ARBOK-ROA (Reverse Osmosis Arbok)

Overview

ARBOK-ROA exists because of a procurement problem, not a technical one. States buy water through tenders, and almost every RFP specifies "procurement of reverse osmosis equipment" by name. Customers repeatedly say the same thing: we want your technology, but the tender mandates RO. ROA is the answer — formally reverse osmosis, so it satisfies the paperwork, but with the high-pressure loop replaced by vacuum. Instead of 150 bar pushing water through membranes, ROA pulls. The main part of the process sits in the sea and fresh water arrives onshore. Brine does not form: salt stays where it was, unconcentrated. Electricity consumption falls 5–7×.

The honest framing: ROA is not the ideal solution — Arbok low-temperature evaporation is, at 10× less energy and zero brine. ROA is what you deploy when regulations are fixated on the letters SWRO.

Applications

State and municipal desalination tenders where reverse osmosis is a mandatory condition of the RFP. Coastal water supply for households, agriculture and industry. Retrofit of existing RO sites.

Adjacent play: where a conventional RO plant already exists, Arbok low-temperature evaporation treats its brine and raises overall freshwater yield 2–2.5× while closing the discharge to zero.

Operating Principle

Conventional RO forces seawater through polyamide membranes at up to 150 bar, after heavy pre-treatment through sand and anthracite filters. ROA inverts the driving force: vacuum pulls water through rather than pressure pushing it.

Consequences of removing the high-pressure loop:

• The main part of the installation is located in the sea; only fresh water travels ashore.
• Brine does not form. Salt remains in the sea or ocean without being concentrated into a toxic near-shore jet.
• No thick-walled piping, no heavy pre-treatment train, no booster pumps.
• Lower material stress, simpler piping, fewer weak links, calmer starts and stops.
• Electricity consumption 5–7× lower than conventional RO.

Limitations, stated plainly: membranes remain, with their capriciousness and cost intact. Microplastic generation from polyamide membranes remains. ROA does not eliminate the flaws of the RO principle — it removes the pressure penalty and the brine.

Key Parameters

| Parameter | Classic RO | ARBOK-ROA |

|---|---|---|

| Driving force | up to 150 bar pressure | vacuum |

| Electricity | ~7 kWh/m³ (actual, not brochure) | 5–7× lower |

| Brine | 50–60 % of intake, 2–2.5× sea salinity | none formed |

| Brine discharge fee exposure | e.g. €0.6–0.9/m³ (Cyprus) | none |

| Pre-treatment | sand/anthracite, cartridges, often UF | not required |

| High-pressure pumps | required | not required |

| Piping | thick-walled | standard |

| Membranes | required | required (retained for tender compliance) |

| Microplastics | present | present |

| Plant location | onshore | main part in the sea |

Reference figures for conventional RO, for comparison:

| Item | Value |

|---|---|

| Recovery (permeate) | 40–50 % of intake |

| Brine salinity | 2–2.5× seawater; local lens 75–90 ppt |

| Energy cost at $0.25/kWh | $1.75/m³ from electricity alone |

| Real all-in cost | $2–6+/m³ |

| Agricultural benchmark price | ~$0.20/m³ |

| Outfall distance | 300 m – 2 km offshore |

| Corrosion onset | 3–4 months of steel exposure to salt air and brine |

| Declared plant lifetime | 10–15 years, then replacement cost ≈ new plant |

Architecture and Components

Sea-located main process section; vacuum generation; membrane modules; onshore freshwater delivery line. Absent by design: high-pressure pumps, thick-walled pressure piping, sand and anthracite pre-treatment vessels, booster stations, brine outfall pipeline and diffusers.

Detailed equipment specification: [требует уточнения из базы]

Advantages

Commercial: satisfies tender language demanding reverse osmosis, which no alternative technology can do regardless of merit. This is the entire reason the product exists.

Energy: 5–7× less electricity than conventional RO, whose high-pressure loop is the main cost driver.

Environmental and regulatory: no brine, therefore no discharge fee exposure, no underwater outfall, no brine lens at 75–90 ppt destroying benthos and seagrass, and no exposure to the EU brine discharge ban.

Capital and operational: no thick-walled piping, no pre-treatment train, no booster pumps; fewer weak links; calmer starts and stops; no continuous pumping load on a brine outfall.

Integrations

ARBOK-JUMBO — низкотемпературное испарение, идеальная альтернатива там, где тендер не связывает руки

ARBOK PURI · ARBOK-CRYSTALLIZER · ARBOK-DEION (solar farms cleaning)

Combination play: Arbok low-temperature evaporation treats the brine of existing RO plants, raising total freshwater yield 2–2.5× and closing discharge to zero, while the dry salt recovered yields revenue comparable to the water itself.

Deployment & Operation

Recommended sequence from the source material:

1. If the tender mandates RO — supply ROA.
2. If a plain RO plant is already in place — remove it from the equation by applying Arbok low-temperature evaporation to its brine, raising freshwater yield 2–2.5×.
3. Launch a pilot at an operating site at 1,000–5,000 m³/day and compare measured performance on the calculator, not on slides.

Proposed procurement shift: buy m³ of water against KPIs — quality, environmental performance, resilience — rather than buying equipment. Take & Go: the customer pays for water only, and every operational headache stays with the supplier.

TRL

Product concept (tender-compliance variant). Formal TRL rating: TRL 7 — проставлен Михаилом 2026-08-06.

Market Potential

The market is defined by procurement rules rather than by technology. State water procurement runs through tenders, and RFPs overwhelmingly specify RO equipment by name — so any superior technology is excluded on paperwork grounds before it is evaluated. ROA addresses exactly that population of tenders.

The scale of the underlying problem: for a mid-size 15,000 m³/day plant, conventional RO requires roughly 43,800 MWh per year, costing $30,000 per day or $10,950,000 per year at $0.25/kWh. Real all-in RO cost lands at $2–6+/m³ against an agricultural benchmark of ~$0.20/m³, and the gap is closed annually by public budget. In municipal format RO is a social service, not a business: industrial tariffs and cheap kilowatts deliver only 5–15 % cosmetic relief.

The BOT model compounds this. The state haggles for cheap hardware, buys it, hands the plant to the tender winner to operate, then pays for years for power, chemicals, wages, land and brine discharge — and pays again for the water. After 10–15 years it takes back a worn-out asset whose refurbishment costs about as much as a new plant. The "T" in BOT is the trap.

Typical Project Economics

Direct savings against conventional RO: electricity reduced 5–7×; brine discharge fees eliminated (Cyprus reference €0.6–0.9/m³); no continuous pumping load on an outfall; no pre-treatment consumables; no high-pressure equipment capital or maintenance.

Reference scale of the avoided cost — conventional RO at 15,000 m³/day: $10,950,000 per year in electricity alone.

Risk Factors

ROA retains membranes, and with them their cost, their intolerance of free chlorine and of shutdowns, and their contribution to microplastics — estimates attribute nearly 30 % of global microplastic to RO systems. The source material states this openly rather than claiming the problem away.

Strategically, ROA is a concession to procurement practice, not the best available answer: Arbok low-temperature evaporation delivers 10× lower energy with zero brine and monetizable dry salt. Positioning ROA too prominently risks anchoring customers on the inferior product.

Formal TRL, equipment specification and unit economics are not recorded in the base.

Related Technologies

ARBOK-JUMBO · ARBOK PURI · ARBOK-CRYSTALLIZER · ARBOK LIGHT-SALT · ARBOK-DEION (solar farms cleaning)