GREY:WSCEE - Post by User
Comment by
goldminegirlon May 27, 2011 12:38am
276 Views
Post# 18632686
RE: RE: RE: RE: NEWS...Performance Results...
RE: RE: RE: RE: NEWS...Performance Results...Bigfoot a cursory examination would indicate that there are significant diferences in relation to:
Throughput versus footprint
Energy in for the throughput
Simplicity of design and operation
Ability to accommodate a range of feed types including heavy sand contamination
Adaptabilty to multiple applications from oil well process water (volume) to oil sands waste (particulate contamination) Same system - different uses - like a Swiss army knife.
H2Omaxx would appear to be ahead in those catagories.
If I were running a waste water treatment facility that had to deal with whatever came through the door I would want that adaptability.
I think the ppm oil number is a bit of a moving target and is dependent on many factors like the starting contamination number, the type of hydrocarbon contamination, throughput rate and other contaminants to deal with. The higher numbers I have heard are for single pass at high throughput and they are still doing better than any regulatory requirment for the application. Slower throughput, recycled throughput, two stage rougher to secondary polisher would all change the number to the better if it were required to meet the regulatory approvals for whatever application was being addressed.
From the newsletter and from recent press releases it would appear that the company is working to create complete systems around the technolgy so it can be adapted to a very wide range of regulatory levels.
Need less than 10 ppm? We can do that. Need less than 1 ppm? We can do that too. We just add a complimentary process to ours. That capability is going to open doors for this company and is one of the reasons I am looking forward to the results of their testing.