SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

ENG470 ENGINEERING HONOURS THESIS

FINAL REPORT

DESIGNING AN ON-FARM EVAPORATION POND FOR

THE WHEATBELT, WESTERN AUSTRALIA

Neetesha Dabeedooal

Bachelor of Environmental Engineering Honours (BEng(Hons))

2nd July 2018

SUPERVISOR

Professor Wendell Ela

A report submitted to the School of Engineering and Information Technology in partial fulfilment of requirements for the unit
ENG470 Engineering Honours Thesis at Murdoch University, Semester 1, 2018.
 DISCLAIMER

I hereby declare that this thesis is my own original work and further, I have acknowledged all sources

used and have cited these in the reference section.

ii
Executive Summary

An evaporation pond is a lined basin where wastewater is disposed to decrease the volume of water in

it. Rejected brine is the by-product waste produced from water treatment technologies. The

conventional evaporation pond is used to evaporate the brine solution through solar radiation and wind.

It is mainly used in countries with dry and warm weather such as Saudi Arabia and it can be utilised in

regions far from the seas. The rejected brine is easily dumped into the sea if the site is located near to

the coast. The volume of effluent is reduced due to evaporation process making the solution more saline.

The Goldfields and Agricultural Water Supply Scheme (GAWS) is a very expensive water supply

option for the Wheatbelt region in Western Australia. Therefore, Water Corporation has launched

Farmland Alternative Water Supply Project to look for an alternative water supply option. Groundwater

salinity is a big issue in Australia and this affects the productivity and income of farmers. Different

water treatment technologies such as Reverse Osmosis/Nano Filtration (RO/NF), solar distillation and

phytodesalination are used to treat groundwater and therefore, evaporation pond is constructed to

manage the brine. The focus in this project is to design an evaporation pond.

Site selection is a major role before designing an evaporation pond. Salinity can be measured by using

an electrical conductivity. In the project, Bakers Hill is considered and the salinity level at the site is

approximately 3000-7000mg/L. The three main factors to design an evaporation pond is pond depth,

pod area and pond evaporation and all the formulae are obtained from literature. The pond area depends

on annual brine inflow, groundwater salinity and the Potential Net Evaporative Loss. After calculating

the Potential Net Evaporative Loss, the area of basin for 100ML/year inflow can be obtained from the

salinity curves and with the given information, the area of the required basin is gained.

From the results, a barchart of the monthly mean rainfall and the monthly evapotranspiration were

plotted. It is noticed that there is less rain during summer than in winter season. The annual rainfall at

Bakers Hilll is approximately 589.4 mm and the annual evapotranspiration is about 1732.4mm. At the

beginning of the year, evaporation rate is very high because the solar radiation intensity is higher during

summer compared to during winter. In the months of June until August, the Potential Net Evaporative

Loss is negative because rainfall records are greater than evaporation rate. An interpolation is done to

iii
find the basin area for 100ML/year inflow at a specific Potential Net Evaporative Loss. Area of required

basin is calculated by using the formula from literature. The parameters can be varying to have a proper

sizing of the evaporation pond. A user manual is written for the design spreadsheet model for the

farmers to follow on how to use it.

The results obtained are compared to data from literature. Two designed spreadsheets are obtained

from internet resources. They are different from the one I have designed because the main parameters

are not assumed but they are calculated using formula from literatures. Similar trend results were

obtained from both spreadsheets.

After designing the pond, some recommendations are made to improve the designed evaporation pond.

Deeper pond can be used to reduce evaporation rate. Spray evaporators is suggested to enhance

evaporation rate and Wind Aided Intensified Evaporation (WAIV) can be an alternative solution for

brine management instead of using conventional evaporation pond.

In this study, a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet is developed to help local people and farmers design an

evaporation pond in an inland region and manage rejected brine. The formulae for each parameter are

provided in the spreadsheet and farmers do not need to calculate or design them. Some factors including

mean rainfall, evapotranspiration and solar radiation obtained from the Bureau of Meteorology (BOM),

annual brine inflow and groundwater salinity were taken into consideration.

iv
Acknowledgements

First, I would like to thank my supervisor, Professor Wendell Ela for his valuable suggestions and

guidance throughout the course of the project.

I would like to show gratitude to Rhys Gustafsson, Research Assistant at Murdoch University and

Abdulla Rasheed, a master’s student for helping me in my proposal and literature review.

Special thanks goes to my father Sudhir, my mother Mooksada and my sister Yatisha to whom I am

forever indebted for their understanding, patience, sacrifice and encouragement when it was most

required.

Last but not the least; I would like to thank all my friends especially Gwenella Saverettiar who have

always been by my side during my engineering course.

v
List of Abbreviations & Acronyms

BOM: Bureau of Meteorology

GAWS: Goldfields and Agricultural Water Supply Scheme

RO/NF: Reverse Osmosis/Nano Filtration

WAIV: Wind Aided intensified Evaporation

TDS: Total dissolved solids

vi
 Table of Contents
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................... iii
Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................................. v
List of Abbreviations & Acronyms ........................................................................................................ vi
List of Figures ...................................................................................................................................... viii
List of Tables ......................................................................................................................................... ix
1.0 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Scope and objectives ..................................................................................................................... 1
1.2 Project management plan .............................................................................................................. 2
2.0 Background ....................................................................................................................................... 3
2.1 RO/NF ........................................................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Phytodesalination ........................................................................................................................ 10
2.3 Solar distillation .......................................................................................................................... 11
2.4 Evaporation pond ........................................................................................................................ 12
3.0 Methodology ................................................................................................................................... 14
3.1 Site selection ............................................................................................................................... 14
3.2 Overall Salt concentration........................................................................................................... 17
3.3 Sizing of evaporation pond ......................................................................................................... 20
3.3.1 Pond depth ........................................................................................................................... 20
3.3.2 Pond area .............................................................................................................................. 23
3.4 Measurement of evaporation....................................................................................................... 25
3.5 Factors affecting evaporation rate ............................................................................................... 27
3.5.1 Sizing ................................................................................................................................... 27
3.5.2 Salinity ................................................................................................................................. 28
3.5.3 Climatic effects .................................................................................................................... 28
4.0 Results and Discussion ................................................................................................................... 30
4.1 Results ......................................................................................................................................... 30
4.2 Discussion ................................................................................................................................... 38
5.0 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 42
6.0 Recommendations ........................................................................................................................... 43
References ............................................................................................................................................. 44
Appendix A: Gantt chart ....................................................................................................................... 50
Appendix B: Rainfall Data from BOM ................................................................................................. 50
Appendix C: Evapotranspiration Data from BOM ............................................................................... 51
Appendix D: Spreadsheet Model .......................................................................................................... 51

vii
List of Figures
Figure 1 GAWS distribution area ........................................................................................................... 3
Figure 2 Increase in salinity through evaporation process (State Water Resources Control Board 2017)
................................................................................................................................................................ 5
Figure 3 Project History (Murdoch University 2016, 18) ...................................................................... 8
Figure 4 On-farm brackish groundwater treatment system..................................................................... 8
Figure 5 Reverse osmosis process .......................................................................................................... 9
Figure 6 Nanofiltration process............................................................................................................. 10
Figure 7 Solar distillation process......................................................................................................... 12
Figure 8 Evaporation pond.................................................................................................................... 13
Figure 9 Location of Bakers Hill townsite ............................................................................................ 15
Figure 10 The constant Head Test ........................................................................................................ 16
Figure 11 Falling Head Test.................................................................................................................. 16
Figure 12 Schematic diagram when feed enters a system..................................................................... 18
Figure 13 Feed water salinity vs. Product water salinity graph ............................................................ 18
Figure 14 Pressure vs. Permeate flux graph .......................................................................................... 19
Figure 15 Feed pressure vs. % Recovery graph .................................................................................... 20
Figure 16 Spray Evaporator .................................................................................................................. 22
Figure 17 Pond aeration ........................................................................................................................ 23
Figure 18 Salinity factor vs. footprint area graph ................................................................................. 28
Figure 19 Potential Net Evaporative Loss vs. Basin area (ha) for 100ML/year inflow ........................ 25
Figure 20 A diagram of Class A Pan .................................................................................................... 26
Figure 21 Annual Rainfall (Australian Government Bureau of Meterology 2018) .............................. 30
Figure 22 Annual Evapotranspiration ................................................................................................... 31
Figure 23 Graphs at different salinity ................................................................................................... 34

viii
List of Tables
Table 1 Salinity of different water sources (State Water Resources Control Board 2017)..................... 4
Table 2 Permeability Table ................................................................................................................... 17
Table 3 Estimation of freeboard through discharge (Thandaveswara 2008). ....................................... 24
Table 4 Specifications to measure evaporation rate automatically (MEA 2011) ................................. 27
Table 5 The calculated basin area for 100ML/year at Potential Net Evaporative Loss of 1616mm/year
.............................................................................................................................................................. 35
Table 6 An example of a designed spreadsheet for an evaporation pond ............................................. 39

ix
1.0 Introduction

An evaporation pond is a shallow lined earthen basin used to dispose rejected brine from inland water

treatment plants particularly from desalination plants (Voutchkov 2011, 121-134). Brine is the rejected

waste by-product of water from desalination processes like RO and NF, solar distillation and

phytodesalination such as investigated in the Wheatbelt project, which was discussed in the background

section (Syrinx Environmental PTY Ltd 2017). The evaporation pond is a natural or artificial pond that

allows water to evaporate through solar radiation and wind. They are especially useful in countries with

dry and warm weather (Mushtaque Ahmed 2000). Evaporation ponds reduce the effluent volume of

water from water treatment plants making it more concentrated than in non-volatile components than

the influent water. Evaporation ponds are mainly utilised in the regions that are far from the sea. There

are different means of brine disposal and they depend on the location of the plant. One is for inland

areas and the other one is for the coastal areas. In areas close to the coast, the rejected brine is normally

dumped into the ocean or sometimes used in agriculture (Mushtaque Ahmed 2000). Ocean disposal is

considered simpler than inland disposal. For inland regions where no effluent is to be discharged to the

environment, evaporation ponds areas are often used (Condorchem envitech 2012). Before constructing

the evaporation pond, the most significant part is to design a proper pond to identify the volume of brine

coming in and out as a function of time. In this study, a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet will be created to

help local people and farmers design an evaporation pond.

1.1 Scope and objectives

Planning, designing, constructing, monitoring and maintenance of the evaporation pond are the main

aims for disposal of water and storage of disposed salts in an inland project (Hauck and JDA Consultant

Hydrologists 2004). A spreadsheet is developed for designing an evaporation pond for local people and

farmers who install a small-scale water treatment system. This is especially applicable for areas far from

the coast. This will be very beneficial, as an adjunct to water treatment projects which produce brines

because the farmers do not need to calculate or design each parameter and the formulae for calculations

will be already provided in the sheet.

1
The purpose of this study is the design of evaporation ponds, on-farms across the Wheatbelt. With the

help of my supervisor, a set of objectives was developed to facilitate planning and evaluate performance

efficiently throughout the project (Webb 2016).

The main aim of the project is to develop a friendly Microsoft Excel spreadsheet and an algorithm

methodology for farmers to design an evaporation pond that can take into consideration the following

parameters:

• To consider the mean monthly rainfall, evapotranspiration and solar radiation across the whole year

• To identify the mean monthly brine inflow rate into the evaporation pond

• To determine the Class A Pan evaporation

• To identify the salinity of groundwater

• To determine the Potential Net Evaporative Loss

• To design area of required basin and depth of the pond

1.2 Project management plan

A Project management plan has been developed to keep track of the tasks to be carried out throughout

the project. Therefore, a Gantt chart has been made to display the starting and ending dates of the tasks

in the project (Investopedia 2007) by using a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet. Another Gantt chart has been

constructed to plan my weekly meetings with my supervisor and the work done till the final report

submission. Gantt charts will have to be followed until the end of the project to ensure that the different

milestones are completed. The chart can also be modified if the progress of the tasks is not

corresponding to the timeline (Appendix A).

2
2.0 Background

Goldfields and Agricultural Water Supply Scheme (GAWS) supplies water from Mundaring Weir in

the Perth hills to as far as Kalgoorlie in the Goldfields region as shown in Figure 1 (Water Corporation

2017). The GAWS, which includes approximately 9,600 km of pipeline, provides water for more than

100,000 customers, farm establishments, mines and other enterprises (Water Corporation 2017). This

scheme water is supplied by Water Corporation at a high operational cost and through pipes, many of

which are reaching their useful lifespan. Water Corporation is therefore, looking for an alternative water

supply option within Wheatbelt because GAWS is a very expensive water supply option to deliver a

small capacity of water to the farmland region (Murdoch University and Syrinx Environmental PTY

Ltd 2017). Moreover, bursting of pipelines has been occurring frequently over recent years leading to

the need to repair pipes regularly to prevent disruptions of water supply to customers (Murdoch

University and Syrinx Environmental PTY Ltd 2017). The cost of maintenance and repairing the pipes

is massive. Therefore, the use of local water resources such as surface water, groundwater and

desalinated water could result in a reduction in scheme water provision (Murdoch University 2016).

Figure 1 GAWS distribution area (Rasheed 2017)

3
CSIRO has reported that soil salinity is a big issue in all parts of Australia but particularly in Western

Australia, South Australia and in the Murray-Darling Basin. Australian Bureau of Statistics (2010)

stated that in 2000, 5.7 million hectares of Australia have a high possibility for the development of

salinity in the soil. This included 20,000 farms, and 2 million hectares of agricultural land. Loss of

productivity and income from soil salinization will affect farmers and it is predicted that more regions

will be affected if solutions are not found soon (Australian Bureau of Statistics 2010).

Saline groundwater consists of total dissolved solids and there are various methods to measure salinity

of the water (State Water Resources Control Board 2017). Total dissolved solids (TDS) encompass of

inorganic salts such as calcium, magnesium, potassium, chlorides, sulphates, and organic matter that

are dissolved in water (Oram 2014). It is used for characterisation of different water resources,

groundwater, rainwater and seawater. The salinity can be tested in the laboratory. Electrical

conductivity (EC) is another way to measure salinity. It is the measurement of concentrated dissolved

ions in water and it is tested in the laboratory where an electric current is passed through the water. The

ability of current to pass through water is proportional to the amount of dissolved salts in water (State

Water Resources Control Board 2017).The table below shows the approximate range of dissolved salts

in fresh water to very saline water.

Table 1 Salinity of different water sources (State Water Resources Control Board 2017)

Salinity status Salinity(mg/L) Uses

Fresh < 500 Drinking and irrigation

1. Irrigation certain crops only

Saline 2 000 - 10 000 2. Useful for most stock

Very saline groundwater Limited

Highly saline 10 000 - 35 000 use for certain livestock

Seawater, some mining and

Brine >35 000 industrial uses

4
High salinity in groundwater will have adverse effects on crops and drinking water. Crops are damaged

and plant growth is affected. Many plants can bear high saline water for a short period but it can be

harmful for ecosystems later on. Moreover, it is not advisable for drinking purposes. Groundwater

becomes saline due to dissolution of soil, rock and organic material process (State Water Resources

Control Board 2017). Minerals dissolved in groundwater cause salinity levels to increase. Rainwater or

water for irrigation passes through the soil dissolving ionic and non-ionic particles from minerals in the

soil. The water passing through the soil in a particular site is saline. Salinity of groundwater can increase

in several ways including evaporation processes. When groundwater is evaporated, mineral salts remain

making it more salt concentrated as shown in Figure 2 (State Water Resources Control Board 2017).

Figure 2 Increase in salinity through evaporation process (State Water Resources Control Board 2017)

From Table 1, the salinity of groundwater in Australia is within a range of less than 500mg/L to more

than 50,000mg/L (State Water Resources Control Board 2017). Soil salinity had an adverse effect in

the town of Wickepin in the Wheatbelt. Since the salinity of groundwater was increasing, the

Department of Conservation and Land Management (DCLM) decided on a salinity management plan.

In the plan, bores are installed to reduce the amount of salt level. Water is pumped and furthermore,

reported that approximately 300,000m3 per year of saline groundwater is removed. The rejected saline

groundwater is then discharged into an evaporation pond (Department of Conservation and Land

Management 2003).

Engineers have found a simple solution for brine management. An evaporation pond is constructed to

dump the brine produced from different water treatment technologies. The evaporation process makes

the effluent more concentrated and reduces the volume of water. In the Murray-Darling Basin of

5
Australia, there are approximately 190 evaporation ponds with a total area of approximately 15,000

hectares. That makes each pond approximately about 80 hectares with a total capacity of 113,000ML.

The annual brine disposal is about 210,000ML/yr (State Water Resources Control Board 2017).

Water Corporation has involved Syrinx Environmental PTY Ltd along with Murdoch University to

evaluate the different alternative water sources available on-farm and the water treatment systems

across Wheatbelt (Murdoch University and Syrinx Environmental PTY Ltd 2017). The Farmlands On-

Farm Water Supply project aims to find alternative water sources to reduce the dependency on GAWS

scheme for supply of water within Wheatbelt, which will ultimately lessen the cost of water supply.

The use of local water will be more efficient and sustainable compared to scheme water. This project

will be beneficial for the farmers because on-farm regions do not require a large amount of water

(Murdoch University and Syrinx Environmental PTY Ltd 2017). The chosen water source often has to

be treated, especially groundwater which is frequently very saline in that area. The main aim of the

project is to identify the feasibility of local supply, in terms of performance and cost of small-scale

impaired groundwater desalination as a component of an alternative water supply approach across the

Wheatbelt region (Murdoch University and Syrinx Environmental PTY Ltd 2017). The major issues in

the project are economic, socio-cultural and environmental for local people, farm establishments, mines

and other enterprises. GAWS scheme is high cost means of providing water to the farmland region

(Murdoch University and Syrinx Environmental PTY Ltd 2017). Firstly, water is supplied on a small

scale that does not require a high volume of water. Secondly, there is a decrease in cost efficiency with

the aged water infrastructure due to the increase of maintenance and repair of equipment. Local

communities are dissatisfied with the service especially with the water provider due to the frequent

occurrence of water supply failure across Wheatbelt. Moreover, according to farmers, there is limited

water delivery in the area and this affects the growth of their business region (Murdoch University and

Syrinx Environmental PTY Ltd 2017). Water Corporation has launched the Farmlands On-Farm

Alternative Water Supply Project to reduce capital and operational costs and improve the performance

of water delivery. This project will evaluate the opportunities and constraints of the alternative water

supply options. Moreover, cultural indigenous connections will be established in the project to help

6
them gain interest and knowledge on the alternative water sources and the water treatment systems as

well as collaborate in the project (Murdoch University and Syrinx Environmental PTY Ltd 2017).

The first stage of the Farmlands On-Farm Water Supply project conducted into two work packages,

namely:

1. Farmlands On-Farm Alternative Water Supply Trial-Stage 1, Work Package 1

2. Farmlands On-Farm Alternative Water Supply Trial- Stage 1, Work Package 2

Work Package 1 began in 2016 with Hauck and Associates and later in the same year, there was another

Work Package when Murdoch University joined the project. The Stage 1 Farmlands project evaluated

the available water supply options to substitute GAWS scheme as shown in Figure 3. Unimpaired

groundwater, rainwater, impaired groundwater and surface water were the main alternative water

resources across Wheatbelt. Different aspects such as the volume of water that will be supplied on-farm

and the technical capacity for their development were considered before selecting the proper water

source (Murdoch University 2016). After evaluation, it was found out that rainwater and groundwater

sources do not meet the objectives of the project (Water Corporation 2017). Therefore, desalination of

impaired groundwater was chosen to be the most feasible option to the on-farm water supply because

it can be used as a long-term technology and saline groundwater will be treated as well.

After Stage 1 Farmlands project, in 2017, Water Corporation has contracted Stage 2 Farmlands project

directly to Syrinx Environmental PTY Ltd in collaboration with Murdoch University as shown in Figure

3. This study assessed water treatment technologies that can be used on farmland region. RO and NF

are the processes that were selected as feasible technologies (Water Corporation 2017). Murdoch

University was responsible for further development and testing of the RO/NF technology whereas

Syrinx Environmental PTY Ltd has established a phytodesalination system for brine treatment and

water treatment from wells, and groundwater springs. These technologies are suitable within Wheatbelt

because the site is a small-scale region, which requires low yield but high quality water treatment

(Murdoch University 2016).

7
 Figure 3 Project History (Murdoch University 2016, 18)

Figure 4 shows the main technologies that are used to treat saline groundwater in the Farmlands On-

Farm Water Supply project. The treatment technologies are:

• RO/NF

• Phytodesalination

• Solar distillation

• Evaporation pond

RO/NF is the main technology for water treatment whilst phytodesalination, solar distillation and

evaporation are post treatments for brine as shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4 On-farm brackish groundwater treatment system

8
2.1 RO/NF

RO is a physical separation process, which uses a semi permeable membrane to remove suspended

solids and all organic molecules from raw water, which is one of the most common desalination

processes to treat saline water (Safe Drinking Water Foundation 2011). The RO process forces raw

water to move from a high concentrated region to a low concentrated region through a membrane as

shown in Figure 5 with operating pressure less than 30 bar (Bouguecha 2015). The pressure depends

on the quality of feed water and seawater desalination can be as high as 60 bars and in this process,

pressure acts as driving force for desalination, requiring energy use.The membrane has a pore of about

0.0001 micron. In this process, pressure acts as the source of energy for desalination. Raw water is

separated into permeate and brine. Permeate is the water product that passes through the membrane

whereas brine is the part that is rejected by the membrane. RO membranes have a high rejection of TDS

of 98% to 99.5% (Bouguecha 2015).

Figure 5 Reverse osmosis process (PR News Now 2017)

NF is normally a low-pressure RO technology that removes total suspended solids, high organic content

matter, and divalent ions that cause hard water (American's Authority in Membrane Treatment 2007).

It has a higher water permeability than RO (Safe Drinking Water Foundation 2011). Post treatment is

not required because NF can treat water that is low in salinity (<1500mg/L TDS) and it is applied in

water treatment especially for water softening. It has a pore size ranging from 1 to10nm and operates

at a pressure less than 20 bars. It acts as a barrier in the same way as reverse osmosis and NF plants

9
operate at 85 to 95% recovery (Safe Drinking Water Foundation 2011). However, NF has high rejection

on hardness, organic matter and metals especially iron. NF can be used for pre-treatment of feed to

prevent fouling and scaling.

Figure 6 Nanofiltration process (Fumatech 2017)

RO/NF is a preferred technology for both small-scale and large scale applications. Moreover when

applicable, NF can produce more permeate at a low cost (Safe Drinking Water Foundation 2011).

Smaller plant required less area. The performance of membrane, its lifespan and treatment efficiency is

important factors for the selection of RO/NF system (Bouguecha 2015).

Due to the depletion of fossil fuel, the price has increased and therefore, the energy required to drive

the RO/NF system will have higher cost too (Bouguecha 2015). RO desalination systems can be

powered by solar energy in countries with high solar radiance. Solar energy can be used as a source of

power for the RO plant and therefore, an integrated photovoltaic system can be installed for a promising

alternative use of using fossil fuel and improve sustainability. Operational cost is reduced too.

2.2 Phytodesalination

Phytoremediation is one of the technologies that were proposed for the Wheatbelt project to reduce

salinity of the water. It may involve different processes, including phytostabilisation, phytodegradation,

phytovolatilisation and phytoextraction that are applied for wastewater treatment, in surface water and

groundwater purification (Materac, Wyrwicka and Sobiecka 2015). Phytoremediation uses some

specific plants to remove contaminants such as heavy metals, chlorinated solvents and hydrocarbons

10
from the soil or water and concentrate them in their biomass (Manousaki and Kalogerakis 2010).

Phytoextraction removes contaminants from soil, groundwater or surface water that accumulates a high

level of heavy metals or organic compounds whereas in phytostabilisation process, the roots of the

plants remediate the soil and prevents contaminants to groundwater and rainwater runoff. A new

approach of phytoremediation is considered in the project. Phytodesalination extracts sodium chloride

salts. Mickley et al. (1993) has considered a halophyte species and found that the plant is expected to

extract approximately 150-800 kg/salt/ha over a period of three months. The main objective of using

phytodesalination in the project is to remove salts from the brine stream after the RO/NF unit and to

eliminate water from the brine to enhance evapotranspiration (Manousaki and Kalogerakis 2010).

Constructed wetland is an option to treat saline water but it is a more complex system and involves

many processes like bacterial oxidation, phytoremediation, filtration, nitrification, photolysis and

chemical precipitation (Manousaki and Kalogerakis 2010). According to research, a 40m2

phytodesalination unit can treat approximately 2kL/day of brine and 1kL/day of raw water and it has a

recovery rate of 50% (Hauck and JDA Consultant Hydrologists 2004). This process may be beneficial

for the project because it may be less expensive, and more environmentally and socially friendly

compared to other technologies.

2.3 Solar distillation

There are many techniques for purification of saline water. Solar distillation is effective and eco-

friendly. Moreover, the technology is not complex, requires low maintenance and can be repaired easily.

There are two types of solar distillation systems, active type and passive type. In the active type, the

process needs thermal energy to increase evaporation rate that will lead to a high productivity of pure

water (Gugulothu, et al. 2015). In a passive type, only solar energy is utilised to treat the saline water.

Solar radiation passes through the basin raising the temperature of water and causing evaporation to

take place. The water vapour rises from the brine surface of the glass and then condenses to form pure

water (Stevens 2012). It yields a low productivity of pure water. Both solar systems are commonly used

to treat groundwater that has a high level of salinity (Stevens 2012).

11
Solar distillation is the same process as the natural water cycle. Factors that may affect solar stills are

water depth of the basin, solar irradiance, inclination of the glass and ambient temperature. The

temperature difference affects the yield of the treated water. Kumar et al. (2015) obtained distilled water

through solar distillation and found the efficiency is about 30% (Gugulothu, et al. 2015).

Figure 7 Solar distillation process (Tiwari and Dev 2011)

2.4 Evaporation pond

An evaporation pond is used for the disposal of reject brine from inland desalination plants and other

water treatment technologies. It is usually used to treat brine that has a high level of salinity. They are

designed to reduce the volume of brine solution through evaporation. It is designed to reduce the volume

of brine solution through evaporation and removes water from the saline solution by solar radiance.

Evaporation pond can be constructed easily and require low maintenance. Areas having high

evaporation rates may involve an evaporation pond that is low in cost. They are successfully utilised as

a disposal method in countries like Middle East with dry and warm weather. Evaporation ponds do not

need chemicals to treat water and have a long lifespan. They usually require treatments before entering

the evaporation pond and they depend on the feed quality too. However, evaporation pond can also be

a disadvantage. They require large area of land and odour can cause a problem for nearby towns

(Condorchem envitech 2012).

An example is in Murray-Darling Basin of Australia, there are approximately 190 evaporation ponds

with a total area of approximately 15,000 hectares and a total capacity of 113,000ML. O’reilly (2009)

12
found that the annual brine disposal is about 210,000ML/yr. Soil salinity had an adverse effect in the

town of Wickepin in the Wheatbelt. Since the salinity of groundwater was increasing, the Department

of Conservation and Land Management (2009) has decided to make a salinity management plan. In the

salinity management plan, bores are installed under the bed to reduce the amount of salt level. Water is

pumped and DCLM reported that approximately 300,000m3 per year of saline groundwater is removed.

The rejected saline groundwater is then discharged into the evaporation pond (Department of

Conservation and Land Management 2003) for further treatment through solar radiance.

Figure 8 Evaporation pond (Department of Conservation and Land Management 2003)

Various technologies have been developed to enhance the evaporation from evaporation pond. The most

widely studied and used of these is WAIV It is an alternative solution for rejected brine management

and liquid waste minimisation. WAIV uses natural energy sources such as wind to enhance evaporation

rate of brine resulting in lower operation and maintenance costs (Murray and McMinn 2011). However,

WAIV is still being developed. Land required is reduced in comparison to evaporation pond to enhance

evaporation rates (Murray and McMinn 2011).

13
3.0 Methodology

Evaporation is a form of vaporisation that changes from a liquid phase to a gas phase. Net evaporation

can be calculated by multiplying evaporation rate by the surface area as shown in the equation,

E = ER * SA Equation 1

where E is the net evaporation in m3, ER is evaporation in m and SA is the surface area in m2 (Fakir

and Toerien 2009). The net evaporation can be increased by increasing the evaporation rate or the

surface area.

3.1 Site selection

Site investigation plays an important role before designing an evaporation pond. It consists of an

engineering field survey, soil and geology analysis and groundwater study. The investigation gathers

physical data including the site description, catchment description, geology, and climate and drainage

data for the construction of a pond.

For this project, the water treatment is carried out in the township of Bakers Hill. Bakers Hill township

is situated 70km East Perth on the Great Eastern Highway (Addison 2001). According to the Australian

Bureau of Statistics, the district has a population of 270 inhabitants and this region is mostly occupied

with farmers. Bakers Hill is in the Chitty catchment, drained by Clackline Brook (Addison 2001). The

catchment has an area of 3500ha from Bakers Hill to Clackline. Clackline is a locality in Wheatbelt

near Baker Hill. Figure 14 illustrates the map of the site location.

The government has implemented various methods to monitor groundwater. One common option is the

installation of piezometer. Piezometer is an instrument that is placed in boreholes to measure the

pressure or the depth of groundwater. Firstly, drilling is done to place the piezometer in the ground and

a constant pumping test is run for 24 hours. This method does not only monitor the increase or decrease

in groundwater level but can also determine salinity risk of the water. Groundwater is the principal

source of water in the region.

14
 Figure 9 Location of Bakers Hill townsite (WAPHA 2018)

The area near to Bakers Hill has groundwater salinity issues as Bakers Hill. The salinity of groundwater

level is approximately 3000-7000 mg/L TDS. Bakers Hill townsite covers partly granitoid bedrock

including that the regolith consists of residual clay and some laterite (Addison 2001). Residual clay is

formed from weathering of granite and doleritic bedrock (Addison 2001). The type of soil determines

the permeability of the soil profile. Permeability is the capability of water to flow through the soil (SESL

Australia 2015). Permeameter is an instrument to measure soil permeability.

There are two methods to test for permeability of the soil, the constant head test method and the falling

head test (Reddy 2004). These experiments are conducted in the laboratory. The following equation can

be used to find out permeability for constant head test,

𝐐𝐐𝐐𝐐
𝐊𝐊 𝐓𝐓= Equation 2
𝐀𝐀𝐀𝐀𝐀𝐀

where K T is the coefficient of permeability (cm/s), L is the length of specimen (cm), t is the time (s), Q

is the volume of discharge (cm3), A is the cross sectional area of specimen (cm2) and h is the hydraulic

head difference (m).

Constant head flow method is when water flows through a column under constant pressure (Geotechdata

2010). There will be a change in the head drop, h and therefore, the permeability of the soil can be

calculated using the above equation knowing all the parameters, column length, sample cross sectional

area, constant pressure, volume of water flow and time internal as illustrates in Figure 10.

15
 Figure 10 The constant Head Test (NPTEL 2011)

The constant head flow test is suitable for coarse-grained soils (NPTEL 2011).

The other method is the falling head test. The water from standpipe flows through the specimen and the

total head h does not stay constant throughout the experiment. The time difference from flowing upper

to lower level is recorded. The total head changes with different time interval. The permeability can be

calculated using the equation,

𝐚𝐚𝐚𝐚 𝐡𝐡𝟏𝟏
𝐊𝐊 = 𝐀𝐀𝐀𝐀
𝐥𝐥𝐥𝐥 Equation 3
𝐡𝐡𝟐𝟐

where A is a cross sectional area of soil, a is the cross sectional area of the standpipe, t is the time

interval and other parameters like the heights and length are presented in Figure 11 (Powell 2016). This

test is recommended for fine-grained soils (NPTEL 2011).

Figure 11 Falling Head Test (NPTEL 2011)

16
Different soils have different values of K T .

Table 2 Permeability Table (NPTEL 2009)

Soil K T (cm/s) Degree of permeability

-1
Gravel K T >-10 Very high
Sandy, gravel, clean sand, fine sand 10-3< K T <10-1 High to medium
Sand, dirty sand, silty sand 10-5< K T <10-3 Low
Silt, silty clay 10-7< K T <10-5 Very low
Clay K T <10-7 Virtually impermeable

The soil at Bakers Hill has very low permeability meaning it tends to leak causing the brine to flow

directly to groundwater. The climate at Bakers Hill is moderate experiencing rainfall during winter

months. The mean annual rainfall is approximately 605mm according to Bureau of Meteorology.

3.2 Overall Salt concentration

The plant discharge volume could be reduced by minimising the brine. The product of salt rejection is

increased to 98.5% by reducing brine stream according to design specifications. The overall salt

concentration determines the amount of salt in the feed using the formula below:

𝐂𝐂 𝟏𝟏
CF = 𝐂𝐂𝐜𝐜 or CF = [𝟏𝟏 − 𝐑𝐑 𝐰𝐰 (𝟏𝟏 − 𝐑𝐑 𝐬𝐬 )] Equation 4
𝐟𝐟 𝟏𝟏−𝐑𝐑 𝐰𝐰

where C c is the retentate concentration which is the part of the feed that is unable to pass through the

membrane and C f is the feed concentration (Glater and Cohen 2003). The second equation is another

way to measure the salt rejection where R s is the fractional salt rejection and R w is the fractional product

water recovery.

𝐩𝐩 𝐂𝐂
R s can be calculated by R s = 1- 𝐂𝐂 . C p and C f are permeate and feed concentrations respectively and
𝐟𝐟

𝐐𝐐𝐩𝐩
Rw = 𝐐𝐐𝐟𝐟
is used to measure fractional product water recovery (Glater and Cohen 2003). All System

recovery is examined regularly to make sure that the membranes of the technologies are operating

properly. The percentage recovery is the ratio of permeate flow to feed flow,

17
 𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏𝐏 𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟
% 𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑𝐑 = *100 (Water Treatment Guide 2007). The higher the percentage rate, the
𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅𝐅 𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟

less concentrate is the product from the system.

Membrane

Feed Retentate

Permeate

Figure 12 Schematic diagram when feed enters a system

Design parameters that can affect the performance of the membrane in a reverse osmosis system are:

• Feed water salinity

RO systems may undergo a lot of fluctuation on the feedwater during operation due to the level of

salinity in feedwater. This may affect the efficiency of the membrane. Moreover, feed pressure as well

as permeate water salinity can disturb the system. When feed salinity increases, both feed pressure and

permeate salinity increase. However, permeate salinity has a greater rate of increase than the rate

increase in feed pressure. The recovery ratio is reduced when the salinity of feedwater is high and

scaling may occur. Scaling is the deposition of particles on the membrane causing it to block the

feedwater flow. A higher energy is used to force the water through the membrane and the lifespan of

the membrane decreases. Therefore, backwash needs to be done regularly (Lenntech 2015).

Figure 13 Feed water salinity vs. Product water salinity graph (Lenntech 2015)

18
From the graph, you can notice that when the salinity of feedwater increases, the product water salinity

increases as well. The efficiency will therefore reduce.

• Feed pressure

Feed pressure can be adjusted to prevent fouling and, this will compensate for fluctuation of feedwater,

salinity and, temperature. RO equipped with a high-pressure pump is needed to regulate the feed

pressure.

Figure 14 Pressure vs. Permeate flux graph

Before use, the permeate flux is higher when pressure is high and permeate flux starts to decrease after

the water is treated.

• Permeate recovery ratio

Permeate salinity and feed pressures are the main factors to affect recovery ratio.

The average feed salinity is calculated using feed salinity and average concentration factor (ACF).
𝟏𝟏
(𝟏𝟏−𝐑𝐑)
𝐀𝐀𝐀𝐀𝐀𝐀 = 𝐥𝐥𝐥𝐥 Equation 5
𝐑𝐑

where R is the recovery ratio. Recovery is influenced economically because RO system is very costly

(Puretec 2012).

19
 Figure 15 Feed pressure vs. % Recovery graph (Puretec 2012)

Percentage recovery is amount of treated water that is recovered from feedwater. The water that is

recovered is called permeate water or product water. Higher percentage recovery indicates that less

water is wasted which saves more permeates water. Very high percentage recovery can lead to fouling

and scaling (Puretec 2012).

• Membrane fouling

The membrane performance is affected by membrane fouling. Membrane fouling process is the

deposition of inorganic and organic material that blocks water from passing the membrane. The origin

of the fouling process must be identified to manage the membrane fouling by amending pre-treatment

process or operating conditions. Removal of foulant deposits from the membrane surface is done by

chemical cleaning. However, it also depends on the how long foulant deposits were present

(Hydraunautics 2001).

3.3 Sizing of evaporation pond

3.3.1 Pond depth

The evaporation pond should have a suitable depth for water storage, brine disposal, freeboard for

precipitation and wave action. Pond depth should be ranged within 0.02m to 0.5m (Hauck and JDA

Consultant Hydrologists 2004). If the pond depth is within that, evaporation rate will decrease. Shallow

evaporation pond tends to dry or crack easily and it is not durable for concentrate disposal due to an

20
increase in evaporation rate. When pond depth decreases, the evaporation tends to have greater area and

therefore, greater surface leads to higher disposal cost. Deeper pond are most cost effective than shallow

evaporation ponds. It is notice that when the pond depth is increased from 0.1m to 2.5m, evaporation

rate can be reduced by 4% and the most beneficial aspect is that construction cost will be reduced too.

More salts are hence accumulated at the bottom of the pond (Voutchkov 2011) . An ideal evaporation

pond must be able to dispose brine under all conditions (Mushtaque, et al. 2000). Freeboard can be

determined by the rainfall intensity. We have to make sure that the depth of the evaporation pond

exceeds the water stored in the pond. During winter, the pond has a tendency to store reject water.

Therefore, the minimum depth required to store the volume of water is calculated using the formula,

d min = 𝑬𝑬𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂𝒂 𝒇𝒇𝟐𝟐 Equation 6

where d min is the minimum depth in m, E ave is the average evaporation rate in m/d and f 2 is a factor that

incorporates the effect of the length of the winter.

The depth of the basin is referenced from the top of the embankment of 2.2m with life of 50years. 0.5m

freeboard is included in the depth due to wind and rainfall. Freeboard depends on the monthly mean

rainfall of the site and wind velocity in the pond area. The area is directly proportional to the volume of

the reject water and inversely proportional to the evaporation rate. Pond depth has some effect on

evaporation. Shallow ponds have faster evaporation rates than deep ponds (Voutchkov 2011). However,

deep ponds are more effective in enhancing the evaporation rate (Mushtaque, et al. 2000).

There are different ways to enhance evaporation rates from concentrate disposal ponds including spray

evaporation, pond aeration and use of dye from enhanced evaporation. Spray evaporation is mechanical

spray evaporators that enhance evaporation rate by 20%. It scatters the concentrate over the pond

surface in form of fine mist. This process consumes high amount of energy and depending on the

location of the evaporation pond, it may not be as expensive. Evaporation rates depend significantly on

weather conditions such as ambient temperatures, relative humidity and wind speed (Resource West

2018). At low wind velocities, the fine mist can drift away from the evaporation pond and therefore, a

decline in evaporation rate will occur (Bureau of reclamation 2012).

21
 Figure 16 Spray Evaporator (Resource west 2018)

Pond aeration is another method to enhance evaporation rate (Fakir and Toerien 2009). This is done by

increasing the contact surface between the air and concentrate (Hauck and JDA Consultant Hydrologists

2004). Aeration process is a technique that produces air-bubbles. Air bubbles may increase evaporation

in two ways. Firstly, evaporation is a process when water changes from liquid to gas or vapour (U.S

Department of the Interior 2016). When air bubbles break up at the surface of the pond, humid air is

removed from the surface making the rate of evaporation to increase. Secondly, when air is introduced

into the water, bubbles are formed causing water vapour to diffuse. This water vapour contributes in an

increase in loss of water. Pond aeration is an effective way in reducing evaporation (Helfer, Lemckert

and Zhang 2012). It acts as a water circulating system that draws the brine from the bottom and mixes

it to the water on top of the surface and this can leads to an increase of approximately 30% of

evaporation rate. However, pond aeration requires high maintenance as it depends on motors to function

(Hill 2013). It is not effective in deep water and water treatment occurs only on the surface of water.

During cold weather, water at the surface freezes as it is exposed to the ambient air. Motors fail to

operate to this condition (Hill 2013).

22
 Figure 17 Pond aeration (Safe rain 2012)

The use of dye can also enhance evaporation. It is found out that when 2mg/L of Naphtol is added on

top of the basin, the evaporation rate is increased. For example, an area of 500m2 will increase the

evaporation by 13%. However, this technique is very costly especially for large pond (Hauck and JDA

Consultant Hydrologists 2004).

3.3.2 Pond area

An evaporation pond’s purpose is to transfer brine into the pond to water vapour in the atmosphere and

the size of the pond is managed by the rate at which the pond transfers water into it. Brine has a total

dissolved solids concentration of approximately 20 000mg/L and 35 000mg/L. When the salts dissolved

in water, the saturation vapour pressure is lowered due to a decrease in evaporation rate. Sizing of pond

required the determination of both designed surface area and designed depth. The surface area relies

primarily on the evaporation rate using the local climate conditions. The standard evaporation rate is

typically represented in m/year and this is said that 1m/year signifies 27.4m3/day.ha. The open pond of

the evaporation pond is calculated using the following formula,

𝐀𝐀 𝐕𝐕𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫 𝐟𝐟𝟏𝟏 Equation 7

𝐨𝐨𝐨𝐨𝐨𝐨𝐨𝐨=
𝐄𝐄

where A open is the open surface area of evaporation pond (m2),

V reject is the volume of reject water (m3/d), E is the evaporation rate (m/d) and f 1 is a safety factor (Glater

and Cohen 2003). During winter, the reject water is stored into the evaporation pond. Freeboard also

23
plays an important role in the design of an evaporation basin and it is defined as the depth above the

normal reject water surface (Mickley, et al. 1993). Rainfall and evaporation must be considered to avoid

spillage of reject water.

𝐅𝐅𝐁𝐁 = �𝐂𝐂 𝐲𝐲 Equation 8

is a simpler formula to calculate freeboard in which F B is the freeboard in feet, y is the design depth in

feet and C is a coefficient (1.5) (Thandaveswara 2008).

It can be considered to calculate freeboard and it does not require wind velocity. The table below shows

the freeboard recommended for different discharge.

Table 3 Estimation of freeboard through discharge (Thandaveswara 2008).

Q (m3/s) Freeboard F B (m)

< 0.75 0.45

0.75 - 1.5 0.60

1.5 - 85.0 0.75

>85 0.90

The area of the pond depends also on annual brine inflow, groundwater salinity and Potential Net

Evaporative Loss. The Potential Net Evaporative Loss is calculated by subtracting the annual pan

evaporation and the mean annual rainfall. The area basin (ha) for a 100ML/year annual inflow can be

determined based on the curves below. The curves have different groundwater salinity level.

24
 Figure 18 Potential Net Evaporative Loss vs. Basin area (ha) for 100ML/year inflow (Hauck and JDA Consultant

Hydrologists 2004)

After obtaining the area of basin (ha) for a 100ML/year annual inflow, the area of required basin is

calculated using A b = A 100 x Q i /100 assuming negligible leakage.

3.4 Measurement of evaporation

Evaporation can be measured using different techniques but the most common one is the standard

evaporation pan, which is also called the Class A Pan. Pond evaporation can be calculated by

multiplying pan evaporation (E pan ) and pan coefficient (K pan ). A small pond has a pan coefficient of 0.7

(Kean 2011). Some equation includes salinity coefficient because salinity affects evaporation rate.

Evaporation rate tends to decrease due to the presence of salts in the brine. When the water is

evaporated, there will be salts remaining in the pond making it to be very concentrated (INEEL 2001).

Class A Pan is a cylindrical with a diameter of 1.21m and a depth of 0.254 m (MEA 2011). It has a wire

mesh to prevent the access of birds and animals to the pan.

25
 Figure 19 A diagram of Class A Pan (Hyquest solutions 2018)

Measurements can be done manually or automatically. User needs to take measurements and refill the

pan at a regular time every day for the manual pan whereas the automatic pan refills automatically by

using software or recordings can be sent and saved to a PC (MEA 2011). Along with the measurement

of evaporation, meteorological data such as wind velocity, humidity, temperatures and precipitation are

taken into account (The Constructor Civil Engineering Home 2017). The pan is first set up in the field

and filled with a known volume of water. The level of water is recorded. After the water has been

evaporated, the level of the remaining water is measured. The evaporation is determined by using the

formula above. E pan is calculated by the amount of evaporation per time (Eijkelkamp Agrisearch

Equipment 2009). The amount of evaporation is the difference between the two recorded water depths

(Eijkelkamp Agrisearch Equipment 2009). For class A evaporation pan, K pan can vary between 0.35

and 0.85 but the most efficient one is approximately 0.70 (Kean 2011). Pan coefficient usually depends

on the pan used, the area where it is used and the climate. When there is high humidity and low wind

speed, high K pan should be used and when humidity is low and wind speed is high, low K pan should be

used (Eijkelkamp Agrisearch Equipment 2009).

26
Table 4 Specifications to measure evaporation rate automatically (MEA 2011)

Specification for Class A Evaporation Pan

Measurement Up to 60mm of evaporation/day

Accuracy ±0.01mm

Inputs Depth, Temperature, sensors connection

Storage 152 days

Power supply 10W solar panel

Water balance is another way to balance all the inputs and outputs of the system and to determine

evaporation rate (lanfax labs 2008). The evaporation pond is designed from water budgets obtained

from monthly data. The water balance can be expressed from the equation below (INEEL 2001),

∆ Evaporation Pond Storage

= direct precipitation falling on pond + process water inputs + leachate inputs – evaporation output

Equation 9

3.5 Factors affecting evaporation rate

3.5.1 Sizing

Evaporation rate is the main key factor that influences the design of evaporation ponds and the

evaporation rate can be calculated using a proper sizing of a basin. An evaporation pond removes water

when brine is disposed to the pond and transfers water vapour into the atmosphere. When the rejected

brine is disposed into the evaporation pond, the volume of water is reduced and it becomes more

concentrated due to the evaporation process. It is said that the larger the surface area of the basin, the

greater the rate of evaporation. However, a smaller pond is more easily manageable in bad weather and

less maintenance is required. Therefore, to reduce the maintenance cost, local people should be trained

and need to be aware about the technology.

27
3.5.2 Salinity

Evaporation pond is the best way to manage waste for brine production at a water treatment plant. The

rate of evaporation depends on the size of the basin and it is said that salinity has an adverse impact on

the rate of evaporation. Salinity factor is an indication when there is a decrease in evaporation rate. It is

recommended that the salinity factor is approximately 70% (Rusydi 2018). Evaporation rate decreases

exponentially with increasing salinity. Higher salinity concentrate needs a smaller volume of pond and

it is less costly to evaporate. Evaporation rate of saline solution is calculated by multiplying the rate of

evaporation of water by the salinity factor.

𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄𝐄 𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫 𝐨𝐨𝐨𝐨 𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬 𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬 = 𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫𝐫 𝐨𝐨𝐨𝐨 𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞𝐞 𝐨𝐨𝐨𝐨 𝐰𝐰𝐰𝐰𝐰𝐰𝐰𝐰𝐰𝐰 ∗ 𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬𝐬 𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟𝐟

Equation 10

Figure 20 Salinity factor vs. footprint area graph (Fakir and Toerien 2009)

Figure 20 shows a decline in salinity factor with an increasing surface area and making the pond

footprint to increase exponentially with a reduction in evaporation rate. The following equation is used

to determine the evaporation factor:

𝐅𝐅 = 𝟏𝟏. 𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎 − 𝟎𝟎. 𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝐞𝐞𝟎𝟎.𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎𝟎 Equation 11

where S is the salinity level (mg/L) (Fakir and Toerien 2009).

3.5.3 Climatic effects

Climatic conditions such as humidity, temperature, solar irradiation intensity, wind and rainfall are

another aspect that affects evaporation. The pond requires enough energy for evaporation process to

occur. When there is a rise in humidity, the rate of evaporation decreases because saturation level is

28
reached faster. Wind speed and duration are a significant impact on the evaporation rate windier region

is suitable for evaporation pond. The evaporation pond is effective when temperature and solar radiation

are very high especially when it is located on the dry equatorial regions of the world for brine disposal.

This is because the water molecules are heated to a required temperature for vaporisation. Solar

radiation provides heat to enable evaporation. The actual design pond evaporation rate and

evapotranspiration potential can be calculated as shown below:

Actual design pond evaporation rate = Annual evaporation rate – Actual annual rainfall rate

Evapotranspiration potential = standard annual evaporation rate – Annual rainfall Equation12

The type of brine being disposed in the basin has also an effect on evaporation rate. The greater the total

dissolved solids, the lower the evaporation rate.

29
4.0 Results and Discussion

4.1 Results

A user-friendly spreadsheet is developed for designing an evaporation pond for local people and farmers

in Wheatbelt. Bakers Hill township is the site location for this project. The mean monthly rainfall at

Bakers Hill is recorded from the BOM and Figure 21 demonstrates the amount of rainfall measured in

each month (Australian Government Bureau of Meterology 2018). During summer, there is less rain

compared during winter season. June and July are the two months that have obtained more rainfall and

November until January are mostly dry period. The annual rainfall at Bakers Hill is approximately 589.4

mm. It is estimated by adding the rainfall data in each month. The number of rain days was about 120

in 2017. However, due to climate change, rainfall is declining every year (Australian Government

Bureau of Meteorology 2018).

Figure 21 Annual Rainfall (Australian Government Bureau of Meterology 2018)

The Class A pan evaporation rate data is gained in a technical report from the Department of Agriculture

and Food at Baker Hill (Luke, Burke and O'Brien 1987). The Bureau of Meteorology considers only

Class A pan with bird guard records. The system has a wire mesh to prevent the access of birds and

animals to the pan. However, it reduces the evaporation by 7% (Luke, Burke and O'Brien 1987). Class

A pan evaporation rate depends mainly on the site location and solar radiation. Next, evapotranspiration

30
data at the site is given from the Bureau of Meteorology website. Firstly, the location of the site must

be selected and data including rainfall, evapotranspiration and solar radiation are obtained from the

website. The annual evapotranspiration is about 1732.4mm. Figure 22 illustrates the evapotranspiration

for each month. Evapotranspiration being a vital component of water cycle is the transfer of water from

land to the atmosphere by evaporation process (Natural Resources and Mines 2005). From the

evapotranspiration graph, it can be seen that the trend is opposite to the rainfall graph. At the beginning

of the year, evaporation rate is very high because the solar radiation intensity is higher during summer

compared to during winter. Evapotranspiration is lowest in the month of July and highest in January.

Figure 22 Annual Evapotranspiration

In the Farmlands On-Farm Water Supply project, different technologies are used to treat saline

groundwater. These technologies are RO/NF, phytodesalination and solar distillation. Treated water

and brine are the two by-products after treating saline groundwater. The sum of the brine produced from

all these technologies is actually the brine inflow in the evaporation pond.

The Potential Net Evaporative losses are obtained by deducting the Class A pan evaporation rate by the

mean rainfall.

Potential Net Evaporative loss = Class A pan evaporation rate – Mean rainfall Equation 13

31
For the month of January,

Potential Net Evaporative loss = 366mm – 20.8mm

Potential Net Evaporative loss = 345mm

The months of June until August show negative values because rainfall records are greater than

evaporation rate. Evaporation rate is lower due to less sunlight in winter. At that location, the

groundwater salinity must be found out before calculating the evaporation rate of the saline solutions.

This is determined by multiplying the Class A pan evaporation rate and the salinity factor.

Evaporation rate of the saline solutions = Class A pan evaporation rate x salinity factor (0.7)

Equation 14

For the month of January,

Evaporation rate of the saline solutions = 366mm x 0.7

Evaporation rate of the saline solutions = 256mm

The salinity factor as mentioned earlier is an indication of the reduction in evaporation rate and it is

recommended that the salinity factor is approximately 70% due to the site location. This will specify

the amount of water being evaporated in saline solutions and it varies depending on the saline

concentration of groundwater. The actual design pond evaporation rate is obtained the same way as the

Potential Net Evaporative Loss, which subtracts the Class A pan evaporation rates data to the mean

rainfall records.

Actual design pond evaporation rate = Potential Net Evaporative loss Equation 15

For the month of January,

Actual design pond evaporation rate = 345mm

Later, the pond evaporation was calculated by multiplying Class A pan evaporation rates with K pan

coefficient.

32
Pond evaporation = Class A pan evaporation rate x K pan Equation 16

For the month of January,

Pond evaporation = 366mm x 0.7

Pond evaporation = 256mm

A small pond usually has pan coefficient of 0.7 based on research. Pond evaporation has the same trend

as evapotranspiration data.

To determine the evaporation pond size, firstly, the pond depth is calculated using

d min = E ave f 2 Equation 17

where d min is the minimum depth, E ave is the calculated average pond evaporation and f 2 is the losses

from length that is assumed to be one. Therefore, the designed minimum depth is 0.24m. From literature

review, the suitable pond depth is approximately 0.45m (Mickley, et al. 1993). The percentage error is

about 47%. Pond depth varies with increasing or decreasing pond evaporation. Embankment, spillway

and pond height are not designed parameters. They are obtained from literature reviews for a proper

designed evaporation pond and users do not have to change the values of these parameters. Freeboard

is then determined by using

F B = √(C y) Equation 18

where C is a coefficient that is assumed to be 1.5 and y the design depth. Knowing the design depth, F B

is about 0.6m. The lifespan of the pond varies with embankment height. From literature review, a pond

with an embankment height of 2.2m will have a designed life of 50years. It is very efficient but it has

to be maintained all the time. Evaporation pond is a technique to treat brine produced through

evaporation process. Before designing a pond, the salinity of the water must be taken into consideration.

Normally, the salinity of groundwater is ranged within 3000 to 7000mg/L. The salinity at Bakers Hill

is considered 7000mg /L. From figure 18, there are three curves and all the curves have different salinity

level. A trendline is passed through each of the curve and the equation of the trendline is displayed as

shown below.

33
 Salinity 5,000mg/L Salinity 10,000mg/L
Basin area (ha) for 100ML/year
25 25
23

Basin area (ha) for 100ML/year

23
21 21
19 19
17 17
inflow

15 y = -0.0056x + 22.652 15 y = -0.0088x + 30.546

inflow
13 13
11 11
9 9
7 7
5 5
1200 1700 2200 1200 1700 2200
Potental Net Evaporative Loss (mm/year)
Potental Net Evaporative Loss (mm/year)

Salinity 50,000mg/L
100ML/year inflow

25
Basin area (ha) for

20
y = -0.0104x + 34.944
15
10
5
1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 2200 2400 2600
Potental Net Evaporative Loss (mm/year)

Figure 23 Graphs at different salinity

The Potential Net Evaporative is calculated as shown above and its value is about 1616mm/year. From

the equations below, the basin area (ha) for 100ML/year inflow is calculated.

For salinity level of 5000mg/L,

y = -0.0056x + 22.652 Equation 19

y = (-0.0056*1616) + 22.652

y = 13.6 ha

Table 5 illustrates the equations of trendline at different salinity level and from that equations, basin

area (ha) for 100ML/year inflow is obtained.

34
Table 5 The calculated basin area for 100ML/year at Potential Net Evaporative Loss of 1616mm/year

Salinity (mg/L) Equation of trendline Basin area (ha) for 100ML/year inflow

5000 y= -0.0056x + 22.652 13.6

10,000 y= -0.0088x + 30.546 16.3

50,000 y= -0.0104x + 34.944 18.1

However, the equations are based only at salinity level 5000mg/L, 10,000mg/L and 50,000mg/L. Since

the salinity level of groundwater is assumed 7000mg/L, interpolation is done to find out the basin area

(ha) for 100ML/year inflow at Potential Net Evaporative loss of 1616mm/year.

For salinity level of 7000mg/L,

(5000, 13.6) (7000, y) (10000, 16.3)

The interpolation equation is

(𝐲𝐲 − 𝐲𝐲 )
y = y 1 + (x – x 1 ) (𝐱𝐱𝟐𝟐 − 𝐱𝐱𝟏𝟏 ) Equation 20
𝟐𝟐 𝟏𝟏

(16.3− 13.6)
y = 13.6 + (7000-5000)
(10000−5000)

y = 14.7ha

It shows that at Potential net Evaporative loss = 1616mm/year, the basin area (ha) for 100ML/year

inflow is approximately 14.7 ha. The area of the required basin is calculated using the formula, A b =A 100

𝐐𝐐 𝐢𝐢
x 𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏 from the literature review where A 100 is the basin area (ha) for 100ML/year inflow and Q i is the

annual design inflow which is the annual brine inflow of evaporation pond. The brine is produced from

all the treatment technologies like RO/NF, solar distillation and phytodesalination and then disposed in

the evaporation pond. The annual brine inflow is about 10.48ML.

𝐐𝐐
A b =A 100 x 𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝟏𝐢𝐢 Equation 21

10.48
=14.7 x
100

35
=1.54ha

~ 15 000m2

The area of the basin is approximately 15,000 m2 and from the area, the volume of the basin can be

obtained. The pond volume is calculated by the formula below.

Pond volume = Area of required basin x pond height Equation 22

The pond height is gained from literature review and it is suitable for a designed evaporation pond.

Pond volume = 15 000m2 x 1.5m

Pond volume ~ 23 000 m3

A spreadsheet is developed and all the data from the literature reviews are placed into it. The designed

parameters are calculated in the Excel sheet. This spreadsheet is mainly constructed for farmers to help

designing an evaporation pond so that they are aware of the size of the basin. A user manual is written

for farmers to follow the steps on how to use the designed spreadsheet.

36
 USER MANUAL FOR A DESIGN SPREADSHEET MODEL

When designing an evaporation pond, the location of the site must be taken into

consideration so that they can find rainfall, evapotranspiration and solar radiation data.

The Bureau of Meteorology website is opened in a new browser and WA is chosen from

the map of Australia found in the front page. Under past weather, the user must select on

data and graphs. A new screen is shown and the location of the site is searched to obtain

monthly rainfall data. The data is from 1964 to 2018. The user is allowed to choose any

year from the data and placed it in the row of mean rainfall in the database sheet. Class A

pan evaporation is based on literature review at a particular site. Evapotranspiration is

searched on the BOM website. Recent evapotranspiration is chosen from the website and

one of the states is selected. A list of places is given and from each place,

evapotranspiration and solar radiation data can be found. Evapotranspiration and solar

radiation data are placed in the database sheet. The annual brine inflow is the input of

evaporation pond in each month and users must add all the brine produced from the

treatment technologies. Later, the records are put in the annual brine inflow row. Salinity

factor and pan coefficient can be changed but they are not necessary. From the annual

brine inflow, the area of the required basin can be automatically calculated using the

spreadsheet.

37
4.2 Discussion

The spreadsheet is a simple way to design an evaporation pond and it can be used for any conditions.

The main parameters that will make the spreadsheet sensitive are:

• Annual mean rainfall

• Potential Net Evaporative Loss

• Annual brine inflow

• Pond evaporation

• Salinity level

The location of the site depends on proper sizing of the evaporation pond. Evaporation pond are mainly

utilised in regions that are far from the sea where brine produced can be disposed. In areas close to the

coast, the rejected brine is normally dumped into the ocean or sometimes used in agriculture (Mushtaque

Ahmed 2000). Ocean disposal is considered simpler than inland disposal. It is said that the treatment of

saline groundwater is more effective in arid countries such as Saudi Arabia due to high solar radiation

intensity. When less rainfall is collected, evaporation loss increases due to sunlight. When the mean

rainfall is greater than Class A pan evaporation, there is insignificant evaporation loss. The calculated

Potential Net Evaporative loss becomes negative that means the site is situated in a dry place where

there is less rainfall. The curves in Figure 18 are exponential decay therefore, when evaporation loss is

lower, Figure 18 demonstrates that the basin area for 100ML/year inflow is higher for all the three

curves at different salinity level. Larger basin is required to dispose the rejected brine. Brine inflow is

another factor that can affect the area of the evaporation pond. A larger basin needs to be designed for

greater brine inflow. The average pond evaporation influences the pond depth of the evaporation pond.

When the average pond evaporation has high value, there is an increase in pond depth. In the formula,

d min = E ave f 2 , f 2 being the losses is assumed to be one and the pan coefficient is 0.7. The pan coefficient

may not affect the pond depth because the value is suitable for a proper designed evaporation pond

obtained from literature reviews. The user can change the pan coefficient in the spreadsheet but they do

not have to. When there is a decline in the salinity of groundwater, the area of basin for 100ML/year

inflow decreases and therefore, the area of the basin reduce too. More water has to evaporate when the

38
salinity of groundwater is low and salts remained at the bottom of the basin (State Water Resources

Control Board 2017). For lower salinity, a small evaporation pond is required. The evaporation process

makes the effluent more concentrated and reduces the volume of water.

Two spreadsheets were found from internet resoures to compare the results that was obtained. The first

spreadsheet is a bit different from my design model. In that spreadsheet, the evaporation per year and

the volume of the pond are calculated. They have designed the pond by inputting the diameter of the

pond and the pond depth. The slope of the pond remains constant and is assumed to be 0.5. When the

pond diameter and the pond depth vary, the sizes of the pond are obtained from the spreadsheet.

Therefore, the volume of the basin is determined with the designed parameters. The evaporation per

year is also calculated by multiplying the average evaporation with the surface area of the pond. The

spreadsheet tells the volume of water that the pond can evaporate and the pond capacity of brine it can

hold. Table 6 illustrates an example of a designed evaporation pond. The first four parameters that can

be changed are in blue. By changing them, a proper size of an evaporation pond will be obtained.

Table 6 An example of a designed spreadsheet for an evaporation pond

Parameters in ft/in in m
Pond diameter (m) 100 30.5
Pond depth (m) 20 6.10
Slope 1 1
Average evaporation per year (m) 39 0.991

Volume (m3) 799079 3025

Evaporation by year average (m3) 189910 719
Top radius (m) 50 15.24
Bottom radius (m) 30 9.14
Surface area (m2) 7854 730
Volume (m3) 106814 3025
Area of basin (m2) 496

My model spreadsheet is different compared the first spreadsheet that I found online. Pond depth was

calculated using formula and there were parameters such as embankment and pond height were

suggested from literature. From this information including salinity of rejected brine, the area of the

required basin is later achieved. However, as shown in table 6, pond diameter, depth, slope and the

average evaporation must be assumed to get the area and volume of the basin.

39
The second spreadsheet is based mainly on seepage loss and evaporation loss at a particular site.

Seepage is a slow discharge of water thorough porous soil. In the spreadsheet, calculations are done to

determine the seepage loss of an evaporation pond. The soil at the site and the pond depth are

considered. Afterwards, the surface area of the pond will be looked at. The stability of the water inside

the basin is inversely proportional to the seepage meaning that when seepage has a higher value

therefore, the stability is low (Shailesh 2012). Seepage is dependent on soil texture and seepage is more

when water is infiltrated into the soil at different soil structure. Water loss can be affected by various

factors such as soil type, permeability, depth of the pond and climate (Agri LIFE EXTENSION 2012).

Evaporation

Figure 24 Seepage loss and Evaporation loss (FAO 2011)

Evaporation loss is another parameter that they look at in the second spreadsheet. The monthly

evaporation rate was recorded and the evaporation loss was calculated by multiplying the evaporation

rate and the surface area of the pond. The pond depth was estimated and next, the surface of the area

and the pond capacity are calculated using pond depth. From estimated parameters, seepage loss and

evaporation loss are gained.

The spreadsheets from the internet are different from my designed model spreadsheet. Mine was mainly

designed for farmers. The main parameters are not assumed but they are calculated using formula from

literature. From literature, it says that when there is a rise in evaporation rate, the volume of brine

solution reduces making the pond smaller. Small evaporation pond has low cost and therefore, low in

maintenance. With my designed model, when evaporation loss is increased, the volume of brine solution

is reduced and therefore, the area of the required basin decreases.

40
Table 7 Comparing with the designed spreadsheet and the ones from online resources

Design model Online spreadsheet 1 Online spreadsheet 2

spreadsheet
Purpose Sizing a designed Obtaining area of basin Obtaining seepage loss
evaporation pond and evaporation loss
Data -Bureau of Meteorology -Calculating volume of -Measuring evaporation
for rainfall and pond rate
evapotranspiration data - Recording pond area
User friendly Especially for local People who has People who has
people and farmers knowledge about the knowledge about the
topic topics
Assumptions -Site location -Pond diameter -Soil Texture
-Class A pan evaporation -Pod depth -Pond depth
-Annual brine inflow -Slope
-Salinity factor -Average evaporation
-Pan coefficient per year

41
5.0 Conclusion

The main objective of the project is to develop a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet helping local people and

farmers design an evaporation pond. An evaporation pond is a shallow lined earthen basin for rejected

brine disposal in inland region. If the site is closed to the coast, the brine produced will therefore be

dumped into the ocean. Rejected brine is the waste by-product from water treatment systems. Different

parameters including rainfall, evapotranspiration and solar radiation data collected from the BOM are

considered. The Potential Net Evaporative Loss, the salinity of groundwater and the annual brine inflow

are used to calculate the pond depth and area of required basin. Farmland Alternative Water Supply

Project is launched by Water Corporation to find alternative water resources such as groundwater,

rainwater and surface water. This is because GAWS is a very expensive water supply and it can reduce

the dependency of scheme water too. Bursting of pipes that occur frequently and the salinity issue at

the region are also the reason why Water Corporation has launched the project. Therefore, to overcome

salinity issue, an evaporation pond needs to be constructed to manage rejected brine. The treatment

technologies that have been used in the project are RO/NF, solar distillation and phytodesalination to

treat saline groundwater. To model the spreadsheet, the pond depth was calculated by using the formula

from the literature. The salinity of the groundwater at the site is measured so that the area of the required

basin is calculated. All the calculations were made in the spreadsheet. The barchart of each rainfall and

evapotranspiration at a specific site were plotted to see the trend monthly. The results were compared

to the data obtained from literature and from the two examples of a model spreadsheet found from the

internet. The area of required basin increases with decreasing evaporation loss and increasing salinity.

42
6.0 Recommendations

It is recommended to use deeper evaporation pond in the future for disposal of rejected brine. Shallow

pond tends to dry due to an increase in evaporation rate and crack easily. Moreover, it is durable for

rejected brine disposal. Deep evaporation pond is more cost effective compared to shallow pond. It also

increases evaporation rate making it less dry. When pond depth is within the range 0.1m to 2.5m, there

is a decline in 4% evaporation rate. Therefore, this causes a reduction in construction cost. In the

designed model spreadsheet, in the months of June to August, it is noticed that the Potential Evaporative

Loss has negative values. It signifies that the mean rainfall is greater than the Class A Pan evaporation.

If the pond is deep, the value for the Potential Evaporative Loss will be always positive even during

winter period. Brine solution will take longer time to evaporate the water and therefore, the Class A Pan

evaporation will always be greater than the mean rainfall. With increasing depth of the basin, freeboard

will increase as well which represents the height above the waterline and it prevents overflowing of

water.

Spray evaporators is suggested to enhance evaporation rate. It scatters the concentrate over the pond

surface in form of fine mist. Water temperature is increased leading to a faster evaporation process

(Farnham, et al. 2015). Therefore, a smaller area of land is required to construct a small evaporation

pond.

Another recommendation is using Wind Aided Intensified Evaporation (WAIV) instead of evaporation

pond. It is an alternative solution for rejected brine management and liquid waste minimisation. WAIV

uses natural energy sources such as wind to enhance evaporation rate of brine resulting in lower

operation and maintenance costs. However, WAIV is still being developed.

Evaporation pond has a higher footprint, higher costs but a longer lifespan compared to WAIV (Murray

and McMinn 2011). Moreover, land required is reduced in comparison to evaporation pond due to

enhance evaporation rates.

43
References
Addison, Damien. 2001. Groundwater study of the Bakers Hill townsite. 1 August.

https://researchlibrary.agric.wa.gov.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=https://www.google.com.au/

httpsredir=1&article=1188&context=rmtr.

Agri LIFE EXTENSION. 2012. Measuring seepage losses from canal using the ponding test method.

01

September. https://aglifesciences.tamu.edu/baen/wp-content/uploads/sites/24/2017/01/B-6218

Measuring-Seepage-Losses-from-Canals-Using-the-Ponding-Test-Method.pdf.

American's Authority in Membrane Treatment. 2007. “Nanofiltration and Reverse Osmosis

(NF/RO).”

3 February. https://www.amtaorg.com/wp-content/uploads/3_NF_RO.pdf.

Australian Bureau of Statistics. 2010. Salinity. 15 September.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/1370.0~2010~Chapter~Salinity%

0(6.2.4.4).

Australian Government Bureau of Meteorology. 2018. Greater Perth in 2017: Rain and temperatures

near average. 9 January.

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/current/annual/wa/archive/2017.perth.shtml.

Australian Government Bureau of Meterology. 2018. Climate statistics for Australian locations.

http://www.bom.gov.au/climate/averages/tables/cw_010244.shtml.

Bouguecha, Salah Al Tahar. 2015. “Solar-Driven Integrated Ro/Nf For Water.” 27 August.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Salah_Bouguecha2/publication/281280529_Solar

Driven_Integrated_RoNf_For_Water_Desalination/links/55dee79908ae45e825d3b126/Solar-Driven

Integrated-Ro-Nf-For-Water-Desalination.pdf.

Bureau of reclamation. 2012. “Zero Liquid Discharge.” Technical.

Business Dictionary. 2017. Capital cost. http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/capital

cost.html.

Condorchem envitech. 2012. Zero liquid discharge by means of evaporation ponds. March.

http://blog-en.condorchem.com/zero-liquid-discharge-by-means-of-evaporation

ponds/#.WgaGDVuCzIV.

44
Department of Conservation and Land Management. 2003. “Solar salt field Toolibin Lake.”

Feasibility Study.

Department of Finance. 2011. Definition of 'Best Value for money'. https://www.finance

ni.gov.uk/articles/definition-best-value-money.

Eijkelkamp Agrisearch Equipment. 2009. “Evaporation Pan.”

Fakir, P Dama, and A Toerien. 2009. Evaporation rates on brine produced during membrane

treatment of mine water. 19 October. https://www.imwa.info/docs/imwa_2009/IMWA2009_Dama

Fakir.pdf.

FAO. 2011. ESTIMATES OF WATER REQUIREMENTS.

http://www.fao.org/fishery/static/FAO_Training/FAO_Training/General/x6705e/x6705e02.htm.

Farnham, Craig, Masaki Nakao, Masatoshi Nishioka, Minako Nabeshima, and Takeo Mizuno. 2015.

Effect of water temperature on evaporation of mist sprayed from a nozzle. http://www.heat

island.jp/web_journal/download/15A004.pdf.

Fumatech. 2017. Nanofiltration. https://www.fumatech.com/EN/Membrane

processes/Process%2Bdescription/Nanofiltration/index.html.

Geotechdata. 2010. Constant head permeability test. 4 April.

http://www.geotechdata.info/geotest/constant-head-permeability-test.html.

Glater, Julius, and Yoram Cohen. 2003. Brine disposal from land based membrane desalinaiton plats:

A critical review. 24 July. http://www.lesico-cleantech.com/pdf/brine_disposal_article_ucla.pdf.

Gugulothu, Ravi, Naga Sarada Somanchi, K.Vijaya Kumar Reddy, and Devender Gantha. 2015. “A

review of solar water distillation using sensible and latent heat.” June.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187852201500123X.

Hauck, Edward, and JDA Consultant Hydrologists. 2004. “Evaporation basin guidelines for disposal

of saline.” Research.

Helfer, Fernanda, Charles Lemckert, and Hong Zhang. 2012. “Influence of bubble plumes on

evaporation from non-stratified waters.” 22-23.

Hill, Patrick. 2013. Pros and Cons of Surface Aeration in Wastewater Lagoons. 21 May.

http://www.triplepointwater.com/pros-and-cons-of-surface-aeration-in-wastewater

lagoons/#.W2cVtVUzbIU.

45
Hoque, Shamia, Terry Alexander, and Gurian L Patrick. 2015. Innovative Technologies Increase

Evaporation Pond Efficiency. 04 September.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272540197_Innovative_Technologies_Increase_Evapora

ion_Pond_Efficiency.

Hydraunautics. 2001. Design Parameters Affecting Performance. 23 January.

http://www.membranes.com/docs/trc/desparam.pdf.

Hyquest solutions. 2018. Class A Evaporation Pan. https://www.hyquestsolutions.com/products

services/products-hardware/meteorology/class-a-evaporation-pan/.

INEEL. 2001. Evaporation pond sizing with water balance and make-up water calculations. 7 July.

https://ar.icp.doe.gov/images/pdf/200209/2002092700636GSJ.pdf.

Investopedia. 2007. Gantt Chart. http://www.investopedia.com/terms/g/gantt-chart.asp.

Kean. 2011. Evaporation Pan operating instructions.

http://www.kean.edu/~csmart/Hydrology/Lectures/Evaporation_pan.pdf.

lanfax labs. 2008. Water Balance for Land Application of Domestic Effluent.

http://www.lanfaxlabs.com.au/water_balance.htm.

Lenntech. 2015. Particles, scaling and biofouling. https://www.lenntech.com/particles-scaling

biofouling.htm.

Luke, GJ, KL Burke, and T M O'Brien. 1987. “Evaporation data for Western Australia.” Technical.

Manousaki, Eleni, and Nicolas Kalogerakis. 2010. “Halophytes Present New Opportunities in

Phytoremediation of Heavy Metals and Saline Soils.” 14 June.

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/ie100270x?src=recsys.

Materac, Milena, Anna Wyrwicka, and Elzbieta Sobiecka. 2015. Phytoremediation techniques in

wastewater treatment.

October.http://www.environmentalbiotechnology.pl/eb_dzialy/eb_online/2015/vol11_1/eb2015,1

(1)_ms249.pdf.

MEA. 2011. Evaporation Pan. http://mea.com.au/upload/Brochures/Weather/Evaporation_Pan.pdf.

Mickley, Mike, Robert Hamilton, Lana Gallegos, and Jeffrey Truesdall. 1993. Membrane Concentrate

Disposal. AWWA Research Foundation and American Water Works Association.

Murdoch University and Syrinx Environmental PTY Ltd. 2017. “Scoping Study for an On-FarmWater

46
Treatment.” Technical.

Murdoch University. 2016. “Farmland On-Farm Alternative Water Supply Scoping Study: Stage 1,

Work Package 2.” Technical.

Murray, Brendan, and David McMinn. 2011. WAIV TECHNOLOGY - ALTERNATIVE SOLUTION

FOR BRINE MANAGEMENT. http://www.awa.asn.au/documents/140%20BMurray.pdf.

Mushtaque Ahmed, Walid H. Shayya, David Hoey, Arun Mahendran, Richard Morris, Juma Al

Handaly. 2000. “Use of evaporation ponds for brine disposal in desalinaiton plants.” ELSEVIER 155

168.

Mushtaque, Ahmed, Shayya Walid, David Hoey, Arun Mahendran, Richard Morris, and Juma Al

Handaly. 2000. “Use of evaporation ponds for brine disposal in desalination plants.”

Natural Resources and Mines. 2005. “Australian synthetic daily Class A pan evaporation.” Technical.

NPTEL. 2011. Constant Head Flow. http://nptel.ac.in/courses/105103097/29.

—. 2011. Determination of Coefficient in the Laboratory.

http://nptel.ac.in/courses/105104132/Module2/lecture6.pdf.

—. 2009. Permeability of different soils. 31 December. https://nptel.ac.in/courses/105103097/27.

Oram, Brian. 2014. Water Testing Total Dissolved Solids Drinking Water Quality. https://www.water

research.net/index.php/water-treatment/tools/total-dissolved-solids.

Powell, Mervyn. 2016. Permeability. http://slideplayer.com/slide/6104388/.

PR News Now. 2017. Reverse Osmosis. 27 April. http://www.prnewsnow.com/the-true-usage-of

reverse-osmosis-systems/.

Puretec. 2012. SCALING. https://puretecwater.com/reverse-osmosis/what-is-reverse

osmosis#recovery.

Q.Wu, E.W. Christen and D. Enever. 1999. A Water Balance Model for Farms with Subsurface Pipe

Drainage and On-Farm Evaporation Basin. Technical, CSIRO Land and Water.

Rasheed, Abdulla. 2017. “Farmlands On-Farm Alternative Water Supply.” Project.

Reddy, Prof. Krishna. 2004. “Permeability (Hydraulic conductivity) Test Constant Head Method.”

Laboratory.

Resource west. 2018. Landshark Wastewater Evaporator. https://www.resourcewest.net/landshark

wastewater-evaporator/.

47
Resource West. 2018. Landshark Wastewater Evaporator. https://www.resourcewest.net/landshark

wastewater-evaporator/.

Rusydi, Anna F. 2018. “Correlation between conductivity and total dissolved solid in various type of

water.” review.

Safe Drinking Water Foundation. 2011. “Ultrafiltration, Nanofiltration and Reverse osmosis.”Reverse

osmosis and Nanofiltration. https://www.safewater.org/fact-sheets

1/2017/1/23/ultrafiltrationnanoandro .

Safe rain. 2012. Water pond aeration system. http://www.saferain.com/en/floating

fountains/water-pond-aeration-system.html.

Schmack, M, G Ho, and M Anda. 2014. “Saline water desalination with vapour capture device.”

SESL Australia. 2015. Soil Permeability And How To Measure It. http://sesl.com.au/blog/soil

permeability-and-how-to-measure-it/.

Shailesh. 2012. 7 September. http://greencleanguide.com/water-losses-through-seepage/.

State Water Resources Control Board. 2017. “Salinity.” Groundwater information sheet. November.

https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/gama/docs/coc_salinity.pdf.

Stevens, Kenny. 2012. “Renewable Energy: Solar Water Distillers.” 14 February.

Syrinx Environmental PTY Ltd, Murdoch university and Water Corporation. 2017. “Farmlands

Alternative Water Supply Study: Stage 2 Scoping study for on-farm and community water.”

Technical.

Texas Tech University. 2015. Geotechnical Engineering Laboratory. 16 April.

https://www.slideshare.net/hronaldo10/class-5-permeability-test-geotechnical-engineering.

Thandaveswara, B S. 2008. Design of Canals.

http://www.nptel.ac.in/courses/105106114/pdfs/Unit21/21_1.pdf.

The Constructor Civil Engineering Home. 2017. What is Evaporation and How it Occurs?

https://theconstructor.org/water-resources/evaporation-and-its-measurement/4575/.

Tiwari, Gopal Nath, and Rahul Dev. 2011. Solar Distillation. 16 June.

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-1104-4_6.

U.S Department of the Interior. 2016. The Water Cycle: Evaporation. 02 December.

https://water.usgs.gov/edu/watercycleevaporation.html.

48
USDI. 1969. “Research and Development Progress Report.” Washington, DC.

Voutchkov, Nikolay. 2011. Desalination Plant Concrentrate Management. Bangkok.

WAPHA. 2018. Wheatbelt. https://www.wapha.org.au/primary-health-networks/country-

wa/wheatbelt/.

Water Corporation. 2017. “Farmlands Alternative Water Supply Study: Stage 2 Scoping study for on-

farm and community water.” Technical.

—. 2017. Goldfields and Agricultural. https://www.watercorporation.com.au/water-supply/our-

regional-water-supply/goldfields-and-agricultural.

Water Treatment Guide. 2007. RO System Maintenance & Operation: System Recovery.

http://www.watertreatmentguide.com/system_recovery.htm.

Webb, Naomi. 2016. The Importance of Setting Objectives and Sticking to Them. 6 September.

https://techspective.net/2016/09/06/importance-of-setting-objectives/.

49
 Appendix A: Gantt chart
Table A1 Gantt chart for the main project conducted by Water Corporation

Jul- Aug- Sep- Oct- Nov- Dec- Jan- Feb- Mar- Apr- May- Jun-
Schedule/Task 17 17 17 17 17 17 18 18 18 18 18 18
Thesis
Project Plan
Literature Review
Trial Setup
Procurement/logistics
Site preparation (levelling,
compaction etc.)
Installation of RO units & blending
system
Construction/installation of
phytoremediation units
Installation of solar distillers at town
wells
Comm & SH Engagement
Engagement Plan
Trial Monitoring
System monitoring, sampling, data
entry & analysis, trouble shooting

Appendix B: Rainfall Data from BOM

Figure B1 Rainfall Data. Step 1, BOM rainfall in Australia entry page; Step 2 Western Australia Weather Data; Step

3, Climate Data online at a specific area and Step 4, Rainfall Data at the site.

50
Appendix C: Evapotranspiration Data from BOM

Figure C1 Evapotranspiration Data. Step 1, BOM Evapotranspiration Data in Australia entry page; Step 2,

Evapotranspiration Data at a specific area; Step3, Western Australia Weather Evapotranspiration Data and Step 4,

Western Australia Daily Evapotranspiration Data.

Appendix D: Spreadsheet Model

51