brackish water it would foul up the membrane 
unless an adequate iron manganese removal filter 
were inserted. 
OSW program for 1969 will test electrodialysis 
techniques on 10 types of brackish water typical 
of those found in the U.S. west central area. 
5. Advanced Processes in Initial Development 
The quest for new processes has led to promis- 
ing findings in the area of electrode demineralizers, 
environmentally modulated ion absorption beds, 
new hydrate processes, electrogravitational separa- 
tion techniques, and the transport depletion and 
electro-sorption processes. Recent developments 
indicate that ion exchange may be competitive as a 
means of desalting brackish water having less than 
3,000 ppm. 
C. Projection of Water Costs 
Mr. Frank Di Luzio, in testimony before the 
Senate, stated:77 
The factors that influence the cost of water to a 
customer fall into two main areas: First, factors 
that occur “within the skin” of the plant itself, 
engineering optimization of such effects as heat 
transfer rates, steam temperatures, chemistry of 
feed water, scaling, corrosion, fuel cost, construc- 
tion costs, and many other factors. The second set 
of factors are those outside the characteristics of 
the desalination plant. These include the cost of 
money; the amount of water needed for a specific 
area—that is, size of the plant; availability of a 
properly sized storage and distribution system; the 
geographical need for large blocks of power in the 
case of a dual-purpose plant. Much too often we 
concentrate on the first set of factors and ignore 
the second. 
Testimony from Mr. Mark Dusbabek of the 
Fluor Corporation, Ltd., during the same hearings 
emphasized several points in estimating costs for 
the Metropolitan Water District of Southern Cali- 
fornia (MWD); i.e., the Bolsa Island 150 mgd 
distillation plant.*® Cost for heat energy and 
capital amounted to about 70 per cent of the 
47 Senate Hearings, May 1965, op. cit., p. 137. 
48 hid. p. 123. 
total. Only about five per cent was for labor and 
general administrative expenses. The remainder 
comprised materials and electric power. Figure 66 
shows the proposed Bolsa Island dual nuclear 
power and desalting plant that was to be located 
near Los Angeles. 
Recently the Bolsa Island plans were termi- 
nated by mutual agreement of all participants, 
because escalating costs over the past three years 
made it uneconomical. However, the Office of 
Saline Water has indicated new plans are being 
prepared for an alternate dual purpose desalting- 
power plant having a comparable capacity at a 
more favorable location. 
A reduction in water costs is enabled by use of 
dual purpose plants. During the 1965 hearings Mr. 
Dusbabek stated:*? 
When a sea water distillation plant is coupled with 
a steam powerplant, both plants benefit from the 
more efficient use of heat. If all of the benefit is 
ascribed to the waterplant and, depending upon 
the economic situation, we would expect a reduc- 
tion in water costs. 
Such reduction in water costs has been estimated 
more recently to be about 20 to 25 per cent. 
Figure 67 is a recent projection of desalting 
costs made by OSW for a range of plant sizes. It is 
based on distillation technology. Note that the 
price per thousand gallons is expected to decrease 
to 50 cents for plants with capacities up to 10 mgd 
during the five years 1969 to 1973. Indications 
also are that during the same period, the larger 
dual-purpose plants, 50 to 150 mgd capacities, 
may produce water for 20 to 30 cents per 
thousand gallons. Such cost reductions would 
attract municipal and industrial users where water 
is in short supply or of poor quality. 
Beyond 1975 the cost of desalting in large size 
plants may decrease sufficiently for such water to 
be used for agricultural irrigation. However, these 
decreases hinge on technological innovation in 
large scale desalting developments and on the 
attainment of such low-cost heat sources as nu- 
clear breeder reactors. 
During the 1967 Senate hearings it was pointed 
out that even at 22 cents per 1,000 gallons of 
water (slightly more than $80 per acre-foot), this 
99 Tbid., p. 123. 
VI-207 
