Water Resources Management

, Volume 27, Issue 2, pp 433–449 | Cite as

A Decision Support Methodology for Integrated Urban Water Management in Remote Settlements

  • G. Tjandraatmadja
  • A. K. Sharma
  • T. Grant
  • F. Pamminger
Article

Abstract

This paper describes a decision support methodology for the selection of a wastewater treatment system based on integrated urban water management principles for a remote settlement with failing septic systems. Thirty-two service and treatment technologies options were considered, these included: (i) conventional gravity sewerage, (ii) common effluent drainage, (iii) community sewage treatment plant based on various technology options (lagoon treatment, Living Machine®, sequencing batch reactor, membrane biological reactor, rotating biological contactor, recirculating textile filter, extended aeration) with and without urine separation, greywater diversion or treatment and reuse at household scale. The options were assessed using a framework that considered technical, economic, environmental and social factors relevant to the local community and associated stakeholders (water utility, government agencies) and tools such as engineering design, life cycle assessment and multi-criteria analysis for evaluation of overall sustainability. Adoption of a systems approach allowed the identification of benefits and trade-offs among stakeholders creating opportunities for adoption of more innovative treatment options and maximisation of the sustainability of the service. The treatment option that maximised the social, environmental and economic benefits for the settlement consisted of individual households adopting greywater treatment, storage and reuse, urine separation and a community wastewater treatment plant with recirculating textile filter technology. This solution provided the required sanitation, increased the sources of water supply to residents, satisfied environmental regulator requirements, minimised nitrogen discharge to waterways and provided an option for beneficial reuse of urine for neighbouring farmers at a cost and management needs acceptable to the water utility.

Keywords

Wastewater treatment Decentralised system Sustainable development Design Life cycle assessment Multi-criteria analysis 

Notes

Acknowledgments

S. Mennen, A. Kaksonnen, T. Ellis, F. Boulaire and L. Neumann for suggestions on the manuscript.

References

  1. Balkema AJ, Preisig HA, Otterpol R, Lambert FJD (2002) Indicators of sustainability assessment of wastewater treatment systems. Urban Water 4:153–161CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barton AB, Smith AJ, Maheepala S, BarronO (2009) Advancing IUWM through an understanding of the urban water balance, 18th World IMACS/MOSSIM Congress, Cairns, Australia, 13–17 July 2009, http://mssanz.org.au/modsim09
  3. Berndtsson JC (2006) Experiences from implementation of a urine separation system: goals, planning, reality. Build Environ 41:427–437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bradley BR, Daigger GT, Rubin R, Tchobanoglous G (2002) Evaluation of onsite wastewater treatment technologies using sustainable development criteria. Clean Techn Environ Policy 4:87–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Butler D, Parkinson J (1997) Towards sustainable urban drainage. Water Sci Technol 35(9):53–63Google Scholar
  6. Cason TN, Gangadharan L, Duke C (2003) A laboratory study of auctions for reducing non‐point source pollution. J Environ Econ Manag 46(3):446–471Google Scholar
  7. Crites R, Tchobanoglous G (2003) Small and decentralised wastewater management systems. McGraw-HillGoogle Scholar
  8. Crockett J, Oliver S, Millar C (2003) Feasibility study for a dry composting toilet and urine separation demonstration project. http://www.ghd.com.au/aptrixpublishing.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/PP+CompostingToiletStudy+PDF/$FILE/e4215.pdf. Accessed 20 Feb 2010
  9. Diaper C (2004) Innovation in on‐site domestic water management systems in Australia: A review of rainwater, greywater, stormwater and wastewater utilization techniques, CSIRO MIT Technical report 2004–073, April 2004Google Scholar
  10. Diaper C, Tjandraatmadja G, Kenway S (2007) Sustainable subdivisions: Review of technologies for integrated water services. Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation, Research report, ISBN 978-0-9803503-9-5Google Scholar
  11. EPA Vic (1995) Publication 473 ‘Managing sewer discharges to inland waters’. http://epanote2.epa.vic.gov.au/EPA/Publications.NSF/PubDocsLU/473?OpenDocument. Accessed 20 Dec 2010
  12. EPA Vic (2003) Publication 464.2 ‘Guidelines for environmental management—Use of reclaimed water’, Environmental Protection Agency of Victoria. ISBN: 07306 7622 6. http://epanote2.epa.vic.gov.au/EPA/publications.nsf/PubDocsLU/464.2?OpenDocument. Accessed 20 May 2011
  13. Findhorn Ecovillage (2010) http://www.ecovillagefindhorn.com/findhornecovillage/biological.php. Accessed 30 Dec 2010
  14. Fittschen I, Hahn HH (1998) Characterization of the municipal wastewater part I human urine and a preliminary comparison with liquid cattle excretion. Water Sci Technol 38(6):9–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Grant T, Opray L (2007) Sustainability of alternative water and sewerage servicing options life cycle assessment stage 2—Pheasant Creek (Kinglake West), RMIT University report, May 2007Google Scholar
  16. Gray SR, Becker NSC (2002) Contaminant flows in urban residential water systems. Urban Water 4:331–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hiessl H, Walz R, Toussaint D (2005) Design and sustainability assessment of scenarios of urban water infrastructure systems. http://isi.fraunhofer.de/isi/publ/download/isi02p49/urban-water.pdf?pathAlias=/publ/downloads/isi02p49/urban-water.pdf. Accessed 20 Mar 2010
  18. Hoffman B, Nielsen SB, Elle M, Gabriel S, Eilersen AM, Henze M, Mikkelsen PS (2000) Assessing the sustainability of small wastewater systems – a context oriented approach. Environ Impact Assess Rev 20:347–357Google Scholar
  19. Jones PH et al (2004) Report: Economic and environmental impacts of disposal of kitchen organic wastes using traditional landfill—food waste disposer—home composting. Waste Management Research Unit, Griffith University, 2004Google Scholar
  20. Jonsson H (2002) Urine separating sewage systems‐environmental effects and resource usage. Water Sci Technol 46(6–7):333–340Google Scholar
  21. Jönsson H, Stenström TA, Svensson J, Sundin A (1997) Source separated urine-nutrient and heavy metal content, water saving and faecal contamination. Water Sci Technol 35(9):145–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lane J, Gardner T (2009) A life-cycle comparison of decentralised and centralised water cycle options for an SEQ urban development, Ozwater 09 conference, Melbourne 16–18 MarchGoogle Scholar
  23. Larsen TA, Gujer W (1997) The concept of sustainable urban water management. Water Sci Technol 35(9):3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Larsen TA, Alder AC, Eggen RIL, Maurer M, Lienert J (2009) Source separation: will we see a paradigm shift in wastewater handling. Environ Sci Technol 43:6121–6125CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Linkov I, Varghese A, Jamil S, Seager TP, Kiker G, Bridges T (2004) Multi-criteria decision analysis: A framework for structuring remedial decisions at contaminated sites. In: Linkov I, Ramada A (eds) Comparative risk assessment and environmental decision-making. Kluwer, p 15–54Google Scholar
  26. Lundie S, Peters GM, Beavis PC (2004) Life cycle assessment for sustainable metropolitan water systems planning. Environ Sci Technol 38(13):3465–3473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lundie S, Peters GM, Beavis PC (2005) Quantitative systems analysis as a strategic planning approach for metropolitan water service providers. Water Sci Technol 52(9):11–20Google Scholar
  28. Lundin M, Bengtsson M, Molander S (2000) Life cycle assessment of wastewater systems: influence of system boundaries and scale of calculated environmental loads. Environ Sci Technol 34:180–186Google Scholar
  29. Maheepala S, Blackmore J, Diaper C, Moglia M, Sharma A, Kenway S (2010) Integrated Urban Water Management Planning Manual, Water Research Foundation/CSIROGoogle Scholar
  30. Makropoulos CK, Butler D (2010) Distributed water infrastructure for sustainable communities. Water Resour Manag 24:2795–2816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mitchell VG, Diaper C (2005) UVQ user manual, CSIRO document no: CMIT (C) 2005-282. CSIRO, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  32. Muga HE, Mihelcic JR (2008) Sustainability of wastewater treatment technologies. J Environ Manag 88:437–447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Otterpohl R (2002) Options for alternative types of sewerage and treatment systems directed to improvement of the overall performance. Water Sci Technol 45(3):149–158Google Scholar
  34. Otterpohl R, Albold A, Oldenburg M (1999) Source control in urban sanitation and waste management: ten systems with reuse of resources. Water Sci Technol 39(5):153–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sarac K, Kohlenberg T, Davison L, Bruce JJ, White S (2001) Septic system performance: A study at Dunoon, northern NSW, On-site 01 conference, Armidale, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  36. Sharma AK, Grant AL, Tjandraatmadja G, Gray S (2006) Sustainability of alternative sewerage servicing options - Yarra Valley Water, Stage 2 - Backlog areas, CMIT (C) 2006-322, CSIRO. http://www.yvw.com.au/NR/rdonlyres/54B79D7D-73C3-4665-9308-30CE2C893938/0/CSIROStage2FINALApr07.pdf. Accessed 10 April 2010
  37. Sharma A, Grant A, Grant T, Pamminger F, Opray L (2009) Assessing environmental sustainability of urban water services. Environ Eng Sci 26(5):921–934CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. SimaPro UK Ltd (2012) SimaPro. http://www.simapro.co.uk/aboutsimapro.html. Accessed 10 June 2012
  39. State Government of Victoria (2011) http://services.land.vic.gov.au/maps/lassi.jsp. Accessed 10 March 2010
  40. Van der Keur P, Henriksen HJ, Refsgaard JC, Brugnach M, Pahl-wostl C, Dewulf A, Buiteveld H (2008) Identification of Major soruces of uncertainty in current IWTM practice. Illustrated for the Rhine Basin. Water Resour Manag 22:1677–1708CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Visual Decision (2009) Visual Decision Inc. http://www.visualdecision.com/dlab.htm. Accessed 20 May 2010
  42. West S (2003) Innovative on-site and decentralised sewage treatment reuse and management systems in Northern Europe and the USA –Report from a study tour—February to November 2000Google Scholar
  43. Wilsenach JA, Van Loosdrecht MCM (2004) Effects of separate urine collection on advanced nutrient removal processes. Environ Sci Technol 38(4):1208–1215. doi: 10.1021/es0301018 Google Scholar
  44. Winker M, Vinneras B, Muskolus A, Arnold U, Clemens J (2009) Fertiliser products from new sanitation systems: their potential values and risks. Bioresour Technol 100:4090–4096CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Tjandraatmadja
    • 1
  • A. K. Sharma
    • 1
  • T. Grant
    • 2
  • F. Pamminger
    • 3
  1. 1.CSIRO Land and WaterHighettAustralia
  2. 2.Life Cycle Strategies Pty LtdMelbourneAustralia
  3. 3.Yarra Valley WaterMitchamAustralia

Personalised recommendations