DOCSLIB.ORG

Life Cycle Assessment and Cost Analysis of Distributed Mixed Wastewater & Graywater Treatment for Water Recycling in the Context of an Urban Case Study

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Life Cycle Assessment and Cost Analysis of Distributed Mixed Wastewater & Graywater Treatment for Water Recycling in the Context of an Urban Case Study EPA/600/R-18/280 | June 2019 | www.epa.gov/research Life Cycle Assessment and Cost Analysis of Distributed Mixed Wastewater & Graywater Treatment for Water Recycling in the Context of an Urban Case Study Office of Research and Development Washington, D.C. United States Environmental Protection Agency Life Cycle Assessment and Cost Analysis of Distributed Mixed Wastewater and Graywater Treatment for Water Recycling in the Context of an Urban Case Study Ben Morelli and Sarah Cashman Eastern Research Group, Inc. 110 Hartwell Ave Lexington, MA 02421 Prepared for: Cissy Ma, Jay Garland, Diana Bless, Michael Jahne U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Exposure Research Laboratory National Risk Management Research Laboratory Office of Research and Development 26 W. Martin Luther King Drive Cincinnati, OH 45268 Date: June 7, 2019 Draft Report: EPA Contract No. EP-C-16-015, Task Order 0003 Report Revisions: EPA Contract No. EP-C-15-010, Work Assignment 3-32 Although the information in this document has been funded by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under Contract EP-C-16-015 to Eastern Research Group, Inc. (Draft Report) and EPA Contract No. EP-C-15-010 to Pegasus Technical Services, Inc. (Report Revisions), it does not necessarily reflect the views of the Agency and no official endorsement should be inferred. Abstract ABSTRACT Communities such as San Francisco, California are promoting decentralized wastewater treatment coupled with on-site, non-potable reuse (NPR) as a strategy for alleviating water scarcity. This research uses life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle cost assessment (LCCA) to evaluate several urban building and district scale treatment technologies based on a suite of environmental and cost indicators. The project evaluates aerobic membrane bioreactors (AeMBRs), anaerobic membrane bioreactors (AnMBRs), and recirculating vertical flow wetlands (RVFWs) treating both mixed wastewater and source separated graywater. Life cycle inventory (LCI) data were compiled from published, peer reviewed literature and generated using GPS-X™ wastewater modeling software. Several sensitivity analyses were conducted to quantify the effects of system scale, reuse quantity, AnMBR sparging rate, and the addition of thermal recovery on environmental and cost results. Results indicate that the volume of treated graywater is sufficient to provide for on-site urban NPR applications, and that net impact is lowest when the quantity of treated wastewater provides but does not considerably exceed NPR demand. Of the treatment options analyzed, the AeMBR and RVFW both demonstrated similarly low global warming potential (GWP) impact results, while the AeMBR had the lowest estimated system net present value (NPV) over a 30-year operational period. The addition of thermal recovery considerably reduced GWP impact for the AeMBR treatment process it was applied to, and similar benefits should be available if thermal recovery were applied to other treatment processes. The AnMBR treatment system demonstrated substantially higher GWP and cumulative energy demand (CED) results compared to the other treatment systems, due primarily to the need for several post-treatment processes required to prepare the effluent for disinfection. When the quantity of treated wastewater closely matches NPR demand, the environmental benefit of avoiding potable water production and distribution (for non-potable applications) leads to net environmental benefits for the AeMBR and RVFW treatment systems. The same benefit is possible for the AnMBR if intermittent membrane sparging can successfully prevent membrane fouling. i List of Acronyms LIST OF ACRONYMS AeMBR Aerobic membrane bioreactor ALH Administrative labor hours AnMBR Anaerobic membrane bioreactor BOD Biological oxygen demand BV Bed volume CAS Conventional activated sludge CED Cumulative energy demand CHP Combined heat and power CPI Consumer price index COD Chemical oxygen demand COP Coefficient of performance CSTR Continually stirred tank reactor CT Contact time CV Coefficient of variation DHS Downflow hanging sponge EOL End-of-life EPA Environmental Protection Agency (U.S.) ERG Eastern Research Group, Inc. GE General Electric GHG Greenhouse gas gpm Gallons per minute gpd Gallons per day GW Graywater GWP Global warming potential HDPE High-density polyethylene HHV Higher heating value HRT Hydraulic retention time IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ISO International Standardization Organization LCA Life cycle assessment LCCA Life cycle cost assessment LCI Life cycle inventory LCIA Life cycle impact assessment LMH Liters per m2 per hour LRT Log reduction target LRV Log reduction value MBR Membrane bioreactor MCF Methane correction factor MGD Million gallons per day MLSS Mixed liquor suspended solids NPR Non-potable reuse NPV Net present value ii List of Acronyms O&M Operation and maintenance P Phosphorus psi Pounds per square inch PVDF Polyvinylidene fluoride RVFW Recirculating vertical flow wetland SCFM Standard cubic feet per minute SOTE Standard oxygen transfer efficiencies SRT Solids retention time TKN Total kjeldahl nitrogen TSS Total suspended solids TRACI Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Environmental Impacts U.S. LCI United States Life Cycle Inventory Database UV Ultraviolet VSS Volatile suspended solids WW Wastewater WRRF Water resource recovery facility iii Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1. STUDY GOAL AND SCOPE ................................................................................................ 1-1 1.1 Background and Study Goal ................................................................................ 1-1 1.2 Functional Unit .................................................................................................... 1-2 1.3 Case Study Building and District Scenarios ........................................................ 1-2 1.4 Case Study Water Reuse Scenarios ..................................................................... 1-4 1.5 Water Quality Characteristics .............................................................................. 1-6 1.6 System Definition and Boundaries ...................................................................... 1-7 1.6.1 Aerobic Membrane Bioreactor ............................................................... 1-7 1.6.2 Aerobic Membrane Bioreactor with Thermal Energy Recovery ................................................................................................. 1-8 1.6.3 Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactor ........................................................... 1-9 1.6.4 Recirculating Vertical Flow Wetland ................................................... 1-10 1.7 Background Life Cycle Inventory Databases .................................................... 1-11 1.8 Metrics and Life Cycle Impact Assessment Scope ............................................ 1-12 2. LIFE CYCLE INVENTORY METHODS ............................................................................... 2-1 2.1 Pre-Treatment ...................................................................................................... 2-1 2.2 Aerobic Membrane Bioreactor ............................................................................ 2-2 2.2.1 Thermal Energy Recovery for the AeMBR ............................................ 2-5 2.3 Anaerobic Membrane Bioreactor ......................................................................... 2-8 2.3.1 Membrane Fouling and Sludge Output ................................................. 2-12 2.3.2 Biogas Utilization ................................................................................. 2-13 2.3.3 Post-Treatment ...................................................................................... 2-13 2.4 Recirculating Vertical Flow Wetland ................................................................ 2-17 2.5 Disinfection ........................................................................................................ 2-20 2.5.1 Ozone .................................................................................................... 2-23 2.5.2 Ultraviolet ............................................................................................. 2-25 2.5.3 Chlorination .......................................................................................... 2-26 2.6 Water Reuse Scenarios ...................................................................................... 2-26 2.6.1 Wastewater Generation and On-site Reuse Potential ........................... 2-27 2.6.2 Recycled Water Distribution Piping ..................................................... 2-28 2.6.3 Recycled Water Distribution Pumping Energy .................................... 2-30 2.6.4 Displaced Potable Water ....................................................................... 2-34 2.6.5 Centralized Collection and WRRF Treatment ...................................... 2-35 2.7 District-Unsewered Scenario ............................................................................. 2-35 2.7.1 Dewatering – Screw Press .................................................................... 2-35 2.7.2 Composting ........................................................................................... 2-36 2.7.3 Compost Land Application ................................................................... 2-36 2.8 LCI Limitations, Data Quality & Appropriate Use ........................................... 2-38 3. LIFE CYCLE COST ANALYSIS METHODS .......................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Inclusive Business Models for Wastewater Treatment
    INCLUSIVE INNOVATIONS Inclusive Business Models for Wastewater Treatment Enterprises have developed integrated, affordable wastewater treatment solutions for industries and households to encourage reuse or safe disposal HIGHLIGHTS • Wastewater treatment enterprises treat water before disposal or recycle the water so that it can be reused. • Enterprises provide household wastewater treatment systems that are modular, have low operating costs in terms of electricity and maintenance, have silent operation and less odor and offer quick returns on investment. • Enterprises focusing on industrial wastewater treatment solutions offer efficiency and cost effectiveness. They are quickly commissioned, fully automatic, have remote monitoring, require minimal hazardous chemicals, and treat water for reuse. Summary Wastewater sources include domestic wastewater—pertaining to liquid outflow from toilets, bathrooms, basins, laundry, kitchen sinks and floor washing, and industrial wastewater—effluent water that is discharged during manufacturing processes in factories or by-products from chemical reactions. There are significant operational and financial challenges associated with wastewater treatment in marginalized residential communities, where domestic wastewater does not get treated at source, but instead is discharged to local municipal facilities or directly into water bodies. Similarly, industrial wastewater is heavily contaminated and leads to pollution and diseases, if disposed without treatment. It may also contain metals that have high market value and could potentially be recovered. Social enterprises have introduced unique technologies and integrated solutions to treat such wastewater either for safe disposal or for reuse. These solutions aim to be efficient, affordable and convenient. There are two major types of wastewater treatment plants—household (residential) systems and industrial systems. This series on Inclusive Innovations explores business models that improve the lives of those living in extreme poverty.
    [Show full text]
  • Biosolids Management at South East Water
    BIOSOLIDS MANAGEMENT AT SOUTH EAST WATER Aravind Surapaneni 22 February 2012 OVERVIEW • South East Water • Biosolids Management • Biosolids HACCP • Challenges 2 SOUTH EAST WATER • Commenced operation in 1995 • Provides water, sewerage and recycled water services in the south-east region of Melbourne • One of 3 water retailers in the Melbourne metropolitan area • 1.5 million people served in a 3640 square kilometre area • 8 STPs 3 SOUTH EAST WATER PRODUCTS • Drinking Water • Recycled Water • Biosolids • Effluent for environmental discharge • Sewage (as an ingredient of recycled water) • IWMS products (eg. Sewer mining, Storm water) SOUTH EAST WATER PRODUCT QUALITY OBJECTIVES 1.That our products be safe, sustainable and satisfy customer need. 2. That our products are backed by quality systems that emphasise optimal performance and accountability. SOUTH EAST WATER QUALITY SYSTEM BUSINESS WIDE ISO9000 ISO14000 AS4801 HACCP & ISO22000 PRODUCTS Drinking Water – IWMS (alternative sources) Raw Sewage – Discharge Effluent – Recycled Water – Biosolids 6 South East Water Sewage Treatment Plants Eastern Treatment Port Phillip Plant Bay Pakenham Longwarry Blind Bight Koo Wee Rup Lang Lang Mt Martha Western Port Somers Melbourne Water Boneo Sewage Treatment Plant South East Water Sewage Treatment Plant 2010-11 ESC REPORTING DATA (tDS) South East Water STP Sludge Produced Sludge Stored Biosolids Used Boneo 529 5150 789 Somers 225 2367 835 Mt Martha 665 2198 349 Pakenham 433 3608 194 Blind Bight 29 225 0 Koo Wee Rup 27 261 0 Longwarry 33 467 0 Lang Lang
    [Show full text]
  • Community Decision Making for Decentralized Wastewater Systems Rocky Mountain Institute Snowmass, Colorado
    National Decentralized Water Resources Capacity Development Project Case Studies of Economic Analysis and Community Decision Making for Decentralized Wastewater Systems Rocky Mountain Institute Snowmass, Colorado December 2004 Case Studies of Economic Analysis and Community Decision Making for Decentralized Wastewater Systems Submitted by Rocky Mountain Institute Snowmass, Colorado NDWRCDP Project Number: WU-HT-02-03 National Decentralized Water Resources Capacity Development Project (NDWRCDP) Research Project Final Report, December 2004 NDWRCDP, Washington University, Campus Box 1150 One Brookings Drive, Cupples 2, Rm. 11, St. Louis, MO 63130-4899 DISCLAIMER This work was supported by the National Decentralized Water Resources Capacity Development Project (NDWRCDP) with funding provided by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency through a Cooperative Agreement (EPA No. CR827881-01-0) with Washington University in St. Louis. This report has not been reviewed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. This report has been reviewed by a panel of experts selected by the NDWRCDP. The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the NDWRCDP, Washington University, or the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, nor does the mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. CITATIONS This report was prepared by Richard Pinkham Booz Allen Hamilton Jeremy Magliaro Michael Kinsley Rocky Mountain Institute 1739 Snowmass Creek Road Snowmass, CO 80002 The final report was edited and produced by ProWrite Inc., Reynoldsburg, OH. This report is available online at www.ndwrcdp.org. This report is also available through the National Small Flows Clearinghouse P.O. Box 6064 Morgantown, WV 26506-6065 Tel: (800) 624-8301 WWCDCS25 This report should be cited in the following manner: Pinkham, R.
    [Show full text]
  • Wastewater-Based Resource Recovery Technologies Across Scale a Review
    Resources, Conservation & Recycling 145 (2019) 94–112 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Resources, Conservation & Recycling journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/resconrec Wastewater-based resource recovery technologies across scale: A review T ⁎ Nancy Diaz-Elsayed, Nader Rezaei, Tianjiao Guo1, Shima Mohebbi2, Qiong Zhang Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of South Florida, 4202 E. Fowler Avenue, Tampa, FL, 33620, USA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Over the past few decades, wastewater has been evolving from a waste to a valuable resource. Wastewater can Water reuse not only dampen the effects of water shortages by means of water reclamation, but it also provides themedium Energy recovery for energy and nutrient recovery to further offset the extraction of precious resources. Since identifying viable Nutrient recovery resource recovery technologies can be challenging, this article offers a review of technologies for water, energy, Wastewater treatment and nutrient recovery from domestic and municipal wastewater through the lens of the scale of implementation. System scale The system scales were classified as follows: small scale (design flows3 of17m /day or less), medium scale (8 to 20,000 m3/day), and large scale (3800 m3/day or more). The widespread implementation of non-potable reuse (NPR) projects across all scales highlighted the ease of implementation associated with lower water quality requirements and treatment schemes that resembled conventional wastewater treatment. Although energy re- covery was mostly achieved in large-scale plants from biosolids management or hydraulic head loss, the highest potential for concentrated nutrient recovery occurred in small-scale systems using urine source separating technologies. Small-scale systems offered benefits such as the ability for onsite resource recovery and reusethat lowered distribution and transportation costs and energy consumption, while larger scales benefited from lower per unit costs and energy consumption for treatment.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of Water Reclamation in Water Resources Management in the 21St Century
    THE ROLE OF WATER RECLAMATION IN WATER RESOURCES MANAGEMENT IN THE 21ST CENTURY K. Esposito1*, R. Tsuchihashi2, J. Anderson1, J. Selstrom3 1*: Metcalf & Eddy, 60 East 42nd Street, 43rd Floor, New York, NY 10165 2: Metcalf & Eddy, 719 2nd Street, Suite 11, Davis, CA 95616 3: Metcalf & Eddy, 2751 Prosperity Ave Suite 200, Fairfax, VA 22031 ABSTRACT In recognition of the existing and impending stress to traditional water supply, water planners must look beyond structural developments and interbasin water transfers to secure supply into the future. In this process, it is becoming evident that various issues related to water must be integrated into a whole system approach, including water supply, water use, wastewater treatment, stormwater management, and management of surrounding water environment. In bringing disparate water assets together, alternatives to traditional water supply should arise. Integrated water resources management can provide a realistic framework for examining the feasibility of water reuse. This paper evaluates how water reuse can become a strategic alternative in water resources management. The key challenges that limit water reclamation as one of the key elements in integrated water resources management scheme are discussed, including limitations with typical centralized wastewater treatment systems and public health protection, particularly the implications of trace contaminants. The key considerations to address these challenges are presented including (1) selection of appropriate treatment processes and reuse applications, (2) scientific and engineering solutions to emerging concerns, (3) consideration for cost effective and sustainable system, and (4) public acceptance. Recent water reclamation projects are presented to illustrate the response of the engineering community to the challenges of making water reclamation and reuse a real and sustainable solution to water supply system management planning.
    [Show full text]
  • Modeling the Effects of Sewer Mining on Odour and Corrosion in Sewer Systems
    20th International Congress on Modelling and Simulation, Adelaide, Australia, 1–6 December 2013 www.mssanz.org.au/modsim2013 Modeling the Effects of Sewer Mining on Odour and Corrosion in Sewer Systems N. Marleni a, S. Gray b, A. Sharma c, S. Burn c and N. Muttil a a College of Engineering and Science, Victoria University, Melbourne b Institute of Sustainability and Innovation (ISI), Victoria University, Melbourne c Commonwealth of Scientific, Industrial and Research Organization (CSIRO) Email: [email protected] Abstract: Increasing demand has led to shortage of potable water in many countries. The use of alternative water sources is one of the solutions undertaken to overcome this issue. Alternative water sources can be derived from either collected rainwater, treated greywater or treated wastewater. Sewer Mining is known as an efficient technology which can reduce the cost of wastewater infrastructure required to transport wastewater because the Sewer Mining facility is usually installed close to the site that is using the treated wastewater. The treated water from Sewer Mining has been used as one of the sources of alternative water, particularly to supply water for public open spaces, garden irrigation and toilet flushing. It is conducted by extracting the sewage from sewer pipes and most of the times, disposing the sludge back to sewer pipes. The sewage extraction and sludge disposal back to sewer network is suspected to trigger sewer problems such as blockages. Several applications of Sewer Mining facility have proved to contribute to the increase of blockages in sewer pipes. Furthermore, the changes in the sewage composition after the sewage extraction and sludge disposal location lead to alteration of the sewage biochemical transformation processes, which finally were suspected to change the state of hydrogen sulphide build up.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation Report on Water Reuse Technologies
    Contents Executive summary ................................................................................................................... 3 1 Overview of the EU water reuse policy framework .......................................................... 4 2 Clarification of Key Concepts ............................................................................................. 6 2.1 Potential uses of reclaimed water ............................................................................. 6 2.2 Water reclamation technologies and processes ....................................................... 9 3 Research purpose and methodology .............................................................................. 11 3.1 Purpose and research questions ............................................................................. 11 3.2 Research methodology and documentation tools .................................................. 12 3.3 Evaluation criteria.................................................................................................... 13 4 Key findings ..................................................................................................................... 14 5 Evaluation of water reuse practices ................................................................................ 20 6 Water reuse practices in AQUARES countries and beyond ............................................. 23 6.1 Germany .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Water Cycle Solutions for Irrigation at the Estate Scale
    WATER CYCLE SOLUTIONS FOR IRRIGATION AT THE ESTATE SCALE Geoff Bott WATER CYCLE AND IRRIGATION: INEFFICIENCIES AND SOLUTIONS Past Total Water Re-use, ‘smart inefficiencies Cycle irrigation’ Management WATER MANAGEMENT INEFFICIENCIES HowIn the it past... works Lot scale water management Rainwater tanks Domestic bores Drinking water for garden watering 50-70% of domestic water usage ex-house. Large lots Reliance on groundwater: becoming more difficult as resources becoming fully allocated Why not rainwater tanks?? TOTAL WATER MANAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES Towards the future... Estate scale water management opportunity for total-water-cycle principles Integrated with Water Sensitive Urban Design Non-potable water sources for irrigation: sewer mining, SHARE Demand management initiatives. Lot size, AAAAA fixtures ‘smart irrigation’ water use efficiency NON-POTABLE WATER SOURCE OPTIONS Alternatives to How it works Considerations: drinking water Determined according to soil Recognition of geomorphologic types and groundwater opportunities and constraints: resource availability: Aquifer Storage and Guildford formation / sands; Recharge. Aquifer characteristics; Stormwater harvesting and re-use (SHARE) systems; Groundwater over-allocation; Sewer mining; Lot yield and irrigation use CONVENTIONAL ASR: IMAGE EXAMPLE FROM CAMPBELLTOWN SOUTH AUSTRALIA SHARE SYSTEMS: THE CONCEPT A form of domestic-scale ASR already common on Swan Coastal Plain: Lot-level soak-wells Estate-level side entry pits / infiltration basins / swales SHARE
    [Show full text]
  • In-Building Sewer Mining System
    In-Building Sewer Mining System HONG KONG PRODUCTIVITY COUNCIL TechDive Apr2020 Environmental Technology Water Management and Urbanisation What is the Problem? Hong Kong: 7.4 million people Due to urbanisation and population growth: Increasing demand of water resources Great demand of uninterrupted supply of good quality water Higher per capita consumption of water compared to rural areas Tokyo: 38 million people Shanghai: 22 million people New York: 8.4 million people 2 Hong Kong at a Glance Expected annual housing supply: ~43,000 unit HK’s annual water consumption: 1,012 million m3 HK’s annual sewage discharge: 1,007 million m3 Water consumption & sewage discharge: ~ 1-2% every year Pressure on sewerage infrastructure 3 Sewer Mining in Urban Cities Athens’s Demonstration Plant Sydney Olympic Park • a large scale sewer mining unit has been installed for using recycled water for toilet flushing, irrigation and ornamental fountain • Under the entire Water Reclamation and Management Scheme (WRAMS) • Substitutes more than 50% of potable water 4 In-Building Sewer Mining System A novel concept extracts clean water from domestic sewage or greywater generated from multi-storey residential buildings for on-site reuse. 5 Concept of Sewer Mining Greywater Approach 1 From shower, laundry, washing basin, kitchen and bath Blackwater Toilet Greywater Decentralised Sewer Mining Residual wastes Main Sewer Greywater From shower, laundry, washing basin, Approach 2 kitchen and bath Blackwater Toilet Combined Decentralised Sewage Sewer Mining Residual
    [Show full text]
  • Sewer Design Guide (Revised May, 2015)
    Sewer Design Guide (Revised May, 2015) City of San Diego Public Utilities Department 9192 Topaz Way • San Diego, CA 92123 Tel (858) 292-6300 Fax (858) 292-6310 Sewer Design Guide PREFACE The Sewer Design Guide is a guide for the engineer when planning and designing wastewater facilities and should be used for both public facilities and private facilities which serve multiple lots. This guide summarizes and outlines relevant City policies, applicable codes, and engineering and operational practices and procedures that have been developed in an effort to establish a cost-effective, reliable, and safe wastewater collection system. Also to be considered and used in conjunction with this design guide are all applicable current standard drawings, specifications, codes, laws and industry requirements for the planning and design of wastewater infrastructures. This guide is not intended to be an instructional text and is not a substitute for professional experience, nor is it meant to relieve the design engineer from his/her responsibility to use good engineering judgment. The design engineer shall be responsible for providing a design that, within industry standards, can be safely repaired and maintained, will provide good service and life, and will not create a public nuisance or hazard. Under most conditions, this guide should serve as a minimum standard. However, it is not meant to preclude alternative designs when the standards cannot be met, or when special or emergency conditions warrant, as long as proper authorization is obtained. The Public Utilities Department encourages “partnering”, the creation of an open working relationship between staff in each section/department and our customers, to promote achievement of mutual and beneficial goals.
    [Show full text]
  • An Integrated Framework for Assessment of Hybrid Water Supply Systems
    Article An Integrated Framework for Assessment of Hybrid Water Supply Systems Mukta Sapkota 1,*, Meenakshi Arora 1, Hector Malano 1, Magnus Moglia 2, Ashok Sharma 3, Biju George 4 and Francis Pamminger 5 Received: 22 September 2015; Accepted: 17 December 2015; Published: 24 December 2015 Academic Editors: Ashantha Goonetilleke and Meththika Vithanage 1 Department of Infrastructure Engineering, Melbourne School of Engineering, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia; [email protected] (M.A.); [email protected] (H.M.) 2 Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO), Land and Water, Clayton South, VIC 3169, Australia; [email protected] 3 Institute of Sustainability and Innovation, Victoria University, Melbourne, VIC 3030, Australia; [email protected] 4 International Centre for Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas, P.O. Box 2416, Cairo, Egypt; [email protected] 5 Yarra Valley Water, Mitcham, VIC 3132, Australia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +61-383-449-841 † Based on “Sapkota, M.; Arora, M.; Malano, H.; George, B.; Nawarathna, B.; Sharma, A.; Moglia, M. Development of a framework to evaluate the hybrid water supply systems. In Proceedings of the 20th International Congress on Modelling and Simulation, Adelaide, Australia, 1–6 December 2013”. Abstract: Urban water managers around the world are adopting decentralized water supply systems, often in combination with centralized systems. While increasing demand for water arising from population growth is one of the primary reasons for this increased adoption of alternative technologies, factors such as climate change, increased frequency of extreme weather events and rapid urbanization also contribute to an increased rate of adoption of these technologies.
    [Show full text]
  • Interpreting Farmers' Perceptions of Risks and Benefits Concerning
    water Article Interpreting Farmers’ Perceptions of Risks and Benefits Concerning Wastewater Reuse for Irrigation: A Case Study in Emilia-Romagna (Italy) Melania Michetti 1,* , Meri Raggi 2 , Elisa Guerra 1 and Davide Viaggi 1 1 Department of Agricultural and Food Sciences (DISTAL), University of Bologna, 40127 Bologna, Italy; [email protected] (E.G.); [email protected] (D.V.) 2 Department of Statistical Sciences, University of Bologna, 40126 Bologna, Italy; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +39-051-2096112 Received: 12 November 2018; Accepted: 2 January 2019; Published: 9 January 2019 Abstract: Water recycling is becoming progressively more important as the need for Integrated Urban Water Management (IUWM) is increasing to ensure a transition towards a more sustainable use for water. Perceptions and public acceptance of water reuse are recognised as paramount factors for the successful introduction of wastewater reuse projects, regardless of the strength of scientific evidence in their favour. This article analyses perceptions of risks and benefits of using treated wastewater for irrigation purposes in agriculture when dealing with different crops. Data from an original farmer survey are analysed through descriptive statistics and a classification tree approach. The study reveals limited knowledge of wastewater treatment, yet a good level of openness towards the reuse of wastewater for irrigation. A lower risk perception and a higher acceptance level are mainly explained by positive expectations with regard to the environmental characteristics of effluent water, higher education, and specific cropping choices. Enhancing information availability is also found to positively affect social acceptance. The ease of converting current water-management practices to the new water source explains the perceived benefits of reusing water.
    [Show full text]