Advanced Water Treatment for the Power Generation Industry

SUMMARY

STUDY GOAL AND OBJECTIVES

This BCC, Inc. technical/marketing report provides an in-depth analysis ofthe U.S. market for advanced water treatment for the power generation industry.These methods include membrane filtration, ion exchange, electrodeionization,and emerging processes using ozone and ultraviolet light, coupled under theheading "novel technologies." The so-called "advanced"technologies are known as advanced for their improved effectiveness against arange of contaminants found in source water, their decreased production ofwaste, their nonhazardous properties, their diminished demand for chemicaladditives, and sometimes their lower energy requirements.

Whether physical,biological or chemical processes, water treatment ranges in sophistication fromancient sieving methods to state-of-the-art computer-controlled techniques.Conventional power plant water treatment is heavily dependent on mechanicalprocesses and chemical additives, methods hundreds of years old. The marketvalue for such treatment is estimated to be as large as $6 billion in 2003 andgrowing at an average annual rate of 4% over the next 5 years. High purity wateris pretreated first by clarification. Large particles settle out by gravity,while smaller suspended particles are treated in the clarifier bycoagulation/flocculation to produce a settleable solid. Water hardness also maybe removed in the clarifier using lime and soda ash. Mechanical deaerators areused where water contains dissolved gases such as carbon dioxide, ammonia orhydrogen sulfide. Treated water then is sent to ion exchange beds.

In additionto ion exchange resins, water treatment chemicals include a host of increasinglyregulated substances including the ubiquitous biocide chlorine, scale andcorrosion control additives including zinc and chromate, the toxic oxygenscavenger hydrazine, boiler cleaning solvents and dimineralizer regenerants.While these methods purify water effectively, governments and end users areseeking more environmentally friendly treatment.

This report will evaluate theinfluence of current and proposed regulations under the Clean Water and SafeDrinking Water Acts, rulings that are impacting the design and operation offossil fuel power plants. Under the Clean Water Act, the EPA recently proposedregulations to limit the volume of water used by power plants by requiring wetor dry closed-loop cooling systems. Drinking water regulations also could affecthow power plants dispose of certain waste products. In addition to environmentalconcerns, the lack of available fresh water is affecting the siting andpermitting of new power plants. Issues of demised U.S. water resources in termsof both water quantity and quality will be discussed alongside the advancedtreatments that permit water reuse. Barriers to the adoption of new technologywill be presented where their impact is noticeable.

With the exception of ionexchange, which has managed to remain "advanced" despite requiringcaustic chemicals, none of the traditional technologies will be evaluated inthis report except to make comparisons to advanced treatments. In addition toregulatory drivers, technical and market drivers are considered in appraisingthe current value of the technologies and in forecasting growth and trends. Theconclusions are illustrated with statistical information on markets,applications, industry structure, and dynamics along with technologicaldevelopments. The report is primarily a study of the U.S. market, but due to theinternational presence of many of the industry participants, global activitiesare included where appropriate.

REASONS FOR DOING THIS STUDY

This report is intended for those who require a thorough analysis of thepower plant water treatment industry that traces significant developments andforecasts important trends, quantifies the various market sectors, and profilescompanies active in those areas. Because of the fragmented nature of theindustry, it is difficult to find studies that gather extensive data fromdiverse resources and analyze it in the context of a comprehensive document.This report contains a unique collection of information and conclusions that isdifficult to find elsewhere.

CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE STUDY AND FOR WHOM

This comprehensive technical/marketing report aims to provide thoseinterested in investment, acquisition, or expansion into the market for advancedpower plant water treatment with specific, detailed information crucial tomaking educated decisions. Senior marketing personnel, venture capitalists,executive planners, research directors, government officials, and suppliers tothe membrane industry who want to discover and exploit current or projectedmarket niches should find this report of value. Readers who wish to understandhow regulations, market pressures, and technology interact in the arena alsowill find this study worthwhile.

SCOPE AND FORMAT

This report examines the market for four categories of water treatment:membrane filtration; ion exchange; deionization, which combines ion exchange andmembranes; and a few emerging novel methods such as ozone and ultraviolet light.5-year projections are provided for market activity and value. Industrystructure, technological trends, pricing considerations, R&D, governmentregulations, company profiles, and competitive technologies are included in thestudy.

METHODOLOGY

A comprehensive literature, patent, and Internet search was undertaken, andkey industry players were queried. News and current developments in the fieldare evaluated in BCC, Inc.'s monthly newsletters, Water Technology News andMembrane & Separation Technology News.

Growth rates were calculated basedon existing and proposed equipment sales during the forecast period. Consumablesused in the processes, replacement membranes, resins, etc., were also taken intoaccount. Values are given in U.S. dollars; forecasts are made in constant U.S.dollars, and growth rates are compounded. Calculations for system sales do notinclude design or engineering costs.

INFORMATION SOURCES

In addition to data from BCC, Inc.'s related monthly newsletters, otherinformation in this report was gleaned from many different sources. Figures onU.S. electricity production, capacity, new plants and user demand are based onstatistics from the Energy Information Administration. Department of Commercenumbers on water/wastewater expenditures are quoted in the section describinginternational markets. SEC filings, annual reports, patent literature, business,scientific and industry journals, government reports, census information,conference literature, patent documents, on-line resources were researched.Interviews with industry participants also were conducted.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

• STUDY GOAL AND OBJECTIVES
• REASONS FOR DOING THIS STUDY
• CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE STUDY AND FOR WHOM
• SCOPE AND FORMAT
• METHODOLOGY
• INFORMATION SOURCES
• ANALYSTS CREDENTIALS
• RELATED BCC, INC. WORK CREDENTIALS
• BCC, INC. ON-LINE SERVICES
  • INTERNET

SUMMARY

• Summary Table:
  SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR THE U.S. POWER PLANT WATER TREATMENT MARKET,THROUGH 2008 ($ MILLIONS)
• Summary Figure:
  SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR POWER PLANT WATER TREATMENT, 2001-2008 ($MILLIONS)

INDUSTRY OVERVIEW

• POWER PRODUCTION
• Table 1 U.S. ELECTRICITY GENERATION BY FUEL, 2002 (MILLION KWH)
• Figure 1 U.S. ELECTRICITY GENERATION BY FUEL, 2002 (%)
  • HOW FUEL AFFECTS POWER PLANT WATER NEEDS
• Table 2 WATER USE PER KWH OF ELECTRICITY (BY TYPE OF FUEL USED)
  • COAL
  • NUCLEAR
  • NATURAL GAS
  • OIL
  • BIOMASS
  • SOLAR
  • MARKET TRENDS IN THE POWER INDUSTRY
    • NEW CAPACITY, 1999 TO 2002
    • RETIRING CAPACITY TO 2025
    • NEW CAPACITY TO 2025
    • Coal
    • Nuclear
    • Natural Gas
    • Oil
    • Renewables
• Figure 2 ANTICIPATED CAPACITY ADDITION BY FUEL, 1970-2025 (BILLIONS OFKILOWATT-HOURS)
  • U.S. Capacity Additions
• Table 3 EXISTING CAPACITY AND PLANNED CAPACITY ADDITIONS AT U.S. ELECTRICUTILITIES BY FUEL, 2001-2025
• Table 4 EXISTING CAPACITY AND PLANNED CAPACITY ADDITIONS AT U.S.NONUTILITIES BY FUEL, 2000
  • PLANT CANCELLATIONS
  • WATER USE/CONSUMPTION IN ELECTRIC POWER PRODUCTION
  • POWER PLANT WATER WITHDRAWALS
• Figure 3 SOURCE, USE AND DISPOSITION OF FRESH WATER IN THE U.S.
• Table 5 WATER USED BY U.S. FOSSIL FUEL AND NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS, BY STATE,1990 (MGD)
• Table 5 (CONTINUED)
• Figure 4 WATER USED BY U.S. FOSSIL FUEL AND NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS, BYSTATE, 1990 (MGD)
  • WATER USE EFFICIENCY
• Figure 5 DECREASING WATER NEEDS OF THERMOELECTRIC POWER PLANTS, 1950-1990(GALLONS OF WATER USED TO PRODUCE 1 KILOWATT-HOUR)
  • WATER QUALITY
  • NEW GENERATING TECHNOLOGY
  • THE ENERGY-WATER INTERFACE
    • WATER REUSE
    • What Can Be Reused?
    • Combining Fresh and Used Water
    • DESIGNING POWER PLANTS TO OPTIMIZE WATER REUSE
    • Zero Liquid Discharge
    • High Desert Power Plant
    • Outsourcing Water Treatment
    • Newman Power Plant
    • Co-Locating Water/Power Plants
    • Tampa Bay Desalination Plant at Big Bend Power Station
    • Other Resource Sharing Options
    • Gregory Power Partners Plant
  • THE STEAM GENERATION PROCESS
• Figure 6 TYPICAL STEAM GENERATION PROCESS
  • THE NUCLEAR POWER GENERATION PROCESS
    • PRESSURIZED WATER REACTORS
• Figure 7 PRESSURIZED WATER REACTOR
  • BOILING WATER REACTOR
• Figure 8 BOILING WATER REACTOR
  • WHERE WATER TREATMENT IS NEEDED WITHIN A POWER PLANT
    • BOILER FEED
    • Boiler Impurities
• Table 6 BOILER WATER IMPURITIES
  • Boiler Water Contaminant Limits
• Table 7 RECOMMENDED BOILER WATER CONTAMINANT LIMITS (AMERICAN SOCIETY OFMECHANICAL ENGINEERS/AMERICAN BOILER MAKERS ASSOCIATION STANDARDS)
• Table 8 CHANGING STEAM PURITY REQUIREMENTS
  • Deoxygenation
  • BOILER BLOWDOWN
  • Reusing Boiler Blowdown
  • COOLING TOWER WATER
  • Cooling Water Contaminants
  • Legionella
  • Conventional Cooling Water Treatment
  • COOLING TOWER BLOWDOWN
  • Reuse Cooling Tower Blowdown
  • CONDENSATE POLISHING
  • EPRI Radial Flow Polisher
  • NUCLEAR PLANT WATER
  • Steam Generator Feedwater
  • Cooling Water
  • Liquid Radioactive Waste
  • ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF WASTEWATER DISCHARGES
  • REGULATORY DRIVERS
    • CLEAN WATER ACT
    • Section 303
    • Section 316(b)
    • SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
    • RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT
  • HISTORY OF THE INDUSTRY
• Table 9 HISTORY OF THE INDUSTRY

MEMBRANE FILTRATION

• MEMBRANE FILTRATION
• Table 10 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGY IN POWER PLANTWATER TREATMENT, THROUGH 2008 ($ MILLIONS)
• Figure 9 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR MEMBRANES USED IN POWER PLANT WATERTREATMENT, 2001-2008 ($ MILLIONS)
  • TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW
    • REJECTED CONTAMINANTS
    • MEMBRANE CONFIGURATIONS
    • FLUX
    • OTHER PROCESS PARAMETERS
    • MODES OF FILTRATION
    • MEMBRANE FOULING
    • FILTRATION PROCESSES
  • REVERSE OSMOSIS
    • RO MEMBRANES
    • RO SYSTEMS
    • INSTALLED RO SYSTEMS
• Table 11 INSTALLED RO SYSTEMS (2002)
• Table 11 (CONTINUED)
• Table 11 (CONTINUED)
• Table 11 (CONTINUED)
  • BENEFITS AND DRAWBACKS
  • TRENDS AND TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS
  • High Efficiency Reverse Osmosis
  • ELECTRODIALYSIS REVERSAL
    • BENEFITS AND DRAWBACKS
    • Advantages
    • Disadvantages
    • EDR MEMBRANES/SYSTEMS
  • MEMBRANES FOR PRETREATMENT
    • MICROFILTRATION
    • MF Membranes
    • MF Systems
    • Benefits and Drawbacks
    • Advantages
    • Disadvantages
    • ULTRAFILTRATION
    • UF Membranes
    • UF Systems
    • Advantages and Drawbacks
    • Advantages
    • Drawbacks
    • COST OF MF/UF PRETREATMENT
    • NANOFILTRATION
  • GAS TRANSFER MEMBRANES
  • MANUFACTURERS OF MEMBRANES AND SYSTEMS
• Table 12 MANUFACTURERS OF MEMBRANES AND MEMBRANE SYSTEMS FOR POWER PLANTWATER TREATMENT
• Table 13 U.S. MARKET SHARE FOR MANUFACTURERS OF MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGY USEDIN POWER PLANT WATER TREATMENT, 2003
• Figure 10 U.S. MARKET SHARE FOR MANUFACTURERS OF MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGY USEDIN POWER PLANT WATER TREATMENT, 2003 (%)

ION EXCHANGE

• ION EXCHANGE
  • ION EXCHANGE (CONTINUED)
• Table 14 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR ION EXCHANGE SYSTEMS USED IN POWERPLANT WATER TREATMENT. THROUGH 2008 ($ MILLIONS)
• Figure 11 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR ION EXCHANGE IN POWER PLANT WATERTREATMENT, 2001-2008 ($ MILLIONS)
  • TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW
    • ION EXCHANGE RESINS
    • Structure
    • Particle Size
    • Functionality
• Table 15 ION EXCHANGE RESIN FUNCTIONALITIES
  • Cation Resins
  • Strong Acid Cation Resins
  • Weak Acid Cation Resins
• Table 16 COMMON CATION RESINS
• Table 16 (CONTINUED)
  • Anion Resins
  • Strong Base Anion Resins
  • Weak Base Anion Resins
• Table 17 COMMON ANION RESINS
  • Mixed Bed Resins
• Table 18 COMMON MIXED BED RESINS
  • Nuclear Grade Resins
• Table 19 COMMON NUCLEAR GRADE RESINS
  • ION EXCHANGE EQUIPMENT
  • Packed Bed
  • Mixed Bed
  • Short Bed
  • BENEFITS AND DRAWBACKS
  • TRENDS AND TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS
  • Shallow Shell Resins
• Figure 12 PUROLITE SHALLOW SHELL RESINS
  • WHERE RESINS ARE USED IN POWER PLANT WATER TREATMENT
  • ION EXCHANGE VS. REVERSE OSMOSIS
    • BENEFITS AND DRAWBACKS
    • Advantages
    • Disadvantages
• Table 20 ION EXCHANGE RESIN MANUFACTURERS AND MARKET SHARE, 2003
• Figure 13 ION EXCHANGE RESIN MANUFACTURERS AND MARKET SHARE, 2003 (%)

• ELECTRODEIONIZATION
• Table 21 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR ELECTRODEIONIZATION IN POWER PLANTWATER TREATMENT, THROUGH 2008 ($ MILLIONS)
• Figure 14 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR ELECTRODEIONIZATION IN POWER PLANTWATER TREATMENT, 2001-2008 ($ MILLIONS)
  • TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW
    • THE EDI STACK
    • Cell Configuration
    • Benefits and Drawbacks
    • Advantages
    • EDI VS. MIXED BED IX
    • TRENDS AND TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS
  • MANUFACTURERS OF EDI MODULES AND SYSTEMS
• Table 22 MANUFACTURERS OF EDI MODULES AND SYSTEMS
• Table 23 MARKET SHARE FOR EDI TECHNOLOGY, 2003
• Figure 15 MARKET SHARE FOR EDI TECHNOLOGY, 2003 (%)

NOVEL TREATMENTS

• OVERVIEW
• Table 24 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR NOVEL PROCESSES USED IN POWER PLANTWATER TREATMENT, THROUGH 2008 ($ MILLIONS)
• Figure 16 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR NOVEL PROCESSES USE IN POWER PLANTWATER TREATMENT, 2001-2008 ($ MILLIONS)
  • OZONE TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW
    • MECHANISMS OF OZONE DISINFECTION
    • Other Contaminants Oxidized
    • Generating O3
    • Dispersing the Gas
    • Ozone with Hydrogen Peroxide
    • COOLING WATER TREATMENT WITH OZONE
    • CONTROLLING MACROFOULANTS
    • DRAWBACKS AND BENEFITS
    • Advantages
    • Disadvantages
    • MANUFACTURERS OF OZONE TECHNOLOGY
• Table 25 MANUFACTURERS OF OZONE SYSTEMS
• Table 26 MARKET SHARES FOR MANUFACTURERS OF OZONE TECHNOLOGY, 2003 (%)
• Figure 17 MARKET SHARES FOR MANUFACTURERS OF OZONE TECHNOLOGY, 2003 (%)
  • ULTRAVIOLET LIGHT TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW
    • UV LAMPS
    • REACTOR TYPES
• Figure 18 FLOW DIAGRAM OF ACTUAL MAKE-UP WATER SYSTEM SHOWING UV TREATMENTLOCATIONS
  • BENEFITS AND DRAWBACKS
  • Advantages
  • Disadvantages
  • UV MANUFACTURERS AND PRODUCTS
• Table 27 UV MANUFACTURERS AND PRODUCTS
• Table 28 MARKET SHARES FOR UV TREATMENT, 2003 (%)
• Figure 19 MARKET SHARES FOR UV TREATMENT, 2003 (%)
  • TRENDS AND TECHNICAL DEVELOPMENTS
  • Photocatalytic Water Purification
  • UV and Zebra Mussels

INDUSTRY STRUCTURE

• THE PLAYERS
  • THE PLAYERS (CONTINUED)
• CONTINUED CONSOLIDATION
  • THE URGE TO MERGE
  • Why Merge?
• Table 29 MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS IN THE WATER TREATMENT INDUSTRY (SINCE1996)
  • COMPANY PROFILES
    • AQUIONICS
    • BAYER/SYBRON CHEMICALS, INC.
    • CALGON CARBON CORP.
    • Sentinel
    • Rayox
    • CELGARD
    • DOW LIQUID SEPARATIONS
    • FilmTec
    • Dowex
    • ELECTROPURE, INC.
    • GE POWER SYSTEMS
    • GE Glegg Water Technologies
    • Osmonics, Inc./GE Specialty Materials
    • GRAVER WATER SYSTEMS
    • HYDRANAUTICS
    • RO Membrane Elements
    • HYDRAcap
    • NF Membrane Elements
    • IONICS
    • Multimembrane Systems
    • Triple Membrane Trailer
    • Power Contracts
    • INDECK
    • KOCH MEMBRANE SYSTEMS
    • LIGHTSTREAM TECHNOLOGIES
    • MITSUBISHI ELECTRIC POWER PRODUCTS, INC.
    • NEW LOGIC
    • OMEXELL, INC.
    • OZONIA
    • OZAT
    • PALL CORP.
    • PULSAR UV TECHNOLOGIES
    • PUROLITE CO.
    • RESINTECH
    • ROHM AND HAAS
    • SEVERN TRENT SERVICES
    • Severn Trent/UltraDynamics
    • UV Systems
    • SUEZ LYONNAISE DES EAUX
    • Ondeo Degrémont
    • Aquaray
    • TRISEP CORP.
    • TROJAN TECHNOLOGIES
    • UVLogic
    • USFILTER
    • High Desert Plant
    • WEDECO AG
    • Wedeco Ozone Technologies
    • Effizon Technology
    • Wedeco UV Technologies
    • Spektrotherm Lamps
    • ZENON ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
  • RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
    • NETL
    • EPRI
    • WEF/WERF
  • PATENT SURVEY
• Table 30 FIVE-YEAR PATENT SURVEY, MAY 1, 1998 - APRIL 1, 2003
• Table 30 (CONTINUED)
• Table 30 (CONTINUED)
• Table 30 (CONTINUED)
  • PATENTS BY TECHNOLOGY
• Table 31 PATENTS BY TECHNOLOGY TYPE, MAY 1998 TO APRIL 2003
• Figure 20 PATENTS BY TECHNOLOGY TYPE, MAY 1998 TO APRIL 2003 (%)
  • PATENTS BY COMPANY
• Table 32 PATENTS BY COMPANY, MAY 1998 - APRIL 2003
• Figure 21 PATENTS BY COMPANY, MAY 1998 TO APRIL 2003 (%)

INTERNATIONAL ASPECTS

• GLOBAL ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION
• Table 33 WORLD NET ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION BY REGION, 1990 - 2025 (BILLIONKILOWATT-HOURS)
  • PLANNED PLANT CONSTRUCTION
• Table 34 PLANNED GLOBAL POWER GENERATION PROJECTS (2002)
• Figure 22 GLOBAL POWER GENERATION PROJECTS, 2002 (%)
  • THE GLOBAL WATER INDUSTRY
  • MAJOR PLAYERS IN GLOBAL WATER TREATMENT
• Table 35 U.S. EXPORTS OF WATER TREATMENT EQUIPMENT ($)
  • CONSOLIDATION
  • OVERSEAS MARKETS FOR ADVANCED WATER TREATMENT
  • Europe
  • UK
  • Spain
  • Hungary
  • Poland
  • Turkey
  • Asia
• Table 36 NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN ASIA (OPERATING, IN PROGRESS, ANDPROPOSED, 2003)
  • Japan
  • India
  • Pakistan
  • Bangladesh
  • South Korea
  • China
  • Taiwan
  • Taiwan
  • Vietnam
  • Thailand
  • Indonesia
  • Philippines
  • Latin America
  • Mexico
  • Brazil
  • Australia
  • Australia (Continued)

APPENDIX

• MANUFACTURERS DIRECTORY
• Table 37 MANUFACTURERS DIRECTORY
• Table 37 (CONTINUED)
• Table 37 (CONTINUED)
• Table 37 (CONTINUED)
• Table 37 (CONTINUED)
• Table 37 (CONTINUED)
• Table 37 (CONTINUED)
• Table 37 (CONTINUED)
• Table 37 (CONTINUED)
• Table 37 (CONTINUED)
• Table 37 (CONTINUED)
• Table 37 (CONTINUED)
• Table 37 (CONTINUED)
  • ACRONYMS
  • NEW U.S. ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS (2002 TO 2003, EXCLUDINGWIND-POWERED UNITS)
• Table 38 NEW U.S. ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, JANUARY 2002
• Table 39 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, FEBRUARY 2002
• Table 40 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, MARCH 2002
• Table 41 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, APRIL 2002
• Table 42 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, MAY 2002
• Table 42 (CONTINUED)
• Table 43 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, JUNE 2002
• Table 43 (CONTINUED)
• Table 43 (CONTINUED)
• Table 44 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, JULY 2002
• Table 44 (CONTINUED)
• Table 44 (CONTINUED)
• Table 45 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, AUGUST 2002
• Table 45 (CONTINUED)
• Table 46 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, SEPTEMBER 2002
• Table 46 (CONTINUED)
• Table 47 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, OCTOBER 2002
• Table 47 (CONTINUED)
• Table 48 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, NOVEMBER 2002
• Table 49 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, DECEMBER 2002
• Table 49 (CONTINUED)
• Table 50 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, JANUARY 2003
• Table 51 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, FEBRUARY 2003
• Table 52 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, MARCH 2003
• Table 52 (CONTINUED)
• Table 53 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, APRIL 2003
• Table 54 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, MAY 2003
• Table 54 (CONTINUED)
• Table 55 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING FACILITIES, JUNE 2003
• Table 55 (CONTINUED)
• Table 55 (CONTINUED)
• Table 56 NEW INTERNATIONAL ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS,
• Table 56 (CONTINUED)

LIST OF TABLES

Summary Table:
SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR THE U.S. POWER PLANT WATER TREATMENT MARKET,THROUGH 2008 ($ MILLIONS)

Table 1 U.S. ELECTRICITY GENERATION BY FUEL, 2002 (MILLION KWH)

Table 2 WATER USE PER KWH OF ELECTRICITY (BY TYPE OF FUEL USED)

Table 3 EXISTING CAPACITY AND PLANNED CAPACITY ADDITIONS AT U.S. ELECTRICUTILITIES BY FUEL, 2001-2025

Table 4 EXISTING CAPACITY AND PLANNED CAPACITY ADDITIONS AT U.S.NONUTILITIES BY FUEL, 2000

Table 5 WATER USED BY U.S. FOSSIL FUEL AND NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS, BY STATE,1990 (MGD)

Table 6 BOILER WATER IMPURITIES

Table 7 RECOMMENDED BOILER WATER CONTAMINANT LIMITS (AMERICAN SOCIETY OFMECHANICAL ENGINEERS/AMERICAN BOILER MAKERS ASSOCIATION STANDARDS)

Table 8 CHANGING STEAM PURITY REQUIREMENTS

Table 9 HISTORY OF THE INDUSTRY

Table 10 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGY IN POWER PLANTWATER TREATMENT, THROUGH 2008 ($ MILLIONS)

Table 11 INSTALLED RO SYSTEMS (2002)

Table 12 MANUFACTURERS OF MEMBRANES AND MEMBRANE SYSTEMS FOR POWER PLANTWATER TREATMENT

Table 13 U.S. MARKET SHARE FOR MANUFACTURERS OF MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGY USEDIN POWER PLANT WATER TREATMENT, 2003

Table 14 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR ION EXCHANGE SYSTEMS USED IN POWERPLANT WATER TREATMENT. THROUGH 2008 ($ MILLIONS)

Table 15 ION EXCHANGE RESIN FUNCTIONALITIES

Table 16 COMMON CATION RESINS

Table 17 COMMON ANION RESINS

Table 18 COMMON MIXED BED RESINS

Table 19 COMMON NUCLEAR GRADE RESINS

Table 20 ION EXCHANGE RESIN MANUFACTURERS AND MARKET SHARE, 2003

Table 21 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR ELECTRODEIONIZATION IN POWER PLANTWATER TREATMENT, THROUGH 2008 ($ MILLIONS)

Table 22 MANUFACTURERS OF EDI MODULES AND SYSTEMS

Table 23 MARKET SHARE FOR EDI TECHNOLOGY, 2003

Table 24 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR NOVEL PROCESSES USED IN POWER PLANTWATER TREATMENT, THROUGH 2008 ($ MILLIONS)

Table 25 MANUFACTURERS OF OZONE SYSTEMS

Table 26 MARKET SHARES FOR MANUFACTURERS OF OZONE TECHNOLOGY, 2003 (%)

Table 27 UV MANUFACTURERS AND PRODUCTS

Table 28 MARKET SHARES FOR UV TREATMENT, 2003 (%)

Table 29 MERGERS AND ACQUISITIONS IN THE WATER TREATMENT INDUSTRY (SINCE1996)

Table 30 FIVE-YEAR PATENT SURVEY (MAY 1, 1998 - APRIL 1, 2003)

Table 31 PATENTS BY TECHNOLOGY TYPE, MAY 1998 TO APRIL 2003

Table 32 PATENTS BY COMPANY, MAY 1998 TO APRIL 2003

Table 33 WORLD NET ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION BY REGION, 1990 TO 2025(BILLION KILOWATT-HOURS)

Table 34 PLANNED GLOBAL POWER GENERATION PROJECTS (2002)

Table 35 U.S. EXPORTS OF WATER TREATMENT EQUIPMENT ($)

Table 36 NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS IN ASIA (OPERATING, IN PROGRESS, ANDPROPOSED, 2003)

Table 37 MANUFACTURERS DIRECTORY

Table 38 NEW U.S. ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, JANUARY 2002

Table 39 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, FEBRUARY 2002

Table 40 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, MARCH 2002

Table 41 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, APRIL 2002

Table 42 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, MAY 2002

Table 43 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, JUNE 2002

Table 44 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, JULY 2002

Table 45 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, AUGUST 2002

Table 46 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, SEPTEMBER 2002

Table 47 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, OCTOBER 2002

Table 48 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, NOVEMBER 2002

Table 49 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, DECEMBER 2002

Table 50 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, JANUARY 2003

Table 51 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, FEBRUARY 2003

Table 52 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, MARCH 2003

Table 53 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, APRIL 2003

Table 54 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS, MAY 2003

Table 55 NEW ELECTRIC GENERATING FACILITIES, JUNE 2003

Table 56 NEW INTERNATIONAL ELECTRIC GENERATING UNITS,  

LIST OF FIGURES

Summary Figure:
SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR POWER PLANT WATER TREATMENT, 2001-2008 ($MILLIONS)

Figure 1 U.S. ELECTRICITY GENERATION BY FUEL, 2002 (%)

Figure 2 ANTICIPATED CAPACITY ADDITION BY FUEL, 1970-2025 (BILLIONS OFKILOWATT-HOURS)

Figure 3 SOURCE, USE AND DISPOSITION OF FRESH WATER IN THE U.S.

Figure 4 WATER USED BY U.S. FOSSIL FUEL AND NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS, BYSTATE, 1990 (MGD)

Figure 5 DECREASING WATER NEEDS OF THERMOELECTRIC POWER PLANTS, 1950-1990(GALLONS OF WATER USED TO PRODUCE 1 KILOWATT-HOUR)

Figure 6 TYPICAL STEAM GENERATION PROCESS

Figure 7 PRESSURIZED WATER REACTOR

Figure 8 BOILING WATER REACTOR

Figure 9 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR MEMBRANES USED IN POWER PLANT WATERTREATMENT, 2001-2008 ($ MILLIONS)

Figure 10 U.S. MARKET SHARE FOR MANUFACTURERS OF MEMBRANE TECHNOLOGY USEDIN POWER PLANT WATER TREATMENT, 2003 (%)

Figure 11 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR ION EXCHANGE IN POWER PLANT WATERTREATMENT, 2001-2008 ($ MILLIONS)

Figure 12 PUROLITE SHALLOW SHELL RESINS

Figure 13 ION EXCHANGE RESIN MANUFACTURERS AND MARKET SHARE, 2003 (%)

Figure 14 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR ELECTRODEIONIZATION IN POWER PLANTWATER TREATMENT, 2001-2008 ($ MILLIONS)

Figure 15 MARKET SHARE FOR EDI TECHNOLOGY, 2003 (%)

Figure 16 SALES AND PROJECTIONS FOR NOVEL PROCESSES USE IN POWER PLANTWATER TREATMENT, 2001-2008 ($ MILLIONS)

Figure 17 MARKET SHARES FOR MANUFACTURERS OF OZONE TECHNOLOGY, 2003 (%)

Figure 18 FLOW DIAGRAM OF ACTUAL MAKE-UP WATER SYSTEM SHOWING UV TREATMENTLOCATIONS

Figure 19 MARKET SHARES FOR UV TREATMENT, 2003 (%)

Figure 20 PATENTS BY TECHNOLOGY TYPE, MAY 1998 TO APRIL 2003 (%)

Figure 21 PATENTS BY COMPANY, MAY 1998 TO APRIL 2003 (%)

Figure 22 GLOBAL POWER GENERATION PROJECTS, 2002 (%)