Science of the Total Environment 681 (2019) 551–563

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Science of the Total Environment

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scitotenv

Review

Zero-liquid discharge (ZLD) technology for resource recovery from

wastewater: A review
Muhammad Yaqub, Wontae Lee ⁎
Department of Environmental Engineering, Kumoh National Institute of Technology, 61 Daehak–ro, Gumi 39177, Republic of Korea

H I G H L I G H T S G R A P H I C A L A B S T R A C T

• Encapsulated the ZLD systems, opera-

tional principle and their significance
• Detailed study of existing ZLD technolo-
gies, their benefits, drawbacks and in-
dustrial application
• Described global status of ZLD systems
commissioned, in progress or planned
in near future
• Presented environmental and opera-
tional aspects of ZLD with possible
solutions

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

Article history: Water resources are becoming scarce meaning that reuse options are receiving more and more attention. In this
Received 11 February 2019 perspective, zero-liquid discharge (ZLD) is considered as an emerging technique to minimize waste, recover re-
Received in revised form 2 April 2019 sources, treat toxic industrial waste streams, and mitigate potential water quality impacts in receiving water
Accepted 6 May 2019
streams. Although ZLD systems are capable of minimizing contamination of water sources and amplifying
Available online 8 May 2019
water supply, its industrial scale applications are restricted due to their high cost and intensive energy consump-
Editor: Huu Hao Ngo tion. In ZLD systems, membrane-based technologies are an attractive future strategy for industrial wastewater
reclamation. Therefore, this review examines why a greater focus on environmental protection and water secu-
Keywords: rity is leading to more widespread adoption of ZLD technology in various industries. We highlight existing ZLD
Zero-liquid discharge processing schemes, including thermal and membrane-based processes, and discuss their limitations and poten-
Resource recovery tial solutions. We also investigated global application of ZLD systems for resource recovery from wastewater. Fi-
Industrial wastewater nally, we discuss the potential environmental impacts of ZLD technologies and provide some focus on future
Membrane research needs.
Reclamation
© 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Abbreviations: AGMD, air gap membrane distillation; BMED, bipolar membrane electrodialysis; DCMD, direct contact membrane distillation; ED, electrodialysis; EO, electrochemical
oxidation; EDR, electrodialysis reversal; FO, forward osmosis; HERO, high efficiency reverse osmosis; kWh, kilowatt hour; MD, membrane distillation; MVC, mechanical vapor
compression; RO, reverse osmosis; SWRO, saline water reverse osmosis; SGMD, sweeping gas membrane distillation; TDS, total dissolved solids; UF, ultrafiltration; VMD, vacuum
membrane distillation; WMH, water minimization hierarchy; ZLD, zero-liquid discharge.
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: wtlee@kumoh.ac.kr (W. Lee).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.062
0048-9697/© 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
552 Muhammad Yaqub, W. Lee / Science of the Total Environment 681 (2019) 551–563

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 552
2. Zero-liquid discharge and resource recovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 553
2.1. Significance of resource recovery through ZLD systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 553
2.2. Existing ZLD systems with resource recovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 553
2.2.1. Thermal ZLD systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 553
2.2.2. RO-incorporated thermal ZLD systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 554
2.2.3. Emerging membrane-based ZLD systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 555
3. Global status of ZLD systems for resource recovery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 558
3.1. USA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 558
3.2. China . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 559
3.3. India . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 559
3.4. Other countries with ZLD applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 559
4. Environmental and operational aspects of ZLD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 560
5. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 560
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 560
References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 561

1. Introduction
The growing trend of urbanization and industrialization is placing
increasing pressure on freshwater resources worldwide. This is one of
the biggest global challenges, causing a major threat to water quality,
security, ecosystems, and economic growth (Grant et al., 2012;
Vörösmarty et al., 2010; Tong and Elimelech, 2016). Freshwater is
widely used in industry, producing substantial amounts of wastewater
as a result. Where wastewater is discharged into water bodies without
adequate treatment, it can cause severe contamination that adversely
affects aquatic ecosystems and, ultimately, human health
(Schwarzenbach et al., 2010). Previously, wastewater treatment pro-
cesses including, phase separation, sedimentation, filtration, oxidation,
chemical/biochemical oxidation (Cheremisinoff, 2018), polishing
through adsorption (Mo et al., 2018) and membrane processes (Wang
et al., 2008) were applied for only safe disposal of wastewater. However,
recently, reclamation of wastewater appeared as technology-based
practice especially in regions under water scarcity (Eslamian and
Eslamian, 2017; Salgot et al., 2018). The industries are required to
adopt sustainable water management strategies for the reclamation of
wastewater to reduce consumption and minimize contamination of re-
ceiving waterbodies. Currently, due to the continuous and increasing
demand of water, reclamation of industrial wastewater has become a
very active area of research (Grant et al., 2012). This offers a means of
minimizing wastewater volumes and their associated environmental
hazards, thereby lessening the pressure on freshwater resources (Tong
and Elimelech, 2016).
Water resource recovery by zero-liquid discharge (ZLD) technology
is attracting interest as a valuable water management solution for in-
dustrial wastewaters by maximizing water recycling and minimizing
wastewater volumes (Mays, 2007). In the ZLD technique, a closed
water cycle is used so that no water is discharged from a system if
there is possibility of it being reused after appropriate treatment. This
can eliminate the risk of water contamination via wastewater discharge
and also maximizes water usage efficiency (Byers, 1995). It has been
suggested that ZLD can be accomplished by following the water minimi-
zation hierarchy (WMH) shown in Fig. 1 (Alwi et al., 2008). A water-
audited system used in combination with the WMH can help determine
appropriate measures for water conservation. ZLD is more likely to be
achieved by considering inputs, outputs, and water quality, rather
than aiming to minimize wastewater outputs only (Barrington and
Ho, 2014). However, due to intensive energy use, ZLD is generally char-
acterized as an expensive technology that has not yet been widely im-
plemented (Oren et al., 2010). However, considered a best practice
end goal, ZLD can stimulate innovation to minimize industrial water
usage (Lens et al., 2005).
Recently, due to severe water shortages and contamination of
aquatic environments across the globe, ZLD technology has received in-
creasing interest. Moreover, strict environmental regulation policies,
the increasing value of freshwater, and the rising cost of wastewater dis-
posal are fueling effort to make ZLD a valuable means of industrial
wastewater treatment (GWI, 2009). Indeed, ZLD may be considered a
necessary strategy for sustainable wastewater management. Globally,
investment in the development of ZLD technology is at least $100–200
million (Lanny, 2015), including rapid growth in developed regions
such as USA and Europe as well as in emerging economies like China
and India.
In conventional ZLD systems, thermal processes are fundamental;
wastewater is fed to a brine concentrator for evaporation and then a
brine crystallizer; collected distillate is then reused, whereas the recov-
ered solids are either disposed of or reclaimed as valued byproducts.
These systems are already being used successfully, but they consume a
substantial amount of energy. Alternatively, further development of
membrane-based reverse osmosis (RO) technology in combination
with ZLD is lowering energy requirements (Elimelech and Phillip,
2011). However, while the incorporation of RO technology can improve
energy-efficient relative to thermally driven ZLD systems, it is only ap-
plicable to feed waters with a limited salinity range. More recently,
salt-concentrating techniques have emerged as alternative ZLD technol-
ogies, including membrane distillation (MD), forward osmosis (FO), and
electrodialysis (ED) (Tong and Elimelech, 2016).
In this review, we describe the principles of the ZLD technique, the
importance and progress of the technology from thermal evaporation
to membrane-based processes, and outline other existing technologies

Increasing priority
1 2 3 4 5
Direct
Source Regeneration
Source reduction use/Outsourcing Fresh water use
elimination reuse
of external water

Fig. 1. Block diagram of the water minimization hierarchy (WMH).

 Muhammad Yaqub, W. Lee / Science of the Total Environment 681 (2019) 551–563
with respect to environmental impacts and resource recovery from in-
dustrial wastewater. We also examine aspects of performance and
cost for individual processing steps while considering water volume
and quality parameters. In addition, we discuss the current status of
ZLD systems' application across the globe. Furthermore, we highlight
how ZLD technologies are currently being evaluated, and consider the
future research needs for securing its feasibility and sustainability.
2. Zero-liquid discharge and resource recovery
Due to a rapid increase in water and energy demand and associated
costs, public attitude toward wastewater as an “out-of-sight, out-of-
mind” issue is shifting toward it being viewed as a valuable resource.
The recycling and reuse of wastewater can minimize the exploitation
of new water supplies, and nutrients, such as phosphorus, can be recov-
ered in numerous forms for agricultural applications as fertilizer. More-
over, energy in the form of heat and electricity can be extracted from
organics to offset the power demands of processing facilities
(Worthen, 2015). Consequently, limits on available resources are push-
ing society away from a focus on wastewater treatment toward re-
source recovery (Puyol et al., 2017).
ZLD is a system comprised of a variety of advanced water treatment
technologies aimed at improving water usage efficiency and resource
recovery. ZLD technology has gained more attention in recent decades;
development started in the USA, followed by China, India, and the rest of
the world. It is a preferred process through which no liquid discharge is
made to the environment, as industrial wastewater is reused after treat-
ment to meet required standards (Tong and Elimelech, 2016). ZLD can
be achieved following the WMH as described in Fig. 1 (Alwi et al.,
2008). In this hierarchy, five key actions that water use should focus
on are ranked in decreasing priority. Greatest priority is given to the
elimination of wastewater production followed—in decreasing order
of priority—by a reduction in wastewater generation, direct reuse with-
out any treatment, reclamation following treatment, and lastly, use of
freshwater.
2.1. Significance of resource recovery through ZLD systems
Freshwater is an increasingly valuable resource while industrial ap-
plications threaten its availability. Industrial processes need water,
thereby reducing its availability in the environment or, alternatively,
polluting and releasing wastewater that can damage local ecosystem
(Szuez, 2018). In recent years, even as industrial economies continue
Industrial wastewater
Brine
Pretreatment
concentrator
Fig. 2. Schematic diagram of a thermal ZLD system.
553
to expand and produce greater volumes of contaminated wastewater,
there is increasing international agreement over the necessity to safe-
guard the environment from pollution. This mindset represents a
major shift from historical views and is helping to build more support
for programs and policies that encourage best practice and innovative
solutions for protecting ecosystems, conserving water supplies, and im-
proving water quality. The major concerns pushing industries toward
water resource recovery include strict regulations on wastewater dis-
posal and water scarcity due to intensified pressure on water resources
(Mark Bornhoft, 2018).
Moreover, public environmental awareness, rising costs of wastewa-
ter treatment, and problems associated with its disposal are driving the
development of ZLD systems. These systems are beneficial for comply-
ing with environmental regulations, for reducing wastewater disposal
costs, for supplementing water supplies, and for protecting the environ-
ment. Thus, ZLD systems minimize waste, recover resources, treat pol-
luting industrial wastewater more effectively, and mitigate potential
water quality impacts in receiving waters. According to Lux Research
(Lux Research, 2017), the ZLD market will be boosted by technological
innovations because of the rising cost of water and stringent environ-
mental regulations; ZLD systems prevent any wastewater discharge
from power plants and industries, and growth in this technology is ex-
pected to increase at an annual rate of 12%, reaching a $2.7 billion mar-
ket value by 2030 (Lux Research, 2017).
2.2. Existing ZLD systems with resource recovery
Conventional thermal ZLD process schemes employed all over the
world are relatively expensive, which has urged research into finding al-
ternates. In this context, three types of existing technologies are
discussed in the following sections, focusing on systems incorporating
thermal, RO, and other emerging technologies. In addition, details of
ZLD systems and their associated resource recovery processes are
provided.
2.2.1. Thermal ZLD systems
The major elements involved in this system include wastewater pre-
treatment, treatment in a brine concentrator and brine crystallizer,
followed by evaporation and solids recovery (Fig. 2). During pretreat-
ment, wastewater undergoes various processes such as filtration, pH ad-
justment, de-aeration and anti-scaling to minimize the scaling potential
of water. Next, this water is sequentially concentrated using a brine con-
centrator followed by a brine crystallizer. This produces distillates that
Treated water for reuse
Brine
crystallizer
Evaporation
pond
Solids
disposal
Solids recovery
554 Muhammad Yaqub, W. Lee / Science of the Total Environment 681 (2019) 551–563
are recycled and reused as clean water, while solids are either recovered
as valuable byproducts or sent to evaporation ponds for disposal after
further processing (Tong and Elimelech, 2016).
Brine concentrators function via mechanical vapor compression
(MVC), where feed water mixed with brine slurry travels within the
concentrator through the tubes of a heat exchanger (Ghaffour et al., n.
d.). Evaporation occurs as brine slurry passes through the heat ex-
changer, and latent heat produced by superheated water vapor is used
to vaporize the brine slurry. The sensible heat of distillate is then utilized
to preheat the feed water (Mickley, 2008a). The scaling phenomena on
the surface of heat transfer tubes can be prevented by adding calcium
sulfate seeds to the recirculating brine, which keeps salts in suspension
(Mickley, 2008b; Bostjancic and Ludlum, 1996). In the concentrator, the
formation of a thin film of falling slurry on the surface of heating tubes
improve the rate of heat transfer, thus decreasing the energy consump-
tion of the compressor (Shaffer et al., 2013) and enabling further heat
recovery via the heat exchangers.
MVC brine concentrators consume large amounts of energy, in the
order of 20–25 kWhe/m3 of treated feed water (Mickley, 2008b;
Burbano and Brandhuber, 2012) and up to 39 kWhe/m3 of feed water
(McGinnis et al., 2013). Moreover, to prevent corrosion, MVC systems
are manufactured by using titanium- and stainless steel-based materials
that increase capital costs (US Department of the Interior Bureau of
Reclamation, 2008; Bostjancic and Ludlum, 1996). Brine concentrators
are capable of achieving solid concentration up to 250,000 mg/L, with
90–98% of recovered water having total dissolved solids of b10 mg/L
(Burbano and Brandhuber, 2012; US Department of the Interior
Bureau of Reclamation, 2008).
Subsequently, the concentrated brine is fed to a brine crystallizer for
further water recovery, which follows a similar working principle to the
brine concentrator. Brine is pumped through a submerged heat ex-
changer by forced circulation under pressure, to prevent scaling of
heat exchanger tubes (Bostjancic and Ludlum, 1996). Because of the
higher salinity and viscosity of the treated feed water, energy consump-
tion by crystallizers is as high as 52–66 kWhe/m3, which is almost three
times of the amount consumed by brine concentrators (Mickley, 2008b;
Burbano and Brandhuber, 2012). Steam-driven crystallizers are eco-
nomically feasible for small-scale applications, however, typically
b23 L/min (Mickley, 2008b; US Department of the Interior Bureau of
Reclamation, 2008).
Evaporation ponds consume solar energy and can be an inexpensive
alternative to brine crystallizers, especially where small volumes of
water are being treated and if site land is cheap (Burbano and
Brandhuber, 2012; US Department of the Interior Bureau of
Industrial wastewater
Brine
concentrator
Pretreatment
Reverse Osmosis (RO)
Fig. 3. Schematic diagram of an RO-incorporated ZLD system.
Reclamation, 2008; Subramani and Jacangelo, 2014). In contrast, evapo-
ration ponds can be extremely expensive; the cost of land procurement
for the construction of evaporation ponds of ZLD-based desalination
schemes in Las Vegas, Nevada, was nearly three times the total cost of
brine concentrators and crystallizers (Stanford et al., 2010). Moreover,
water cannot be recovered from evaporation ponds meaning there is
no additional opportunity to enhance water usage efficiency. In some
cases, spray driers are also be used for brine-to-salt processing due to
their efficiency in dewatering brine concentrates (Tillberg, 2004).
2.2.2. RO-incorporated thermal ZLD systems
In this system, RO—a well-established, pressure-driven desalination
technology—is combined with thermal ZLD systems to decrease the vol-
ume of brine slurry entering the brine concentrator or crystallizer,
thereby lowering the energy consumption (Fig. 3). The energy con-
sumption by RO for 50% recovery in the desalination of seawater is
around 2 kWhe/m3 of product water (Elimelech and Phillip, 2011),
which is much lower than for brine concentrators and crystallizers.
This type of system is economical if RO-fed wastewater has a lower sa-
linity (Al-Karaghouli and Kazmerski, 2013), typically up to 70,000 mg/L
(Shaffer et al., 2013), while the availability of newly developed mem-
branes indicates further opportunities to apply RO in wastewater
treatment.
Wastewater is therefore concentrated by RO before entering to ther-
mal processes, minimizing capital and operational costs. As reported in
previous studies, using RO to treat brine in a desalination plant con-
serves around 58–75% of energy and 48–67% of treatment costs com-
pared to a brine concentrator-evaporation pond setup (Bond and
Veerapaneni, 2007, 2008). It has been noted that brine concentrators
still have high capital and operational costs even after applying a sec-
ondary RO plant (Bond and Veerapaneni, 2007). The application of RO
has a salinity limit, however, and fouling problems that decrease
water flux and the lifespan of membranes in ZLD systems are also an
issue. Therefore, various techniques can be employed during pretreat-
ment including chemical softening, pH adjustment, and ion exchange
(Fig. 3). During pretreatment, intensive use of chemicals results in addi-
tional solid waste production and ultimately increases operational costs.
Ultrafiltration (UF) may be an efficient pretreatment technology. One
pilot study tested an RO-incorporated ZLD system designed to treat
basal aquifer water with a higher scaling potential, having an average
total dissolved salts load of 21,300 mg/L (Loganathan et al., 2016). It
was observed that UF removed most of the suspended solids, iron, and
approximately 50% of oil and grease from the feed water, which ulti-
mately increased the efficiency of RO (Loganathan et al., 2016).
Treated water for reuse
Brine
crystallizer
Evaporation
pond
Solids
disposal
Solids recovery
 Muhammad Yaqub, W. Lee / Science of the Total Environment 681 (2019) 551–563 555

Table 1 fundamental elements. Each of these technologies are described in

RO- and HERO-incorporated ZLD systems. Sections 2.2.3.1 and 2.2.3.2, respectively.
Parameters RO-incorporated ZLD HERO-incorporated ZLD

Recovery rate 70 to 80% More than 90%

Initial cost Larger E, higher initial cost Smaller E and B decrease
initial cost
Running cost High steam consumption, high Lower running cost, short
running cost period ROI
Periodical Frequent CIP of RO, cleaning of Less frequent CIP, stable
maintenance E. operation of E
Daily inspection Easily inspection Equipment needs in daily
inspection
CIP: clean in place; E: evaporator; B: boiler; ROI: return of investment.
A newly introduced technology named high efficiency RO (HERO)
has a lower tendency for fouling/scaling and achieves higher water re-
covery using combined pretreatment methods (Subramani and
Jacangelo, 2014; Roca and Cited, 2006; Burbano and Brandhuber,
2012). Globally, HERO has been used in multiple full-scale ZLD applica-
tions (Aquatech, 2015a; Sarkar, 2011) including a recent project in
China at a coal-to-liquids plant with a capacity to process 2300 m3/h
(Aquatech, 2015a). The salinity limit of RO is well below that attained
by brine concentrators (up to 250,000 mg/L) meaning that RO is typi-
cally placed before a brine concentrator in ZLD systems (Bond and
Veerapaneni, 2008; US Department of the Interior Bureau of
Reclamation, 2008; Mickley, 2008b). The development of new technol-
ogies capable of treating brine as efficiently and as economically as RO is
therefore significant goal in the advancement of ZLD systems. A com-
parative study of RO- and HERO-incorporated ZLD systems is presented
in Table 1 (TOSHIBA, 2018).
2.2.3. Emerging membrane-based ZLD systems
Early ZLD systems were based only on thermal processes whereas
RO was more widely incorporated later, up to its salinity limit discussed
in Section 2.2.2. Emerging membrane-based processes such as mem-
brane distillation (MD), forward osmosis (FO), and electrodialysis
(ED) now emerging as alternatives in ZLD systems to achieve further
concentration after RO. In these cases, RO brine is further concentrated
using these technologies prior to being fed into the brine crystallizer
or evaporation pond (Fig. 4). A detailed comparison of these technolo-
gies is presented in Table 2.
MD and FO technologies are known as thermolytic because they op-
erate on the basis of both thermal and membrane processes, although
thermal energy is supplied to the system whereas membranes are
2.2.3.1. MD-incorporated ZLD systems. In MD, hydrophobic microporous
membranes are made of polytetrafluoroethylene, polypropylene, or
polyvinylidene fluoride are usually used. These have low resistance to
mass transfer, low thermal conductivity to prevent heat loss, high resis-
tance to chemical degradation, and good thermal stability at extreme
temperatures. It is a rapidly developing technology that has the poten-
tial to concentrate saline wastewater to near saturation by utilizing
waste heat (Bush et al., 2016; Schwantes et al., 2013). Generally, a
brine concentrator is employed in ZLD systems to concentrate the
wastewater to near saturation using electrical or thermal energy
(Tong and Elimelech, 2016). These brine concentrators are much more
expensive, but they can recover 60–90% of water (Tong and Elimelech,
2016; US Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation, 2008;
Singh and Hankins, 2016). Therefore, application is limited to situations
where waste heat can be utilized, as in MD. The waste heat utilization in
MD makes it economical as it operates at temperatures below 85 °C,
which are achievable using thermal energy. So far, comparative studies
of MD and BC have mainly considered direct contact MD, which is not
optimal in all applications (US Department of the Interior Bureau of
Reclamation, 2008; Eykens et al., 2016). The key parameters of MD are
described in Table 3.
In MD, separation is thermally driven through a hydrophobic, highly
porous membrane that only permits the vapor produced due to the
temperature difference on both sides of the membrane, as shown in
Fig. 5 (Winter, 2015). MD has great potential but it is yet to be explored
on a large scale and in different industrial wastewater treatment appli-
cations. Moreover, it can be used with ZLD systems for brine treatment
in situations where conventional techniques might otherwise falter due
to stringent governmental regulations (Tong and Elimelech, 2016). In
this process, mass transfer occurs through a combination of molecular
and Knudsen diffusive transport, and fundamental equations used to
describe this heat and mass transfer are specified in the literature
(Winter, 2015).
Various methods are used to establish the thermal driving force in
MD and different channel arrangements have been developed (Fig. 5).
It is the combination of thermal and membrane-based desalination in
which partial vapor pressure drives water vapor across a hydrophobic,
microporous membrane (Camacho et al., 2013). The feed water is typi-
cally heated up to 60–90 °C, and the temperature difference between
this hot feed water and the colder permeate results in a vapor pressure
difference that drives water vapor flux (Alklaibi and Lior, 2005; Lawson

Treated water for reuse

Pretreatment RO

Brine
crystallizer
Diluate back to RO

RO brine

FO ED/EDR MD
Evaporation
pond
Solids
disposal

Fig. 4. Schematic diagram of emerging membrane-based ZLD systems, reverse osmosis (RO), membrane distillation (MD), electrodialysis (ED) and electrodialysis reversal (EDR).
556 Muhammad Yaqub, W. Lee / Science of the Total Environment 681 (2019) 551–563

Table 2
Benefits and limitations of different technologies used in ZLD systems modified (Tong and Elimelech, 2016).

Tech. Benefits Limitations Energy References

kWhe/m3

MVC High salinity limit N200,000 mg/L High capital and operational costs 20–25, (Mickley, 2008b; Burbano and Brandhuber, 2012; McGinnis
28–39 (a) et al., 2013; Charisiadis, 2018)
RO Energy-efficient Limited salinity; scaling 2–6, (Elimelech and Phillip, 2011; Al-Karaghouli and Kazmerski,
1.5–2.5 (b) 2013; Charisiadis, 2018)
MD High salinity limit N200,000 mg/L Low flux and recovery; limited area of 40–45, (Schwantes et al., 2018; Al-Obaidani et al., 2008;
application 22–67 (b) Charisiadis, 2018)
FO High salinity limit N200,000 mg/L; requires Low flux at high salinity; reverse 21 (a) (McGinnis et al., 2013; Haupt and Lerch, 2018; Oasys
low-grade heat; less fouling solute flux; limited use Water, 2017; Li et al., 2017)
ED/EDR Salinity limit N100,000 mg/L; less fouling High energy consumption 7–15 (a) (Korngold et al., 2009; Loganathan et al., 2016; Turek et al.,
2005; Tufa et al., 2015)

Tech; Technologies, (a) energy consumption kWhe/m3 of feed water; (b) energy consumption kWhe/m3 of product water.

Table 3
Key parameters of MD.

Parameters Related parameters Trends References

Liquid entry pressure Feed concentration and presence of Decreases with increased feed concentration (Gostoli and Sarti, 1989)
organic solutes
Membrane thickness (optimum Morphology and pore size Inversely proportional to permeate flux (Laganà et al., 2000)
30–60 μm) distribution
Membrane porosity (30 to 85%) Organic solvents High porosity results in higher permeate flux and lower (El-Bourawi et al., 2006)
conductive heat loss
Mean pore size and distribution (100 Feed and operating conditions Directly proportional to permeate flux (El-Bourawi et al., 2006; Lawson and
nm to 1 μm) Lloyd, 1997)

and Lloyd, 1997). In direct contact membrane distillation (DCMD), per-
meate comes in direct contact with the membrane while water vapor is
collected on a condensation surface that is not in direct interaction with
the membrane. This is the case for air gap membrane distillation
(AGMD), vacuum membrane distillation (VMD), and sweeping gas
membrane distillation (SGMD) (Camacho et al., 2013; Curcio and
Drioli, 2005; Meindersma et al., 2006; Tijing et al., 2014; Subramani
and Jacangelo, 2015).
The theoretical minimum amount of energy required for seawater
desalination using single pass DCMD with heat recovery is 27.6 MJ/m3
of product water at a feed temperature of 60 °C (Lin et al., 2014). This
is much higher than energy consumed by RO—3.8 MJ/m3 of product
water with a typical recovery of 50% (Elimelech and Phillip, 2011). Prac-
tically, energy consumption for seawater desalination was estimated as
143–162 MJ/m3 of product water using DCMD (Al-Obaidani et al., 2008)
and 80–240 MJ/m3 of product water using AGMD (Meindersma et al.,
2006). In MD, an intensive amount of energy is required for water sep-
aration because it depends on liquid vapor phase transition. Consump-
tion of thermal energy during MD cannot, however, be directly
compared with other electricity-driven technologies, such as RO, ED/
Membrane
Heat
E v a p or at or
C ond e n s er
EDR, and brine concentrators, because the efficiency of electricity gener-
ation from thermal energy is temperature dependent.
MD has many applications depending on the membrane process in-
volved, the targeted wastewater, membrane thickness, and pore size
(Table 4). However, most recent applications are still at the laboratory
or small-scale pilot plant stage. In California, MD has been applied in a
ZLD inland desalination study, at the bench scale, for further concentra-
tion of secondary RO brine, achieving N98% water recovery from brack-
ish groundwater (Martinetti et al., 2009). Recently, an MD-incorporated
near-ZLD system, in combination with EDR, proved a better solution for
water recovery and energy production at a seawater desalination plant
(Tufa et al., 2015). In this case, MD decreased the volume of simulated
SWRO brine by N80%. Brine produced by MD was mixed with seawater
in a red stack for to generate electrochemical energy. Currently, because
of the relatively low water recovery rates and technical immaturity, no
industrial application of MD in ZLD schemes have been reported (US
Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation, 2008; Lin et al.,
2014).
MD is capable of treating highly saline feed waters that cannot be de-
salinated by RO using low-grade thermal energy. In addition, it is an
economical and environment friendly process compared to other tech-
nologies, especially when low-grade energy is available. Furthermore, it
can be operated at low temperature and pressure, and has minimum
fouling propensity (Lawson and Lloyd, 1997; Meindersma et al., 2006;
Al-Obaidani et al., 2008; Alkhudhiri et al., 2012). However, the presence

exchanger of volatile pollutants or surfactants in the feed water, such as in coal-to-

c h a n n el

c h a n n el

Feed water chemical (Zhang et al., 2006), brewery (Simate et al., 2011), and shale
gas industries (Shaffer et al., 2013), can result in membranes becomes
tank
wet, which allows volatile compounds to pass through and thus reduces
Distillate permeate water quality (Shaffer et al., 2013; Lawson and Lloyd, 1997;
Feed Pump tank El-Bourawi et al., 2006).

2.2.3.2. FO-incorporated ZLD systems. In FO, movement of water mole-

cules through a semipermeable membrane occurs because of an os-
 motic pressure difference across the membrane. This membrane
permits passage of pure water molecules and rejects the solute or salt
Fig. 5. Schematic diagram of a batch type MD system. molecules. In the FO process, a highly concentrated salt solution
 Muhammad Yaqub, W. Lee / Science of the Total Environment 681 (2019) 551–563 557

Table 4
Individual MD industrial applications.

M process Targeted wastewater M thickness μm M pore size μm References

DCMD Pure water and humic acid 178 0.2 (Khayet et al., 2004)
DCMD Pure water, NaCl, brackish, and seawater 126 0.22 (Termpiyakul et al., 2005)
DCMD Olive mill wastewater 55 0.198 (El-Abbassi et al., 2009)
DCMD Heavy metal waste 120 0.22 (Zolotarev et al., 1994)
AGMD NaCl, H2SO4, NaOH, HCl, HNO3 80 0.20 (Kimura et al., 1987)
DCMD NaCl and seawater 175 0.20 (Hsu et al., 2002)
DCMD Textile wastewater/Textile plant 125 0.22 ± 0.08 (Laqbaqbi et al., 2019; Dow et al., 2017)
DCMD Livestock anaerobic digestate wastewater 125 0.22 (Kim et al., 2018)
AGMD Textile dyes 180 0.20 (Leaper et al., 2018)
AGMD Heavy metals 100 ± 3, 125 ± 2 0.37–0.47, 0.22 (Attia et al., 2017)
MD Anaerobic digestate from food and dairy 110 0.59 (Rao et al., 2018)
DCMD Gas-fired power plant – 0.5 ± 0.08 (Dow et al., 2016)

M: membrane: MD: membrane distillation; DCMD: direct contact MD; AGMD: air gap MD.

known as the draw solution is used, which has low water chemical po-
tential to attract water molecules from a saline water, which has a
higher water chemical potential and lower osmotic pressure
(Valladares Linares et al., 2014). According to the second law of thermo-
dynamics, transportation of water molecules will result an equilibrium
between chemical potentials in the feed and the draw solutions. Pure
water is then recovered from the diluted draw solution using an
energy-efficient separation technique (Li et al., 2017). In desalination,
FO takes place in two stages where, first, water molecules are moved
from the feed to the draw solution through the semipermeable mem-
brane and, second, pure water is separated from the diluted draw solu-
tion for draw-solution recovery and reuse (Qasim et al., 2015). The brine
produced during this processes is fed to a crystallizer or an evaporation
pond for further concentration, and for the recovery of water and other
salt byproducts (Fig. 6).
Newly developed thermolytic draw solutes, such as NH3/CO2, have
cemented the way for combining FO with ZLD systems. These draw so-
lutions are capable of producing very high osmotic pressures to drive
the separation process, and they can be regenerated using low-
temperature distillation techniques (McGinnis and Elimelech, 2007;
McCutcheon et al., 2005). Moreover, these draw solutions decompose
at 60 °C (at atmospheric pressure), attained using low-grade thermal
energy from industrial waste heat, and is used to regenerate the draw
solution (McGinnis and Elimelech, 2007). In a pilot FO plant, water pro-
duced from the Marcellus shale region of the USA was concentrated up
to a salinity of 180,000 mg/L (McGinnis et al., 2013). In 2012, the annual
amount of waste heat produced from power plants in the USA was esti-
mated to be 803 MGJ at temperatures N90 °C (McCutcheon et al., 2005),
Feed Diluted draw
solution solution
FO membrane
which can be used to regenerate draw solutions for the production of
1.9 billion m3 of water (Zhou et al., 2015). Additionally, geothermal en-
ergy is easily available in major ZLD markets including the USA and
China (Shaffer et al., 2013; Zhu et al., 2015; Lund et al., 2005).
FO is advantageous because the permeation of water molecules
through the membrane occurs under the influence of an osmotic pres-
sure difference, with low or no hydraulic pressure required (Cath
et al., 2006; Zhao et al., 2012; Holloway et al., 2007). This consumes
less energy compared to other conventional desalination techniques
(Field and Wu, 2013). Moreover, it has additional advantages including
lower and reversible membrane fouling (Zhao et al., 2012; Achilli et al.,
2009; Field and Wu, 2013), high salt rejection (Emadzadeh et al., 2013;
Altaee et al., 2014), and the effects of various contaminants present in
the feed solution are negligible (Zhao et al., 2012; Yangali-Quintanilla
et al., 2011; Xie et al., 2014). It also offers a cleaner alternative solution
to the brine produced by desalination plants. Furthermore it has the po-
tential to achieve higher water flux and recovery by reducing the
amount of brine generated (Zhao et al., 2012; Cath et al., 2006). In
these respects, RO is a promising and economically viable alternative
to conventional thermally driven brine concentration systems (Oasys
Water, 2017).
The world's first FO-incorporated ZLD system was installed at the
Changxing power plant in China, with a capacity of 650 m3/day (Oasys
Water). This system using RO to concentrate mixed wastewater from
flue-gas desulfurization and cooling tower blowdown up to
60,000 mg/L. Further concentration, up to 220,000 mg/L or above, is
then achieved using a draw solution (NH3/CO2). Finally, FO brine is
sent to a crystallizer for further concentration. This process produces
water with a solute concentration of b100 mg/L that is recovered and
reused in the boiler (Oasys Water, 2017).
2.2.3.3. ED-incorporated ZLD systems. This technique has been success-
fully employed for the desalination of surface and groundwater. It can
also be used in ZLD systems for pretreatment and pre-concentration of
brine before being fed to the evaporative crystallizer (Turek et al.,

water regeneration

2005). In this technique, ion exchange membranes are used to eliminate

1st stage. Permeation

2nd stage. Draw

and pure water

of water from feed

dissolved ions from water, where electric potential is the driving force.
to draw solution

recovery

These membranes allow transport of selective counter-ions but prevent

the carrying of co-ions (Xu and Huang, 2008). As shown in Fig. 7, cations
pass through cation-exchange membranes and move toward a nega-
tively charged cathode while anions travel in the opposite direction
through anion-exchange membranes. As a result, salt-depleted diluate
and concentrated brine streams are produced. Any scaling or fouling
of membranes is removed by reversing the polarity of the electrodes,
known as electrodialysis reversal (EDR) (US Department of the
Pure Interior Bureau of Reclamation, 2008), meaning less pretreatment is re-
Draw water quired compared to RO (Strathmann, 2010). Moreover, these tech-
Brine
solution niques have a lower tendency for scaling, even for silica-enriched feed
waters, because neutral silica is not accumulated in the brine stream
Fig. 6. Schematic diagram of the two-stage forward osmosis (FO) desalination process. (US Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation, 2008).
558 Muhammad Yaqub, W. Lee / Science of the Total Environment 681 (2019) 551–563

Feed water

A C A C A C

Anode Cathode

Concentrate
Dilutatnt

Fig. 7. A schematic diagram of electrodialysis (ED) process, A; Anion exchange membrane, C; Cation exchange membrane.

Compared to RO, ED and EDR are capable of concentrating feed wa-
ters to salinities above 100,000 mg/L by consuming 7–15 kWhe/m3 of
feed water (Table 5). However, at lower diluate salinities, the estimated
cost of salt removal by ED is higher (McGovern et al., 2014). Moreover, a
stand-alone or single-stage system is not appropriate for attaining ZLD
in many cases. Therefore, multistage configuration is one option, but
this will increase capital costs (McGovern et al., 2014; Turek, 2003;
Wang et al., 2015). The application of ED/EDR with RO in ZLD systems
extends the salinity limit of RO and decreases energy consumption com-
pared to brine concentrator systems.
3. Global status of ZLD systems for resource recovery
The practical implementation of ZLD systems across the globe for re-
source recovery depends upon geographical location, as applied in the
European Union, USA, Australia, Canada, the Middle East, Mexico,
China, and India (Lanny, 2015; GWI, 2009; Durham and Mierzejewski,
2003; Heins and Schooley, 2004).
3.1. USA
Currently, most ZLD systems in the world are operational in the USA.
Initial development of ZLD dates back to the 1970s when power plants
near the Colorado River adopted ZLD systems due to the increasing sa-
linity of river water (Lanny, 2015; Mickley, 2008b). Today, ZLD is mainly
applied in the power generation sector to treat and recycle the FGD
wastewater and cooling tower blowdown. A survey of operational ZLD
systems in 2008 showed that around 60 out of 82 ZLD plants were asso-
ciated with the power industry (Mickley, 2008b) while the rest were
used in various industries including chemical, mining, electronics, nu-
clear, and fertilizer industries. Recently, the USA Environmental Protec-
tion Agency revised guidelines regarding wastewater discharge from
thermal power plants (Roberts, n.d.). Consequently, to meet the set
limits of toxic metals and other harmful pollutants, ZLD is a preferred
option for power plants (USEPA, 2015). Compliance with newly intro-
duced standards for wastewater discharge provides incentives for ZLD
installations at power plants. In North USA, it is forecast that the ZLD
market will increase by $109.8 million between 2017 and 2025,
reaching $243.9 million. A recent study in 2018 on growth opportunities
in the global ZLD market up to 2024 presents a clear trend for future de-
velopment (Reportlinker, 2018).
One of the biggest challenges for inland desalination plants is brine
management, yet traditional brine management practices have poten-
tially adverse impacts on surface and groundwater. ZLD systems capable
of managing brine therefore have significant potential for inland desali-
nation in water-scarce regions (Xevgenos et al., 2016; Mickley, 2008b).
ZLD applications at inland desalination plants were investigated by gov-
ernmental agencies and organizations in the USA, including the Bureau
of Reclamation and California Energy Commission (Mickley, 2008b;
Bond and Veerapaneni, 2008; US Department of the Interior Bureau of
Reclamation, 2008; Bond and Veerapaneni, 2007; Burbano and
Brandhuber, 2012). Application of ZLD technologies at inland desalina-
tion plants provides several advantages including maximizing water re-
covery, preserving natural resources, and formation of byproduct salts
(Elsaid et al., 2012). However, costs and energy consumption are the
main barriers to full-scale ZLD applications at inland desalination plants
in the USA. Most ZLD systems operational in the USA can only recover
70–90% of wastewater for reuse (known as near-ZLD), yet they are

Table 5
Applications of ED/EDR incorporated ZLD systems.

Process Application Energy (kWhe/m3) Recovery (%) References

ED RO brine 7–8 97–98 (Korngold et al., 2009)

EDR-RO Basal aquifer water 8.1/RO, 14.5/EDR 77–85 (Loganathan et al., 2015)
ED-EDR Coal mine brine 9.4–14.4 80 (Turek et al., 2005)
ED-EDR Coal mine brine 7.8–14.4 85 (Turek, 2004)
EDR-RO Brackish water 12.4 80–90 (McGovern et al., 2014)
ED Seawater desalination 6.6–8.7 – (Turek, 2003)
EDR-RO Brackish water 5–6 88 (Oren et al., 2010)
MD-EDR Simulated brine 0.9–2.4 (a) 92 (Tufa et al., 2015)
RO/EO/BMED Dyeing wastewater 24.6 97 (Yao et al., 2016)
EDR Chemical industry – 89 (Kimberly-clark, 2018)
ED Domestic wastewater – 100 (b) (Gally et al., 2018)
ED-Complex Electroplating wastewater 84.95 (c) 86.6 (Babilas and Dydo, 2018)

(a): power density (W/m2); (b): in terms of quality standards; (c): current efficiency; EO: electrochemical oxidation: BMED: bipolar membrane ED.
 Muhammad Yaqub, W. Lee / Science of the Total Environment 681 (2019) 551–563
still very effective and may be a good option for meeting the immediate
regulatory requirements and overall financial goals (Mark Bornhoft,
2018). EDR, or electrodialysis reversal, is a membrane desalter and
Flex EDR successfully extracted 89% of the salt load, surpassing the
75% goal. Saltworks Technologies is launching its Flex EDR product
line – the next generation electrodialysis reversal technology for chal-
lenging waters (Kimberly-clark, 2018). A typical chip plant wastewater
reuse with a daily water consumption of 1.5 million required capital
cost $10 million and 2–3 cents cost per gallon installed by XZERO
(XZERO, 2019).
3.2. China
Due to rapid economic development and urbanization, water con-
sumption and water pollution have been increased in China. Conse-
quently, China announced a new action plan to tackle water pollution
through the improvement of water resources quality and ecosystems
by 2020 (Council, n.d.). In China, water-intensive thermal power plants
operated by the five largest state-owned companies are located in
water-scarce regions (Finance, 2013). ZLD is therefore, considered a
sustainable solution in the energy-water nexus. Recently, the world's
first FO-based ZLD system was installed at the Changxing coal-fired
power plant in Zhejiang Province (Jining, 2018). A further application
based on the same technology has since been implemented at a
power plant of the Huaneng group for the treatment of wastewater
(Group, 2016).
China has seen a recent boom in the installation of coal-to-chemicals
plants, which consume a substantial amount of freshwater. As a result,
ZLD has become mandatory at coal-to-chemicals plants for the preser-
vation of water resources and ecosystems (Stanley, 2015). Several ZLD
systems are currently installed or are at the design stage for feed
water with a salinity in the range of 2000–16,000 mg/L, having a treat-
ment capacity of 110–2300 m3/h (Sarkar, 2011; Aquatech, 2015a,b).
The objectives of 12th Five-Year Plan by the Chinese government in-
cluded environmental protections that have enhanced the application
of ZLD systems in existing and newly installed coal-fired power plants
and coal-to-chemicals plants (Hilton, 2012). Recently, Desalitech has
won a tender to provide an ultrapure ZLD water treatment system at
the Novelis aluminum production plant in Changzhou to fulfill regula-
tory requirements for wastewater processing (Desalitech, 2016). The
Gradient Corporation also installed a carrier gas extraction system
based on humidification-dehumidification processes at a coal-fired
power plant northwest of Shanghai, which treats highly contaminated
FGD wastewater for reuse with a recovery of N90% (Rimbach, 2018).
Moreover, greater public awareness of water pollution in China may fa-
cilitate wider ZLD implementation.
A recent study proved that utilization of exhausted heat of flue gas in
ZLD system for flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater treatment de-
creases the cost including initial investment, operating and mainte-
nance cost as compared to other conventional methods (Fu et al., 2018).
3.3. India
Rapid industrialization and urbanization in India is creating severe
pressure on water resources and is increasing pollution. Recently, a
three-year target was set by the Indian government—known as the
“Clean Ganga” project—that imposes stringent regulations on wastewa-
ter discharge and compels high-polluting industries to move toward
ZLD (Abdelhamid, 2015). In 2015, the Indian government's water con-
servation policies imposed ZLD installation at all textile plants generat-
ing N25 m3 of wastewater per day (Singh and Bhalla, 2017). India has
extended ZLD to a range of industrial sectors including power, steel,
pharmaceutical, chemical, textile, and food and beverage industries
(Rappich, 2016). In 2008, a ZLD system was implemented in the city
of Tirupur for the recovery of both water and valuable salts from textile
559
wastewater, which are directly reused in the dyeing process (Singh and
Bhalla, 2017).
A study on regulating effluents from India's textile sector suggested
new requirements and compliance monitoring for ZLD (Gronwall and
Jonsson, 2017). The Indian ZLD market was valued at $39 million in
2012 and was anticipated to grow continuously at the rate of 7% be-
tween 2012 and 2017. The application of ambient air evaporators in
ZLD systems for tannery wastewater treatment has been shown to im-
prove efficiency (Rajkumar et al., 2018). In India, textile, brewery,
power, and petrochemical industries are the major areas of ZLD applica-
tion (Vishnu et al., 2008). However, capital, land, and operating costs are
challenges to be addressed for full-scale application of ZLD systems in
India (Vyas, 2016).
The Chemplast Sanmar Limited has numerous wastewater sources
coming from mainly caustic soda and PVC monomer plants. This com-
bined wastewater is heavily contaminated with various pollutants and
has high COD and TDS as well. Initially, Chemplast intended to treat
the RO reject water using evaporation/crystallization technique and to
use treated water for cooling tower make-up and other usages at
plant site to achieve Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) (Aquatech, 2018).
ZLD plant commissioned at for Japanese Automobile manufacturer
using HEROTM technology that decreased capital and operational cost
(Matsui, 2018). A project on successful return on investment through
ZLD technology from textile wastewater treatment is in progress
(AustroWaterTech, 2018).
3.4. Other countries with ZLD applications
ZLD systems are being employed to meet increasingly stringent reg-
ulations for difficult-to-treat wastewaters, or in situations where water
scarcity demands water recycling and reuse. The Egyptian Ethylene and
Derivatives Company (ETHYDCO) awarded Aquatech a contract to pro-
vide a water treatment facility at its petroleum derivatives manufactur-
ing site in Alexandria in 2016, including the first integrated ZLD plant
(Marlett, 2017). The scheme was shortlisted for a global water yearly
award (2017) in the industrial water project category, which recognizes
the most inspiring technical or environmental accomplishments in the
field of industrial water (Corporation, 2017). An “eco-natural model”
for wastewater treatment that employs an innovative ecological design
in the treatment and reuse of wastewater in the Western Desert is also
currently under development, expected to be completed in 2019
(Alexandria University, 2019).
In Northern Canada, Saltworks Technologies have installed two full-
scale saline water treatment systems at a precious metals mine. In these
systems, mine water will be treated to recover freshwater and solid
salts. Initially, a year-long pilot project demonstrated that it is possible
to treat this challenging mine water for resource recovery (Saltworks,
2018). A project to recover from effluent discharge for sustainable cop-
per processing in Europe has also been in progress since April 2017, due
for completion by the end of 2019. This project aims to evaluate the
technical and economic feasibility of a new process intended to maxi-
mize water recovery from the aqueous effluents of a copper smelter.
This new process should enable optimal use of raw materials within
Europe and will also contribute to the current EU strategy on the Circu-
lar Economy (Eit RawMaterials, 2019).
Recently, GEA, a founding partner of Mass Challenge Switzerland,
has developed a hybrid ZLD system for a molybdenum production facil-
ity with a capacity of 110 m3/h. It consists of a brine purification pre-
treatment section followed by an RO pre-concentration unit and
subsequent concentration via a falling film evaporator, all driven by me-
chanical vapor recompression. Crystallization and solid separation com-
pletes the process, which produces pure water for reuse in production
(GEA, 2018). In Pakistan, a ZLD system was installed in 2013 at
Jamshoro by Archroma Pakistan to treat textile and chemical wastewa-
ter with 80% recovery (Archroma Pakistan, 2016). Thermo-economic
evaluation of a hybrid solar- conventional energy supply system at
560 Muhammad Yaqub, W. Lee / Science of the Total Environment 681 (2019) 551–563
ZLD WWT plant, on the basis of seasonal climate change of Tehran
(Iran) was conducted. The variations of the temperature and pressure
shown negligible affect at the inlet of thermo-compressor in thermody-
namic analysis. Quality studies showed that 34% of solar energy contrib-
utes in average in winter design to produce water, but, approximately
60% of heat transfer surface area remain unused during hot seasons
(Najafi et al., 2019). A demo plant in Stockholm, Sweden, testing of an-
other small scale plant in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia and a pilot plant is in op-
eration at Doha, Qatar (XZERO, 2019). The operation of 1st successful
industrial wastewater treatment and recycle plant commissioned by
Toshiba in Oman having capacity of 7500m3/d of process water
(Draper, 2016).
The Initial Appraisal of a European Commission Impact Assessment
to setting minimum requirements for water reuse was studied. It is
mentioned that member states including Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark,
France, Greece, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, the Netherlands, Portugal,
Spain, Sweden, and the UK where water reuse is being practiced., The
tentative volume of treated wastewater reused in the EU was 1100 mil-
lion m3/year during 2015 while estimated potential is much higher that
is 6000 million m3/year by 2025 (Vera, 2018).
4. Environmental and operational aspects of ZLD
Irrespective of the advantages of ZLD systems in diminishing water
pollution and improving water sustainability, some environmental
problems are associated with ZLD applications. A major operational
challenge is caused by the recalcitrant organics present in the wastewa-
ter. These organics are usually difficult to decompose by conventional
biological processes because of their chemically stable or toxic nature.
Therefore, they eventually increasing fouling risk of the membrane sys-
tems and compromising the system stability (Xiong and Wei, 2017).
The technologies including conventional biological treatment systems
improvement through process design or bacterial community optimiza-
tion (Jia et al., 2014, 2016) and advanced oxidation process application
(Jia et al., 2015; Zhao and Liu, 2016) can enhance the removal of recal-
citrant organics. Other challenges and future technologies trend are de-
scribed in the following parts of this section.
Firstly, the produced solid wastes mixed salts are unfit for reuse and,
if stored in evaporation ponds, create odors and have a negative impact
on wildlife and a risk of leakage (Burbano and Brandhuber, 2012). In ad-
dition, if disposed in landfills, these wastes may cause chemical leaching
(Younos, 2005). As a result, these waste solids create serious storage
and disposal concerns because, in many cases, they require hazardous
waste disposal facilities. Therefore, impermeable linings and consistent
monitoring of such systems are essential to prevent wider contamina-
tion. A fast growing strategy is to produce multiple high purity salts in-
stead of mixed salts to reduce the operational cost spend on disposing of
the mixed salts as hazardous waste and to sell those pure salts as indus-
trial materials for economy purposes. The most commonly expected
salts are sodium sulfate and sodium chloride which can be separated
by two-stage thermal crystallizers operated at different controlled tem-
peratures as used in traditional salt chemical industry (Kim, 2011; Kılıc
and Kılıc, 2005). Moreover, NF membranes can also be used to separate
chloride and sulfate ions and further treat the concentrated stream and
the permeate stream to produce sodium sulfate and sodium chloride re-
spectively (Fridman-Bishop et al., 2015; Yan et al., 2016; Xiong and Wei,
2017).
Secondly, high operational cost is a big concern regarding existing
ZLD technologies because sophisticated pretreatment systems are re-
quired to achieve higher water recovery. Moreover, complex system de-
sign leads to high chemical cost, large quantity of sludge production and
noticeably caused of salinity in the wastewater passing to the down-
stream. As a result, pretreatment systems for complete removal of hard-
ness have practically become a standard in the ZLD technologies.
Therefore, efforts are made to develop hybrid membrane and crystalli-
zation process at room temperature for high efficiency pre-
concentration technology to recover water and produce calcium sulfate
solids simultaneously (Xiong et al., 2013).
Thirdly, pretreatments such as acidification and degasification re-
lease CO2 into the atmosphere and cause air pollution. Additionally, con-
sumption of large amounts of energy leads to significant emission of
greenhouse gases. Furthermore, CO2 is emitted from ED applications
used in the concentration of RO brine from energy consumption
sources, and during de-carbonation to control scaling (Zhang et al.,
2012). A life-cycle study in California showed that greenhouse gas emis-
sions would rise by 50% if water supply was switched from imported
water to water recovered via brackish water reverse osmosis (BWRO)
(Stokes and Horvath, 2009). In terms of energy efficiency, incorporating
technologies such as RO can decrease greenhouse gas emissions. Addi-
tionally, incorporating emerging membrane technologies into ZLD sys-
tems means that low-grade or renewable energy can be used, which
can reduce greenhouse gas emissions (Shaffer et al., 2013; Zhou et al.,
2015; Gingerich and Mauter, 2015; Xevgenos et al., 2016).
5. Conclusion
The implementation of ZLD systems is considered a significant strat-
egy for industrial wastewater management that can diminish water
contamination and enhance water supplies across the globe. However,
concerns over high energy consumption and higher capital costs should
be addressed for more widespread ZLD uptake. Energy requirements
along with other related expenses are still higher than conventional
wastewater treatment and disposal options. The severe problems
caused by water pollution are also gaining more attention and, ulti-
mately, regulating authorities are imposing more stringent environ-
mental regulations on industrial wastewater discharge that will force
industries toward ZLD applications. Moreover, freshwater scarcity
resulting from climate change and the overexploitation of water re-
sources will facilitate the implementation of ZLD systems. For example,
continuous drought conditions are being experienced in the Southwest-
ern United States (Cook et al., 2015), and water deficiency is a problem
in areas with high water-consuming industries (e.g., coal-fired power
plants) in China (Zhang et al., 2016). Agencies must therefore impose
limits on industrial freshwater withdrawal (Jiang et al., 2010).
In these situations, ZLD may be a strategy for sustainable water sup-
ply, where the application of energy-efficient techniques for treating
higher salinity ranges, like RO, has the greatest potential. In addition,
membranes with higher resistance to hydraulic pressure and fouling/
scaling problems can decrease the energy requirements and make ZLD
economically feasible. Furthermore, these techniques can reduce opera-
tional costs by minimizing pretreatment and cleaning requirements,
and by improving product water quality for reuse. Emerging
membrane-based technologies, including MD, FO, and ED/EDR, are cur-
rently applied in concentration of RO brine; however, these technolo-
gies are relatively immature compared to established RO and brine
concentrator techniques. More pilot-scale applications are therefore
needed to validate the full-scale performance and feasibility of ZLD sys-
tems. The MD- and FO-incorporated ZLD systems use low-grade energy
that decreases energy demand, operation costs, and greenhouse gas
emissions. Emerging ZLD technologies can recover several nutrients
and recuperate metals and elements from industrial wastewater. In
the future, developing energy-efficient and cost-effective membrane
technologies should make ZLD more viable and sustainable. In terms
of environmental concerns, more studies are needed for life-cycle as-
sessment of energy demand and greenhouse gas emissions to improve
understanding of the cost-benefit balance of ZLD systems.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of
Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government (MSIT) (NRF-
2017R1A2B4009908).
 Muhammad Yaqub, W. Lee / Science of the Total Environment 681 (2019) 551–563
References
Abdelhamid, A., 2015. India Uses Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) to Clean the Ganges River.
[WWW Document]. URL. http://inspiredeconomist.com/2015/01/14/india-uses-zld-
ganges-river/, Accessed date: 12 October 2018.
Achilli, A., Cath, T.Y., Marchand, E.A., Childress, A.E., 2009. The forward osmosis membrane
bioreactor: a low fouling alternative to MBR processes. Desalination 239, 10–21.
Alexandria University, 2019. Eco-natural Model for Wastewater Treatment: Innovative
Ecological Design Treatment Approach for the Reuse of Wastewater in the Western
Desert of Egypt. [WWW Document]. URL. https://www.susana.org/en/knowledge-
hub/projects/database/details/454, Accessed date: 4 November 2018.
Al-Karaghouli, A., Kazmerski, L.L., 2013. Energy consumption and water production cost
of conventional and renewable-energy-powered desalination processes. Renew.
Sust. Energ. Rev. 24, 343–356.
Alkhudhiri, A., Darwish, N., Hilal, N., 2012. Membrane distillation: a comprehensive re-
view. Desalination 287, 2–18.
Alklaibi, A.M., Lior, N., 2005. Membrane-distillation desalination: status and potential. De-
salination 171, 111–131.
Al-Obaidani, S., Curcio, E., Macedonio, F., Di Profio, G., Al-Hinai, H., Drioli, E., 2008. Poten-
tial of membrane distillation in seawater desalination: thermal efficiency, sensitivity
study and cost estimation. J. Memb. Sci. 323, 85–98.
Altaee, A., Zaragoza, G., van Tonningen, H.R., 2014. Comparison between forward
osmosis-reverse osmosis and reverse osmosis processes for seawater desalination.
Desalination 336, 50–57.
Alwi, S.R.W., Manan, Z.A., Samingin, M.H., Misran, N., 2008. A holistic framework for de-
sign of cost-effective minimum water utilization network. J. Environ. Manag. 88,
219–252.
Aquatech, 2015a. Aquatech Awarded Zero Liquid Discharge Project for Coal-to-Liquids
Plant in China. [WWW Document]. URL. https://www.aquatech.com/press-releases/
zero-liquid-discharge-water-treatment-china-project/, Accessed date: 11 October
2018.
Aquatech, 2015b. Mongolia Coal to Chemicals Project to Reuse Wastewater Using
Aquatech's ZLD. [WWW Document]. URL. https://www.waterworld.com/articles/
wwi/2015/11/mongolia-coal-to-chemicals-project-to-reuse-wastewater-using-
aquatech-s-zld.html, Accessed date: 11 October 2018.
Aquatech, 2018. Chemplast-Zero Liquid Discharge in India. [WWW Document]. URL.
https://www.aquatech.com/project/chemplast-zero-liquid-discharge-in-india/,
Accessed date: 15 March 2019.
Archroma Pakistan, 2016. Archroma Pakistan – Saving Water Passionately. [WWW Docu-
ment]. URL. https://fp.brecorder.com/2016/08/2016080170755/, Accessed date: 7
November 2018.
Attia, H., Osman, M.S., Johnson, D.J., Wright, C., Hilal, N., 2017. Modelling of air gap mem-
brane distillation and its application in heavy metals removal. Desalination 424,
27–36.
AustroWaterTech, 2018. Textile Wastewater Treatement: A Successful Return on Invest-
ment Through ZLD Technology. WWW Document https://www.austrowatertech.
com/textile-wastewater-treatment-a-successful-return-on-investment-through-
zero-liquid-discharge-zld-technology/ (accessed 3.25.19).
Babilas, D., Dydo, P., 2018. Selective zinc recovery from electroplating wastewaters by
electrodialysis enhanced with complex formation. Sep. Purif. Technol. 192, 419–428.
Barrington, D.J., Ho, G., 2014. Towards zero liquid discharge: the use of water auditing to
identify water conservation measures. J. Clean. Prod. 66, 571–576. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.jclepro.2013.11.065.
Bond, R., Veerapaneni, S., 2007. Zero Liquid Discharge for Inland Desalination. Awwa Re-
search Foundation.
Bond, R., Veerapaneni, S., 2008. Zeroing in on ZLD technologies for inland desalination.
Journal-American Water Work. Assoc. 100, 76–89.
Bostjancic, J., Ludlum, R., 1996. Getting to zero discharge: how to recycle that last bit of
really bad wastewater. Proceedings of the International Water Conference. Engineers
Society of Western Pennsylvania, pp. 290–295.
Burbano, A., Brandhuber, P., 2012. Demonstration of Membrane Zero Liquid Discharge for
Drinking Water Systems-A Literature Review. WERF 5T10.
Bush, J.A., Vanneste, J., Cath, T.Y., 2016. Membrane distillation for concentration of hyper-
saline brines from the Great Salt Lake: effects of scaling and fouling on performance,
efficiency, and salt rejection. Sep. Purif. Technol. 170, 78–91.
Byers, B., 1995. Zero discharge: a systematic approach to water reuse. Chem. Eng. 102, 96.
Camacho, L.M., Dumée, L., Zhang, J., Li, J., Duke, M., Gomez, J., Gray, S., 2013. Advances in
membrane distillation for water desalination and purification applications. Water 5,
94–196.
Cath, T.Y., Childress, A.E., Elimelech, M., 2006. Forward osmosis: principles, applications,
and recent developments. J. Memb. Sci. 281, 70–87.
Charisiadis, C., 2018. Brine Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) Fundamentals and Design.
https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.19645.31205.
Cheremisinoff, P.N., 2018. Handbook of Water and Wastewater Treatment Technology.
Routledge.
Cook, B.I., Ault, T.R., Smerdon, J.E., 2015. Unprecedented 21st century drought risk in the
American Southwest and Central Plains. Sci. Adv. 1, e1400082.
Corporation, A.I, 2017. Aquatech ZLD Project Shortlisted for 2017 Global Water Award, In-
dustrial Water Project of the Year. [WWW Document]. URL. https://www.aquatech.
com/news/aquatech-zld-project-shortlisted-2017-global-water-award-industrial-
water-project-year/, Accessed date: 11 November 2018.
Council, the S., n.d. The State Council, the People's Republic of China. China Announces Ac-
tion Plan to Tackle Water Pollution [WWW Document]. vol. 2015. URL http://english.
gov.cn/policies/latest_releases/2015/04/16/content_281475090170164.htm
Curcio, E., Drioli, E., 2005. Membrane distillation and related operations—a review. Sep.
Purif. Rev. 34, 35–86.
561
Desalitech, 2016. Desalitech Wins Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) Deal in China. WWW Doc-
ument https://www.desalitech.com/desalitech-wins-zero-liquid-deal-in-china/
(accessed 11.7.18).
Dow, N., Gray, S., Zhang, J., Ostarcevic, E., Liubinas, A., Atherton, P., Roeszler, G., Gibbs, A.,
Duke, M., 2016. Pilot trial of membrane distillation driven by low grade waste heat:
Membrane fouling and energy assessment. Desalination 391, 30–42.
Dow, N., García, J.V., Niadoo, L., Milne, N., Zhang, J., Gray, S., Duke, M., 2017. Demonstra-
tion of membrane distillation on textile waste water: assessment of long term perfor-
mance, membrane cleaning and waste heat integration. Environ. Sci. Water Res.
Technol. 3, 433–449.
Draper, K., 2016. Waste water treatment and biochar. Biochar J 1–5.
Durham, B., Mierzejewski, M., 2003. Water reuse and zero liquid discharge: a sustainable
water resource solution. Water Sci. Technol. Water Supply 3, 97–103.
Eit RawMaterials, 2019. Recovery of Effluent Discharge for Sustainable Copper Processing
in Europe. [WWW Document]. URL. https://eitrawmaterials.eu/project/red_scope/,
Accessed date: 30 October 2018.
El-Abbassi, A., Hafidi, A., García-Payo, M.C., Khayet, M., 2009. Concentration of olive mill
wastewater by membrane distillation for polyphenols recovery. Desalination.
El-Bourawi, M.S., Ding, Z., Ma, R., Khayet, M., 2006. A framework for better understanding
membrane distillation separation process. J. Memb. Sci. 285, 4–29. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.memsci.2006.08.002.
Elimelech, M., Phillip, W.A., 2011. The future of seawater desalination: energy, technol-
ogy, and the environment. Science 333, 712–717 80-..
Elsaid, K., Bensalah, N., Abdel-wahab, A., 2012. Inland desalination: potentials and chal-
lenges. Adv. Chem. Eng., 449–480 https://doi.org/10.5772/33134.
Emadzadeh, D., Lau, W.J., Ismail, A.F., 2013. Synthesis of thin film nanocomposite forward
osmosis membrane with enhancement in water flux without sacrificing salt rejec-
tion. Desalination 330, 90–99.
Eslamian, S., Eslamian, F.A., 2017. Handbook of Drought and Water Scarcity: Environmen-
tal impacts and analysis of drought and water scarcity. 1. CRC Press.
Eykens, L., Reyns, T., De Sitter, K., Dotremont, C., Pinoy, L., Van der Bruggen, B., 2016. How
to select a membrane distillation configuration? Process conditions and membrane
influence unraveled. Desalination 399, 105–115.
Field, R.W., Wu, J.J., 2013. Mass transfer limitations in forward osmosis: are some poten-
tial applications overhyped? Desalination 318, 118–124.
Finance, B.N.E, 2013. China's Power Utilities in Hot Water: Executive Summary. Bloom.
New Energy Financ.
Fridman-Bishop, N., Nir, O., Lahav, O., Freger, V., 2015. Predicting the rejection of major seawa-
ter ions by spiral-wound nanofiltration membranes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 8631–8638.
Fu, J., Hu, N., Yang, Z., Wang, L., 2018. Experimental study on zero liquid discharge (ZLD)
of FGD wastewater from a coal-fired power plant by flue gas exhausted heat. J. Water
Process Eng. 26, 100–107.
Gally, C.R., Benvenuti, T., Da Trindade, C.D.M., Rodrigues, M.A.S., Zoppas-Ferreira, J., Pérez-
Herranz, V., Bernardes, A.M., 2018. Electrodialysis for the tertiary treatment of munic-
ipal wastewater: Efficiency of ion removal and ageing of ion exchange membranes.
J. Environ. Chem. Eng. 6, 5855–5869.
GEA, 2018. Zero Liquid Discharge for Environmental Protection. [WWW Document]. URL.
https://www.gea.com/en/news/insights/2018/zero-liquid-discharge-environmental-
protection.jsp, Accessed date: 6 November 2018.
Ghaffour, N., Missimer, T.M., Amy, G.L., n.d., Technical review and evaluation of the eco-
nomics of water desalination: current and future challenges for better water supply
sustainability, Desalination. 309, 197–207, 2013 1–32.
Gingerich, D.B., Mauter, M.S., 2015. Quantity, quality, and availability of waste heat from
United States thermal power generation. Environ. Sci. Technol. 49, 8297–8306.
Gostoli, C., Sarti, G.C., 1989. Separation of liquid mixtures by membrane distillation.
J. Memb. Sci. 41, 211–224.
Grant, S.B., Saphores, J.-D., Feldman, D.L., Hamilton, A.J., Fletcher, T.D., Cook, P.L.M.,
Stewardson, M., Sanders, B.F., Levin, L.A., Ambrose, R.F., 2012. Taking the “waste”
out of “wastewater” for human water security and ecosystem sustainability. Science
337, 681–686 80-..
Gronwall, J., Jonsson, A.C., 2017. Regulating effluents from India's textile sector: new com-
mands and compliance monitoring for zero liquid discharge. Law Env't Dev. J. 13, iii.
Group, T.H, 2016. World first for zero liquid discharge. Filtr. + Sep. 53, 20–22. https://doi.
org/10.1016/S0015-1882(16)30038-6.
GWI, 2009. From Zero to Hero – The Rise of ZLD. [WWW Document]. URL. https://www.
globalwaterintel.com/global-water-intelligence-magazine/10/12/market-insight/
from-zero-to-hero-the-rise-of-zld, Accessed date: 15 October 2018.
Haupt, A., Lerch, A., 2018. Forward Osmosis Application in Manufacturing Industries: A
Short Review. Membranes (Basel) 8, 47.
Heins, W., Schooley, K., 2004. Achieving zero liquid discharge in SAGD heavy oil recovery.
J. Can. Pet. Technol. 43.
Hilton, I., 2012. China's Green Revolution Energy, Environment and the 12th Five-Year
Plan Contents.
Holloway, R.W., Childress, A.E., Dennett, K.E., Cath, T.Y., 2007. Forward osmosis for con-
centration of anaerobic digester centrate. Water Res. 41, 4005–4014.
Hsu, S.T., Cheng, K.T., Chiou, J.-S., 2002. Seawater desalination by direct contact membrane
distillation. Desalination 143, 279–287.
Jia, S., Han, H., Hou, B., Zhuang, H., Fang, F., Zhao, Q., 2014. Treatment of coal gasification
wastewater by membrane bioreactor hybrid powdered activated carbon (MBR–PAC)
system. Chemosphere 117, 753–759.
Jia, S., Han, H., Zhuang, H., Xu, P., Hou, B., 2015. Advanced treatment of biologically
pretreated coal gasification wastewater by a novel integration of catalytic ultrasound
oxidation and membrane bioreactor. Bioresour. Technol. 189, 426–429.
Jia, S., Han, H., Zhuang, H., Hou, B., 2016. The pollutants removal and bacterial community
dynamics relationship within a full-scale British Gas/Lurgi coal gasification wastewa-
ter treatment using a novel system. Bioresour. Technol. 200, 103–110.
562 Muhammad Yaqub, W. Lee / Science of the Total Environment 681 (2019) 551–563
Jiang, Y., Chen, Y., Younos, T., Huang, H., He, J., 2010. Urban water resources quota man-
agement: the core strategy for water demand management in China. Ambio 39,
467–475.
Jining, C., 2018. Market Profile: China's Industrial Water Market Fighting the War on
Water Pollution 2–4.
Khayet, M., Velázquez, A., Mengual, J.I., 2004. Direct contact membrane distillation of
humic acid solutions. J. Memb. Sci. 240, 123–128.
Kılıc, Ö., Kılıc, A.M., 2005. Recovery of salt co-products during the salt production from
brine. Desalination 186, 11–19.
Kim, D.H., 2011. A review of desalting process techniques and economic analysis of the
recovery of salts from retentates. Desalination 270, 1–8.
Kim, Seunghwan, Kim, Sewoon, Ahmed, Z., Cha, D.K., Cho, J., 2018. Flux model for the
membrane distillation process to treat wastewater: Effect of solids concentration.
J. Membr. Sci. 566, 396–405.
Kimberly-clark, 2018. Economic zero liquid discharge at US chemical facility. Filtr. + Sep.
55, 12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-1882(18)30205-2.
Kimura, S., Nakao, S.-I., Shimatani, S.-I., 1987. Transport phenomena in membrane distil-
lation. J. Memb. Sci. 33, 285–298.
Korngold, E., Aronov, L., Daltrophe, N., 2009. Electrodialysis of brine solutions discharged
from an RO plant. Desalination 242, 215–227.
Laqbaqbi, M., García-Payo, M.C., Khayet, M., El Kharraz, J., Chaouch, M., 2019. Application
of direct contact membrane distillation for textile wastewater treatment and fouling
study. Sep. Purif. Technol. 209, 815–825.
Laganà, F., Barbieri, G., Drioli, E., 2000. Direct contact membrane distillation: modelling
and concentration experiments. J. Memb. Sci. 166, 1–11.
Lanny, W., 2015. The Global Push for Zero. [WWW Document]. URL. https://www.
waterworld.com/articles/wwi/print/volume-30/issue-1/technology-case-studies/
the-global-push-for-zero.html, Accessed date: 16 October 2018.
Lawson, K.W., Lloyd, D.R., 1997. Membrane distillation. J. Memb. Sci. 124, 1–25.
Leaper, S., Abdel-Karim, A., Gad-Allah, T.A., Gorgojo, P., 2018. Air-gap membrane distilla-
tion as a one-step process for textile wastewater treatment. Chem. Eng. J. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.cej.2018.10.209.
Lens, P., Pol, L.H., Wilderer, P., Asano, T., 2005. Water recycling and resource recovery in
industry: analysis, technologies and implementation. Water Intell. Online 4,
9781780402802.
Li, X., He, T., Dou, P., Zhao, S., 2017. 2.5 Forward Osmosis and Forward Osmosis
Membranes.
Lin, S., Yip, N.Y., Elimelech, M., 2014. Direct contact membrane distillation with heat re-
covery: thermodynamic insights from module scale modeling. J. Memb. Sci. 453,
498–515.
Loganathan, K., Chelme-Ayala, P., El-Din, M.G., 2015. Treatment of basal water using a hy-
brid electrodialysis reversal–reverse osmosis system combined with a low-
temperature crystallizer for near-zero liquid discharge. Desalination 363, 92–98.
Loganathan, K., Chelme-Ayala, P., Gamal El-Din, M., 2016. Pilot-scale study on the treat-
ment of basal aquifer water using ultrafiltration, reverse osmosis and evaporation/
crystallization to achieve zero-liquid discharge. J. Environ. Manag. 165, 213–223.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2015.09.019.
Lund, J.W., Freeston, D.H., Boyd, T.L., 2005. Direct application of geothermal energy: 2005
worldwide review. Geothermics 34, 691–727.
Lux Research, 2017. Eliminating Wastewater: Zero-Liquid Discharge Market to $2.7B in
2030. [WWW Document]. URL. https://www.wateronline.com/doc/eliminating-
wastewater-zero-liquid-discharge-market-to-b-in-0001, Accessed date: 6 November
2018.
Mark Bornhoft, P.T., 2018. Considerations for Implementing a Zero Liquid Discharge Pro-
gram. [WWW Document]. URL. https://www.watertechonline.com/implementing-
zero-liquid-discharge/, Accessed date: 25 October 2018.
Marlett, M., 2017. Zero to Hero ZLD Potential for the Power Industry. [WWW Document].
URL. https://www.waterworld.com/articles/wwi/print/volume-29/issue-1/technol-
ogy-case-studies/zero-liquid-discharge-zld/zero-to-hero-zld-potential-for-the-
power-industry.html (accessed 11.5.18).
Martinetti, C.R., Childress, A.E., Cath, T.Y., 2009. High recovery of concentrated RO brines
using forward osmosis and membrane distillation. J. Memb. Sci. 331, 31–39. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.memsci.2009.01.003.
Matsui, K., 2018. development-of-water-solutions-for-the-next-india.pdf.
Mays, L.W., 2007. Water Resources Sustainability. McGraw-Hill, New York.
McCutcheon, J.R., McGinnis, R.L., Elimelech, M., 2005. A novel ammonia—carbon dioxide
forward (direct) osmosis desalination process. Desalination 174, 1–11.
McGinnis, R.L., Elimelech, M., 2007. Energy requirements of ammonia–carbon dioxide for-
ward osmosis desalination. Desalination 207, 370–382.
McGinnis, R.L., Hancock, N.T., Nowosielski-Slepowron, M.S., McGurgan, G.D., 2013. Pilot
demonstration of the NH3/CO2 forward osmosis desalination process on high salinity
brines. Desalination 312, 67–74.
McGovern, R.K., Weiner, A.M., Sun, L., Chambers, C.G., Zubair, S.M., 2014. On the cost of
electrodialysis for the desalination of high salinity feeds. Appl. Energy 136, 649–661.
Meindersma, G.W., Guijt, C.M., De Haan, A.B., 2006. Desalination and water recycling by
air gap membrane distillation. Desalination 187, 291–301.
Mickley, M., 2008a. Survey of high-recovery and zero liquid discharge technologies for
water utilities. Membr. Technol. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0958-2118(08)70018-1.
Mickley, M., 2008b. Survey of High-Recovery and Zero Liquid Discharge Technologies for
Water Utilities. WateReuse Foundation.
Mo, J., Yang, Q., Zhang, N., Zhang, W., Zheng, Y., Zhang, Z., 2018. A review on agro-
industrial waste (AIW) derived adsorbents for water and wastewater treatment.
J. Environ. Manag. 227, 395–405.
Najafi, A., Jafarian, A., Darand, J., 2019. Thermo-economic evaluation of a hybrid solar-
conventional energy supply in a zero liquid discharge wastewater treatment plant. En-
ergy Convers. Manag. 188, 276–295. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2019.03.059.
Oasys Water, I., 2017. Changxing Power Plant Debuts the World's First Forward Osmosis-
Based Zero Liquid Discharge Application. [WWW Document]. URL. https://www.
wateronline.com/doc/changxing-power-plant-debuts-the-world-s-first-forward-os-
mosis-based-zero-liquid-discharge-application-0001 (accessed 10.20.18).
Oren, Y., Korngold, E., Daltrophe, N., Messalem, R., Volkman, Y., Aronov, L., Weismann, M.,
Bouriakov, N., Glueckstern, P., Gilron, J., 2010. Pilot studies on high recovery BWRO-
EDR for near zero liquid discharge approach. Desalination 261, 321–330.
Puyol, D., Batstone, D.J., Hülsen, T., Astals, S., Peces, M., Krömer, J.O., 2017. Resource recov-
ery from wastewater by biological technologies: opportunities, challenges, and pros-
pects. Front. Microbiol. 7, 2106.
Qasim, M., Darwish, N.A., Sarp, S., Hilal, N., 2015. Water desalination by forward (direct)
osmosis phenomenon: a comprehensive review. Desalination 374, 47–69. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.desal.2015.07.016.
Rajkumar, R., Sathish, S., Senthilkumar, P., 2018. Studies on enhancing the efficiency of
ZLD plant for tannery effluent by implementing low cost ambient air evaporator sys-
tem. Rasayan J. Chem. 11, 13–17.
Rao, U., Posmanik, R., Hatch, L.E., Tester, J.W., Walker, S.L., Barsanti, K.C., Jassby, D., 2018.
Coupling hydrothermal liquefaction and membrane distillation to treat anaerobic
digestate from food and dairy farm waste. Bioresour. Technol. 267, 408–415.
Rappich, O., 2016. The Rising Industrial Adoption of Zero Liquid Discharge. [WWW Docu-
ment]. URL. https://www.waterworld.com/articles/wwi/print/volume-31/issue-3/
siww-show-preview-section/the-rising-industrial-adoption-of-zero-liquid-dis-
charge.html (accessed 11.8.18).
Reportlinker, 2018. Growth Opportunities in the Global Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD) Sys-
tems Market, Forecast to 2024. [WWW Document]. URL. https://www.reportlinker.
com/p05580336/Growth-Opportunities-in-the-Global-Zero-Liquid-Discharge-ZLD-
Systems-Market-Forecast-to.html, Accessed date: 12 December 2018.
Rimbach, R., 2018. Zero Liquid Discharge Plant Has Been Commissioned in China. [WWW
Document]. URL. https://www.pollutionequipmentnews.com/6157-2, Accessed date:
7 November 2018.
Roberts, C., n.d. Effluent limitations guidelines and standards for the steam electric power
generating point source category; Proposed Rule 78 Fed. Reg. 34,vol. 432 ((June 7,
2013)).
Roca, S.F., Cited, R., 2006. (12) United States Patent 2. doi:https://doi.org/10.1038/
incomms1464
Salgot, M., Folch, M., Unit, S.S., 2018. Wastewater treatment and water reuse. Curr. Opin.
Environ. Sci. Heal. 2, 64–74.
Saltworks, 2018. Two Zero Liquid Discharge Treatment Plants Headed to Low Arctic Mine.
WWW Document https://www.saltworkstech.com/news/two-zero-liquid-dis-
charge-treatment-plants-headed-to-low-arctic-mine/ (accessed 11.5.18).
Sarkar, A., 2011. Zero Liquid Discharge, Membrane Hybrid Excels in China. [WWW Docu-
ment]. URL. https://www.waterworld.com/articles/wwi/print/volume-26/issue-4/
editorial-focus/sludge-processing/zero-liquid-discharge-membrane.html (accessed
10.10.18).
Schwantes, R., Cipollina, A., Gross, F., Koschikowski, J., Pfeifle, D., Rolletschek, M., Subiela,
V., 2013. Membrane distillation: solar and waste heat driven demonstration plants
for desalination. Desalination 323, 93–106.
Schwantes, R., Chavan, K., Winter, D., Felsmann, C., Pfafferott, J., 2018. Techno-economic
comparison of membrane distillation and MVC in a zero liquid discharge application.
Desalination 428, 50–68.
Schwarzenbach, R.P., Egli, T., Hofstetter, T.B., Von Gunten, U., Wehrli, B., 2010. Global
water pollution and human health. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 35, 109–136.
Shaffer, D.L., Arias Chavez, L.H., Ben-Sasson, M., Romero-Vargas Castrillón, S., Yip, N.Y.,
Elimelech, M., 2013. Desalination and reuse of high-salinity shale gas produced
water: drivers, technologies, and future directions. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47,
9569–9583.
Simate, G.S., Cluett, J., Iyuke, S.E., Musapatika, E.T., Ndlovu, S., Walubita, L.F., Alvarez, A.E.,
2011. The treatment of brewery wastewater for reuse: state of the art. Desalination
273, 235–247.
Singh, Z., Bhalla, S., 2017. Towards zero liquid discharge. Advance Research in Textile En-
gineering 2, 1–4.
Singh, R., Hankins, N., 2016. Emerging Membrane Technology for Sustainable Water
Treatment. Elsevier.
Stanford, B.D., Leising, J.F., Bond, R.G., Snyder, S.A., 2010. Inland desalination: current prac-
tices, environmental implications, and case studies in Las Vegas. NV. Sustain. Sci. Eng.
2, 327–350.
Stanley, T., 2015. Coal-to-Chemicals an Emerging Opportunity in China. [WWW Docu-
ment]. URL. http://usedtouseful.com/post/108284189605/coal-to-chemicals-an-
emerging-opportunity-in-china, Accessed date: 10 October 2018.
Stokes, J.R., Horvath, A., 2009. Energy and Air Emission Effects of Water Supply.
Strathmann, H., 2010. Electrodialysis, a mature technology with a multitude of new appli-
cations. Desalination 264, 268–288.
Subramani, A., Jacangelo, J.G., 2014. Treatment technologies for reverse osmosis concen-
trate volume minimization: a review. Sep. Purif. Technol. 122, 472–489.
Subramani, A., Jacangelo, J.G., 2015. Emerging desalination technologies for water treat-
ment: a critical review. Water Res. 75, 164–187.
Szuez, 2018. What Is Zero Liquid Discharge & Why Is it Important? WWW Document
https://www.saltworkstech.com/articles/what-is-zero-liquid-discharge-why-is-it-
important/ (accessed 11.16.18)
Termpiyakul, P., Jiraratananon, R., Srisurichan, S., 2005. Heat and mass transfer character-
istics of a direct contact membrane distillation process for desalination. Desalination
177, 133–141.
Tijing, L.D., Choi, J.-S., Lee, S., Kim, S.-H., Shon, H.K., 2014. Recent progress of membrane
distillation using electrospun nanofibrous membrane. J. Memb. Sci. 453, 435–462.
Tillberg, F., 2004. ZLD-Systems—An Overview. Dep. Energy Technol. R. Inst. Technol.KTH
Stock, pp. 1–5. https://docplayer.net/23902297-Zld-systems-an-overview.html.
 Muhammad Yaqub, W. Lee / Science of the Total Environment 681 (2019) 551–563
Tong, T., Elimelech, M., 2016. The global rise of zero liquid discharge for wastewater man-
agement: drivers, technologies, and future directions. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50,
6846–6855.
TOSHIBA, 2018. Solutions for Industrial Water Treatment Zero Liquid Discharge (ZLD)
with HERO™. [WWW Document]. URL. https://www.toshiba.co.jp/sis/en/environ-
ment/solution/s2/zld.htm, Accessed date: 8 November 2018.
Tufa, R.A., Curcio, E., Brauns, E., van Baak, W., Fontananova, E., Di Profio, G., 2015. Mem-
brane distillation and reverse electrodialysis for near-zero liquid discharge and low
energy seawater desalination. J. Memb. Sci. 496, 325–333. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
memsci.2015.09.008.
Turek, M., 2003. Cost effective electrodialytic seawater desalination. Desalination 153,
371–376.
Turek, M., 2004. Electrodialytic desalination and concentration of coal-mine brine. Desa-
lination 162, 355–359.
Turek, M., Dydo, P., Klimek, R., 2005. Salt production from coal-mine brine in ED–
evaporation–crystallization system. Desalination 184, 439–446.
US Department of the Interior Bureau of Reclamation, 2008. Evaluation and selection of
available processes for a zero-liquid discharge system for the Perris, California,
Ground Water Basin. Desalin. Water Purif. Res. Dev. Progr. Rep. No. 149.
USEPA, 2015. Federal Register - Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the
Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category 80, 1–67.
Valladares Linares, R., Li, Z., Sarp, S., Bucs, S.S., Amy, G., Vrouwenvelder, J.S., 2014. Forward
osmosis niches in seawater desalination and wastewater reuse. Water Res. 66,
122–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2014.08.021.
Vera, V., 2018. Initial Appraisal of a European Unfair Trading Practices in the Food Supply
Chain. p. 93.
Vishnu, G., Palanisamy, S., Joseph, K., 2008. Assessment of fieldscale zero liquid discharge
treatment systems for recovery of water and salt from textile effluents. J. Clean. Prod.
16, 1081–1089.
Vörösmarty, C.J., McIntyre, P.B., Gessner, M.O., Dudgeon, D., Prusevich, A., Green, P.,
Glidden, S., Bunn, S.E., Sullivan, C.A., Liermann, C.R., 2010. Global threats to human
water security and river biodiversity. Nature 467, 555.
Vyas, J.K., 2016. For Challenges Against Implementation of ZLD in Textile Processing In-
dustries and Clusters in India. pp. 1–28.
Wang, L.K., Chen, J.P., Hung, Y.-T., Shammas, N.K., 2008. Membrane and Desalination
Technologies. Springer.
Wang, M., Xing, H., Jia, Y., Ren, Q., 2015. A zero-liquid-discharge scheme for vanadium ex-
traction process by electrodialysis-based technology. J. Hazard. Mater. 300, 322–328.
Winter, D., 2015. Membrane Distillation - A Thermodynamic, Technological and Eco-
nomic Analysis. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpca.6b07064 PhD Dissertation.
Worthen, T., 2015. Resource Recovery in Wastewater Treatment. [WWW Document].
URL. https://www.waterworld.com/articles/print/volume-31/issue-6/departments/
wwema-corner/resource-recovery-in-wastewater-treatment.html, Accessed date:
15 November 2018.
Xevgenos, D., Moustakas, K., Malamis, D., Loizidou, M., 2016. An overview on desalination
& sustainability: renewable energy-driven desalination and brine management.
Desalin. Water Treat. 57, 2304–2314.
563
Xie, M., Nghiem, L.D., Price, W.E., Elimelech, M., 2014. Relating rejection of trace organic
contaminants to membrane properties in forward osmosis: measurements, model-
ling and implications. Water Res. 49, 265–274.
Xiong, R., Wei, C., 2017. Current status and technology trends of zero liquid discharge at
coal chemical industry in China. J. Water Process Eng. 19, 346–351.
Xiong, R., Zhang, C., Yu, Z., Zepeda, A., Peichel, J., Cai, W., 2013. Non-thermal brine concen-
tration: a cost effective high water recovery solution for wastewater reuse. The World
Congress on Desalination and Water Reuse.
Xu, T., Huang, C., 2008. Electrodialysis-based separation technologies: a critical review.
AICHE J. 54, 3147–3159.
XZERO, 2019. Everything to zero. [WWW Document]. URL. https://www.xzero.se/en/
the-xzero-system/, Accessed date: 20 March 2019.
Yan, Z.-Q., Zeng, L.-M., Li, Q., Liu, T.-Y., Matsuyama, H., Wang, X.-L., 2016. Selective separa-
tion of chloride and sulfate by nanofiltration for high saline wastewater recycling.
Sep. Purif. Technol. 166, 135–141.
Yangali-Quintanilla, V., Li, Z., Valladares, R., Li, Q., Amy, G., 2011. Indirect desalination of
Red Sea water with forward osmosis and low pressure reverse osmosis for water
reuse. Desalination 280, 160–166.
Yao, J., Wen, D., Shen, J., Wang, J., 2016. Zero discharge process for dyeing wastewater
treatment. J. Water Process Eng. 11, 98–103.
Younos, T., 2005. Environmental issues of desalination. J. Contemp. Water Res. Educ. 132,
11–18.
Zhang, W., Jun, M.A., Shidong, Y., Zhang, T., Yongfeng, L.I., 2006. Pretreatment of coal gas-
ification wastewater by acidification demulsion. Chinese J. Chem. Eng. 14, 398–401.
Zhang, Y., Ghyselbrecht, K., Vanherpe, R., Meesschaert, B., Pinoy, L., Van der Bruggen, B.,
2012. RO concentrate minimization by electrodialysis: techno-economic analysis
and environmental concerns. J. Environ. Manag. 107, 28–36.
Zhang, C., Zhong, L., Fu, X., Wang, J., Wu, Z., 2016. Revealing water stress by the thermal
power industry in China based on a high spatial resolution water withdrawal and
consumption inventory. Environ. Sci. Technol. 50, 1642–1652.
Zhao, Q., Liu, Y., 2016. State of the art of biological processes for coal gasification wastewa-
ter treatment. Biotechnol. Adv. 34, 1064–1072.
Zhao, S., Zou, L., Tang, C.Y., Mulcahy, D., 2012. Recent developments in forward osmosis:
opportunities and challenges. J. Memb. Sci. 396, 1–21.
Zhou, X., Gingerich, D.B., Mauter, M.S., 2015. Water treatment capacity of forward-
osmosis systems utilizing power-plant waste heat. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 54,
6378–6389.
Zhu, J., Hu, K., Lu, X., Huang, X., Liu, K., Wu, X., 2015. A review of geothermal energy re-
sources, development, and applications in China: current status and prospects. En-
ergy 93, 466–483.
Zolotarev, P.P., Ugrozov, V.V, Volkina, I.B., Nikulin, V.M., 1994. Treatment of waste water
for removing heavy metals by membrane distillation. J. Hazard. Mater. 37, 77–82.