Case Study
and infrastructure cost savings, as well as reduced installation costs. The district's two water treatment facilities are half the size of a comparable filtration plant that utilizes a longer backwash cycle. And configuring the original system to utilize efficiently, its modest footprint allows for possible future expansion if necessary, which also can result in significant long- term savings. The smaller tanks also will require less electricity and smaller pumps to operate. Finally, a highly efficient backwash cycle conserves water, which is particularly important in water-constrained environments common in the southwestern United States. As much as 99.9% of the backwash water can be reclaimed and put back into the system (a good backwash-to-filtration ratio should be 0.2% or less).
Automation
$348,000 (2.2% of total system cost) A high degree of automation ensuring full, unattended operation is a key benefit of the district's filtration system. It reduces operator time, providing smooth, consistent management as well as system alarms and advanced status reporting. While it will have higher upfront costs at installation, automation will significantly reduce on-going labor costs over the 20-year lifecycle of the system. For example, a fully automated system typically requires approximately 50 man-hours/year for O&M;, versus a less automated system, which may require as many as 700 man-hours/ year to operate. Using the Bureau of Labor Statistics' national average rate of $25/hour for water treatment
NEW!
PT1 POCKET TESTER MYRONL.COM
TEMPERATURE REPORTED WITH EVERY READING
EVERYBODY NEEDS ONE 24 Water Online The Magazine, Cleanwater Edition ■ wateronline.com