the costs
for desalting in many applications from the realm of "expensive" to
"competitive". The desalination cost is a function of the feed water salinity,
where an increase in the salts concentration of the feed water will reflect on an
increased desalination costs. The costs of unit cubic meter desalination using
RO processes as a function of feed water salinity and the plant capacity are
145
shown in Figure 6.14. Table 6.1 summarizes the total cost estimates for the
three injection scenarios.
1.2
3000-5000 ppm
1 5000-10000 ppm
Cost (USD/m3)
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000
Plant Capacity
Figure 6.14. Unit Cost of Brackish Water RO Desalination with Plant
Capacity (Khidr, 2012).
Table 6.1. Summary of the Costs of the Injection Wells of the Three Scenarios
Scenario Depth Well Cost Affected Salinity EGP Total Cost of
(m) (EGP) Volume (ppm) per Environmental Injection
(m3) m3 Penalty Cost (EGP)
(EGP)
1 611 2,444,000 2,625,000 9,700 1.77 4,646,250 7,090,250.00
2 611 2,444,000 2,143,750 9,800 1.82 3,901,625 6,345,625.00
3 561 2,244,000 2,712,500 8,800 1.44 3,906,000 6,150,000.00
Figure 6.15 shows the cost estimated for the three scenarios. The black
portion gives the cost of the well drilling and ooperating, whereas the grey
component pertains to the environmental penalty. It can be seen from the figure
that the third disposal scenario yields the lowest well installation cost and the
lowest environmental penalty. Therefore, the third scenario gives the lowest
total cost among the three scenarios.
146
8
Millions
7
7.09
6
6.346
6.15
Total Cost (EGP)
5
2.444
2.444
2
2.244
1
0
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
Figure 6.15. The Cost of Disposal of the Proposed Three Injection Scenarios.
Figure 6.16 recalls back the costs of the current disposal system of the Al-
Monbateh desalination plant (i.e., the lined evaporation ponds) and sets the
costs of the two different alternatives together in one graph for a relative
comparison. The figure shows that the deep well injection disposal option
yields an exaggerated cost compared to that of the evaporation ponds, whether
compared to the current ponds or the proposed ponds which takes into account
the actual evaporation rates, rainfall, and salinity effects. The assessment
results stand in a favor of the evaporation ponds choice regardless of the fact
that the sizing was not properly done. This supports the use of evaporation
ponds for membrane concentrate disposal as it is most appropriate for smaller
volume flows as well as for regions having a relatively warm, dry climate with
high evaporation rates, level terrain, and low land costs.
147
7
Millions 6
6.15
5
Total Cost (EGP)
2.244
1.885
Uncertain
1 Costs
0.541
0
Exiting Pond New Pond Deep Well
Injection
Figure 6.16. The Total Costs of the Different Disposal Options.
6.8. The Proposed Potential Areas for Future Extraction of Feed Water
within the Study Area
Sinai could be self sufficient in satisfying its domestic water demand under
the proper water management. Extensive development in the socio-economic,
industrial and agricultural sectors is expected to be stressed in the future. The
Lower Cretaceous aquifer is the most prospective aquifer in Sinai as mentioned
earlier by many researches. The aquifer is not yet effectively utilized nor
precisely evaluated, although it represents a strategic reserve for future
economic development. Spatially distributed areas of good quality groundwater
suitable for various types of development are identified and the suitable areas
for domestic and irrigation purposes are delineated in this study based on four
design criteria. Three of the criteria pertain to the Lower Cretaceous aquifer
and these are the depth to water (which can also be referred as depth to
aquifer), the thickness of the aquifer and the quality of the water (e.g., salinity).
The forth criterion is the topography of the area.
The results can be considered to be useful for preparing preliminary

groundwater development plans for the studied domain. The desalination
potential is addressed through a preliminary estimate for the water needed for a
148
domestic usage in the area and a projection for the two common brine disposal
options is applied for the proposed exploitation scheme. The costs of the two
disposal options are studied and presented as a function of the demand. The
desalination technology proposed is the RO process with a recovery rate of
70% and a reject brine concentration of 12,000 mg/L as given in Al-Monbateh
desalination plant (i.e., the first stage of desalination only is taken). The cost
elements of the evaporation ponds are taken as discussed earlier in Chapter
three whereas the injection wells as presented in this chapter.
The evaluation of groundwater development in the study area relies on four

criteria as mentioned above. The study area is divided into polygons with high,
fair, and low development priority and values of 3, 2, or 1 is assigned for each
polygon. The four criteria are included in the evaluation by summation of the
polygonal values of each criterion and averaging the results to get a value
between 1 and 3 expressing the priority of the groundwater development with 3
as highest and 1 as lowest. It is worth noting that the water quality criterion was
given a higher weight in the averaging process. Figure 6.17 shows the polygons
of each criterion and their priority with the lighter color giving the highest
while the darker giving the lowest groundwater development priority. Figure
6.18 presents the results of the averaging (i.e., overlying the four criteria) and
the spatial potential areas are expressed in lightest colors.
149
Land Levels Depth to the Lower Cretaceous
Aquifer
Thickness of the Lower Cretaceous Salinity of the Lower Cretaceous

Aquifer Aquifer
Figure 6.17. The Four Criteria for Potential Groundwater Development.
The most suitable areas are chosen as shown in Figure 6.19 and the
expected demand is calculated based on the population density of north Sinai.
The World Bank (2012) (http://maps.worldbank.org/mena/egypt-arab-republic,
accessed on: May, 2012) estimated the current population density as
approximately 44. However, a value of 100 capita per square kilometer and 200
cubic liters as a daily consumption are assumed in estimating the total demand.
Three zones are identified and the estimated future demand is 7600 m3/d, 7100
m3/d, and 4000 m3/d for the three areas shown in the figure. It is worth noting
the Al-Monbateh well lies in the highest priority zone.
150
Figure 6.18. The Overly of the Four Potential Criteria (the light color
expresses the high potential while the dark color expresses low
potential).
Figure 6.19. The Proposed Suitable Areas for Groundwater

Development.
151
The developed regional model is utilized to simulate the proposed
extraction and injection of the brine. The groundwater heads after the 25-year
simulation for the Upper and Lower Cretaceous aquifers are shown in Figures
6.20 and 6.21, respectively. The change in regional water heads is minute if
compared to that of the base-case scenario. The resulting flow fields are used in
the solute transport simulation.
Figure 6.22 shows the transport simulation results where the simulation is
conducted under the total extraction and injection rates. The figure shows the
lateral migration of each injection well field on the regional model grid where
each cell has dimensions of 250 x 250 meters. Five injection wells are assumed
for the studied domain as a preliminary step for injection. For the first injection
well field, the maximum lateral migration is about 700 m, while it is 600 m for
the second zone and only 375 m for the third injection area. The same approach
for evaluation of the environmental penalty used in the local disposal scenarios
is applied in the regional case and the affected volumes are estimated as well as
the increased desalination costs in case of future extraction. The calculation of
the environmental penalty is based on the present value of money and does not
consider the expected achievements in the desalination technologies which will
reflect on reduced costs of desalination.
A detailed study regarding the allowable injection rate and required

pressure is required before any step of groundwater development, desalination,
and injection of brine. However, the assumed hypothetical case can be
beneficial in a future detailed study with a proper management scheme for the
extraction and injection wells.
152
Figure 6.20. The Head Contours of the Upper Cretaceous Aquifer for the
Proposed Potential Extraction and Injection Model (The proposed wells and the
existing wells are presented as black dots).
Figure 6.21. The Head Contours of the Lower Cretaceous Aquifer for the
Proposed Potential Extraction and Injection Model (The proposed wells and the
existing wells are presented as black dots).
153
Figure 6.22. Injection Results of the Upper Cretaceous Aquifer for the Proposed Potential Extraction and Injection Model (The
proposed wells and the existing wells are presented as black dots).
154
6.9. The Cost of the Different Disposal Options for the Proposed
Groundwater Development Potential
The cost of disposal for the two proposed alternatives (evaporation pond
and deep well injection) can be estimated based on the cost elements discussed
earlier in this chapter and in Chapter three during the evaluation of the current
disposal system of Al-Monabateh plant. The cost of the environmental penalty
is added also to the cost of implementation of the injection wells.
For calculating the cost of the lined evaporation ponds, the model
discussed in Chapter three is used for the proper sizing of the ponds using the
same criteria of the actual evaporation rates, rainfalls and effect of salinity on
reducing the evaporation rates. Different production rates are assumed and the
corresponding expected reject brine is used as the input water to the pond. The
size is obtained then the cost is roughly estimated based on this size. Table 6.2
shows the estimated costs with different extraction discharges.
Table 6.2. The Estimated Costs of the Lined Evaporation Ponds with Different
Extraction Rates
Extraction (m3/d) Product (m3/d) Brine (m3/d) Pond Cost (EGP)
3200 2240 960 53,992,185
6400 4480 1920 105,785,145
9600 6720 2880 156,461,681
16000 11200 4800 261,733,144
24000 16800 7200 392,857,283
The cost of the deep well injection disposal option is estimated by

assuming a number of injection wells for the three proposed groundwater
development zones. Both the well implementation costs and the environmental
penalty costs are added to express the total cost of the wells. Table 6.3 shows
the estimated costs of the deep injection disposal option.
155
Table 6.3. The Estimated Cost of the Deep Well Injection Disposal Option
Implementation Volume
Extraction Production Reject Brine Number of Cost Affected Penalty Cost Total Cost
3 3 3
(m /d) (m /d) (m /d) Injection Wells (EGP) (m3) (EGP) (EGP)
4650 3255 1395 1 2,592,000 43,750,000 39,943,750 42,535,750
9300 6510 2790 2 5,168,000 86,406,250 78,888,906 84,056,906
15200 10640 4560 3 7,640,000 146,562,500 133,811,563 141,451,563
21000 14700 6300 4 10,108,000 190,312,500 173,755,313 183,863,313
23860 16702 7158 5 13,016,000 217,656,250 198,720,156 211,736,156
26720 18704 8016 5 13,016,000 234,062,500 213,699,063 226,715,063
156
Figure 6.23 presents the costs of the two brine disposal options as a
function of the product water quantity. Shown are the total cost of the
evaporation ponds and the total cost of the deep well injection. The two cost
components of the deep well injection are presented with the dashed lines. The
figure shows that the cost of the deep well injection is generally less than that
of the lined evaporation ponds and the cost difference increases with increasing
the product water (i.e., increasing the reject brine) which can give a preliminary
claim that deep well injection is a favorable option in case of large brine
volumes. However evaporation ponds for membrane concentrate disposal are
most appropriate for smaller volume flows, which was the case in Al-Monbateh
desalination plant.
450
Millions
Total Cost of Evaporation Ponds

400
Total Cost of Injection
350 Injection Wells Capital Cost
Penalty of Injection
Total Costs (EGP)
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000
Product Water (m3/day)
Figure 6.23. The Cost of Disposal of Different Alternatives with the Product
Water Quantity.
Although the deep well injection proves an economic feasibility, but there
are many advantages associated with the use of the evaporation ponds: (1) they
are relatively easy and straightforward to construct; (2) properly constructed
evaporation ponds are low maintenance and require little operator attention
157
compared to mechanical equipment; (3) except for pumps to convey the
concentrate water to the pond, no mechanical equipment is required; and (4) for
smaller volume flows, evaporation ponds are frequently the least costly means
of disposal, especially in areas with high evaporation rates and low land costs.
Taking into consideration that injecting back the reject brine is a conservative
water mass attitude which means that the reject water will be locally stored
again in the aquifer domain and thus decrease the quantity loss of water.
Achievements in the desalination technologies are expected in the future which
may overcome the higher costs associated with higher salinity waters.
Despite the inherent advantages of evaporation ponds, they are not without
disadvantages that can limit their application. First, they can require large tracts
of land if they are located where the evaporation rate is low or the disposal rate
is high. Second, they mostly require impervious liners of clay or synthetic
membranes such as polyvinylchloride (PVC) or Hypalon, and this requirement
substantially increases the costs of evaporation ponds. Third, seepage from
poorly constructed evaporation ponds can contaminate underlying potable
water aquifers and cause an increased environmental penalty. Lastly, there is
little economy of scale for this land-intensive disposal option. Consequently,
disposal costs can be large for all but small-sized membrane plants.
It is worth noting, however, that regardless of the high cost of the lined
evaporation ponds, they can be utilized as solar ponds and thus they provide a
renewable energy source for the desalination plant where the energy is to be
harnessed for operating high compression pumps needed for reverse osmosis
modular systems the promising desalination technology. And the reasons are
obvious, since Egypt has great potential of brackish water wells, immense
amounts of solar radiation in remote areas and future integrated development
projects are located at a distance from the Nile water.
158
CHAPTER SEVEN
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTRE WORK
7.1. Summary
Awareness of increasing water scarcity has driven efforts to seek for non-
conventional water resources. Atop of these resources is the saline water of
both the sea and the groundwater aquifers. Desalination of brackish water holds
a great promise as a freshwater resource which helps ameliorate the stress on
the Nile River as the only renewable source of water in Egypt. Brackish
groundwater is usually present in vast quantities, where inland desalination can
be utilized. In parallel with the implementation of an inland desalination plant,
a disposal system for the produced reject brine has to be developed. This
disposal should have the mildest effects on the environment and be cost
effective. The two main disposal alternatives, the evaporation ponds and the
deep injection into saline aquifers, are addressed through a field case study, Al-
Monbateh desalination plant that already exists in Central Sinai.
For the assessment of the current disposal system of the plant, the
evaporation ponds, a MATLAB simulation code utilizing the water and salt
balance was developed for the evaluation process considering the effect of
salinity on the evaporation rates and its projection on the area of the pond. The
current disposal system malfunctioned after a couple of months of operation
and concentrate started to flood, and thus pumping units were attached and an
unmanaged disposal took place on land surface few meters away from the
constructed lined evaporation ponds. For a fair comparison between the current
disposal and other alternatives, the code is used for investigating the cause of
159
the problem. It is found that the main issue is the reduced evaporation rates due
to the high salinity of the reject. New dimensions are calculated for an
independent evaporation pond disposal alternative and the associated
approximate cost of the pond is calculated. Sensitivity analysis for the effect of
salinity is carried out for assessing its importance in the design of the ponds.
Deep injection of the reject brine in saline aquifers is studied as an

alternative for the evaporation pond. The injection host is the Upper Cretaceous
aquifer while the extraction of Al-Monbateh well is from the Lower Cretaceous
aquifer. The fact that the two aquifers are not hydraulically connected is
strengthened by the different water head and salinity values for the same spatial
point at the two aquifers. For the proposed injection scheme, the groundwater
flow direction around the disposal well is simulated and the possibility of such
disposal and its short- and long-term sustainability are evaluated in this study.
An environmental penalty is defined for the study as the volume of the
groundwater flow that is adversely affected by the increased salinity of more
than 1,000 ppm and its projection on the cost of desalination, in case of future
utilization of the resource.
In order to investigate the abovementioned issues, a regional three-

dimensional numerical groundwater flow and solute transport model is applied
and used to evaluate the impact of the proposed disposal and address the
uncertainty associated with the subsurface characteristics, processes and
injection location of the reject brine. The different versions of the groundwater
model are developed and run using well established groundwater packages.
The USGS groundwater flow model, MODFLOW, and the associated solute
transport model, MT3DMS, in conjunction with SEAWAT for variable density
groundwater flow simulation are used in this study. The simulation timeframe
is taken as 25 years of continuous injection of the reject brine from Al-
Monbateh desalination plant. For the small injection rate associated with the
plant, a local model is extracted from the regional model and a finer grid
160
discretization is used for a more accurate simulation of the groundwater flow
and salt transport.
Two water-bearing formations are modeled, the Upper and the Lower
Cretaceous aquifers. Confined aquifer conditions are assumed for the Lower
Cretaceous while unconfined conditions are assumed for the Upper aquifer.
Specified head boundaries are assigned to the lateral model boundaries expect
for the northern boundary of the Lower Cretaceous aquifer that is assigned as a
no-flow boundary. This is because it represents a deeply faulted limestone unit
terminating the Lower Cretaceous aquifer. No recharge is assumed for both
modeled aquifers.
The groundwater flow model is calibrated using the head values extracted
from potentiometric maps of both aquifers and from two wells tapping the
Lower Cretaceous aquifer. Hydraulic conductivity is considered the calibration
parameter, and the calibration is performed using the Pilot Points method
integrated with the PEST (parameter estimated) code. The calibration process
is assessed using the sum of squared errors (the difference between the
observed and the simulated heads). Heterogeneity fields for both aquifers are
created as a result of calibration. After the calibration is done, the base case
scenario for the flow and solute transport is developed based on the current
production from the two aquifers from the present nine wells in the regional
study domain. The reject brine injection is at a rate of 16 m3/day, and the local
model is utilized in the simulation of the injection scenarios.
Preliminary groundwater development potential areas are identified in the

study area based on four criteria; the topography of the area, the depth to the
producing aquifer which is the Lower Cretaceous aquifer, the thickness of the
aquifer and the salinity of the water. A projection of the two disposal
alternatives is carried on the potential areas for extraction in order to assess the
environmental and economic feasibility of the different alternatives for brine
disposal in case desalination is utilized in future development expansion. The
161
regional model is used to assess the environmental impacts and penalty
resulting from the deep well injection option.
7.2. Conclusions
After analyzing the results presented throughout this study and the case
study on the two disposal alternatives, the following conclusions can be drawn
from the analysis:
1. Salinity effect on evaporation rates is a critical factor in the design of

evaporation ponds.
2. For small disposal volumes the evaporation pond design is very
sensitive to the side slopes while not in case of large volumes.
3. Deep well injection is an attractive disposal alternative for large disposal
volumes but probably not so for small volumes compared to lined
evaporation ponds, however several aspects involve the decision on
which is the better alternative and the most appropriate alternative is
highly site specific.
4. It is anticipated that evaporation ponds most likely is a competitive
option for relatively small plants in remote, inland locations with high
evaporation rates.
5. Although deep well injection causes unpleasant impacts which are
reflected on an increased cost for desalination, but the option preserves
the amount of reject brine produced in the host formation instead of
losing these volumes through evaporation. These volumes might be a
great resource of water in the future especially with the rapid evolution
of the desalination technologies and the ever decreasing costs.
6. For the case study, the injection at a distance of 50 meters above the
clay lens is found to be the most economic among the deep injection
options.
7. For the case study, the lack of a clay lens beneath the injection zone has
high environmental penalty for the Lower Cretaceous, thus accurate
162
aquifer characterization is important before choosing the injection well
location.
7.3. Recommendations for Future Work
Based on the results of this study and through the literature for the
previous studies of the disposal options, the following is recommended for
future studies:
1. Study in depth the effect of salinity on evaporation rates and the

dependency on the geographical location.
2. In case of location dependency, field experiments are needed to
formulate relationships for the different regions of Egypt.
3. Consider the chemical characterization of the injected reject brine in the
injection simulation as well as the temperature of the injected fluid to
account for the effects of viscosity variations on groundwater flow.
4. Survey the potential aquifers for brackish groundwater for desalination
with an estimate of the stored volumes and the allowable exploitable
volumes for the main brackish aquifers in Egypt.
5. Study the possible development schemes for Central Sinai and other
areas rich with brackish water through the appropriate management and
decision-making tools.
6. Investigate the possible enhancements for the addressed disposal
alternatives and especially for the evaporation ponds, like the use of the
evaporation pond as a source of renewable energy (i.e., solar pond) for
operating the desalination plant thus achieving the integrity of an
independent system of producing fresh water,
7. Study the use of unlined evaporation ponds, with the environmental
impacts and penalties associated with the expected seepage
8. Study the feasibility of using mechanical evaporation in the disposal of
the concentrate.
163
REFERENCES
1. Abd El Rahman, H. (2001). Evaluation of Groundwater Resources in
Lower Cretaceous Aquifer System in Sinai, Water Resources
Management 15, pp. 187202.
2. Abou Rayan, M., Djebedjian, B., & Khaled, I. (2001). Water supply and
demand and a desalination option from Sinai, Egypt. Desalination,
136, pp. 73-81.
3. Ahmed, M., Shayya, W. H., Hoey, D., Mahendran, A., Morris, R., & Al-
Handaly, J. (2000). Use of evaporation ponds for brine disposal in
desalination plants. Desalination, 130(2), pp. 155-168.
4. Ahmed, M., Shayyab, W. H., Hoey, D., & Al-handaly, J. (2001). Brine
disposal from reverse osmosis desalination plants in Oman and the
United Arab Emirates, Desalination, 133, pp. 135-147.
5. Ahmed, M., Hoey, D., Thumarukudyd, M. R., Goosen, M. F. A., Al-

haddabi, M., & Al-belushi, A. (2003). Feasibility of salt production
Corn inland RO desalination plant reject brine: a case study.
Desalination, 158, pp. 109-117.
6. Ali, A. A. M. (2009). Assessing Environmental Impacts of Disposal of

Gas Production Byproducts in Deep Aquifers: Application to El
Wastani Formation. A masters thesis. Department of Irrigation and
Hydraulics, Cairo University, Egypt.
7. Allam, A. R., Saaf, E., & Dawoud, M. A. (2002). Desalination of brackish

groundwater in Egypt, Desalination, 152, pp. 19-26.
8. Arnal, J. M., Sancho, M., Iborra, I., Gozlvez, J. M., Santaf, a., & Lora,
J. (2005). Concentration of brines from RO desalination plants by
natural evaporation. Desalination, 182(1-3), pp. 435-439.
9. Attia, F. A. Groundwater resources management in Egypt in the concept

of IWRM, Mediterranean Document on Groundwater.
10. Baxter, G.P., and Wallace, C.C., 1916, Changes in volume upon solution
in water of halogen salts of alkali metals: IX, American Chemical
Society Journal, no. 38, p. 70-104.
11. Buros, O. K., Cox, R. B., Nusbaum, I., El-Nashar, A.M., and Bakish R.
164
(1980). The USAID Desalination Manual. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
IDEA Publications.
12. Burston, I. and A Akbarzadeh. (1995). Integration of Solar Ponds into Salt
Affected Areas. Conference Proceedings, International Symposium
on Energy, Environment and Economics, University of Melbourne.
13. Chow, V.T., Maidment, D.R. and Mays, L.W. (1988) Applied Hydrology,
McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
14. Committee on Advancing Desalination Technology, National Research

Council. (2008). Desalination: A National Perspective. Washington,
DC: The National Academies Press.
15. Cosgrove, W.J. and Rijsberman, F.R. (2000). World Water Vision:
Making Water Everybodys Business. Earthscan Publications,
London.
16. Daintith, M. (1996). Rotifers and Artemia for Marine Aquaculture: A

Training Guide. University of Tasmania.
17. Doherty, J. (1994). PEST. Watermark Computing, Corinda, Australia.
18. El-Kady, M., El-Shibini, F. (2001). Desalination in Egypt and the future
application in supplementary irrigation, Desalination, 136, pp. 6372.
19. El-Sadek, A. (2010). Water desalination: An imperative measure for water

security in Egypt. Desalination, 250, pp. 876-884.
20. EPIQ Water Policy Team. (1998). Hydrogeology of Deep Aquifers in the
Western Desert and Sinai, report no. 10. Ministry of Public Works
and Water Resources in Egypt and the US Agency for International
Development.
21. Gilron, J., Folkman, Y., Savliev, R., & Waisman, M. (2003). WAIV -
wind aided intensified evaporation for reduction of desalination brine
volume, Desalination, 158, pp. 205-214.
22. Guo, W., and Langevin, C.D., 2002, Users guide to SEAWAT: A
computer program for simulation of three-dimensional variable-
density ground-water flow: U.S. Geological Survey Techniques of
Water-Resources Investigations, book 6, chap. A7.
23. Harbaugh, A.W., and McDonald, M.G. (1996), User's documentation for
MODFLOW-96 an update to the U.S. Geological Survey modular
finite-difference ground-water flow model: U.S. Geological Survey
Open-File Report 96-485.
24. Javandel, I., Doughty, C., and Tsang, C.F. (1984) Groundwater Transport:
165
Handbook of Mathematical Models, American Geophysical. Union,
Water Resources Monograph.
25. Khalil, E. E. (2004). Water strategies and technological development in

Egyptian coastal areas, Desalination, 165, pp. 2330.
26. Khidr, S. (2012). Economic of Using Desalinated Seawater and Brackish

Water in Supplementary Irrigation. A Masters thesis. Department of
Irrigation and Hydraulics, Cairo University, Egypt.
27. Khordagui H. (1997). Environmental aspects of brine reject from

desalination industry in the ESCW region, ESCWA, Beirut,
Lebanon.
28. Lam, N. S. (1983). Spatial interpolation methods review. The American

Cartographer, 10, pp. 129-149.
29. Macedonio, F., Katzir, L., Geisma, N., Simone, S., Drioli, E., & Gilron, J.
(2011). Wind-Aided Intensified eVaporation (WAIV) and Membrane
Crystallizer (MCr) integrated brackish water desalination process:
Advantages and drawbacks. Desalination, 273(1), pp. 127-135.
30. Mahmoud A. M. H. (2011). Evaporation Pond Modeling for Closed Basin

Drainage. A doctoral thesis. Irrigation and Hydraulic Department,
Cairo University, Egypt
31. Malmrose, P., J. Lozier, M. Mickley, R. Reiss, J. Russell, J. Schaefer, S.

Sethi, J. Manuszak, R. Bergman, and K. Atasi. (2004). Current
perspectives on residuals management for desalting membranes.
AWWA, 96 (12), pp. 73-87.
32. McDonald, M.G., and Harbaugh, A.W. (1988). A modular three-

dimensional finite-difference ground-water flow model: Techniques
of Water-Resources Investigations of the United States Geological
Survey, Book 6, Chapter A1.
33. McWorter, D.B., and D.K. Sunada, 1977, Groundwater Hydrology and
Hydraulics, Water Resources Publications, Fort Collins, Colo.
34. Mickley, M., Hamilton, R., Gallegos, L., & Truesdall. J. (1993).
Membrane concentration disposal. American Water Works
Association Research Foundation. Denver, Colorado.
35. Mickley, M. (1995). Environmental considerations for the disposal of

desalination concentrate. International Desalination Association
Conference. Abu Dhabi. United Arab Emirates.
36. Mickley, M. (2010). Brackish Groundwater Concentrate Management.

Mickley & Associates Boulder, Colorado.
166
New Mexico State University.
37. Midwater. (2010). Design basis and plant description of Al-Monbateh

desalination plant - Life Sinai Program. Cairo, Egypt.
38. Moawad, A. (2008). Future of Desalination in Egypt. The First Arab

Water Forum. Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
39. Mohamed, A., Maraqa, M., & Al Handhaly, J. (2005). Impact of land
disposal of reject brine from desalination plants on soil and
groundwater. Desalination, 182(1-3), pp. 411-433.
40. Nassar, M. K. K. (2004). Design and management of discharge and

recharge well fields for coastal desalination plants. A masters thesis.
Department of Irrigation and Hydraulics, Cairo University, Egypt.
41. Navarro A. and Carbonell M. (2007). Assessment of groundwater

contaminant caused by uncontrolled dumping in old gravel quarries
in the Besos aquifer (Barcelona, Spain). Environmental
Geochemistry Health, 30. pp. 273-289
42. Nile Consultants. (2003). Water Resources Supply for Bedouins

Settlement in Sinai. Final Report, Vol. 1. In conjunction with the
Ministry of Water Resources and Irrigation, Cairo, Egypt.
43. Rachid, M., and C. Abdelwahab. (2005). Ecotoxicological marine impacts

from seawater desalination plants. Desalination 182. pp. 403-410.
44. Saripalli, K. P., M. M. Sharma and S. L. Bryant, (2000). Modeling

injection well performance during deep-well injection of liquid
wastes, Hydrology, 227. pp. 41-55.
45. Sethi, S., S. Walker, P. Xu, and J. Drewes. (2006a). Existing and
emerging concentrate minimization and disposal practices for
membrane systems, Florida Water Resources Journal, pp. 38-48.
46. Skehan, S., & Kwiatkowski, Peter J. (2000). Concentrate disposal via
injection wells permitting and design considerations, Florida Water
Resources Journal, pp.19-21.
47. Snyder, R. L., Orang, M., Matyac, S., Grismer, M. E., & Asce, M. (2005).
Simplified Estimation of Reference Evapotranspiration from Pan
Evaporation Data in California. Journal of Irrigation and Drainage
Engineering, (June), 249-253.
48. Talaat, H.A., Sorour, M.H., Abulnour, A.G., Shaalan, H. F. (2002). The
potential role of brackish water desalination within the Egyptian
water supply matrix. Desalination, 152, pp. 375-382.
167
49. Thomson, M. (2003). Reverse-osmosis desalination of seawater powered
by photovoltaics without batteries. A doctoral thesis. Loughborough
University.
50. Tzen, E. (2005). "Successful RES Desalination Applications," Proceeding

of the International Seminar, Hammamet, Tunisia.
51. USBR (U.S. Bureau of Reclamation). (2003). Desalting Handbook for

Planners, 3rd Edition. Washington, D.C., USA.
52. Wangnick Consulting. (2000). IDA worldwide desalting plants inventory.

Report no. 16. Gnarrenburg, Germany,
53. Xu, T. (2005). "Ion exchange membranes: State of their development and
perspective," Journal of Membrane Science 263(1-2), pp. 1-29
54. Younos T., & Tulou, K. E. (2005). Overview of desalination techniques,

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Universities
Council On Water Resources, Journal Of Contemporary Water
Research & Education, 132, pp. 3-10.
55. Yousef, R. M., Sakr M.L., & Shakweer, A. F. (2007). Desalination

Technology Roadmap 2030, The Cabinet Information and Decision
Support Center Center for Future Studies, Cairo, Egypt.
56. Zheng, C. (1990). MT3D: A Modular Three-Dimensional Transport

Model for Simulation of Advection, Dispersion and Chemical
Reactions of Contaminants in Groundwater Systems. Report to the
USEPA, 170 pp.
57. Zheng, C. and Wang, P.P. (1999), MT3DMS: A Modular Three-

Dimensional Multispecies Transport Model for Simulation of
Advection, Dispersion and Chemical Reactions of Contaminants in
Groundwater Systems; Documentation and Users Guide, Contract
Report SERDP-99-1, U.S. Army Engineer Research and
Development Center, Vicksburg, MS.
168
608 34!6"63#$%&56' 340123456089
5609
56 8568568
3(48)%8#56 089*56+26,09-56.956/ 802 9156082305603056438-56
@A%&56?
-89"=6>-456;6<3) 068<5645673(689:256/056;6<3)
B3*C
D)3156%&56
3#$ 068<564563(346:256+E345656073F=3)*566567G);38356:23.9
034-5603056838K6<4L83LM67365K6!356B38C56 B3J34=6HI) 56
%&56?
*9503-5608931-56'3-L=6HI)N55O 089*56089-L+26,.995
B3*CP
3()438-5609-50853L0831G5856R6$:8-&2?$5SB3J34=6:6$%-T2Q68K$
3*56I ?3&3453)56B<I9L23-563685U"568 D09-56V93WD0C3K
8XB30*-95+26456.956Y853
28Z346838K038-I56087156B3,6[567
3(4
5 089*95\313(5\]6
-8*)438-5608-O9L^73*3#$ %)Q381,V8
560893156
?7_V8]&5600*-56B6>_068<56053*)0,833 012345609-56V93[5089*5609
2<[2
09
2%"=6 a <JbO=63(,$U*F $856R6$;6<6
DJPc6DJ6-569<L
77878123456789
7878429266784788878 !
'(. ,-129(78)*6+ '4"78#$7812%&78
/70789(78

878467898:123456788+;5767 4(. 8787"2 34!/70789(78961+
244>8?78"42@?+A BC8? 44!D EF82&$G785G6788"=< 7"
8G78(4* !F5767'H4$788"L8?H=4!<BC 5G78I24!JK78
'(. NO129(78)*6+ '98&4712L8345678M8678
H8789(78
WG223X &6+7'VSTUR< 878PQ567892:G781!2!@6G:9(7886<Q8+
@77VT\]^_\`R< /G7886<P428568F678 Y7Z>1225678[&47
"478BC@77VUde`eaR2c8678X86:8@77VTab]R P%7878)+
)*6+ '[&786<9"P256784g(678I?7823F7'778PP0*78fZ6>8
'(. h129(78
i25789(78
[&47=78 8PL8?862k8l+XZ>129(7886<P)+78[:m1:j(7+F
p85785767 m&W 8$&2P@?E78P%7878o&2 7"G;ngF2
F'K78[&789!&!G6!I8P928786<6>=F6+6"@?E788G$47*7 478
F8F5767 @+78PG678c4L823F )+78@77Q567892:G78l+q+=
!F5767 )+47L84KL8[&474(6782178q+=9(7HE+'@+78
9(78864Hq+=? r2'4KL8[&781296&678478[&782 3F7'[&7886<9
6:
12 4G8678sG788BC67HtG&647Q5678"4787!78X86:8[&74(23
)*6+ '7782Z2L8878X86:IL8[&47l.9!Fq+=9(7886<Y7Z>
'(. N,129(78
?789(78
?862L8/"12478[&78Q856H1878I" (46578[&789
6:9(7886<X &6+
12%&78(4*6784! BC678 "478@?+rH@BC678*78c" 77847=78 8PL8
7"9qPL9.647F4&H:828!F 1878u$:P@?E78474G86244!D=

012346789
!"#$%&'(")%*+,*-&.'/
>?=89+:/;')<+5 67 +)' / 0-1.2&34
?'6*@J&($BJ$HIEG/)4DEFD@A*1&" +&8B C
QLR.2=P@O&(ON@FEEEM +;2'?'2 J+,C2/&6K89CJ)*L
( (*WC<9(; V +$,L(*'J,>1UR*%+ +T)' / S&2*+
+ ,= +,C2/X1Y5*,R*%+ +? + 8$+%+K89C7?
-?'W3 6 6% 0:+ Z*C[9\/)]4A*>*BW)
89+`'a /4\2'b'a!?U)&cd-?'W?_ !^? /
K*6.@'9\+L? % 2 )',4\KJ=R*%+ + Z*C[9
=/ +J (*WC<9(/?:+9
K*6.@'9\,Z*[9a)3 6f \g\?/:+,h:+:\2'e+
;V( =k++l.%+1'J,K*6di21 +ej(.3 6:+9
;&)m4-&n?97'JL !^% `B%L;')<+ +6*#.K*6d
A/Ciq+C? (*W +#)\iq+CAr1 + ,=pFoE%,,*:+K*6%
l l:#<9(@* BJ$FHA'J+,+ ++%+/#.+ +
;'`<6*+&'44\2'(6/+/76-'6(-&n)@Ds;'+-*J
BJ$#* D=H !^?/(dW7(DsE*64/ ++5
4-&nL?pFHo;&)m%#* +(f<5tIEE46*')<#<9
=@* BJ$FEEE+c]q:+pHE%, 8$;&)m
T*(($[9)+ (?A*(J\\#*$
A?d8
u / 8 V?\2'QL;*5+b'Ld?3v*j*'/8QLA?)
I8#*$)?=3QLA*(($,&2?+[9A4(jw,b'LdQL
=8>
Cx8
? + /(J\? 81K"( + 6Ka8QL(
z).8A?)= _ !^?-?'W?c:yr\? 5q*+&&\77'J
123456789
41 96714696792673567722
1239672969
!"#$%
&
'9()*4467+(8,(4
DEFE&<&=>?9@1"&-AB9C&<&-./#01"&-2#341"&5678619:;
&
&=>?9@1"&-AB9C&<&-2#341"&-.GH&I1%&-B#@B&-1928
&>.JKC901"&-C8!&LG$&M6NO1"&P9QGRJB&SB&TUVH
&9:.1X8#.41"&X&Y>1"&-2#3?&LW
&
&
&
ZS.3OJ001"&-3V1&SB&#0JA7
\\\\\\\[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
`267ab67cde9fd&_86JH#1"&]9J2^"
&\\\\\\\[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[
*g(ch767+(ijkd&_86JH#1"&]9J2^"
&[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[\\\\\\\
*g(c`3(d_86JH#1"&]9J2^"
&
&
&
&
&
&=>?9@1"&-AB9C&<&-2#341"&-.GH
&-.;>A1"&>NB&-78640C&<&=U.V1"
&DEFD
&
123456789
41 96714696792673567722
1239672969
!"#$%
&
'9()*4467+(8,(4
DEFE&<&=>?9@1"&-AB9C&<&-./#01"&-2#341"&5678619:;
&
&=>?9@1"&-AB9C&<&-2#341"&-.GH&I1%&-B#@B&-1928
&>.JKC901"&-C8!&LG$&M6NO1"&P9QGRJB&SB&TUVH
&9:.1X8#.41"&X&Y>1"&-2#3?&LW
&Z">[%&\O]
f24f2`9gh^) _`9a_^)
& &
& &
& &
&#$9KB&b9J2c &b9J2c
&9:.1X>.41"&X&Y>1"&dKe &9:.1X>.41"&X&Y>1"&dKe
&-2#341"&-.GH &-2#341"&-.GH
&=>?9@1"&-AB9C &=>?9@1"&-AB9C
&=>?9@1"&-AB9C&<&-2#341"&-.GH
&-.;>A1"&>NB&-78640C&<&=U.V1"
&DEFD
i
123456789
41 96714696792673567722
1239672969
!"#$%
&
'9()*4467+(8,(4
DEFE&<&=>?9@1"&-AB9C&<&-./#01"&-2#341"&5678619:;
&
&=>?9@1"&-AB9C&<&-2#341"&-.GH&I1%&-B#@B&-1928
&>.QVC901"&-C8!&JG$&K6LM1"&N9OGPQB&RB&STUH
&9:.1X8#.41"&X&Y>1"&-2#3?&JW
&
&=>?9@1"&-AB9C&<&-2#341"&-.GH
&-.;>A1"&>LB&-78640C&<&=T.U1"
&DEFD
Z

Assessing Alternatives For Disposal of Reject Brine From Inland Desalination Plants PDF

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Assessing Alternatives For Disposal of Reject Brine From Inland Desalination Plants PDF

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Assessing Alternatives for Disposal of Reject Brine

from Inland Desalination Plants

Mohamed Ezzat AbdelMohsen Mahmoud Ammar

B.Sc. in Civil Engineering, Cairo University, 2010

A Thesis Submitted to the

Faculty of Engineering at Cairo University

In Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree of

IRRIGATION AND HYDRAULICS

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING CAIRO UNIVERSITY

Mohamed Ezzat AbdelMohsen Mahmoud Ammar

B.Sc. in Civil Engineering, Cairo University, 2010

A Thesis Submitted to the

Faculty of Engineering at Cairo University

In Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree of

IRRIGATION AND HYDRAULICS

Professor Associate Professor

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING CAIRO UNIVERSITY

Mohamed Ezzat AbdelMohsen Mahmoud Ammar

B.Sc. in Civil Engineering, Cairo University, 2010

A Thesis Submitted to the

Faculty of Engineering at Cairo University

In Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree of

IRRIGATION AND HYDRAULICS

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING CAIRO UNIVERSITY

1 454 1& 

15 1 17    105

15 75 4557

Owing to the rapid growth in population, the development expansion in all

Per Capita Water share

1.2. Research Potentiality

Desalination of seawater is becoming a reliable and cost effective mean of

Brackish groundwater desalination holds promise as a water supply

This research focuses on addressing this latter issue. In particular, it aims at

1.3. Research Objectives and Methodology

This research will investigate the issue of brackish groundwater

Assess the feasibility of each option in terms of sustainability of the

Evaluate the time-varying effects on groundwater quality in the injection

Suggest the most appropriate disposal system for the desalination

The abovementioned research objectives are achieved using the suitable

The proposed methodology generally consists of the following tasks:

An extensive background on the desalination technologies and the

Literature review of the relevant studies dealing with inland desalination

Case study data collection, analysis and compilation of studies related to

Setting/developing conceptual processes for the different disposal

Developing a numerical model for the groundwater system taking into

1.4. Thesis Organization

The description of the selected case study is presented in Chapter three.

Chapter seven abridges a summary to the performed work in addition to the

BACKGROUND AND LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Desalination History and Evolution

Desalination technologies and their applications have evolved dramatically

A total desalination capacity of about 26 million m3/d was installed or

Figure 2.1. Cumulative capacity of installed desalination plants in the United

2.2. The Desalination Experience in Egypt

In Egypt, the integrated water policy is based on three main fundamentals

The desalination experience in Egypt is relatively new compared to other

Desalination increased notably in Egypt, where the total installed capacity

Figure 2.5. The Desalination Capacities in Egypt in 1980-2005 (El-Sadek,

Desalination units can be categorized into two types based on their

Table 2.3. Governmental Desalination Units in Sinai

1454 1&

151 17105

15754557