Advertisement

A fuzzy multi-objective optimization approach for treated wastewater allocation

  • Saeid TayebikhoramiEmail author
  • Mohammad Reza NikooEmail author
  • Mojtaba Sadegh
Article
  • 76 Downloads

Abstract

In face of the new climate and socio-environmental conditions, conventional sources of water are no longer reliable to supply all water demands. Different alternatives are proposed to augment the conventional sources, including treated wastewater. Optimal and objective allocation of treated wastewater to different stakeholders through an optimization process that takes into account multiple objectives of the system, unlike the conventional ground and surface water resources, has been widely unexplored. This paper proposes a methodology to allocate treated wastewater, while observing the physical constraints of the system. A multi-objective optimization model (MOM) is utilized herein to identify the optimal solutions on the pareto front curve satisfying different objective functions. Fuzzy transformation method (FTM) is utilized to develop different fuzzy scenarios that account for potential uncertainties of the system. Non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm II (NSGA-II) is then expanded to include the confidence level of fuzzy parameters, and thereby several trade-off curves between objective functions are generated. Subsequently, the best solution on each trade-off curve is specified with preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation (PROMETHEE). Sensitivity analysis of criteria’s weights in the PROMETHEE method indicates that the results are highly dependent on the weighting scenario, and hence weights should be carefully selected. We apply this framework to allocate projected treated wastewater in the planning horizon of 2031, which is expected to be produced by wastewater treatment plants in the eastern regions of Tehran province, Iran. Results revealed the efficiency of this methodology to obtain the most confident allocation strategy in the presence of uncertainties.

Keywords

Treated wastewater allocation NSGA-II multi-objective optimization Fuzzy transformation method (FTM) PROMETHEE multi-criteria decision-making Sensitivity analysis 

Notes

References

  1. Alborzi, A., Mirchi, A., Moftakhari, H., Mallakpour, I., Alian, S., Nazemi, A., Hassanzadeh, E., Mazdiyasni, O., Ashraf, S., Madani, K., Norouzi, H., Azarderakhsh, M., Mehran, A., Sadegh, M., Castelleti, A., & AghaKouchak, A. (2018). Climate-informed environmental inflows to revive a drying lake facing meteorological and anthropogenic droughts. Environmental Research Letters, 13(8), 084010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alizadeh, M. R., Nikoo, M. R., & Rakhshandehroo, G. R. (2017). Hydro-environmental management of groundwater resources: a fuzzy-based multi-objective compromise approach. Journal of Hydrology, 551, 540–554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Babel, M. S., Gupta, A. D., & Nayak, D. K. (2005). A model for optimal allocation of water to competing demands. Water Resources Management, 19, 693–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Behzadian, M., Kazemzadeh, R. B., Albadavi, A., & Aghdasi, M. (2009). PROMETHEE: a comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 200, 198–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belton, V., & Stewart, T. (2002). Multi-criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Boston: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bouyssou, D. (2005). Conjoint measurement tools for MCDM. In J. Figueria, S. Greco, & M. Ehrgott (Eds.), Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys (pp. 73–130). Boston: Springer Science Business Media, Inc..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brans, J. P., & Mareschal, B. (1992). PROMETHEE V – MCDM problems with segmentation constraints. Information Systems and Operational Research, 30(2), 85–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brans, J. P., & Mareschal, B. (1995). The PROMETHEE VI procedure. How to differentiate hard from soft multi-criteria problems. Journal of Decision Systems, 4, 213–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brans, J. P., & Mareschal, B. (2005). PROMETHEE methods. In J. Figueria, S. Greco, & M. Ehrgott (Eds.), Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys (pp. 163–195). Boston: Springer Science Business Media Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Brans, J. P., & Vincke, P. (1985). A preference ranking organization method (the PROMETHEE method for multiple criteria decision making). Management Science, 31, 647–656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brans, J. P., Mareschal, B., & Vincke, P. (1984). PROMETHEE: a new family of outranking methods in multi-criteria analysis. In Operational Research (Vol. 84, pp. 408–421). North Holland: Elsevier Science Publishers B.V.Google Scholar
  12. Brans, J. P., Vincke, P., & Mareschal, B. (1986). How to select and how to rank projects: the PROMETHEE method. European Journal of Operational Research, 24(2), 228–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brans, J. P., Macharis, C., Kunsch, P. L., Chevalier, A., & Schwaninger, M. (1998). Combining multi-criteria decision aid and system dynamics for the control of socio-economic processes. An iterative real-time procedure. European Journal of Operational Research, 109, 428–441.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chu, J. Y., Chen, J. N., Wang, C., & Fu, P. (2004). Wastewater reuse potential analysis: implications for China’s water resources management. Water Research, 38, 2746–2756.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. D’Angelo, J. P., & West, D. B. (2000). Mathematical thinking/problem-solving and proofs (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  16. Figueria, J., Greco, S., & Ehrgott, M. (2005). Introduction. In J. Figueria, S. Greco, & M. Ehrgott (Eds.), Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys (pp. 21–36). Boston: Springer Science + Business Media, Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ghosh, S., Mujumdar, P. P., (2005). A fuzzy waste-load allocation model integrating skewness of distributions. In: Proc. National Conference on Advances in Water Engineering for Sustainable Development (NCAWESD—2005) (pp. 55–61) 16–17 May IIT Madras, India.Google Scholar
  18. Ghosh, S., & Mujumdar, P. P. (2006). Risk minimization in water quality control problems of a river system. Advances in Water Resources, 29(3), 458–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hanss, M. (2002). The transformation method for the simulation and analysis of systems with uncertain parameters. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 130, 277–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hanss, M. (2003). The extended transformation method for the simulation and analysis of fuzzy-parameterized models. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 11(06), 711–727.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hochstrat, R., Wintgens, T., & Melin, T. (2008). Development of integrated water reuse strategies. Desalination, 218, 208–217.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kiker, G. A., Bridges, T. S., Varghese, A., Seager, T. P., & Linkov, I. (2005). Applications of multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental decision-making. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management, 1(2), 95–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Macharis, C., Springael, J., De Brucker, K., & Verbeke, A. (2004). PROMETHEE and AHP: the design of operational synergies in multi-criteria analysis. Strengthening PROMETHEE with ideas of AHP. European Journal of Operational Research, 153, 307–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Madani, K., Zarezadeh, M., (2012). Bankruptcy methods for resolving water resources conflicts. In: World Environmental and Water Resources Congress (May 20–24) 2012. ASCE.Google Scholar
  25. Mahjouri, N., & Pourmand, E. (2017). A social choice-based methodology for treated wastewater reuse in urban and suburban areas. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 189(7), 325. 7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mallakpour, I., Sadegh, M., & AghaKouchak, A. (2018). A new normal for streamflow in California in a warming climate: wetter wet seasons and drier dry seasons. Journal of Hydrology, 567, 203–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Mallakpour, I., AghaKouchak, A., & Sadegh, M. (2019). Climate-induced changes in the risk of hydrological failure of major dams in California. Geophysical Research Letters, 46(4), 2130–2139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Niemczynowicz, J. (1999). Urban hydrology and water management – present and future challenges. Urban Water, 1(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Nikoo, M. R., Kerachian, R., Karimi, A., & Azadnia, A. A. (2013). Optimal water and waste-load allocations in rivers using a fuzzy transformation technique: a case study. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 185(3), 2483–2502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Ouda, O. K. M. (2015). Treated wastewater use in Saudi Arabia: challenges and initiatives. International Journal of Water Resources Development, 32(5), 799–809.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pourmand, E., & Mahjouri, N. (2018). A fuzzy multi-stakeholder multi-criteria methodology for water allocation and reuse in metropolitan areas. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 190(7), 444.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. RAYAB Consulting Engineers. (2013). The plan for the use of effluents of treatment plants in the eastern part of Tehran province, Iran (in Persian). Regional Water Company of Tehran Province. Google Scholar
  33. Rehana, S., & Mujumdar, P. P. (2009). An imprecise fuzzy risk approach for water quality management of a river system. Journal of Environmental Management, 90, 3653e3664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Roozbahani, A., Zahraie, B., & Tabesh, M. (2012). PROMETHEE with precedence order in the criteria (PPOC) as a new group decision-making aid: an application in urban water supply management. Water Resources Management, 26(12), 3581–3599.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Roy, B. (2005). Paradigms and challenges. In J. Figueria, S. Greco, & M. Ehrgott (Eds.), Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys (pp. 3–24). Boston: Springer Science + Business Media, Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sadegh, M., & Kerachian, R. (2011). Water resources allocation using solution concepts of fuzzy cooperative games: fuzzy least core and fuzzy weak least core. Water Resources Management, 25, 2543–2573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sadegh, M., & Vrugt, J. A. (2013). Bridging the gap between GLUE and formal statistical approaches: approximate Bayesian computation. Hydrology and Earth System Sciences, 17(12), 4831–4850.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Sadegh, M., Mahjouri, N., & Kerachian, R. (2010). Optimal inter-basin water allocation using crisp and fuzzy Shapley games. Water Resources Management, 24(10), 2291–2310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Sanguanduan, N., & Nititvattananon, V. (2011). Strategic decision making for urban water reuse application: a case from Thailand. Desalination, 268, 141–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sasikumar, K., & Mujumdar, P. P. (2000). Application of fuzzy probability in water quality management of a river system. International Journal of Systems Science, 31(5), 575–591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schacht, K., Chen, Y., Tarchitzky, J., & Marschner, B. (2016). The use of treated wastewater for irrigation as a component of integrated water resources management: reducing environmental implications on soil and groundwater by evaluating site-specific soil sensitivities. In D. Borchardt, J. Bogardi, & R. Ibisch (Eds.), Integrated water resources management: concept, research and implementation (pp. 459–470). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Singh, A. P., Ghosh, S. K., & Sharma, P. (2006). Water quality management of a stretch of river Yamuna: an interactive fuzzy multi-objective approach. Water Resources Management, 21(2), 515–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Taravatrooy, N., Nikoo, M. R., Sadegh, M., & Parvinnia, M. (2018). A hybrid clustering-fusion methodology for land subsidence estimation. Natural Hazards, 1–22.Google Scholar
  44. Tscheikner-Gratl, F., Egger, P., Rauch, W., & Kleidorfer, M. (2017). Comparison of multi-criteria decision support methods for integrated rehabilitation prioritization. Water, 9(2), 68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wang, Z., & Triantophyllou, E. (2006). Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods. Omega, 36(1), 45–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Zhang, K., Kluck, C., & Achari, G. (2009). A comparative approach for ranking contaminated sites based on the risk assessment paradigm using fuzzy PROMETHEE. Environmental Management, 44, 952–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Zhang, W., Wang, C., Li, Y., Wang, P., Wang, Q., & Wang, D. (2014). Seeking sustainability: multi-objective evolutionary optimization for urban wastewater reuse in China. Environmental Science Technology, 48.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Engineering, Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringShiraz UniversityShirazIran
  2. 2.College of Engineering, Department of Civil EngineeringBoise State UniversityBoiseUSA

Personalised recommendations