Abstract

Placing water quality in rivers at the centre of water infrastructure planning and management is an important objective. In response there has been a range of ‘whole system’ analyses. Few studies, however, consider both abstraction (water removed from rivers) and discharge (water returned) to inform the future planning of water systems. In this work we present a systems approach to analysing future water planning options where system development prioritises the water quality of the receiving river. We provide a theoretical demonstration by integrating water supply and wastewater infrastructure, and downstream river water quality, on an open-source, stylised, systems model for London, UK, at a citywide scale. We show that models which consider either supply or wastewater separately will underestimate impacts of effluent on the water quality, in some cases by amounts that would require £1 billion worth of infrastructure equivalent to mitigate. We highlight the utility of the systems approach in evaluating integrated water infrastructure planning using both socio-economic and environmental indicators. Through this approach we find unintended impacts from planning options on downstream river quality; including benefits from water demand management and rainwater harvesting, and costs from wastewater reuse. Finally, we present a novel management planning option between supply and wastewater, which we refer to as ion-Effluent Dilution (AED), that is, to reduce river abstractions during high precipitation events to dilute untreated sewer spills. The AED option is found to provide up to £200 million worth of equivalent infrastructure in river quality improvements and has minimal impact on the reliability of water supply while requiring only a change in operational decision making. This proof-of-concept study highlights that seeing our water systems differently with this holistic approach could fundamentally change the way we think about future water infrastructure planning so that it works both for people and the environment.

Highlights

  • 35 The impact of water infrastructure on river quality has long been a key element in the wider discussion 58 59 36 around water planning and management (Gleick, 2003; Vörösmarty et al, 2010)

  • 44 We look to the urban water system to illustrate this point

  • In Supplementary Material S3, we provide a simple replication of Figure 6 but with 250 river flow to show that abstraction effluent-dilution (AED) is unlikely to significantly interact with flood risk

Read more

Summary

Introduction

35 The impact of water infrastructure on river quality has long been a key element in the wider discussion 58 59 36 around water planning and management (Gleick, 2003; Vörösmarty et al, 2010). Without due 37 consideration to environmental impacts, water infrastructure cannot be described as sustainable (Loucks, 2000). This desire to put the environment central to planning can be facilitated by a systems modelling approach (Coombes & Kuczera, 2002; Kasprzyk et al, 2018). There is a growing literature showing how the expanding of system boundaries changes the behaviour of modelled processes in water systems (Coombes et al, 2016) and even to 43 the extent that would require a system to be managed differently (Dobson et al, 2019b). 44 We look to the urban water system to illustrate this point.

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call