Ion Exchange Water Softening - Environmental Impact Assessment
Introduction
About 60% of the UK has a water supply which is ‘hard’, that is contains relatively high levels of calcium and magnesium in the form of carbonates, resulting from rainwater leaching through limestone rock. The consequences of hard water are scaling of water heating equipment, white deposits and scum on sanitary ware, and poor lather from soaps and detergents, all resulting in additional energy use and costs.
The most effective way to overcome the effects of hard water is to soften using an ion exchange water softener. This equipment is based on a chamber containing a special resin through which the hard water passes. The resin absorbs the calcium and magnesium, replacing them with sodium which, combined with carbonate is much more soluble, and so does not produce deposits. Periodically, the resin bed is automatically regenerated by using a strong salt solution from a brine tank.
Whilst the use of ion exchange water softening systems does have an environmental
impact, this is more than outweighed by the benefits in energy savings and
reduced consumption of detergents and other chemicals.
Environmental Benefits
Whilst not a comprehensive list, some of the substantiated benefits of using softened water are listed below
Work published in France shows that a 1mm increase in scale thickness can reduce heating efficiency by an average of 6%, with the first 0.4mm showing a rate as high as 10%
Another study by New Mexico State University, showed that over 29% more energy was used by gas heaters run on hard water, and 21% more with electric heaters
The Association Français pour l’Etude des Eaux found some 20 years ago that soap and detergent use more than doubled in hard water. Since then detergent formulations have been adapted to take into account hard water, by the use of additives such as phosphates, yet still most brands indicate considerably different usage rates for hard and soft water. Both the additional detergent and the ‘softening’ additives increase the environmental burden of laundry and personal care activities
Because of its scaling effects on sanitaryware, anti scalants are often necessary in hard water areas. These tend to be acid based, so are both costly and have an environmental impact.
A study carried out in a Chicago YMCA laundry, found that softening the water supply increased the life of frequently washed household items such as sheets, pillow slips and bath towels increased their useful life by 20-40%
As yet, full life cycle analysis of water-based processes are very limited. However, a Swiss study on domestic clothes washing showed that ion exchange softening was environmentally better than either the use of unsoftened water, or captured rainwater.
Environmental Impact of softening
Softening equipment is manufactured from various materials, including common metals and plastics, which are recyclable. It should also be noted that the equipment has a long life, typically over 15 years, and requires minimal maintenance.
Salt (sodium chloride) is the only consumable product used in the process. High purity salts designed for the purpose are recommended. Salt is abundant in nature, in both geological deposits and the sea. It is relatively easy to extract and process, with little chemical use or impact on landscape. The principal environmental impact is in energy use in evaporation, which is minimised by the use of efficient evaporator systems
The regeneration cycle of the softening process discharges a quantity of sodium chloride into the drainage system, and sodium ions are added to the softened water. Studies on septic tanks and sewage systems have repeatedly shown that the sodium/salt burden has no deleterious effect. Sodium does not bio-accumulate which ensures that there are no long term environmental effects.
Modern equipment is designed to have a high salt efficiency, so effects on the overall chloride and sodium environmental burden is minimised
The regeneration and backwash cycles of the softener do use more water than standard consumption. However, modern demand-driven equipment keeps wastage to a minimum.
Note on Corrosion
Because naturally soft water has been associated with increased corrosion in
water supply systems, there has been concern that softened water might have
a negative impact on metal. However, tests carried out by the US Environmental
Protection Agency have clearly demonstrated that there is no significant
difference in corrosion performance between softened water and its source
water. Indeed there were indications that in some cases softened water
may be less corrosive.
References:
Le Grand Livre de L’eau
M A Bernardis, La Manufacture 1990
Softened water energy savings study – controlled experimental
testing program on household water heaters
Engineering Experiment Station, New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, New
Mexico, 1979
La dureté de l’eau intérêt économique
de l‘adoucissement collectif pour l‘usager.
Etude de synthèse de l’agence de l’eau Artois-Picardie
Association français pour l’étude des eaux 1981
Benefits of using soft vs hard water in laundering operations
R W Peters, C M Ladisch, Research report sponsored by Water Quality Association
(USA) October 1990
Life cycle assessment of rainwater use for domestic needs
V Bronchi, O Jolliet & P Crettaz
Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, Institute of soil and water management. Paper
given at 2nd Inter-Regional Conference on Environment-Water 99
Ion Exchange Softening: Effects on Metal Concentrations.”
TJ Sorg, MR Schock, and DA Lytle. Water Supply and Water Resources Division,
National Risk Management Research Laboratory, Office of Research and Development,
USEPA, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Journal AWWA, 91(8):85-97 1999
The Effect of sodium discharge from water softeners into the septic
fields of New Jersey
JCF Tedrow, Rutgers University 1997
Potential effects of water softener use on septic tanks soil absorption
on-site waste water systems
Corey, Tyler and Holotoo University of Wisconsin- Madison 197?
The effect of home water softener waste regeneration brines on individual
aerobic wastewater treatment plants
National Sanitation Foundation 197?