Water reuse versus water conveyance for supply augmentation: Cost and carbon footprint

Water‐stressed communities are beginning to consider alternative sources of water supply augmentation. We provide a comparison of water conveyance and potable water reuse over a range of water demands. On a unit basis (US$/1,000 gal) and under current practice, water reuse is generally less costly a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:AWWA water science 2020-01, Vol.2 (1), p.n/a
Main Authors: Chamberlain, Jim F., Tromble, Evan, Graves, Michael, Sabatini, David
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
advanced water treatment
carbon footprint
life‐cycle cost
potable water reuse
water conveyance
water reuse
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Water‐stressed communities are beginning to consider alternative sources of water supply augmentation. We provide a comparison of water conveyance and potable water reuse over a range of water demands. On a unit basis (US$/1,000 gal) and under current practice, water reuse is generally less costly at low flow rates (100 miles), treatment schemes that are based on reverse osmosis (RO) also become cost competitive. Similarly, both BAC‐based and RO‐based reuse schemes have a lower or comparable carbon footprint on a unit basis (g CO2‐equiv/1,000 gal) for a flow rate of 20 mgd. In spite of public reluctance, managers would do well to consider reuse in their portfolio of water supply options.
ISSN:2577-8161
2577-8161
DOI:10.1002/aws2.1170