Spatial optimization for decentralized non-potable water reuse

Environmental Research Letters

Volumn 13, Issue 6, 2018, Pages

  Kavvada, Olga ^a,b,c   Nelson, Kara L ^a,b   Horvath, Arpad ^a,b  

^a Berkeley   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^c LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

building; economies of scale; energy; greenhouse gas; recycling; spatial analysis; urban water

Indexed keywords

BUILDINGS; COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS; ECONOMICS; ENERGY EFFICIENCY; GAS EMISSIONS; GREENHOUSE GASES; HEURISTIC ALGORITHMS; OPTIMIZATION; POTABLE WATER; RECYCLING; WASTEWATER RECLAMATION; WATER CONSERVATION;

ECONOMIES OF SCALE; ENERGY; PUMPING REQUIREMENTS; SCENARIO DEVELOPMENT; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; SPATIAL OPTIMIZATION; TECHNOLOGY INNOVATION; URBAN WATERS;

WATER RECYCLING;

BUILDING; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEM; DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM; ECONOMIC ANALYSIS; GREENHOUSE GAS; INFRASTRUCTURE; OPTIMIZATION; PIPE; PUMPING; RECYCLING; SPATIAL ANALYSIS; URBAN AREA; VISUALIZATION;

EID: 85049808146     PISSN: 17489318     EISSN: 17489326     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/aabef0     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Boulware B 2012 Alternative Water Sources and Wastewater Management (New York: McGraw Hill Professional)
2. Cornejo P K, Zhang Q and Mihelcic J R 2016 How does scale of implementation impact the environmental sustainability of wastewater treatment integrated with resource recovery? Environ. Sci. Technol. 50 6680-9
3. Woods G and Kang D 2012 Centralized versus decentralized wastewater reclamation in the Houghton area of Tucson, Arizona J. Water Resour. Plan. Manage. 139 313-24
4. Lundin M and Bengtsson M 2000 Life cycle assessment of wastewater systems: influence of system boundaries and scale on calculated environmental loads Environ. Sci. Technol. 34 180
5. Kavvada O, Horvath A, Stokes-Draut J R, Hendrickson T P, Eisenstein W A and Nelson K L 2016 Assessing location and scale of urban nonpotable water reuse systems for life-cycle energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions Environ. Sci. Technol. 50 13184-94
6. Stillwell A, Twomey K, Osborne R, Greene D, Pedersen D and Webber M 2011 An integrated energy, carbon, water, and economic analysis of reclaimed water use in urban settings: a case study of Austin, Texas J. Water Reuse Desalin. 1 208-23
7. Marlow D R, Moglia M, Cook S, Beale D J, Land C and Road G 2013 Towards sustainable urban water management: a critical reassessment Water Res. 47 7150-61
8. Daigger G T 2009 Evolving urban water and residuals management paradigms: water reclamation and reuse, decentralization, and resource recovery Water Environ. Res. 81 809-23
9. Maurer M, Rothenberger O and Larsen T A 2005 Decentralised wastewater treatment technologies from a national perspective: At what cost are they competitive? Water Sci. Technol. Water Supply 5 145-54
10. Libralato G, Volpi Ghirardini F and Avezzu A 2012 To centralise or to decentralise: an overview of the most recent trends in wastewater treatment management J. Environ. Manage. 94 61-8
11. Poustie M S, Deletic A, Brown R R, Wong T, de Haan F J and Skinner R 2015 Sustainable urban water futures in developing countries: the centralised, decentralised or hybrid dilemma Urban Water J. 12 543-58
12. Yin Z and Xagoraraki I 2016 Adv Treat Technol Urban Wastewater Reuse ed D Fatta-Kassinos, D D Dionysiou and K Kümmerer (Cham: Springer) Membrane bioreactors (MBRs) for water reuse in the USA pp 223-45
13. Hendrickson T P, Nguyen M T, Sukardi M, Miot A, Horvath A and Nelson K L 2015 Life-cycle energy use and greenhouse gas emissions of a building-scale wastewater treatment and nonpotable reuse system Environ. Sci. Technol. 49 10303-11
14. Eggimann S et al 2017 The potential of knowing more: a review of data-driven urban water management Environ. Sci. Technol. 51 2538-53
15. Eggimann S, Truffer B and Maurer M 2015 To connect or not to connect? Modelling the optimal degree of centralisation for wastewater infrastructures Water Res. 84 218-31
16. Eggimann S, Truffer B and Maurer M 2016 Economies of density for on-site waste water treatment Water Res. 101 476-89
17. Guo T, Englehardt J and Wu T 2014 Review of cost versus scale: water and wastewater treatment and reuse processes Water Sci. Technol. 69 223
18. Hernandez-Sancho F, Molinos-Senante M and Sala-Garrido R 2011 Cost modelling for wastewater treatment processes Desalination 268 1-5
19. Newman J, Dandy G and Maier H 2014 Multiobjective optimization of cluster scale urban water systems investigating alternative water sources and level of decentralization Water Resour. Res. 50 7915-38
20. Kavvada O, Tarpeh W A, Horvath A and Nelson K L 2017 Life-cycle cost and environmental assessment of decentralized nitrogen recovery using ion exchange from source-separated urine through spatial modeling Environ. Sci. Technol. 51 12061-71
21. Lee E J, Criddle C S, Bobel P and Freyberg D L 2013 Assessing the scale of resource recovery for centralized and satellite wastewater treatment Environ. Sci. Technol. 47 10762-70
22. Guo T and Englehardt J D 2015 Principles for scaling of distributed direct potable water reuse systems: a modeling study Water Res. 75 146-63
23. San Francisco Public Utilities Commission 2014 BLUEPRINT for Onsite Water Systems (San Francisco, CA: San Francisco Water Power Sewer)
24. Iglesias R, Simón P, Moragas L, Arce A and Rodriguez-Roda I 2017 Cost comparison of full-scale water reclamation technologies with an emphasis on membrane bioreactors Water Sci. Technol. 75 2562-70
25. Blumensaat F, Wolfram M and Krebs P 2012 Sewer model development under minimum data requirements Environ. Earth Sci. 65 1427-37
26. Nielsen S and Moller B 2013 GIS based analysis of future district heating potential in Denmark Energy 57 458-68
27. Hasik V et al 2017 Evaluating the life cycle environmental benefits and trade-Offs of water reuse systems for net-zero buildings Environ. Sci. Technol. 51 1110-9
28. Bradshaw J L and Luthy R G 2017 Modeling and optimization of recycled water systems to augment urban groundwater recharge through underutilized stormwater spreading basins Environ. Sci. Technol. 51 11809-1181
29. Hendrickson T P and Horvath A 2014 A perspective on cost-effectiveness of greenhouse gas reduction solutions in water distribution systems Environ. Res. Lett. 9 24017
30. Zvoleff A, Kocaman A S, Huh W T and Modi V 2009 The impact of geography on energy infrastructure costs Energy Policy 37 4066-78
31. Kocaman A S, Huh W T and Modi V 2012 Initial layout of power distribution systems for rural electrification: a heuristic algorithm for multilevel network design Appl. Energy 96 302-15
32. Cormen H T 2009 Introduction to Algorithms 3rd edn (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press)
33. Garey M R and Johnson D S 2002 Computers and Intractability (New York: W H Freeman)
34. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) 2014 Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press) Summary for Policymakers
35. The World Bank 2013 CO2 Emissions per capita https://data.worldbank.org/indicator (cited: 1 January 2017)
36. Department of Water Resources 2017 Water-Energy Nexus (cited: 1 January 2017) www.water.ca.gov/climatechange/WaterEnergyStatewide.cfm
37. San Francisco Public Utilities Commission 2014 Water Resources Division Annual Report Fiscal Year 2013-2014 (San Francisco, CA: San Francisco Water Power Sewer) https://sfwater.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=6057
38. San Francisco Public Utilities Commission 2016 2015 Potable Offset Investigation Summary Report (San Francisco, CA: San Francisco Water Power Sewer) http://sfwater.org/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentID=9363
39. Sapkota M et al 2014 An overview of hybrid water supply systems in the context of urban water management: challenges and opportunities Water 7 153-74
40. City and County of San Francisco 2015 Ordinance (San Francisco: Board of Supervisors) http://www.sfbos.org/ftp/uploadedfiles/bdsupvrs/ordinances15/o0109-15.pdf
41. Legislative Counsel Bureau 2016 SB-32 California Global Warming Solutions Actof 2006: Emissions Limit (Sacramento, CA: Legislative Counsel Bureau) https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill-id=201520160SB32