Grand Canyon Railway
Boiler Wastewater Treatment & Storage

Main Content

TEAM BUDGETING

Engineering Costs
The table to the right displays the proposed and actual staffing and associated costs for the project. Changes were made due to the schedule changes that occured. The total hours was 755 and the total enginering costs were $170,946. More information on the schedule changes can be found on the Tasks page.

Life Cycle Analysis
The second table to the rught displays the life cycle analysis completed for the existing wastewater management (shipping the water to Phoenix), as well as the RO system alternative as well as the new softener.

The reverse osmosis system chosen is a prefabricated system created by AMPAC USA. This system has an initial implementation cost of $19,270 and a lifespan of 10-15 years. Maintenance on an RO system can be maintained at about 10% of initial cost per year. Membranes must be replaced; the system has to be backwashed and filters replaced. This cost equates over the lifespan of the system to about $2000 per year. Since, the system will return about half of the wastewater, the system will save GCR about $150-$200 on water cost by reusing the treated water in their boilers. This system equated to about $7,282 per year in annual cost at a capital rate of 5%.

The cost of a new softener was also assesed as it is recommended in addition to the RO alternative. Replacement zeolite softener information was provided by Watertec of Tucson, Arizona. This system cost about $3800 and will replace the old softener that is currently in place at GCR. The softener proposed has a lifecycle of about 7-10 years and a maintenance cost of 20% was assumed. This would include, zeolite bead replacement, backwashing and any other maintenance required on the system. Replacement of the current softener would likely return no significant profits or losses because the operating conditions of GCR’s water treatment would remain the same. The overall cost per year of the new softener would be about $6,100 at a capital rate of 5%.

The recommmended RO alternative reduces costs by more than half of the current methods over the 15-year life of the RO system.