Desalination and Water Treatment 322 (2025) 101236

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Desalination and Water Treatment

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/desalination-and-water-treatment/

Challenges in capital and operation cost reduction of reverse osmosis

desalination process
Ghulam Mustafa * , Omar Alraqibah , Eslam Alwaznani , Mustakeem Mustakeem ,
Nausha Asrar
Water Technologies Innovation Institute & Research Advancement, Saudi Water Authority, Jubail 31950, Saudi Arabia

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: During the last three decades, there has been consistent developments in seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO)
Desalination desalination process. The energy consumption of seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) desalination process has been
Reverse osmosis successfully brought down by more than 50 % since then. However, its energy consumption is still considered
Membrane
high and further investigations on energy intensive areas of SWRO plant are being carried out to make potable
Seawater reverse osmosis
Specific energy consumption (SEC)
water production from seawater more affordable. Although some of the innovative technologies such as forward
3-centre design osmosis, membrane distillation, electrochemical desalination etc. have been tested successfully which may
Energy recovery device address the longstanding operational issues with conventional SWRO desalination process, these technologies
have their own deficiencies and need further development for their use on a large production scale. On the other
hand, the new improvements in the RO membrane, high pressure pumps and energy recovery devices have
resulted in a steady reduction of energy consumption and other operating costs of the SWRO system. This trend
of decline in operating cost of SWRO plants due to recent developments and an increase in cost of water produced
by conventional processes due to stringent global regulatory requirements, are expected to keep a continued
reliance of the potable water production on SWRO desalination plants.
This paper presents various ways to improve key components of the SWRO system aimed at reducing energy
consumption and capital cost. Major factors affecting specific energy consumption (SEC) in SWRO systems have
been analysed, and possible strategies of energy optimization such as use of hybrid membranes, a three-centre
design, high efficiency energy recovery devices (ERDs) etc. have been investigated along with an overall capi­
tal and energy cost investigation. For a 200 MLD SWRO desalination system, the capital and operating energy
costs between a conventional SWRO system and a proposed energy efficient SWRO system have been calculated
and compared in this paper.

1. Introduction System [7]. Nevertheless, there has been consistent increase in instal­
lation of new seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) plants in the MENA
Seawater desalination by Reverse Osmosis (RO) is the ultimate region. In 2021, in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries alone,
answer to the increasing demand of potable water especially in the the contracted SWRO desalination plants were built about 40 % of the
Middle East and North Africa (MENA) countries where the freshwater total world’s capacity [8].
resources such as surface and groundwater are very scarce. Till the year A SWRO plant consists of three major components: pre-treatment,
1990, Multi-stage flash (MSF) distillation and multi-effect distillation SWRO system, and post treatment as shown in Fig. 1. Over the past
(MED) had been the classical thermal methods of seawater desalination two decades, the main areas of technological development in the SWRO
to provide potable water. However, since the year 1990, RO has become system are high permeable membrane, efficient high-pressure pump,
the favoured desalination technology due to considerably low specific energy recovery devices, and RO train construction material and
energy consumption (SEC). At present, major technologies used for configuration. As a result of the above developments, the energy
seawater desalination are MSF [1], MED [2], MD [3,4], ED [5,6], and RO requirement of the SWRO system has been decreasing consistently and

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (G. Mustafa).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dwt.2025.101236
Received 18 March 2025; Received in revised form 14 May 2025; Accepted 15 May 2025
Available online 16 May 2025
1944-3986/© 2025 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc/4.0/).
G. Mustafa et al. Desalination and Water Treatment 322 (2025) 101236

in the recent year it has been estimated to be 2–4 kWh/m3 [9–12].

Similarly, other emerging desalination technologies such as forward
osmosis (FO) and photo-thermal hydrogels have shown economically
viable integration with solar energy [13–15].
Fig. 2 presents the decrease of SEC in SWRO system during 1970s
thru 2030. Due to this decrease in energy cost for SWRO system along
with increasing costs of the conventionally treated surface water and
waste-recycle water due to more stringent environmental safety regu­
latory requirements, the current trend of dependency of potable water
production on RO desalination plant is expected to continue in the next
decade. Moreover, the consistent depleting resource of ground water
and the limited supply of reservoir water due to lack of rainfall partic­
ularly in the cities located in the coastal areas of MENA region has driven
municipalities in those areas to rely mainly on the SWRO plant for the
supply of potable water. Considering the above, it is foreseen that this
scenario of dependency on the SWRO system as the ultimate solution to
drought problem will continue during the next few decades. Fig. 2. The trend of specific energy consumption in SWRO system from 1970s
Though the total energy consumption in the SWRO system has been till 2030. The end of the line is showing a plateau, however, still much beyond
well demonstrated to be lower than that of MSF, MED and several other the theoretical minimum energy consumption [34].
usual desalination processes, the energy requirement of the SWRO
process is still considered high. Therefore, consistent efforts worldwide
are being made to further reduce the RO system energy consumption. Table 1
Forecast of specific energy, water cost and plant construction cost [34,42].
The technological improvements in the RO process have been continued
since the last 30 years, which has resulted in a decrease in the SEC of Year 2018 2022 2030 Target
Value
SWRO system from 20 kWh at the start of the RO system to the present
2.5 kWh/m3 [12]. During the 70 s and 80 s, the SEC in the SWRO system SEC (kwh/m3) 3.5–4.0 2.3–3.2 2.0–2.3 1.5–2.0
was very high (around 20 kWh/m3) mostly due to primitive RO mem­ Water Cost (US$/m3) 0.8–1.2 0.6–1.0 0.2–0.4 0.1–0.2
Construction Cost (US 1200–2200 1000–1800 500–900
branes and energy recovery devices (ERD) [7]. The SEC value was
​
$/m3)
dropped down to 8 kWh/m3 in 1980s and then, it was further dropped to
5 kWh/m3 in 1990s. This value again dropped to < 3.5 kWh/m3 in the
2000s [7,16–20] and finally reached to as low value as 2.27 kWh/m3 in trends, presently, most of the large-scale seawater desalination plants in
the year 2018 in a test run conducted by saline water conversion cor­ the world are being constructed using the SWRO system [38,39].
poration (SWCC) in one of its Jubail SWRO plant [10,21]. This consis­ Although the contribution of SWRO desalination in managing municipal
tent reduction in SEC of the SWRO system was made possible mostly water supply is just above 10 % at present in most cities of the world;
through several energy management strategies and tremendous inno­ however, it is expected that the use of SWRO desalination will rise up to
vation in the field of ERDs [11,22–24], efficient pumps [25–28], 25 % by the year 2030 [37,40].
advanced membranes [29–32], and module design to minimize pressure The world energy crunch has amplified the need for low power
drop in the membrane channel [33–35]. Nikolay presented details of intensive seawater desalination. In this preview, the SWRO system
water production costs and SECs for 20 SWRO plants with production continues to be an important process for creation of new energy saving
capacities over 40 MLD during 2005–2010, that ranged from 0.5 to 3.0 methods and technologies by researchers and engineers [12]. The SWRO
USD/m³ and from 2.5 to 4.0 kWh/m³ , respectively [18,36]. system has been greatly developed with several innovative process in­
The forecast of energy consumption, cost of water, construction cost clusions but with all the progress made, the energy efficiency
for medium and large SWRO desalination plants are given below in improvement still has a long way to go.
Table-1 [37]. As shown in Table 1, by 2030, the technical advancements The theoretical minimum SEC value for the SWRO system at a feed
in the SWRO system are expected to reduce the energy consumption by salinity of 35,000 mg/L and 50 % recovery is estimated to be 1.07 kWh/
20–40 %, cost of potable water production by 25–60 % and cost of plant m³ [10,23]. However, in real operation, the actual SEC value under
construction by 15–60 % [36]. Due to these projected improvement these conditions typically ranges between 2.5 and 4.0 kWh/m³ , which is

Fig. 1. A schematic diagram of a typical seawater SWRO desalination plant showing three components; Pre-treatment, SWRO system and Post treatment.

2
G. Mustafa et al. Desalination and Water Treatment 322 (2025) 101236

significantly higher than the theoretical SEC value [36]. This substantial density index (SDI) ≤ 5 [41–43]. Researchers are constantly putting
gap between the theoretical and practical SEC values call for a real ef­ efforts to develop innovative coagulation/flocculation and clar­
ficiency improvement in the SWRO system. ification/filtration technologies for pre-treatment of the raw seawater
In this paper, the major aspects affecting the SEC of SWRO system for RO feed to minimize RO membrane fouling and maintain product
have been investigated. Moreover, novel approaches to improve the water quality standards [44].
capital cost and energy consumption by selecting optimum design op­ As the energy consumption in pre-treatment and post-treatment of a
tions have been discussed. A theoretical calculation for the SWRO sys­ SWRO plant is almost constant i.e. approximately 1 kWh/m3, there is a
tem of 200 MLD water production capacity has been carried out to little possibility of reduction in energy consumption in these processes.
elucidate the benefits of the optimum SWRO design to reduce the capital Therefore, reduction of the overall SEC value in the SWRO plant oper­
and operating energy costs of the SWRO system. ation relies mostly on improvement in the SWRO system. Several
techno-economical approaches have been introduced to decrease the
2. Factors affecting energy consumption at SWRO desalination capital cost and operating energy cost of the SWRO system. Such ap­
plants proaches are discussed below.

There are several site-specific factors such as feed seawater quality, • Separation of outfall position from intake head
unit energy cost, labour cost, material cost, plant size, location etc. that • Membrane design and configuration
contribute to the capital and operating cost of a SWRO system. As these • Three centre design of SWRO system
factors are varying from site to site, the process design and the energy • Large size pumps with high efficiency
consumption of a SWRO system differ and cannot be generalised. A • Energy recovery by pressure exchanger
tailored SWRO system with design specific to the site condition is • Polymeric lined carbon steel high pressure pipeline
required to optimise its capital and operating cost.
The electrical energy consumption in an SWRO plant concentrates in
the SWRO system, more specifically in the high-pressure pump. An 2.1. Separation of outfall position from intake head
SWRO system includes, high pressure pump, membrane modules and
energy recovery devices as shown in Fig. 1. High pressure pump is used Designing intake and outfall systems with a focus on separating the
to force water through the RO membrane to overcome osmotic pressure. intake and outfall to prevent brine mixing with intake seawater feed is
This high-pressure system is estimated to contribute to approximately critical for energy efficiency, environmental compliance, and opera­
70 % of total energy usage in an SWRO plant. The rest of 30 % energy tional performance in desalination plant facilities. Generally, there is no
usage is employed on seawater intake, pre-treatment steps and post- issue with the position of the seawater intake tower and outfall diffusers,
treatment steps which generally do not vary much with the local provided they are located apart at a distance more than 500 m to ensure
seawater characteristics/ operating conditions. Kim et. al. compared the adequate brine dispersion, so that the discharged brine does not affect
actual performance of several conventional SWRO plants and evaluated the seawater salinity and TDS at the intake tower [45]. The exact dis­
the SECs of the entire desalination plants [11]. Their results confirmed tance depends on local hydrodynamics including direction of flow cur­
that SEC of overall desalination plant processes was about 1 rents and tidal patterns [46]. Placing intakes at around 10 m depth and
kWh/m³ more than that of the SWRO system alone, and this suggests outfalls in deeper waters (e.g., >20 m depth) to exploit density-driven
that the pre and post-treatment processes have a constant SEC value of sinking of negatively buoyant brine, reduces surface mixing with
about 1 kWh/m³ . However, the site-specific intake system, and selec­ intake water [47,48]. Moreover, the use of ocean current data to posi­
tion of pre-treatment and post-treatment processes may have some effect tion outfalls such that effluents are carried away from intakes, is an
on the energy consumption; and the difference between SECs for the effective strategy for intake system design. Site specific oceanography by
total SWRO plant and only SWRO system may fluctuate within conducting hydrodynamic modelling and using tools like CORMIX or
0.9–1.1 KWh/m3. A typical breakdown of energy usage within a SWRO Delft3D to analyse local currents, tides, and bathymetry, ensure that the
desalination plant with seawater feed salinity 33500 mg/L is presented brine plume is not extending up to the intake zone [49,50]. Multiport
by Vouchkov [36]. The specific energy consumption of the SWRO sys­ diffusers to enhance brine dispersion increases initial dilution and re­
tem is shown within 65–80 % of the total energy consumption of the duces plume concentration [51]. Diffusers release brine through multi­
SWRO desalination plant. In the above study, the total energy required ple jets, increasing initial dilution and reducing plume concentration
at the SWRO plant was 3.57 kWh/m3 and the demand of the SWRO [51]. The discharge of brine at a 45–60◦ angle to the seafloor promotes
system alone was 2.54 kWh/m3. The difference in SEC of the SWRO mixing with ambient seawater and prevents brine pooling on the ocean
plant and the SWRO system is 1.03 kWh/m3, that is, about 30 % of the floor [52].
total SEC of the SWRO plant. However, in certain locations such as the Arabian Gulf particularly
The energy consumption of the SWRO system is highly affected by near Khobar desalination plant, the circulation of seawater to the main
certain site-specific factors related to the feed water quality such as total Arabia Gulf is not sufficient and therefore, there is a consistent increase
dissolved solid (TDS) and temperature. These two parameters are in seawater TDS due to the discharge of brine from desalination plants.
responsible for up to 80 % energy consumption at the SWRO system that An increase in TDS has a significant influence on the energy requirement
is mainly associated with the osmotic pressure of the saline water. The of the SWRO system [53–56].
rest energy consumption at SWRO process is related to the seawater The trends of feedwater pressure and specific energy consumption
intake, pre-treatment and post-treatment processes. Here, it is vital to with change of seawater TDS and seawater temperature are generated
include that membrane fouling is also a major concern due to the using a standard RO design software. Fig. 3A indicates linear increase in
presence of various soluble and insoluble ingredients in seawater. feed pressure and SEC value with increase in seawater TDS. In seawater
Therefore, pre-treatment of raw seawater is critical in the operation of system having 31,000 mg/L to 45,000 mg/L TDS at 25 ◦ C, and using
SWRO system as it directly affects the fouling of the RO membranes and isobaric energy recovery (ERD), there is about 1.5–2.0 bar increase in
the increase in energy consumption. Fouled membranes add to the in­ feed pressure resulting 2–3 % increase in SEC value with every
crease in feed pressure to maintain a constant permeate flux and high 1000 mg/L increase in seawater TDS.
maintenance cost due to frequent cleaning, and less membrane lifetime. For an understanding, the trends of pressure and SEC with change in
It is important that the seawater is treated effectively to reduce its sus­ seawater temperature within 21 ◦ C to 35 ◦ C at TDS 33,000 mg/L using
pended particles and dissolved organic substances, so as to produce RO ERD system have been shown in Fig. 3B. Effect of change in SEC due to
feed water with turbidity ≤ 0.2 NTU, dissolved organic ≤ 2 mg/l and silt temperature is remarkably lower as compared to TDS. The figure

3
G. Mustafa et al. Desalination and Water Treatment 322 (2025) 101236

Fig. 3. A: Trend of SEC and Pressure with TDS. Fig. 3B: Trend of SEC and Pressure with Temperature.

indicates that there is about 3–5 % increase in SEC value with 10 ◦ C drop significantly reducing membrane performance. In contrast, the last few
in seawater temperature. It is important to mention here that seawater membrane elements are exposed to higher salinity levels, increasing the
temperature may fluctuate in the vicinity of the brine outfall; however, risk of concentration polarization and mineral scaling. The most
its impact on the seawater temperature at the feed intake tower remains commonly precipitating salts include calcium sulfate (CaSO₄) and cal­
minimal and insignificant. cium carbonate (CaCO₃), which can form scale deposits and impact
system efficiency. Thus, in an SWRO system, particulate deposition,
2.2. Membrane configuration organic fouling, and biofilm formation are typically concentrated in the
first membrane elements, while scaling due to metal salts predominantly
A careful selection and combination of membrane types can signifi­ affects the last membrane elements within the pressure vessel [60–62].
cantly enhance the efficiency of SWRO plants. Utilizing a mix of low- Addressing the imbalance permeation of membrane elements along the
and high-flow (hybrid) membranes, along with those designed for vessel is essential to optimize overall system performance. It may
improved hydrodynamics, holds the potential to improve operational involve strategies such as inter-stage boosting, advanced element de­
efficiencies. signs, or distributed feed configurations to enhance uniformity in
permeate flow.
2.2.1. Hybrid RO membranes SWRO systems will be more efficient with respect to energy con­
Spiral-wound RO membranes of different permeability and salt sumption and process viability, if the permeate flux across membrane
rejection are being produced by most membrane manufacturers. elements does not vary significantly along the pressure vessel. The use of
Commonly available membrane types include Low flow (high rejection) two or more types of membrane elements with varying permeate flow
and High flow (low energy) membranes. Normally, one type of spiral- rates in a vessel can achieve more even flux distribution along the vessel
wound RO membrane is introduced in the pressure vessel for the with reduced specific energy consumption. This technique of providing
desired potable water quality. A judicious selection of the membrane even flux along the vessel has been applied in various SWRO desalina­
types considering the feed seawater conditions and the product water tion plants [34,39]. The combination of two or more types of membrane
quality requirements results in low energy consumption for a required elements will reduce the energy consumption while producing the
production capacity. Studies show that combining reverse osmosis (RO) permeate of the required flow and conductivity. For a SWRO skid of 25
membranes with different nominal flux and salt rejection properties MLD and target permeate TDS of 400 mg/l with seawater feed of TDS
within the same vessel enhances efficiency, lowers operating pressures, 38,000 mg/l, the investigation shows that the combination of low flow
and reduces specific energy consumption (SEC) compared to traditional (high rejection) and high flow (low rejection) seawater RO membrane
RO setups [36,57,58]. This approach is particularly effective in SWRO elements can reduce the energy consumption by 0.1 kWh/m3 coupled
plants, such as the El Coloso plant in Chile (45,360 m³/d capacity), with the reduction in the membrane fouling. Fig. 4 below presents the
where it has been implemented to enhance performance under specific trend of SEC reduction with increase in the number of high flow mem­
operating conditions[59]. brane elements in pressure vessels. A SWRO system design software was
In conventional SWRO configurations, the flow of permeate along a used to find out the energy consumption at different combination of high
pressure vessel is naturally uneven, and declines along the vessel from flow seawater membrane elements (9900 gpd) and low flow seawater
the first membrane element to the last element. As a thumb rule, in an membrane elements (7200 gpd) in an 8-element pressure vessel (1 gpd =
eight-membrane pressure vessel, the first four membrane elements 3.785 litres per day). The combination of low flow (L) and high flow (H)
provide about 70 % of the total permeate flow through the vessel, and flow membrane elements were designated as (8 L+0H), (7 L+1H),
the rest (approximately 30 %) comes from the next four membranes. The (6 L+2H) …. (0 L+8H). Both the selected membrane elements were of
basis of the observed uneven permeation through membrane along the the same surface area, test pressure and salt rejection.
length of a pressure vessel is primarily due to an increase in the feed The best combination of membrane elements to produce permeate
salinity resulting in an increase in osmotic pressure along the vessel. The within the TDS limit of 400 mg/l is 2 low flow and 6 high flow (2 L+6H)
increase in osmotic pressure reduces the net driving force and hence elements when the SEC is about 2.2 kWh/m3. A schematic diagram of
decreases the water permeation of the membrane elements along the the 8-element pressure vessel arrangement achieving optimum flow and
vessel. The additional adverse effect of the uneven permeation is the product quality is shown in Fig. 5. So, compared to all low flow (high
uneven fouling of the inorganic and organic particulates in the mem­ rejection) elements (8 L+0H) with permeate TDS 305 mg/L, the energy
brane elements along the vessel. The first few membrane elements saving using the combination (2 L+6H) with permeate TDS 395 mg/L, is
experience high permeation rates and bear the majority of fouling due to about 0.1 kWh/m3. This combination of membrane elements results in
the suspended particles and organic matter present in the feed water, saving SWRO system energy per day about 2500 kWh for production of
leading to biofouling. These deposits can accumulate over time, 25 MLD permeate. The savings for a 200 MLD plant is about 20000 kWh

4
G. Mustafa et al. Desalination and Water Treatment 322 (2025) 101236

Fig. 4. Trend of SEC with Combination of high and low flow SWRO membrane elements.

Fig. 5. A schematic of membrane pressure vessel showing the arrangement of low and high flow membrane elements – achieving optimum water quality and SEC.

per day. and associated energy costs. Alternating strand designs (ASD) minimize
stagnant areas, reducing biofouling and scaling, leading to ~5 % energy
2.2.2. Membrane with improved hydrodynamics savings [69].
Membranes with enhanced hydrodynamic characteristics play a Recent studies have explored the impact of advanced spacer designs
critical role in improving the performance and efficiency of the SWRO in hybrid desalination systems, such as reverse osmosis–pressure
process. One of the key aspects influencing hydrodynamics within the retarded osmosis (RO–PRO) and forward osmosis–reverse osmosis
membrane module is the feed spacer design. Optimizing feed spacer (FO–RO), with a focus on energy reduction. These studies highlight the
design can significantly reduce energy consumption in RO systems by role of spacers in enhancing hydraulic performance, minimizing mem­
minimizing pressure drop, enhancing mass transfer, and mitigating brane fouling, and reducing specific energy consumption [70–73]. The
fouling. findings suggest that permeable spacers improve flow dynamics and
The primary functions of feed spacers are to: mitigate fouling, which in turn lowers pressure drops and enhances
overall energy efficiency. A recent techno-economic analysis on RO–­
• maintain the flow channel gap, PRO systems emphasizes the contribution of advanced spacer configu­
• promote turbulence in the feed water, rations in optimizing energy recovery, indicating potential energy
• reduce concentration polarization (the build-up of salts near the savings of up to 42 % through improved membrane performance and
membrane surface), reduced fouling-related losses [72].
• improve mixing and flow distribution across the membrane surface.
2.3. Three-Centre design of SWRO system
However, conventional spacers often create regions of dead zones or
induce excessive pressure drop, leading to increased energy consump­ Conventional SWRO system designs face a significant operation and
tion and a higher risk of fouling or biofilm formation. Recent advance­ maintenance limitation due to their reliance on three independent
ments in spacer geometry, such as 3D-printed designs, zigzag or chevron modular units/ components including, high pressure pump, RO mem­
patterns, and low-pressure-drop configurations, aim to overcome these brane rack and energy recovery system. Each modular unit stands alone
limitations [63–67]. These improved spacers enhance internal hydro­ in the SWRO system and failure or turned off state of one unit out of
dynamics, leading to a reduced pressure-drop across the membrane three brings the whole SWRO system/train offline which directly reflects
element. the availability and productivity of the plant. Such train configuration
As a result of innovative spacer design, like 3D-printed spacers, the commonly offers a plant availability at 94–95 %. With one stand-by
water flux improved along with membrane cleaning efficiency and train, the availability can be increased up to 97 %. For a 200 MLD
overall life of membrane compared to available commercial spacers. SWRO system, the design includes eight operating trains each of 25 MLD
These geometries optimize flow patterns, reducing energy losses due to capacity and one stand-by train (total nine trains) for improved avail­
friction as per simulation study carried out [68]. Hydrophilic and ability. All the eight trains usually operate at a fixed feed flow rate
biocidal coatings on spacers, such as PDA-AgNP, improve producing a constant permeate flow rate.
cleaning-in-place (CIP) efficiency of biomass, reducing CIP frequency For better flexibility in operation to trail the diurnal demand and to

5
G. Mustafa et al. Desalination and Water Treatment 322 (2025) 101236

overcome the above obstacle of shutting down the entire train, it is ERD (with Recirculation Pumps) Centre: All ERDs and recirculation
appropriate to use 3-centre design configuration, where each of the pumps are operating in parallel with an available on-line standby. In
three components of the SWRO system (HPPs, RO skid and ERD) works case of failure or preventive maintenance within an ERD or a recircu­
in group for the full SWRO system. With this configuration, the RO skids, lation pump, the standby ERD can take over and the permeate capacity is
HPPs and ERDs are no longer organized in individual RO trains but maintained.
associated in “Centre” forming a 3-Centre design concept as shown in The main advantages of the 3-Centre design are:
Fig. 6. This innovative design reduces the overall capital cost and allows
high plant availability factor (>97 %) with increased flexibility in • Less equipment for the same capacity: capex saving
operation. Apart from minimizing downtime, it reduces energy con­ • Lower energy consumption due to high efficiency of the larger pumps
sumption by up to 20 %, and enhances system reliability [11]. used in the HPPs (Efficiency >89 % for HPPs in pressure centre vs
Combining SWRO with pressure retarded osmosis (PRO) in a 3-center efficiency within 85–86 % for conventional pump-train
framework can reduce energy consumption by approximately 20–42 % configuration).
by harnessing salinity gradient energy from the brine [74]. • Keeping all components of three groups in operation most of the time
The 3-Centre design configuration provides practical features and and so there is reduced need for flushing of the membrane system.
optimum performance for a full scale multi SWRO trains operation. Each • Flexible operation of RO trains at varying conditions of flow, salinity
of the high-pressure pumps, membranes and ERD units works in three and temperature.
separate groups which enables one component of a group to be isolated • Schedule various production regimes, without stopping the trains,
while the other components continue to function. The automation sys­ allowing production at lower recovery yield and lower permeate
tem of the plant self-adjusts and chooses the best configuration of the fluxes through the entire available membrane area.
components from three groups to function in parallel depending on the • System flexibility as the ERD centre can operate at different flow
component functionality and water demand enhancing overall effi­ rates independent of the HPP centre during varying recovery rates.
ciency. This allows the automation system to decide how many high-
pressure pump sets, membrane racks and ERD skids should run at any 2.4. Large-size pumps with high efficiency
given time. This feature enables energy optimization and ensures the
plant operation most of the time during component failures, scheduled Centrifugal pumps are used for high pressure pumping in large-scale
maintenance and diurnal fluctuations in water demand. The 3-Centre desalination due to their reliability and efficiency. Axial-flow or mixed-
design components are further discussed below. flow centrifugal pumps are ideal for high-flow, low-head intake appli­
Pressure Centre: All operating HPPs (and HP Booster pumps) along cations, while high-pressure multistage pumps suit brine discharge [76].
with one online standby pump operating in parallel together. In case of In selecting a high-pressure centrifugal pump, it is vital to consider
failure or preventive maintenance within the HPP or HP booster pumps, several features such as the best efficiency point (BEP), pump size (flow
the standby equipment can take over as operating pump and the rate), head, specific speed and mechanical losses. To maximise the ef­
permeate capacity is maintained. Studies show that two-stage SWRO ficiency and reliability of the pump, a centrifugal pump is normally
systems, when integrated with a centralized pressure center, can achieve designed to operate within the range of + /-10 % of the BEP [77–79].
recovery rates of 50–70 % with lower SEC compared to single-stage Any improvement in efficiency provides huge savings in energy
systems, especially when equipped with ERDs like pressure exchangers consumption and water production cost. One widely accepted method
[75]. for reducing the energy demand in the SWRO system is to employ high-
Membrane Centre: All pressure vessels organised in section (with capacity pumps with higher efficiency. The large flow pumps can serve
isolation valves) together. The size of the membrane section is limited multiple RO trains in pressure centre configuration which can provide
for CIP and flushing operation efficiency which is about 120–150 pres­ better process control compared to the conventional RO train with a
sure vessels. All sections are operated at the same flux and recovery. In relatively small, dedicated pump. There is wide variation in the effi­
case of leak or preventive maintenance (CIP, membrane replacement), ciency of the centrifugal pumps with their sizes. Medium and large sized
the affected section is isolated, and its flow balances to the other sec­ centrifugal pumps are designed to provide efficiency between 75 % and
tions. Flux is slightly increased in the other sections, and the permeate 93 % while the small centrifugal pumps are having efficiency between
capacity is maintained. 50 % and 70 %. When designed exactly and operated at its best

Fig. 6. A 3-Centre Design for 200 MLD SWRO System showing three components: high pressure pump (HPP), SWRO skid, and energy recovery devices (ERD).

6
G. Mustafa et al. Desalination and Water Treatment 322 (2025) 101236

efficiency point, high-pressure centrifugal pumps can be as high as 90 % Fig. 7. The saving is more pronounced with the increase in seawater
efficient and account for 30–50 % of a desalination plant’s operating salinity. Although there is slight increase in feed pressure due to increase
costs [36]. Such high capacity pumps have been used at various desa­ in salinity following concentrate mixing, the energy consumption re­
lination plants in the Middle East region, Spain and Australia where the duces to half with the inclusion of Isobaric ERD in the SWRO system.
high-pressure pumps efficiency is close to 90 % [54]. The Use of variable
frequency drives (VFDs) to optimize pump performance under varying 2.6. Polymeric lined carbon steel high pressure pipeline
flow conditions, enhances energy savings [78,80–82].
The pipelines used in the high-pressure area of the SWRO system are
2.5. Energy recovery by pressure exchanger made of super duplex stainless steel (SDSS) which is quite cost intensive.
The SDSS is used in high pressure areas due to two main reasons: i)
In seawater SWRO process, two streams are produced – one is low protection of the pipelines from corrosion due to high chloride content
saline water (permeate) and another is high saline water (brine/ in seawater and concentrate, and ii) strength to tolerate the hoop
concentrate). The brine stream pressure remains the same as that of the stresses due to high pressure conditions (70 bars and above). Never­
feed pressure minus minor losses inside the membrane element. This theless, the recent plant experiences revealed that the SDSS materials
brine pressure is recovered up to 95 % and transferred to part of the feed did face corrosion, mostly pitting type in the high chloride atmosphere.
stream using isobaric ERD system. The increased feed stream pressure is With this shortcoming of the SDSS material and also due to its excessive
further boosted by a pump to compensate for the minor losses in the cost, it is techno-economically feasible to replace the expensive
membrane vessel to bring the pressure as required for the set water corrosion-resistant alloys (CRAs) pipes with hybrid pipe of carbon steel
production. It is well recognised that the use of ERDs has been instru­ lined with a suitable polymer material. The polymer inner lining of
mental in achieving tremendous reduction in SEC of SWRO system carbon steel pipe provides protection from corrosion in the presence of
which made the system more economical than the thermal desalination. high content of chloride ions and other corrosive chemicals such as
At first, the principles of the Francis turbine were used to recover the strong acid and base. While the carbon steel cover in the pipe will
waste energy in the concentrate followed by the Pelton turbine. How­ provide high strength to withstand the hoop stress up to 80 bars internal
ever, these turbine-type ERDs lacked high efficiency due to the dual pressure which is the maximum pressure limit for conventional RO
energy conversion – first from the hydraulic energy of concentrate to membrane elements. The low friction polymer liners (e.g. HDFC, PTFE)
mechanical energy to turn the shaft and then conversion of mechanical improved hydraulic performance due to the smooth inner surface of
energy to hydraulic energy in the feed stream [11]. polymer liners, which reduces frictional losses and lowers energy con­
The isobaric ERDs were introduced in RO desalination after 2005, sumption for fluid transport in corrosive environments [86,87].
which further helped in improving the energy efficiency of the SWRO This concept of hybrid pipe has been tested for the first time at a
system. Pressure exchangers (PX) are isobaric ERDs that recover hy­ SWRO Pilot plant, Saudi Water Authority, where SWRO desalination
draulic energy from the high-pressure brine stream and transfer to the pilot plant was operated with a hybrid pipe segment keeping brine
incoming low-pressure seawater feed, reducing total energy consump­ pressure at 70 bar for six months. After completion of the test, the visual,
tion of the SWRO system [83]. Usually, PX devices can achieve up to mechanical, and physical analyses of the polymer (Ethylene Tetrafluoro-
97–98 % efficiency in energy recovery, much more than Pelton wheels ethylene, ETFE) lined carbon steel pipeline were carried out which did
or turbocharger ERDs, which have efficiencies of 75–85 % [84]. not show any sign of degradation in material properties. The use of
The only drawback of the isobaric ERDs is the mixing of up to 6 % hybrid pipe is a cost-effective approach where the cost of pipelines in the
concentrate with feed water during hydraulic pressure exchange which high pressure area of the SWRO system is expected to reduce about
increases slight feed salinity and in turn escalates the feed pressure [85]. 30–40 % compared to that of SDSS material pipelines [88].
The SWRO system with the Francis turbine achieved SEC just over 6
kWh/m3 while with the Pelton turbine, SEC was obtained in the range of 3. Cost comparison of conventional and energy efficient SWRO
3.5–5.9 kWh/m3. The recently developed pressure exchangers from system
different manufacturers behave differently in energy consumption. The
SWRO plants with one type of pressure exchanger consume 3.5–4.6 Capital and operational costs for a conventional SWRO system and
kWh/m3, while other pressure exchangers exhibit energy usage 3.0–5.3 an energy efficient SWRO system each of 200 MLD capacity have been
kWh/m3 at different conditions of temperature, salinity, and size of the calculated to compare and find out the benefits of the energy efficient
skid [11]. For a skid of 25 MLD SWRO system, the reduction in SEC with provisions in the SWRO system. The design provisions for the systems
the use of isobaric ERDs is within 2–3 kWh/m3 for the feed seawater are given below in Table 2.
TDS varying from 31,000 mg/L to 45000 mg/L at 25 ◦ C as shown in A comparison of capital and operational costs for conventional and
energy efficient SWRO systems shows considerable cost saving using
energy efficient systems. A cost calculation for a 200 MLD SWRO system
for a conventional SWRO system and an energy efficient SWRO system is
given below in Tables 3 & 4. There are eight working trains and one
standby train - each of 25 MLD capacity for conventional design
configuration. Each train has an independent HP pump, ERD, Booster
pump etc. The energy efficient design configuration has sixteen (16) RO-
sections (all operating). In case of CIP or maintenance of one section, the
production of each section is enhanced to 13.33 MLD to maintain the
plant capacity of 200 MLD. The increase of permeate flux during CIP is
still within the acceptable limit well managed as per the membrane
operation guidelines.
The above calculations for capital and energy costs in Tables 2 to 6
indicate that the energy efficient design with 3-centre design and mixed
membrane configuration has considerable savings in capital and energy
consumption cost. In this 200 MLD SWRO plant and feed seawater
condition, the saving with an energy efficient system in capital cost is
Fig. 7. Trends of SEC with and without ERD at varying TDS. about USD 5.3 million which is about 15 %, and saving in energy cost

7
G. Mustafa et al. Desalination and Water Treatment 322 (2025) 101236

Table 2
Design Provisions for Conventional and Energy Efficient SWRO System for 200 MLD capacity desalination plant.
Design Conventional SWRO System Energy Efficient SWRO System
Provisions

RO Skids 9 skids (8 duty + 1 standby)– each of 25 MLD capacity – total 200 8 skids (16 sections – all duty) – each section of 12.5 MLD capacity– total 200 MLD RO
MLD RO system system
RO Configuration Conventional RO configuration – fully independent skid. Total 9 set 3- Centre RO skid configuration – all skids interconnected. Total 4 set of big HPPs, ERDs
of HPPs, Membrane Skids, ERDs etc. etc. providing feed flow to all the 8 RO skids
RO Membrane 8 membrane elements per pressure vessel – all high rejection (low 8 membrane elements per pressure vessel - 2 high rejection + 6 low energy membrane
flow) membrane elements elements.
ERD Isobaric ERD Isobaric ERD
High Pressure Super Duplex stainless steel Hybrid pipelines – HDPE lined carbon steel pipes
Pipes

Table 3
Capital Cost for Conventional SWRO Configuration for a 200 MLD capacity desalination plant.
Conventional SWRO System (8 working + 1 standby trains)

Pump service Unit Flow (m3/h) Head (m) Efficiency (%) Unit price (USD) Total price (MUSD)
Booster feed HP 9 1063 30 81.6 % 60885 0.55
HPP 9 1063 531 87.9 % 356700 3.21
Booster feed ERD 9 1237 25 84.3 % 81200 0.73
ERD recirculation 9 1247 35 87.9 % 84900 0.76
​ ​ ​ ​ Total pump 5.25
ERD 36 312 9984 ​ 99900 3.60
​ ​ ​ ​ Total ERD 3.60
Membranes 17280 ​ ​ ​ 500 7.78
Pressure Vessels (1920 +240) 2160 ​ ​ ​ 2200 4.32
​ ​ ​ ​ ​ Total RO 12.10
Civil works (including RO building) 9 ​ ​ ​ 431000 3.88
RO trains support frame 9 ​ ​ ​ 492000 4.43
RO piping 9 ​ ​ ​ 492000 4.43
RO I&C 9 ​ ​ ​ 123000 1.11
​ ​ ​ ​ Total Misc. RO 13.84
​ ​ ​ ​ TOTAL 34.79

Table-4
Capital Cost for Energy Efficient SWRO Configuration for a 200 MLD capacity desalination plant.
Energy Efficient SWRO System (3 HPPs working + 1 standby)

Pump service Unit Flow (m3/h) Head (m) Efficiency (%) Unit price (USD) Total price (MUSD)
Booster feed HP 4 2834 48 84.5 % 158940 0.64
HPP 4 2834 513 89.2 % 637140 2.55
Booster feed ERD 4 3298 25 85.5 % 141450 0.57
ERD recirculation 4 3326 35 89.0 % 209100 0.84
​ ​ ​ ​ Total pump 4.59
ERD 33 312 ​ ​ 99900 3.30
​ ​ ​ ​ Total ERD 3.30
Membranes 16384 ​ ​ ​ 450 7.37
Pressure Vessels (1920 +128) 2048 ​ ​ ​ 2000 4.10
​ ​ ​ ​ Total RO 11.47
Civil works (with RO building) 3 ​ ​ ​ 1107000 3.32
RO trains support frame 16 ​ ​ ​ 246000 3.94
RO piping 3 ​ ​ ​ 738000 2.21
RO instru. & control 3 ​ ​ ​ 222000 0.67
​ ​ ​ ​ Total Misc. RO 10.14
​ ​ ​ ​ TOTAL 29.49

Table-5 Table-6
Energy Costs for Conventional and Energy Efficient SWRO System for a 200 MLD Summary of Capital Cost and Energy Consumption for a 200 MLD capacity
capacity desalination plant. desalination plant.
kWh/day MUSD/year SWRO Configuration Capital Cost Energy Cost per Year

Motor VFD Conv. Energy Conv. Energy ​ Million USD Million USD
Efficiency Efficiency Design Eff. Design Eff. Conventional (8 +1) pump design 34.8 15.48
(%) (%) Design Design Energy Efficient (3 +1) pump design 29.5 14.55
96.5 % 100.0 % 21188.7 32730.8 0.8 1.2 Difference 5.3 0.93
96.5 % 98.0 % 355265.7 337007.7 13.0 12.3
96.5 % 100.0 % 19889.4 19606.3 0.7 0.7
96.5 % 97.0 % 27753.3 27415.8 1.0 1.0 per annum is USD 0.93 million (about 6 % saving). The energy saving
Total ​ 424097 416761 15.5 15.2 due to 3-centre design is about 2 % while due to hybrid membrane
configuration, saving is up to 4 %. The operating cost saving may vary

8
G. Mustafa et al. Desalination and Water Treatment 322 (2025) 101236

with different feed conditions and equipment suppliers. regulations, is reshaping water resource strategies. This economic shift is
expected to promote the reliance on oceans as a primary source of
4. Recommendations potable water. Consequently, seawater RO systems remain a key tech­
nology to meet the growing global water demand, particularly in water-
• Bridging the Gap between Theoretical and Practical SEC: Despite scarce regions like the MENA countries. The increasing reliance on the
significant advancements, a considerable gap remains between the ocean demands the need for a more energy-efficient, cost-effective, and
theoretical minimum (1.07 kWh/m³) and the actual energy con­ sustainable SWRO system. A portion of the energy consumption (~
sumption (2.5–4.0 kWh/m³) in the SWRO system. Future research 30 %) in an SWRO desalination plant is attributed to the pre and post
should focus on developing next-generation membranes, energy re­ treatment systems, averaging around 1.0 kWh/m³ , regardless of the
covery devices (ERDs), and system integration techniques to plant’s location. However, most of the energy consumption (~70 %)
approach the theoretical limit of energy consumption. occurs in the SWRO system of desalination plants. Therefore, optimizing
• Advanced Membrane Materials and Configurations: The develop­ the SWRO system itself presents the best opportunity for energy and cost
ment of high-permeability, fouling-resistant, and selective mem­ savings. This paper explored key design strategies to achieve energy and
branes remains a priority. Research should explore nanomaterials, cost savings, including: 1) hybrid SWRO membranes for balanced
graphene-based membranes, and biomimetic designs to enhance permeation and improved flow dynamics, 2) three-center RO skid
water flux and salt rejection while minimizing pressure configuration to reduce capital cost and improve operation, 3) effective
requirements. energy recovery devices (ERDs) to maximize energy efficiency, 4)
• Innovative Energy Recovery Technologies: Although current ERDs optimized intake and reject positioning to reduce operational chal­
have contributed significantly to lowering SEC, next-generation lenges, 5) hybrid polymer-lined pipelines for cost-effective and durable
ERDs with higher efficiencies, compact designs, and minimal mix­ infrastructure.
ing are still needed. Research could also explore hybrid ERD tech­ For a 200 MLD SWRO system, implementing these energy-efficient
nologies or smart ERD systems integrated with real-time monitoring design strategies can lead to approximately 15 % savings in capital
and control. cost and an annual energy cost reduction of around 6 % as compared to
• Low-Energy Pre-treatment and Post-treatment Processes: As part of conventional SWRO system. These findings highlight the importance of
the full SWRO desalination plant, pre-treatment and post-treatment continued innovation in technology to make the SWRO system a more
stages still contribute significantly to the overall energy and capital sustainable, efficient, and economically viable solution for meeting
costs. Developing low-energy, chemical-free or advanced oxidation future water demand.
pre-treatment systems, and efficient remineralization methods
would further improve overall system performance. CRediT authorship contribution statement
• Modular and Scalable SWRO Designs: There is a growing need for
flexible, modular SWRO systems that can be easily scaled up or down Nausha Asrar: Writing – review & editing. Ghulam Mustafa:
based on demand. Research should investigate compact, skid- Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Supervision,
mounted units, integrated energy systems, and AI-driven modular Conceptualization. Omar Alraqibah: Writing – review & editing. Eslam
designs for improved operational flexibility and reduced capital Alwaznani: Writing – review & editing. Mustakeem Mustakeem:
costs. Writing – review & editing, Validation.
• Hybrid Desalination Systems: Combining SWRO with other tech­
nologies such as Forward Osmosis (FO), Pressure Retarded Osmosis
Declaration of Competing Interest
(PRO), Membrane Distillation (MD), or Electrodialysis (ED) offers
potential for improved water recovery, reduced brine volume, and
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
energy savings. Research on cost-effective hybrid configurations
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
tailored to specific feedwater and environmental conditions is
the work reported in this paper.
essential.
• Reducing Construction and Infrastructure Costs: Research on light­
Data availability
weight, durable, and corrosion-resistant materials, 3D-printed com­
ponents, and prefabricated plant modules can help significantly
No data was used for the research described in the article.
lower the capital cost and speed up deployment.
• Carbon neutral and integration with Renewable Energy Sources: To
References
achieve sustainability goals, SWRO systems must be sustainable and
should be powered by solar, wind, or hybrid renewable energy sys­ [1] Semiat R. Energy Issues Desalin Process E ST 2008;42(22).
tems. Research on smart grid integration, energy storage coupling, [2] Miller S, Shemer H, Semiat R. Energy and environmental issues in desalination.
and dynamic load management will be vital for reliable and Desalination 2015;366:2–8.
[3] Alobaidani S, et al. Potential of membrane distillation in seawater desalination:
continuous desalination operation. thermal efficiency, sensitivity study and cost estimation. J Membr Sci 2008;323(1):
• Encouraging further research on adopting hybrid solar-RO systems, 85–98.
hydrogel-based process to utilize solar thermal energy. [4] Park K, Kim DY, Yang DR. Theoretical analysis of pressure retarded membrane
distillation (PRMD) process for simultaneous production of water and electricity.
• Implementing novel spacer designs (helical and corrugated) in Ind Eng Chem Res 2017;56:14888–901.
membrane modules systems to enhance flux recovery and reduce [5] Adiga MR, et al. Performance analysis of photovoltaic electrodialysis desalination
fouling. plant at Tanote in Thar desert. Desalination 1987;67:59–66.
[6] Kuroda O, et al. An electrodialysis sea water desalination system powered by
• Advanced brine volarization and circular economy integration can
photovoltaic cells. Desalination 1987;67:33–41.
be a promising resource for extracting economical minerals found in [7] Fritzmann C, et al. State-of-the-art of reverse osmosis desalination. Desalination
the rejected brine from SWRO plants. This also reduces the risks of 2007;16:1–76.
environmental impacts of brine. [8] IDA. IDA Desalination & Reuse Handbook 2022–2023. Media Analytics Ltd; 2022.
[9] Amy G, et al. Membrane-based seawater desalination: PResent and future
prospects. Desalination 2017;401:16–21.
5. Conclusions [10] Elimelech M, Phillip WA. The future of sea water desalination. Science 2011;333.
[11] Kim J, et al. A comprehensive review of energy consumption of seawater reverse
osmosis desalination plants. Appl Energy 2019;254.
Decrease in the cost of desalinated water production coupled with [12] Park K, et al. Towards a low-energy seawater reverse osmosis desalination plant: a
rising cost of wastewater treatment, driven by strict municipal review and theoretical analysis for future directions. J Membr Sci 2020;595.

9
G. Mustafa et al. Desalination and Water Treatment 322 (2025) 101236

[13] Liang Y. Solar-powered forward osmosis as a sustainable water treatment solution: [51] Bleninger T, Jirka GH. Modelling and environmentally sound management of brine
a review. J Environ Chem Eng 2025:116332. discharges from desalination plants. Desalination 2008;221(1-3):585–97.
[14] Ong WL, et al. Integrated functionality of photothermal hydrogels and membranes [52] Palomar P. and I.J. Losada, Impacts of brine discharge on the marine environment:
in solar water, chemical, mechanical, and electrical domains. Adv Mater Technol Modelling and management. Desalination 2011;280(1-3):21–31.
2025;10(6):2401110. [53] Dawoud MA. Environmental impacts of seawater desalination: Arabian Gulf case
[15] Yang J, et al. Recent advances in solar-driven photothermal conversion hydrogels: study. Int J Environ Sustain 2012;1(3):22–37.
a review. Adv Sustain Syst 2025;9(2):2400330. [54] Voutchkov N. Desalination Engineering. Operation and Maintenance. McGraw-
[16] Akashah S, et al. Cost and economic analysis of Doha reverse osmosis plant Hill; 2018.
(Kuwait). Desalination 1987;64:65–82. [55] Al-Barwani HH, Purnama A. The hypersaline Gulf: A model study of potential
[17] Judd SJ. Membrane technology costs and me. Water Res 2017;122:1–9. impacts of seawater desalination on the marine environment. In: Nemeth AD,
[18] Okamoto Y, Lienhard JH. How RO membrane permeability and other performance editor. The Marine Environment: Ecology, Management and Conservation. Nova
factors affect process cost and energy use: a review. Desalination 2019;470: Science Publishers; 2019. p. 167–77.
114064. [56] Ibrahim HD, Eltahir EAB. Impact of brine discharge from seawater desalination
[19] Wade NM. The effect of the recent energy cost increase on the relative water costs plants on Persian/Arabian Gulf salinity. J Environ Eng 2019;145(12):04019084.
from RO and distillation plant. S Desalin 1991;81:3–18. [57] Zhu A, Christofides PD, Cohen Y. On the effects of hybrid reverse osmosis
[20] Yechiel A, Shevah Y. Optimization of energy costs for SWRO desalination plants. membrane configurations. J Membr Sci 2009;339(1–2):92–104.
Desalin Water Treat 2012;46:304–11. [58] Kim J, Park M, Hong S. Hybrid reverse osmosis systems with mixed membrane
[21] Gude VG. Desalination and sustainability–an appraisal and current perspective. types: Impact on performance and energy efficiency. Desalination 2015;370:43–50.
Water Res 2016;89:87–106. [59] Penate B, Rodriguez LG. Reverse osmosis hybrid membrane inter-stage design: a
[22] Jamil MA, Qureshi BA, Zubair SM. Exergo-economic analysis of a seawater reverse comparative performance assessment. Desalination 2011;281:354–63.
osmosis desalination plant with various retrofit options. Desalination 2017;401: [60] Hoek EMV, Elimelech M. Cake-enhanced concentration polarization: a new fouling
88–98. mechanism for salt-rejecting membranes. Environ Sci Technol 2003;37(24):
[23] Shrivastava A, Rosenberg S, Peery M. Energy efficiency breakdown of reverse 5581–8.
osmosis and its implications on future innovation roadmap for desalination. [61] Greenlee LF, et al. Reverse osmosis desalination: Water sources, technology, and
Desalination 2015;368:181–92. today’s challenges. Water Res 2009;43(9):2317–48.
[24] Voutchkov N. Seawater Desalination—Costs and Technology Trends. Encycl [62] Matin A, et al. Biofouling in reverse osmosis membranes for seawater desalination:
Membr Sci Technol 2013. phenomena and prevention. Desalination 2011;281:1–16.
[25] De la Torre A. Efficiency optimization in SWRO plant: high efficiency & low [63] Kerdi S, et al. Spacer designs for improved hydrodynamics and filtration efficiency
maintenance pumps. Desalination 2008;221:151–7. in sea water reverse osmosis. Membranes 2025;15(1).
[26] Manth T, Gabor M, Oklejas E. Jr., Minimizing RO energy consumption under [64] Yang Q, et al. Inverse design of V-shape feed spacer for batch and semi-batch
variable conditions of operation. Desalination 2003;157:9–21. reverse osmosis. Desalination 2024;591.
[27] Subramani A, et al. Energy minimization strategies and renewable energy [65] Lin P, et al. Effect of permeable spacer structure on energy loss and mass transfer in
utilization for desalination: a review. Water Res 2011;45:1907–20. reverse osmosis membrane modules. Sep Purif Technol 2024;330.
[28] Wilf M, Bartels C. Optimization of seawater RO systems design. Desalination 2005; [66] Karabelas AJ, et al. Analysis of specific energy consumption in reverse osmosis
173:1–12. desalination processes. Desalination 2018;431:15–21.
[29] Choi W, et al. Thin film composite reverse osmosis membranes prepared via [67] Haidari AH, Heijman SGJ, van der Meer WGJ. Optimal design of spacers in reverse
layered interfacial polymerization. J Membr Sci 2017;527:121–8. osmosis. Sep Purif Technol 2018;192:441–56.
[30] Lee KP, Arnot TC, Mattia D. A review of reverse osmosis membrane materials for [68] Siddiqui A, et al. Thin filament spacers for energy-efficient RO. J Membr Sci 2016;
desalination—Development to date and future potential. J Membr Sci 2011;370(1- 516:88–97.
2):1–22. [69] Valladares Linares R, et al. Alternating strand design for fouling reduction in RO.
[31] Park SJ, et al. A facile and scalable fabrication method for thin film composite Water Res 2014;66:177–87.
reverse osmosis membranes: dual-layer slot coating. J Mater Chem A 2017;5: [70] Kim YC, Elimelech M. Adverse impact of feed channel spacers on the performance
6648–55. of pressure retarded osmosis. Environ Sci Technol 2012;46(8):4673–81.
[32] Safarpour M, et al. High flux and fouling resistant reverse osmosis membrane [71] Lin P, et al. Effect of permeable spacer structure on energy loss and mass transfer in
modified with plasma treated natural zeolite. Desalination 2017;411:89–100. reverse osmosis membrane modules. Sep Purif Technol 2024;330.
[33] Johnson J, Busch M. Engineering aspects of reverse osmosis module design. Desalin [72] Touati K, Tadeo F, Kim JH. Techno-economic analysis of a pressure retarded
Water Treat 2010;15:236–48. osmosis (PRO) - seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) hybrid: a case study. Front
[34] Liyanaarachchi S, et al. Problems in seawater industrial desalination processes and Energy Res 2024;12:1345678.
potential sustainable solutions: a review. Rev Environ Sci Biotechnol 2014;13: [73] Ng W, Liang Y, Weihs GF. Quantifying the potential of pressure retarded osmosis
203–14. advanced spacers for reducing specific energy consumption in hybrid desalination.
[35] Schock G, Miquel A. Mass transfer and pressure loss in spiral wound modules. J Water Process Eng 2023;55:104197.
Desalination 1987;64:339–52. [74] Lee S, et al. Toward scale-up of seawater reverse osmosis (SWRO) – pressure
[36] Voutchkov N. Energy use for membrane seawater desalination – current status and retarded osmosis (PRO) hybrid system: a case study of a 240 m3/day pilot plant.
trends. Desalination 2018;431:2–14. Desalination 2020;491:114429.
[37] Daigger GT, et al. The Future of Water: A collection of essays on “disruptive”. [75] Kim J, et al. Optimization of two-stage seawater reverse osmosis membrane
technologies that may transform the water sector in the next 10 years. Solutions. processes with practical design aspects for improving energy efficiency. J Membr
Spring; 2020. p. 43–74. Sci 2020;601:117889.
[38] Latorre FJG, Baez SOP, Gotor AG. Energy performance of a reverse osmosis [76] Pankratz T. Seawater Desalination Handbook. Elsevier; 2012.
desalination plant operating with variable pressure and flow. Desalination 2015; [77] Gülich JF. Centrifugal Pumps. Springer; 2014.
366:146–53. [78] Bloch, H.P. and A.R. Budris, Pump User’s Handbook: Life Extension. 4th ed. ed.
[39] Wenten I. Reverse osmosis applications: prospect and challenges. Desalination 2014: Fairmont Press.
2016;391:112–25. [79] Karassik IJ, et al. Pump Handbook. 4th ed. McGraw-Hill Education; 2008 (ed).
[40] IDA, IDA Desalination Yearbook. 2017, UK: Global Intelligence (GWI) and [80] Shankar VKA, et al. A comprehensive review of energy efficiency in centrifugal
International Desalination Association. pump systems using variable frequency drives. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2016;65:
[41] Voutchkov N. Considerations for selection of seawater desalination pretreatment 384–95.
system. Desalination 2010;261(3):354–64. [81] Ahn BH, Kim YH. Energy saving potential of variable frequency drives in
[42] Edzwald JK, Haarhoff J. Seawater pretreatment for reverse osmosis: chemistry, centrifugal pump systems for industrial applications. Energy Procedia 2012;14:
challenges, and opportunities. Water Res 2011;45(15):4361–70. 1458–63.
[43] Bonnelye V, et al. Reverse osmosis on open intake seawater: pre-treatment strategy [82] Federation, W.E., Energy Conservation in Water and Wastewater Facilities. 2010:
and experience. Desalination 2004;167:191–200. WEF Manual of Practice No. 32.
[44] Jeong S, Naidu G, Vigneswaran S. Submerged membrane adsorption bioreactor as a [83] Migliorini G, Luzzo E. Seawater reverse osmosis plant using the pressure exchanger
pretreatment in seawater desalination for biofouling control. Bioresour Technol for energy recovery: a calculation model. Desalination 2004;165:289–98.
2013;141:57–64. [84] Guirguis, M.J., Energy Recovery Devices in Seawater Reverse Osmosis Desalination
[45] Holdings, E., Design of Large Scale Seawater Intake & Brine Outfall Systems. 2017. Plants with Emphasis on Efficiency and Economical Analysis of Isobaric versus
[46] Jones B, et al. Environmental impacts of desalination: Intake and outfall Centrifugal Devices. 2011, University of South Florida Digital Commons.
considerations. J Environ Manag 2019;242:125–34. [85] Stover RL. Seawater reverse osmosis with isobaric energy recovery devices.
[47] Missimer TM, et al. Intake and Outfall Systems for Seawater Desalination. Springer; Desalination 2007;203:168–75.
2015. [86] Signorelli, R., Corrosion resistant alloys in pipelines. 2021, Nickel Institute.
[48] Einav R, et al. The footprint of the desalination processes on the environment. [87] Mason JA, Thompson LW. Techno-economic evaluation of polymer-lined carbon
Desalination 2002;152(1-3):141–54. steel pipelines for corrosive environments. J Pipeline Syst Eng Pract 2018;9(3):
[49] Roberts PJW, et al. Dilution and dispersion of desalination discharges: modeling 04018012.
and field studies. Desalination 2010;255(1-3):12–22. [88] Smith RE, Brown KJ. Cost-benefit analysis of PTFE-lined carbon steel piping in
[50] Hodges BR, et al. Thin-layer gravity current with implications for desalination chemical processing plants. Chem Eng Trans 2020;81:115–20.
brine disposal. J Hydraul Eng 2011;137(3):356–71.

10