nanotechnology & waste water -...
TRANSCRIPT
Crystal Clear
Technologies
Nanotechnology & Waste Water
Contact:
Lisa M. Farmen
503-544-2330
Crystal Clear
Technologies
Crystal Clear
Technologies
Crystal Clear
Technologies
Crystal Clear’s Mission
To develop and commercialize
water purification technology at
a price the majority of the
world’s population can afford.
9/16/2010
Crystal Clear
Technologies
9/16/2010
CCT Technology Roadmap
• Vision: low cost purification
• Technology: Nano-Technology/ Clean Technology Green Technology
• Capabilities: - Effective for all classes of contaminants- Passive technology
First step:
• Inorganics - Ligand nano-coating technology for low cost metal adsorption & recycling.
Crystal Clear
Technologies
Company Information
• Laboratories & Operations Portland, Oregon
• University of Oregon R&D Partnership
• Oregon Nano and Micro-technology Institute
(ONAMI) Relationship
• Specialty Chemical Manufacturer Relationship
9/16/2010
Crystal Clear
Technologies
CCT Partners
• NSF
• University of Oregon
• ONAMI
• California Clean Tech Open Winner (WATER)
• Stanford Global World Forum
Crystal Clear
Technologies
9/16/2010
Crystal Clear
Technologies
CCT Seed Funding
• NSF SBIR
P1 (R&D) (2005) $100KP2 (Commercialization) $500K U. Oregon
P2-R Grant (modeling) $200K U. Kansas
P2-S (ASU-WQC) $ 25K Arizona St.
• California Clean Tech Open Winner (WATER) $100K
• Siemens WT $ 25K
• ONAMI GAP Funding Winner $225K
• Winner Stanford Global World Forum
Crystal Clear
Technologies
9/16/2010
Crystal Clear
Technologies
9/16/2010
Water Treatment Overview
Public Water System
Contaminant: Lead (Pb)
Contaminants: Metals – Arsenic, Mercury, Lead, Uranium, Organics - MTBE, perchlorate
CCT
Metal Removal
CCT Contaminant
Removal Solutions
Outdoor
CCT Purifier
Crystal Clear
Technologies
9/16/2010
The Problem
• Increasing water use
• Increasing contaminants
• Infrastructure investment
• Consumer concern
• Increasing regulation
MicroorganismsDisinfection Byproduct Disinfectant
Inorganic Chemicals
Organic Chemicals
Radionuclides
• Cryptosporidium
• Giardia
• Coliforms
• Turbidity
• Viruses
•Bromate
•Chlorite
•HAA5
•TTHMs
•Chloramines
•Chlorine
•Chlorine
dioxide
•Antimony
•Arsenic
•Asbestos
•Barium
•Beryllium
•Cadmium
•Chromium
•Copper
•Cyanide
•Fluoride
•Lead
•Mercury
•Perchlorate
•Nitrate
•Selenium
•Thallium
•Acrylamide
•Alachlor
•Atrazine
•Benzene
•Benzoapyrene
•Carbofuran
•Carbon
tetrachloride
•PCB’s
•Picloram
•Styrene
•Tolulene
•Toxaphene
•Vinyl
chloride
•Xylenes
•more
•Alpha particles
•Beta particles
•Radium
•Radon
•Uranium
EPA’s Contaminants of Concern
New EPA Regulations:
Lead: 0 ppb (update in 2006)
Copper: 1.3 ppm (update in 2006)
Arsenic: 50ppb 10ppb (2006)
Radon: coming in 2007
Perchlorate: coming soon
Crystal Clear
Technologies
9/16/2010
Water Problems in the U.S.
Composite map of 16 water quality problems facing the U.S.
Heavy Metals, except mercury
Mining pollution
Mercury contamination
Crystal Clear
Technologies
Global Arsenic Problem
EPA imposed a new drinking
water standard on Jan. 1, 2006,
from 50 ppb to 10 ppb As.
Most arsenic contamination of
drinking water is natural, due to
local geology and mining.
9/16/2010
Crystal Clear
Technologies
Why Arsenic?
Two Motivations:
• Lack of specific chelators optimized for
As(III) coordination geometry
• Lack of supramolecular main-group
chemistry
OH
HS
SH
2,3-dimercaptopropanolBAL Lewisite antidote
SH
SH
O
HO
O
HO
2,3-dimercaptosuccinic acid
SO3H
HS
HS
2,3-dimercapto-1-sulfonic acid1950s secret Soviet Lewisite antidote
Widespread sources
• Found in association with Cu, Pb, Au Ore
mining and refining; semiconductors
• Pesticides, agents of war, pharmaceuticals,
CCA-treated lumber, minerals
Health Effects
• 1-5 mg/day weeks-months—peripheral
neuropathy, anemia
• >400ppb 3-7 years—
hyperpigmentation, hyperkeratosis,
leading to lesions and cancer
• >10ppb 30-40 years—skin cancer
AsCl
ClCl
Lewisite
Lane
County
9/16/2010
Crystal Clear
Technologies
Treatment Product Solutions
Inorganic Chemicals
• Antimony
• Arsenic
• Asbestos
• Barium
• Beryllium
• Cadmium
• Chromium
• Cobalt• Copper
• Cyanide
• Fluoride
• Lead
• Mercury
• Nitrate
• Selenium
• Thallium
Method Issues
Distillation • High Disposal Costs
• Energy intensive
Ion Exchange • High Cost
• Easily fouled due to high TDS
Flocculation • Can’t precipitate a chelated
metal
Reverse Osmosis • Energy intensive
• High operating cost
Adsorbents • Conventional Adsorbents
• NanotechnologyCrystal Clear
Technologies
Cost
Source: “Water Sector Primer”, Goldman Sachs Global Investment Research, June 15, 2005, p.36, CCT estimates
9/16/2010
Crystal Clear
Technologies
Water Flow
Regeneration Flow
Crystal Clear
NMXTM Technology
SePbAs
HgCu
• Low cost substrate
• NMXTM nano-coating (patent pending)
• Remove targeted contaminants
• Regeneration capability
• No waste stream
U
Pb
As
Se
Hg
Cu
As
Cu
H
H O
H
H O
H
H O
H
H O
9/16/2010
Crystal Clear
Technologies
Crystal Clear’s NMXTM
Technology
Result
Low cost, high capacity, application
specific filter media
Low Cost Substrate
SePbAs
HgCuU
PbAs
Se HgCu
As
Cu
• Low cost substrate
• NMXTM nano-coating (patent pending)
• Remove targeted contaminants
• Regeneration capability
• No waste stream
9/16/2010
Crystal Clear
Technologies
Metsorb
(TiO2)
CCT plus
Metsorb
(TiO2)
Dow
Adsorbsia
(TiO2)
CCT plus
Adsorbsia
(TiO2)
Purolite ArsenX
(anion
exchanger)
As Binding 4.78 8.82 5.87 15.75 1.70
Cd Binding 9.29 17.64 5.87 12.60 0.28
Se Binding 1.59 29.39 1.89 6.30 1.98
Hg Binding -- 3.82 0.21 4.10 0.18
Total
Binding
(mg/g)
15.66 59.67 13.84 38.75 4.14
Monofunctional Ligand Advantage
9/16/2010
Challenge Solution: 900 ppb As, 700 ppb Cd, 560 ppb Se, 28 ppb Hg
Binding reported in mg contaminant removed per g material used (mg/g)
Crystal Clear
Technologies
Loading of NMX™ with Pb(II) and As(III/V)
• NMX ™ media is rechargeableLead adsorption - 16%Arsenic adsorption - 10%Selenium (not graphed) 3.2% on the
first layer
• Passed TCLP (Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure)
6.9
100000
160000
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
pp
m
TiO2 TiO2-Pb TiO2-Pb-L-Pb
0
3500
7300
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
pp
m
TiO2 TiO2-As TiO2-As-L-As
Crystal Clear
Technologies
% Pb Adsorbed vs. # CCT bi-functional ligand
layerCumulative loading & % by layer
0%
1%
2%
3%
4%
5%
6%
7%
8%
9%
10%
11%
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
CCT # bi-functional ligand layer
Pb
Lo
ad
ing
-
Cu
mu
lati
ve %
,
g/g
0.0%
0.3%
0.5%
0.8%
1.0%
1.3%
1.5%
1.8%
2.0%
2.3%
2.5%
% P
b L
oad
ing
- b
y l
ayer
Cum %
% by layer
Crystal Clear
Technologies
9/16/2010
Crystal Clear
Technologies
9/16/2010
Why we care about lead
Source: “Low Level Environmental Lead Exposure and Children’s Intellectual Function”; Environmental Health Perspectives, 113, #7, July 2005.
The Impact of Lead on our children
Crystal Clear
Technologies
Biopolymer Performance Status
Berkeley Pit, MT % Removal, R
Metal Cadmium Cobalt Copper Iron Manganese Nickel Zinc Sulfate
ppm 2.1 2.0 128 635 238 1.2 622 22,200
Batch #
#47 2.0% 1.9% 99.9% 1.9% 2.5% 0.0% 2.6% 57.9%
#49 2.0% 1.9% 99.9% 1.6% 1.7% 2.5% 1.8% 50.5%
Cobalt Iron Selenium Sulfate
Beal Mtn, MT 0.64 0.94 0.091 1,440
#33 73% 1% 40.2%
Power Plant FGD
Metal Arsenic Cobalt Mercury Selenium Sulfate
ppm 0.212 0.111 --- 0.950 7,680
#56W 33.5% 19.7% --- 43.9% ---
#60AW 6.1% 7.2% --- 42.3% ---
In House
RSR Simulation Lead Selenium Sulfate
ppm 10.8 28.4 112,200
#49 90oC 98.1% 24.9% ---
Copper Lead Selenium Zinc Sulfate
ppm 0.75 1.76 4.93 0.79 2,530
#54W 74.0% 83.0% 49.1% 10.3% 0.0%
#56W 74.0% 93.0% 55.2% 7.6% 13.4%
R=1-Cf/Ci
9/16/2010
Crystal Clear
Technologies
CCT Customer Savings
Smelter-CCT Cost projections
Smelter - actual 2007 CCT- Proforma
Materials cost: Total Total
Total Materials cost: $175,496 $406,616
Operating costs: Total 65% GM
Total operating costs: $978,179 $489,090
Gallons treated (000) 49,974 49,974
Hazardous disposal $136,300tons to landfill: 1,704 tons to recycle: 2
Total Cost/1000 gal $25.81 $17.92
Overall cost: $1,289,975 $895,705
Potential Savings: per year at one site $394,270
Annual Revenue to CCT= $10,165,393
Smelter has 25 locations WW
9/16/2010
Crystal Clear
Technologies
9/16/2010
• One quarter of the earth’s population is without clean water and two-thirds are having a severe shortage.
• In 2002, 1.1 B people lacked access to improved water source which equates to 17% of the global population and nearly half live in Asia.
• The health consequences of contaminated water impact an estimated 4 B people or two-thirds of the global population resulting in over2.2 M deaths annually.
• In developing countries, over 4 M children contract diarrhea with 200 dying every hour due to poor hygiene, lack of sanitation and an inadequate supply of clean water.
• Long term consumption (20 yrs.) of arsenic contaminated water leads to arcenosis where 70 M are at risk in India, China, Vietnam, Pakistan, Nepal, Myanmar and Cambodia.
Global Water Facts
Crystal Clear
Technologies
9/16/2010
• In the U.S. 86% have concerns about the quality of tap water and 90% of those with children under 12 think their water is not safe.
» Water Quality Association
• $277 billion in investments in the nation’s water utilities are required over the next 20 years to ensure safe drinking water.
» The EPA in its Third Drinking Water Infrastructure Needs Survey and Assessment
• In 2001, the U.S. EPA estimated 1.8-3.5 million Americans get sick from contaminated water each year in the U.S.
• “Single-use” bottled water market was estimated at $22 billion in 2004, growing at 14% CAGR.
Water Facts - The need
Crystal Clear
Technologies
9/16/2010
• 260 M-lbs. of industrial pollutants discharged annually to surface water.
• MTBE in 500 public drinking water wells, 45,000 private wells in 49 states.
• 1.2 B-lbs. of pesticides applied to crops annually.
• Animal manure waste exceeded 1-trillion-lbs.
• Public treatment plants discharge billions of gallons of untreated sewage to surface water.
• 25 States had 39 municipal water treatment plants outbreaks where drinking water contaminant limits were exceeded.
• Perchlorate has entered the food chain from contaminated irrigation water and been found in women’s breast milk.
Water: A resource in Peril