Comparing LTE, MVR, and MEE

A comparison between Low-Temperature Evaporator (LTE), Mechanical Vapor Recompression (MVR), and Multiple-Effect Evaporator (MEE)

As zero liquid discharge (ZLD) and wastewater concentration become increasingly critical in industries like hazardous waste treatment, chemical processing, and landfill leachate management, selecting the right evaporation technology is essential. This brochure compares three widely used systems and outlines why low-temperature vacuum evaporators are often the best solution.

Key Advantages of Low-Temperature Vacuum Evaporator (LTE)

Lower Operating Costs

With OPEX between 50–60 RMB/ton, LTE consumes significantly less energy, particularly because it does not rely on steam or high-pressure compressors like MVR or MEE.

No Steam or Circulating Water Dependency

Traditional evaporators require boilers, steam, and circulating water systems, increasing infrastructure and maintenance burden. LTE systems only require electricity, making them ideal for water-scarce regions or remote installations.

Skid-Mounted, Plug & Play Design

LTE units are fully assembled and factory-tested. No civil works or on-site assembly are required, reducing commissioning time and cost.

High Automation

One-click start, no dedicated operators needed. This reduces labor cost and the risk of human error during operation.

Excellent for Scaling-Prone or Sticky Wastewater

Operates at low temperatures, which slows down scaling and reduces salt crystallization on heat exchangers.

Self-cleaning features and anti-fouling heat exchanger design extend service intervals.

Particularly effective for mother liquor from landfill leachate, high-salt industrial brines, and pharmaceutical residues.

Consistent Water Quality

The distillate from LTE systems is clean and stable, often meeting reuse or discharge standards without further polishing.

Challenges of MVR & MEE

　　· High temperature operation causes frequent scaling.

　　· Requires skilled operators for steam and compressor balancing.

　 · High cleaning and maintenance costs, especially for brine and organic-rich wastewater.

Comparative summary of LTE, MVR and MEE

Item	LTE (Skid) MVR	MVR	MEE (Two/Three Effects)
Operating Cost (OPEX)	50–60 RMB/ton	90–100 RMB/ton	110–140 RMB/ton
Installation	Skid-mounted, plug-and-play	Large footprint, on-site work	Large footprint, extensive installation
Automation Fully automatic, no operator	Fully automatic, no operator	Manual operation required	Manual operation required
Maintenance	Easy cleaning, low risk	Prone to clogging/fouling	High scaling, high cleaning cost
Energy Efficiency	Low energy, no steam needed	Good reuse of latent heat	High steam consumption
Concentration Ratio	High (8–10x typical)	Moderate	Moderate
Suitability	Sticky, scaling-prone, complex wastewater	Stable, low-scaling water	Large-volume, low-complexity waste