E-Mail Alert

Add your e-mail address to receive forthcoming issues of this journal:

Journal Browser

Journal Browser

Special Issue "Development of Alternative Water Sources in the Urban Sector"

A special issue of Water (ISSN 2073-4441).

Deadline for manuscript submissions: 15 January 2018

Special Issue Editor

Guest Editor
Prof. Dr. Eran Friedler

Faculty of Environmental, Water and Agricultural Engineering, Technion—Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa 32000, Israel
Website | E-Mail
Interests: alternative water sources and their influence on sustainable urban water use; greywater; rainwater harvesting; municipal sewers

Special Issue Information

Dear Colleagues,

Population growth and urbanisation lead to ever-increasing pressure on potable water sources. Climate change amplifies this stress. Centralised approaches to urban water infrastructure (water supply, wastewater collection and treatment and urban drainage) have been the prevalent practice worldwide for many decades. The advantages of this centralised approach are lately being questioned, while interest in alternative water sources is increasing. Transition to a distributed or a combined centralised-distributed approached where alternative water sources play a significant role, is envisaged to enhance water security, lower energy demand, lower maintenance costs, lead to co-management of the various facets of the urban water cycle, enhance sustainability, and encourage local community engagement. Furthermore, in contrast with centralised approach, alternative water sources are able to supply 'fit for purpose' water.

The proposed Special Issue intends to bring together recent research findings from renowned scientists in this field. The goal is to assemble contributions on alternative water sources that may include, amongst others, harvested rainwater or stormwater, greywater and municipal wastewater. We seek contributions that analyse various alternative water sources systems especially ones that puts them in the context of the urban water cycle.

Prof. Dr. Eran Friedler
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All papers will be peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a single-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Water is an international peer-reviewed open access monthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

Keywords

  • Alternative water sources

  • Onsite treatment and reuse

  • Rainwater harvesting

  • Greywater reuse

  • Sustainable urban water use

Published Papers (4 papers)

View options order results:
result details:
Displaying articles 1-4
Export citation of selected articles as:

Research

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle UV Disinfection of Hand-Rinse Greywater and Performance Testing Using Indigenous Staphylococcus spp.
Water 2017, 9(12), 963; doi:10.3390/w9120963
Received: 1 November 2017 / Revised: 4 December 2017 / Accepted: 8 December 2017 / Published: 11 December 2017
PDF Full-text (678 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text | Supplementary Files
Abstract
Greywater reuse is a feasible solution for decreasing raw water extraction in urban and rural settings. However, pathogen-specific performance guidelines and regulations have only recently been recommended; practical means to assess performance are missing. Here we examine the efficacy of Staphylococcus spp. as
[...] Read more.
Greywater reuse is a feasible solution for decreasing raw water extraction in urban and rural settings. However, pathogen-specific performance guidelines and regulations have only recently been recommended; practical means to assess performance are missing. Here we examine the efficacy of Staphylococcus spp. as an endogenous surrogate for greywater pathogen reduction performance testing, by evaluating UV-C irradiation of hand-rinse greywater, and the variability in UV resistance between different wild Staphylococcus species. Hand-rinse greywater samples were collected from five participants, and a collimated UV-C beam (256 nm) was used to assess log10 reductions. Assays of colony-forming units on tryptic soy agar (TSA) were compared to mannitol salt agar (MSA) using LysostaphinTM to confirm Staphylococcus spp. After irradiating raw hand-rinse samples to a dose of 220 mJ·cm−2, log10 reductions of Staphylococcus spp. were similar (2.1 and 2.2, respectively, p = 0.112). The similarity of the reduction based on TSA and Staphylococcus-specific culture assays following UV irradiation and the dominating presence of Staphylococcus spp. suggests that Staphylococcus spp. could be used as an endogenous performance surrogate group for greywater treatment testing. Suspended wild Staphylococcus isolates were irradiated with 256 nm UV-C to compare the variability of different Staphylococcus species. Staphylococcus isolates exhibited significant variance in log10 reduction values when exposed to 11 mJ·cm−2 of UV-C. Staphylococcus hominis subsp. hominis exhibited surprising resistance to UV-C, with only a 1.6-log10 reduction when exposed to 11 mJ·cm−2 of UV-C (most other isolates exhibited > 5-log10 reduction). The efficacy of UV-C was also significantly reduced when the sunscreen oxybenzone was present at a possible endogenous greywater concentration. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Development of Alternative Water Sources in the Urban Sector)
Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle Water Saving and Cost Analysis of Large-Scale Implementation of Domestic Rain Water Harvesting in Minor Mediterranean Islands
Water 2017, 9(12), 916; doi:10.3390/w9120916
Received: 20 October 2017 / Revised: 16 November 2017 / Accepted: 22 November 2017 / Published: 25 November 2017
PDF Full-text (5343 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
This paper describes a novel methodology to evaluate the benefits of large-scale installation of domestic Rain Water Harvesting (RWH) systems in multi-story buildings. The methodology was specifically developed for application to small settlements of the minor Mediterranean islands characterized by sharp fluctuations in
[...] Read more.
This paper describes a novel methodology to evaluate the benefits of large-scale installation of domestic Rain Water Harvesting (RWH) systems in multi-story buildings. The methodology was specifically developed for application to small settlements of the minor Mediterranean islands characterized by sharp fluctuations in precipitation and water demands between winter and summer periods. The methodology is based on the combined use of regressive models for water saving evaluation and of geospatial analysis tools for semi-automatic collection of spatial information at the building/household level. An application to the old town of Lipari (Aeolian islands) showed potential for high yearly water savings (between 30% and 50%), with return on investment in less than 15 years for about 50% of the installed RWH systems. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Development of Alternative Water Sources in the Urban Sector)
Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle Use of Cotton as a Carbon Source for Denitrification in Biofilters for Groundwater Remediation
Water 2017, 9(9), 714; doi:10.3390/w9090714
Received: 30 July 2017 / Revised: 30 August 2017 / Accepted: 15 September 2017 / Published: 18 September 2017
PDF Full-text (3046 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
This study is part of a comprehensive research aimed at the development and application of the “Water Sensitive Cities” idea in Israel. This is a sustainable concept, incorporating among others the harvesting, treatment, and reuse of storm-water. The use of engineered biofiltration systems
[...] Read more.
This study is part of a comprehensive research aimed at the development and application of the “Water Sensitive Cities” idea in Israel. This is a sustainable concept, incorporating among others the harvesting, treatment, and reuse of storm-water. The use of engineered biofiltration systems for the harvesting and treatment of storm-water in Israel is complicated due to the prolonged dry climate period, spanning 7–8 months of the year. Therefore, the tactic suggested is to use a hybrid biofiltration system for both storm-water harvesting/polishing during winter, and for remediation of nitrate-contaminated groundwater during summer. This paper focuses on the summer design (denitrification) configuration. In preliminary experiments, it was found that crude cotton could serve as an effective carbon source for denitrification. Further results are reported herein regarding the design and operation of biofilter columns applied for the treatment of synthetic mixtures simulating nitrate-contaminated groundwater. The columns were composed of crude cotton wool and polyethylene beads, which prevented the effect of cotton compression. This application was shown to enable controlled removal of nitrate to low levels, while emitting very low concentrations of total organic carbon (TOC) and nitrite. It was also concluded that a biofilter requires judicious design and operation, since complete removal of nitrogen oxides might lead to the formation of undesired compounds such as sulfides due to the development of anaerobic conditions. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Development of Alternative Water Sources in the Urban Sector)
Figures

Figure 1

Open AccessFeature PaperArticle End-User Cost-Benefit Prioritization for Selecting Rainwater Harvesting and Greywater Reuse in Social Housing
Water 2017, 9(7), 516; doi:10.3390/w9070516
Received: 26 May 2017 / Revised: 1 July 2017 / Accepted: 6 July 2017 / Published: 12 July 2017
Cited by 1 | PDF Full-text (2871 KB) | HTML Full-text | XML Full-text
Abstract
Rainwater harvesting (RWH) and greywater reuse (GWR) are increasingly being considered at the building-level to achieve multiple goals. Cost-benefit assessments facilitate decision-making; however, most are focused on large-scale systems with limited information available for households from developing countries. To better understand the prioritization
[...] Read more.
Rainwater harvesting (RWH) and greywater reuse (GWR) are increasingly being considered at the building-level to achieve multiple goals. Cost-benefit assessments facilitate decision-making; however, most are focused on large-scale systems with limited information available for households from developing countries. To better understand the prioritization of costs and benefits by potential end-users in this context, this paper presents an assessment of an RWH/GWR system in low income, low consumption households in a social housing development in Colombia. From an initial household consultation, preferences related to the use of RWH/GWR were identified and three alternatives were proposed and designed. In a follow-up consultation, potential end-users were engaged with the cost-benefit of the proposed alternatives. Potential end-users prioritized the selection of the system with potable water savings of 25%, a payback period of 30 years, an internal return rate of 4.7%, and a Benefit/Cost ratio of 1.3. Of the three alternatives, this system had the median payback period, highest investment, and highest maintenance cost, but also the highest volumetric water saving and highest water and sewerage bill savings. In contrast to findings from developed countries, this indicates that minimising the cost may not be the primary decision making criteria in some developing country contexts, where perhaps a greater value is placed on conserving water resources. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Development of Alternative Water Sources in the Urban Sector)
Figures

Back to Top