Evaluating the Interests of Different Stakeholders in Beijing Wastewater Reuse Systems for Sustainable Urban Water Management
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Studied Wastewater Reuse Systems
3. Evaluation Method
4. Analysis from the Perspectives of Different Stakeholders
4.1. Perspective of the MAC
4.1.1. Centralized Systems
Cost Evaluation
Benefits Evaluation
4.1.2. Decentralized Systems
Cost Evaluation
Benefits Evaluation
4.2. Perspective of the MEPB
4.2.1. Centralized Systems
4.2.2. Decentralized Systems
4.3. Perspective of Plant Managers
4.3.1. Centralized Systems
4.3.2. Decentralized Systems
4.4. Perspective of Users
4.4.1. Centralized Systems
4.4.2. Decentralized Systems
5. Results and Comparative Analysis
5.1. Comparison among Different Stakeholders
5.2. Comparison between Centralized and Decentralized Systems
6. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Acknowledgments
Author Contributions
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Starkl, M.; Brunner, N. Feasibility versus sustainability in urban water management. J. Environ. Manag. 2004, 71, 245–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chen, W.; Bai, Y.; Zhang, W.; Lyu, S.; Jiao, W. Perceptions of different stakeholders on reclaimed water reuse: The case of Beijing, China. Sustainability 2015, 7, 9696–9710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sa-nguanduan, N.; Nititvattananon, V. Strategic decision making for urban water reuse application: A case from Thailand. Desalination 2011, 268, 141–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Derak, M.; Taiquib, L.; Aledoc, A.; Cortina, J. Similarities in stakeholder identification of restoration targets in a semiarid area. J. Arid Environ. 2016, 128, 30–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, X.; van Dijk, M.P. The Factors in the Decision to Continue Rainwater Harvesting Systems in Beijing to achieve Sustainable Water Management. Water 2016, 8, 7–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bixio, D.; Thoeye, C.; de Koning, J.; Joksimovic, D.; Savic, D.; Wintgens, T.; Melin, T. Wastewater reuse in Europe. Desalination 2006, 187, 89–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogoshi, M.; Suzuki, Y.; Asano, T. Water Reuse in Japan. Water Sci. Technol. 2001, 43, 17–23. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Yi, L.; Jiao, W.; Chen, X.; Chen, W. An overview of reclaimed water reuse in China. J. Environ. Sci. 2011, 23, 1585–1593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liang, X.; van Dijk, M.P. Financial and economic feasibility of decentralized wastewater reuse systems in Beijing. Water Sci. Technol. 2010, 61, 1965–1973. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chang, D.; Ma, Z. Wastewater reclamation and reuse in Beijing: Influence factors and policy implications. Desalination 2012, 297, 72–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, W.; Chen, W.; Jiao, W. Policy evaluation and analysis on reclaimed wastewater reuse in Beijing. Huan Jing Ke Xue Xue Bao/Acta Sci. Circumst. 2013, 33, 2862–2870. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, Z.; Ngo, H.H.; Guo, W. A critical review on sustainability assessment of recycled water schemes. Sci. Total Environ. 2012, 426, 13–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fan, Y.; Chen, W.; Jiao, W.; Chang, A.C. Cost-benefit analysis of reclaimed wastewater reuses in Beijing. Desalination Water Treat. 2015, 53, 1224–1233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Menikpura, S.N.M.; Gheewala, S.H.; Bonnet, S. Framework for life cycle sustainability assessment of municipal solid waste management systems with an application to a case study in Thailand. Waste Manag. Res. 2012, 30, 708–719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Amer, M.; Daim, T.U. Selection of renewable energy technologies for a developing county: A case of Pakistan. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2011, 15, 420–435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Plakas, K.V.; Georgiadis, A.A.; Karabelas, A.J. Sustainability assessment of tertiary wastewater treatment technologies: A multi-criteria analysis. Water Sci. Technol. 2016, 73, 1532–1540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Liang, X.; van Dijk, M.P. Cost benefit analysis of centralized wastewater reuse systems. J. Benefit-Cost Anal. 2012, 3, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asano, T. Urban Water Recycling. Water Sci. Technol. 2005, 51, 83–89. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Beijing Water Authority. Analysis of Wastewater Reuse in Beijing; The Working Papers of Beijing Water Authority; Beijing Water Authority: Beijing, China, 2002.
- Hernandez, F.; Urkiaga, A.; Fuentes, D.L.; Bis, B.; Chiru, E.; Balazs, B.; Wintgens, T. Feasibility Studies for Water Reuse Projects: An Economical Approach. Desalination 2006, 187, 253–261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Skeer, J.; Wang, Y. Carbon charges and natural gas use in china. Energy Policy 2005, 34, 2251–2262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dahowski, R.T.; Li, X.; Davidson, C.L.; Wei, N.; Dooley, J.J.; Gentile, R.H. A preliminary cost curve assessment of carbon dioxide capture and storage potential in China. Energy Procedia 2009, 1, 2849–2856. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tol, R.S.J. The Marginal Damage Costs of Carbon Dioxide Emissions: An Assessment of the Uncertainties. Energy Policy 2005, 33, 2064–2074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Christova-Boal, D.; Eden, R.E.; McFarlane, S. An Investigation into Greywater Reuse for Urban Residential Properties. Desalination 1996, 106, 391–397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ottoson, J.; Stenström, T.A. Faecal Contamination of Greywater and Associated Microbial Risks. Water Res. 2003, 37, 645–655. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Haller, L.; Hutton, G.; Bartram, J. Estimating the Costs and Health Benefits of Water and Sanitation Improvements at Global Level. J. Water Health 2007, 5, 467–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Aramaki, T.; Galal, M.; Hanaki, K. Estimation of reduced and increasing health risks by installation of urban wastewater systems. Water Sci. Technol. 2006, 53, 247–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- World Health Organization. Global Burden of Disease Report. 2004. Available online: www.who.org (accessed on 25 October 2016).
- World Bank. Cost of Pollution in China: Economic Estimates of Physical Damages. 2007. Available online: www.worldbank.org/eapenvironment (accessed on 25 October 2016).
- Camagni, R.; Gibelli, M.C.; Rigamonti, P. Urban Mobility and Urban Form: The Social and Environmental Costs of Different Patterns of Urban Expansion. Ecol. Econ. 2002, 40, 199–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luo, Y. The Social Cost of Residential Resettlement in China. Master’s Thesis, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Beijing Municipal Statistics Bureau. Beijing Statistical Yearbook; Beijing Statistics Press: Beijing, China, 2014.
- Wang, B. Wastewater Reclamation and Reuse in Chinese Cities. Available online: www. chinacitywater.org (accessed on 9 June 2009). (In Chinese)
- Beijing Water Authority. Pricing the Reused Water in Beijing; The Working Papers of Beijing Water Authority; Beijing Water Authority: Beijing, China, 2002.
- Liu, X.; Zou, C. Calculating and forecasting shadow prices of all kinds of water in China and its nine major river basins. Adv. Sci. Technol. Water Resour. 2014, 34, 11–15. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Wang, D.X.; Wang, H.; Yin, M.W. Water resource, water resource value, water resource shadow price. Water Resour. Evol. 1999, 10, 195–200. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Yuan, R.H.; Zhu, J.L.; Tao, X.Y.; Mao, C.M. Application of shadow price method in calculation of water resources theoretical value. J. Nat. Resour. 2002, 17, 757–761. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Li, H. A study on the relation between economic growth and employment elasticity. J. Financ. Econ. 2003, 29, 24–27. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Ding, S.; Lu, X.; Jiang, J. Re-estimation of China’s employment elasticity. J. Sichuan Univ. (Soc. Sci. Ed.) 2009, 2, 81–88. [Google Scholar]
- Liu, F.X. The study on the monetary cost of noise pollution in Dalian city. Liaoning Urban Environ. Technol. 1999, 19, 27–29. (In Chinese) [Google Scholar]
- Department of Planning and Program. The Water Planning in Beijing; Chinese Department of Planning and Program: Beijing, China, 2001.
Centralized Systems | Decentralized Systems | |
---|---|---|
Cost (CG) | Initial investment (I1) | |
O&M cost (M1) | Initial investment (I2) | |
Carbon dioxide emission (E1) | O&M cost (M2) | |
Health risk (H1) | Noise pollution (N2) | |
Residential resettlement (V1) | Health risk (H2) | |
Noise pollution | Air pollution | |
Air pollution | ||
Benefits (BG) | Cost saving on fertilizers (L1) | Cost savings on constructing pipes (X2) |
Increase of water availability (O1) | Increase in water availability (O2) | |
Increase of jobs (J1) | Raising social awareness (A2) | |
Reuse of pollutants | Cost saving on water distribution | |
Raising social awareness | Cost saving on water purification |
Centralized Systems | Decentralized Systems | |
---|---|---|
Cost (CE) | Carbon dioxide emission (E1) Noise pollution Air pollution | Noise pollution (N1) Air pollution |
Benefits (BE) | Increase of water availability (O1) | Increase in water availability (O2) |
Centralized Systems | Decentralized Systems | |
---|---|---|
Cost (CP) | Initial investment (I1) O&M cost (M1) | Initial investment (I2) O&M cost (M2) |
Benefits (BP) | Revenue (R1) Subsidies (S1) | Revenue (R2) Subsidies (S2) |
Domestic | Landscape | Industrial | Power Generating Plant | |
---|---|---|---|---|
Reused water | 1 | 0.9 | 1.5 | 0.9 |
Municipal water | 4 | 4 | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Centralized Systems | Decentralized Systems | |
---|---|---|
Cost (CP) | Health risk (H1) | Noise pollution (N2) Health risk (H2) Air pollution |
Benefits (BP) | Money saving (m1) | Money saving (m2) |
Decentralized Plants | Centralized Plants | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Plant 1 | Plant 2 | Plant 3 | Plant 4 | |
Capacity (m3/day) | 65 | 400 | 470,000 | 60,000 |
From the perspective of MAC | ||||
Cost (CNY ¥/m3) | 14.8 | 3.4 | 0.4 | 0.5 |
Benefits(CNY ¥/m3) | 67 | 18.5 | 3 | 3 |
Ratio of benefits to cost | 4.5 | 5.4 | 7.5 | 6 |
Economically feasible | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
From the perspective of MEPB | ||||
Cost (CNY ¥/m3) | 0.14 | 0.007 | 0.009 | 0.0009 |
Benefits (CNY ¥/m3) | 1.7 | 1.93 | 1.47 | 1.47 |
Ratio of benefits to cost | 12.35 | 259 | 167 | 1697 |
Economically feasible | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
From the perspective of plant managers | ||||
Cost (CNY ¥/m3) | 14.5 | 3.5 | 0.39 | 0.5 |
Benefits (CNY ¥/m3) | 1.9 | 1.3 | 0.6 | 0.9 |
Ratio of benefits to cost | 0.13 | 0.37 | 1.5 | 1.8 |
Economically feasible | No | No | Yes | Yes |
From the perspective of users | ||||
Cost (CNY ¥/m3) | 0.34 | 0.02 | 0.05 | 0.02 |
Benefits (CNY ¥/m3) | 3 | 0 | 3 | 3 |
Ratio of benefits to cost | 8.8 | 0 | 60 | 150 |
Economically feasible | Yes | No | Yes | Yes |
© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Liang, X.; Van Dijk, M.P. Evaluating the Interests of Different Stakeholders in Beijing Wastewater Reuse Systems for Sustainable Urban Water Management. Sustainability 2016, 8, 1098. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8111098
Liang X, Van Dijk MP. Evaluating the Interests of Different Stakeholders in Beijing Wastewater Reuse Systems for Sustainable Urban Water Management. Sustainability. 2016; 8(11):1098. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8111098
Chicago/Turabian StyleLiang, Xiao, and Meine Pieter Van Dijk. 2016. "Evaluating the Interests of Different Stakeholders in Beijing Wastewater Reuse Systems for Sustainable Urban Water Management" Sustainability 8, no. 11: 1098. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8111098