Indirect Potable Reuse: A Sustainable Water Supply Alternative
2. Existing Indirect Potable Reuse Projects
3. Studies on Health Effects
3.1. Epidemiological Studies
3.2. Toxicological Studies
4. Measures for Public Health Protection
4.1. Recycled Water Quality and Monitoring
4.2. Membrane Treatment and the Multiple Barrier Approach in Treatment
4.3. Regulatory Framework
5. Knowledge Gaps, Aspects to be Implemented and Future Research
5.1. Recycled Water Quality, Monitoring and Risk Assessment
- On-line biomonitoring systems using fish have been developed in recent years to evaluate potential health impacts without using concentrates of recycled water . Behavioral and/or physiological stress responses of organisms exposed in situ are evaluated, to provide additional assurance that untested or as yet undetected chemicals of concern would not remain undetected.
- Biomarkers for endocrine, developmental, and potential reproductive effects in aquatic organism exposed to recycled water are also under development and seem to be a promising area .
- On-line sensor technologies for triggering contaminant warning systems have proven feasible in the laboratory. For example, the USEPA studied 20 on-line commercial sensors for their ability to identify 25 injected contaminants into the distribution system by testing of 17 water quality parameters. They found that free chlorine and total organic carbon detected the widest array of contaminants and produced the largest, and most easily detectable, water quality changes . However, more research is needed linking changes in physico-chemical water quality indicators to the presence of contaminants relevant in the IPR context, and on the sensitivity and long term reliability of online sensors (such as particle counters).
- Quantitative structure activity relationship (QSAR) methods are being used not only to predict the potential toxicity of compounds based on their physical and chemical properties [80,81] but also to predict rejection of micropollutants such as pharmaceutically active compounds by different types of membranes during IPR treatment. This is a promising area that requires further research.
5.2. Regulatory Framework
5.3. Epidemiological Surveillance
5.4. Public Perception
6. Concluding Remarks
|Orange County Water District (OCWD).
Water Factory 21
|California (USA)||1975–2004||Lime clarification, recarbonation, multimedia filtration, granular activated carbon, filtration and chlorination.
RO added in 1977.
Advanced oxidation with hydrogen peroxide and UV added in 2001
|Aquifer||Less than 2 million||3.2% total OC water
4.8% OC groundwater
|OCWD Groundwater replenishment system (GRS) (Upgrade of the Water Factory 21 plant)||California (USA)||Pilot plant from 2004 to 2007 Full scale plant since 2007||MF/RO and advanced oxidation (UV and hydrogen peroxide)||Aquifer||2.3 million (300,000 to 700,000 additional residents projected by 2020).||15–18%||[8,89]|
|Denver Potable Water Demonstration Project||Colorado (USA)||1985–1992||Treatments tested included: high-pH lime clarification, sedimentation, recarbonation, filtration, selective ion exchange for ammonia removal, UV irradiation, activated carbon adsorption, RO, air stripping, ozonation, chlorine dioxide disinfection, ultrafiltration and chloramination.||NA||NA||NA|||
|West Basin Municipal Water District||California (USA)||Since 1995||MF/ RO UV and advanced oxidation processes||Aquifer||950,000||10–15%|||
|Upper Occoquan Sewage Authority (UOSA)||Virginia (USA)||Since 1978||Lime clarification Two-stage recarbonation Flow equalization Sand filtration Granular activated carbon Ion exchange Post carbon filtration Chlorination||Reservoir||1.2 million||10–45 %|||
|Montebello Forebay Groundwater Recharge Project||California (USA)||Since 1962||Secondary treatment, chloramination and injection.
Inert media filtration was added in 1977 as an additional measure for public health protection to enhance virus inactivation.
|Aquifer||1.28 million||18.7% up to 35%||[19,20, 28]|
|Tampa Water Resource Recovery Project||Florida (USA)||1987–1989||Pre-aeration, lime clarification, recarbonation, gravity filtration, and ozone disinfection.
Granular activated carbon, RO, and ultrafiltration, were also evaluated after filtration and before disinfection.
|San Diego Water Repurification Project||California (USA)||1981||In 1985 Several treatments tested including RO and granular activated carbon.
Since 2002 MF/RO, and advanced oxidation using UV light and hydrogen peroxide.
|Potomac Estuary Experiment al Wastewater Treatment Plant (EEWTP)||Washington D.C. (USA)||1980–1982||Floculation, sedimentation, filtration, granular activated carbon adsorption and disinfection.||Estuary||NA||NA||[7,30]|
|Hueco Bolson Recharge Project||Texas (USA)||1985||Two-stage powdered activated carbon treatment, lime treatment, two-stage recarbonation, sand filtration, ozonation, GAC filtration, chlorination, and storage.||Aquifer||250,000||40–100%|||
|The Chelmer Augmentati on Wastewater Reuse Scheme (Water 2000)||Essex England||1997||MF UV||Reservoir||1.7 million||8–12%|| |
|Water Reclamatio n Study (NeWater)||Singapore||2000||Ultrafiltration, RO, UV, Stability control and chlorination||Reservoir||4.4 million||Currently 1% and 2.5% by 2012||[12,23]|
|Goreangab Water Reclamatio n Plant||Windhoek Namibia||1968–2002
Upgrade 2002– present
|Algae flotation Foam fractionation Chemical clarification Sand filtration Granular activated carbon Chlorination
Pre-ozonation for Fe/Mn removal Dissolved air flotation Sand filtration Ozonation Granular activated carbon Ultrafiltration Chlorination
|Torreele Reuse Plant||Wulpen Belgium||2002||MF/RO + UV disinfection||Aquifer||60,000||40%||[11,96]|
|Project||Aim of the study||Study years||Experimental Details||Results||Source|
|Montebello Forebay Groundwater Recharge Project Health Effects Study No 1||Assessment of health outcomes between the Montebello Forebay area, which has received some recycled water in its water supply with a control area.||1969–1980||[7,24]|
|Montebello Forebay Groundwater Recharge Project Health Effects Study No 2||Assessment of health outcomes between the Montebello Forebay areas, which has received some recycled water in its water supply for almost 30 years, with a control area.||1987–1991|||
|Montebello Forebay Groundwater Recharge Project Reproductive Study||Assessment of adverse health outcomes among live born infants, including low birth weight, preterm births, infant mortality and 19 categories of birth defects.||1982–1993|||
|Potable Reuse Project Windhoek (Namibia)||Assessment of cases of diarrhoeal diseases, jaundice, and deaths in Windhoek, where the average contribution of recycled water to the waster was 4% between 1968 and 1991.||1976–1983||[97,98]|
|Project||Aim of the study||Experimental Details||Results||Source|
|Orange County Water District. Water Factory 21 Santa Ana River Water Quality and Health Study (Evaluation Task No 7)||Water quality evaluation and risk assessment of Santa Ana River, imported water and recycled water from Water Factory 21.
At the time of the study more than 90% of the base flow of the Santa Ana River comprises wastewater discharge which is the primary source for recharging the groundwater basin
|Denver Potable Water Demonstration Project||Chronic toxicity and oncogenicity studies in animals.||[100, 101]|
|Orange County Water District GWR system||On-line biomonitoring of fish to evaluate the water quality.|||
|Denver Potable Water Demonstration Project||Chronic toxicity and oncogenicity studies in animals.||[100,101]|
|Denver Potable Water Demonstration Project||Water quality assessment Organic challenge study.|||
|Hueco Bolson Recharge Project||Water quality assessment|||
|Montebello Forebay Groundwater Recharge Project (Health Effects Study)||Characterization of water quality for microbiological and inorganic chemical content.
Toxicological and chemical studies to isolate and identify organic constituents of significance to health.
|Water Reclamation Study (NeWater) Health Effects Study||Water quality and toxicological studies.|||
|San Diego Water Repurification Project||Water quality assessment||[28,30]|
|Tampa Water Resource Recovery Project (Health Effects Study)||Characterization of water quality for chemical, physical and microbiological content.
|San Diego Water Repurification Project. (Health Effects Study)||Identification, characterization and quantification of infectious diseases agents and potentially toxic chemicals.
Screening for mutagenicity and bio- accumulation of chemical mixtures.
Chemical risk assessment.
|Potomac Estuary Experimental Wastewater Treatment Plant||Toxicological studies||[7,30]|
- WHO/UNICEF Joint Monitoring Programme for Water Supply and Sanitation. Water for life: Making it happen; World Health Orgnization, Unicef: Geneva, Switzerland, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Goldstein, G. The health implications of efficient water use in urban areas. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Efficient Water Use in Urban Areas - Innovative Ways of Finding Water for Cities, WHO Kobe Centre Conference Room, Kobe, Japan, 8–10 June 1999; UNEP: Kobe, Japan, 1999; p. 530. [Google Scholar]
- Asano, T. Groundwater recharge with reclaimed municipal wastewater – Regulatory perspectives. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Efficient Water Use in Urban Areas - Innovative Ways of Finding Water for Cities, WHO Kobe Centre Conference Room, Kobe, Japan, 8–10 June 1999; UNEP: Kobe, Japan, 1999; p. 530. [Google Scholar]
- National Research Council. Setting priorities for drinking water contaminants; National Academic Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- Bixio, D; Deheyder, B; Cikurel, H; Muston, M; Miska, V; Joksimovic, D; Schäfer, AI; Ravazzini, A; Aharoni, A; Savic, D; Thoeye, C. Municipal wastewater reclamation: where do we stand? An overview of treatment technology and management practice. Water Supply 2005, 5, 77–85. [Google Scholar]
- NRMMC EPHC & NHMRC. Australian Guidelines for Water Recycling: Augmentation of Drinking Water Supplies (Phase 2); Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council, Environment Protection and Heritage Council and the National Health Medical Research Council: Canberra, Australia, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- National Research Council. Issues in potable reuse: The viability of augmenting drinking water supplies with reclaimed water; National Academic Press: Washington, DC, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Daugherty, JL; Deshmukh, SS; Patel, MV; Markus, MR. Employing advanced technology for water reuse in Orange County; Orange County Water District: Fountain Valley, California, USA, 2005; p. 12. [Google Scholar]
- Christen, K. Water reuse: Getting past the ‘yuck factor’. Water Environ. Technol 2005, 17, 11–16. [Google Scholar]
- Durham, B; Angelakis, AN; Wintgens, T; Thoeye, C; Sala, L. Water recycling and reuse. A water scarcity best practice solution. In Coping with drought and water deficiency: from research to policy making; Arid Cluster: Cyprus, May 12–13 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Van Houtte, E; Verbauwhede, J. The IWVA Torreele water re-use plant: operational experiences (IWVA). Proceeding of Ultra-and Nanofiltration in water treatment operational experience and research results, Aachen, Germany; 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Seah, H; Poon, J; Leslie, G; Law, I. Singapore's NeWater demonstration project: Another milestone in indirect potable reuse. Water 2003, 30, 43–46. [Google Scholar]
- Khan, S; Roser, D. Risk assessment and health effects of indirect potable reuse schemes: Centre for water and waste technology; Report No: 207/01; Centre for Water and Waste Technology School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of New South Wales: New South Wales, Australia, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Marsden, J; Pickering, P. Securing Australia's urban water supplies: Opportunities and impediments; Department of the Primer Minister and Cabinet: Victoria, Australia, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Water Corporation. Integrated water supply scheme. Source development plan 2005; Water Corporation: Perth, Australia, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Choice. Choice Recycled drinking water: myths and facts: Recycling our waste water for drinking could help with water shortages, but are there any truths in the dirty name-calling? Choice; Chippendale, Australia, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- NWC. Using recycled water for drinking: An introduction; National Water Commission: Canberra, Australia, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Traves, WH; Gardner, EA; Dennien, B; Spiller, D. Towards indirect potable reuse in South East Queensland. Water Sci. Technol 2008, 58, 153–161. [Google Scholar]
- Sloss, EM; Geschwind, S; McCaffrey, DF; Ritz, BR. Groundwater recharge with reclaimed water: An epidemiologic assessment in Los Angeles County, 1987–1991; RAND Corporation: Santa Monica, California, USA, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- Sloss, EM; McCaffrey, DF; Ronald, D; Fricker, J; Geschwind, S; Ritz, BR. Groundwater recharge with reclaimed water birth outcomes in Los Angeles County, 1982–1993; RAND Corporation: Santa Monica, California, USA, 1999. [Google Scholar]
- NWRI. Report of the scientific advisory panel Orange County Water District's. Santa Ana river water quality and health study; National Water Research Institute: California, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Lauer, W. Denver's direct potable water reuse demonstration project final report; Denver Water Department: Denver, Colorado, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Singapore Government. Singapore water reclamation study: Expert panel review and findings; Singapore Government; Singapore, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Nellor, MH; Baird, RB; Smyth, JR. Health effects of indirect potable water reuse. J. Amer. Water Work. Assn 1985, 77, 88–96. [Google Scholar]
- Drewes, JE; Hemming, JDC; Schauer, JJ. Removal of Endocrine Disrupting Compounds in Water Reclamation Processes (Werf Report); Report No.: 01-HHE-20T; Water Environment Research Foundation: Alexandria, Virginia, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, J; Lee, BC; Ra, JS; Cho, J; Kim, IS; Chang, NI; Kim, HK; Kim, SD. Comparison of the removal efficiency of endocrine disrupting compounds in pilot scale sewage treatment processes. Chemosphere 2008, 71, 1582–1592. [Google Scholar]
- Olivieri, AW; Eisenberg, DM; Cooper, RC; Tchobanoglous, G; Gagliardo, P. Recycled water - A source of potable water: City of San Diego health effects study. Water Sci. Technol 1996, 33, 285–296. [Google Scholar]
- WEF. Using reclaimed water to augment potable water resources; Water Environment Federation (WEF) & American Water Works Association (AWWA): Columbus, Ohio, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- OCWD & OCSD. OCWD and OCSD Water quality white paper; Orange County Water District (OCWD) and Orange County Sanitation District (OCSD): Fountain Valley, California, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- City of San Diego. Water reuse study 2005 interim report; Water Reuse Workshop: San Diego, California, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Tchobanoglous, G; Burton, FL; Stensel, HD. Wastewater engineering: treatment and reuse, 4th Ed ed; Metcalf & Eddy, Inc.: Boston, Massachusetts, USA, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Jolis, D; Hirano, RA; Pitt, PA; Müller, A; Mamais, D. Assessment of tertiary treatment technology for water reclamation in San Francisco, California. Water Sci. Technol 1996, 33, 181–192. [Google Scholar]
- Ma, BX; Eaton, CL; Kim, JH; Colvin, CK; Lozier, JC; Marinas, BJ. Removal of biological and non-biological viral surrogates by spiral-wound reverse osmosis membrane elements with intact and compromised integrity. Water Res 2004, 38, 3821–3832. [Google Scholar]
- DeCarolis, J; Adham, S; Kumar, M; Pearce, B; Wasserman, L. Integrity and performance evaluation of new generation desalting membranes during municipal wastewater reclamation. Proceedings of Water Enviroment Federation; Water Environment Federation: Chicago, USA, 2005; pp. 3518–3529. [Google Scholar]
- Hu, J; Ong, S; Song, L; Feng, Y; Liu, W; Tan, T; Lee, L; Ng, W. Removal of MS2 bacteriophage using membrane technologies. Water Sci. Technol 2003, 47, 163–168. [Google Scholar]
- Snyder, SA; Adham, S; Redding, AM; Cannon, FS; DeCarolis, J; Oppenheimer, J; Wert, EC; Yoon, Y. Role of membranes and activated carbon in the removal of endocrine disruptors and pharmaceuticals. Desalination 2007, 202, 156–181. [Google Scholar]
- Wintgens, T; Salehi, F; Hochstrat, R; Melin, T. Emerging contaminants and treatment options in water recycling for indirect potable use. Water Sci. Technol 2008, 57, 99–107. [Google Scholar]
- Drewes, JE; Sedlak, D; Snyder, S; Dickenson, E. Development of indicators and surrogates for chemical contaminant removal during wastewater treatment and reclamation; Water Reuse Foundation: Alexandria, VA, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Carter, JM; Delzer, GC; Kingsbury, JA; Hopple, JA. Concentration data for anthropogenic organic compounds in ground water, surface water, and finished water of selected community water systems in the United States, 2002–05; U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 268; U.S. Geological Survey: Reston, Virginia, USA, 2007; pp. 1–30. [Google Scholar]
- Barnes, K; Kolpin, D; Furlong, E; Zaugg, S; Meyer, M; Barber, L. A national reconnaissance for pharmaceuticals and other organic wastewater contaminants in the United States: I) Ground water. Sci. Total Environ 2008, 402, 192–200. [Google Scholar]
- Van der Graaf, J; Kramer, JF; Pluim, J; de Koning, J; Weijs, M. Experiments on membrane filtration of effluent at wastewater treatment plants in the Netherlands. Water Sci. Technol 1999, 39, 129–136. [Google Scholar]
- Lazarova, V; Savoye, P; Janex, ML; Blatchley, ER; Pommepuy, M. Advanced wastewater disinfection technologies: State of the art and perspectives. Water Sci. Technol 1999, 40, 203–214. [Google Scholar]
- Beverly, SD; Conlon, WJ; McIntyre, D. Indirect potable reuse and aquifer injection of reclaimed water; American Water Works Association: Florida, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Drewes, JE; Reinhard, M; Fox, P. Comparing microfiltration - reverse osmosis and soil -aquifer treatment for indirect potable reuse of water. Water Res 2003, 37, 3612–3621. [Google Scholar]
- Lacy, SM. Large scale systems. In Water Conservation, Reuse, and Recycling; Proceedings of an Iranian-American Workshop, National Academic Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Huang, CH; Sedlak, DL. Analysis of estrogenic hormones in municipal wastewater effluent and surface water using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and gas chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. Environ. Toxicol. Chem 2001, 20, 133–139. [Google Scholar]
- Kim, S; Cho, J; Kim, I; Vanderford, B; Snyder, S. Occurrence and removal of pharmaceuticals and endocrine disruptors in South Korean surface, drinking, and waste waters. Water Res 2007, 41, 1013–1021. [Google Scholar]
- Snyder, SA; Westerhoff, P; Yoon, Y; Sedlak, DL. Pharmaceuticals, personal care products, and endocrine disruptors in water: Implications for the water industry. Environ. Eng. Sci 2003, 20, 449–469. [Google Scholar]
- Agenson, KO; Oh, JI; Urase, T. Retention of a wide variety of organic pollutants by different nanofiltration/reverse osmosis membranes: controlling parameters of process. J. Membr. Sci 2003, 225, 91–103. [Google Scholar]
- Bellona, C; Drewes, JE; Xu, P; Amy, G. Factors affecting the rejection of organic solutes during NF/RO treatment–a literature review. Water Res 2004, 38, 2795–2809. [Google Scholar]
- Drewes, JE; Amy, G; Reinhard, M. Targeting bulk and trace organics during advanced membrane treatment leading to indirect potable reuse. Proceeding of Water Sources Conference and Exhibition, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, 2002; American Water Works Association: Denver, Colorado, USA, 2002; pp. 1–18. [Google Scholar]
- WSAA. National waste water source management guideline draft for public comment; Water Services Association of Australia: Melbourne, Australia, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Crook, J; Surampalli, RY. Water reuse criteria in the United States. Water Supply 2005, 5, 1–7. [Google Scholar]
- California, DHS. Chemical contaminants in drinking water; California Department of Health Services: California, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Florida, DEP. Risk impact statement - Phase II revisions to chapter 62-610, F.A.C. Docket; Report No. 95-08R; Florida Department of Environmental Protection: Florida, USA, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Ivahnenko, T; Barbash, JE. Chloroform in the hydrologic system—sources, transport, fate, occurrence, and effects on human health and aquatic organism; Report No.: Scientific Investigations Report 2004–5137; Geological Survey: Reston, Virginia, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Crook, J; Hultquist, RH; Sakaji, RH; Wehner, MP. Evolution and status of California's proposed criteria for groundwater recharge with reclaimed water. Proceeding of American Water Works Association Annual Conference and Exposition, New Orleans, USA, 2002; American Water Works Association: Denver, Colorado, USA, 2002; p. 11. [Google Scholar]
- California, DHS. Groundwater recharge reuse draft regulation; California Department of Health Services: California, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Paustenbach, DJ. Retrospective on US health risk assessment: How others can benefit. Risk: Health, Safety Environ 1995, 6, 283–332. [Google Scholar]
- Miller, R; Whitehill, B; Deere, D. A national approach to risk assessment for drinking water catchments in Australia. Water Supply 2005, 5, 123–134. [Google Scholar]
- WHO. Health risks in aquifer recharge using reclaimed water - State of the art report; World Health Organization, Regional Office for Europe: Copenhagen, Denmark, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- FAO/UNCHS/UNEP. Food quality and safety systems - A training manual on food hygiene and the hazard analysis and critical control point (HACCP) system; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United States - Food Quality and Standards Service Food and Nutrition Division: Rome, Italy, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- Kirby, RM; Bartram, J; Carr, R. Water in food production and processing: quantity and quality concerns. Food Control 2003, 14, 283–299. [Google Scholar]
- U.S. FDA. Hazard analysis and critical control points principles and application guidelines: US Food and Drug Administration and U.S. Department of Agriculture; U.S. FDA: Rockville, Maryland, Washington, DC, USA, 1997. [Google Scholar]
- Dewettinck, T; van Houtte, E; Geenens, D; van Hege, K; Verstraete, W. HACCP (Hazard analysis and critical control points) to guarantee safe water reuse and drinking water production. A case study. Water Sci. Technol 2001, 43, 31–38. [Google Scholar]
- Westrell, T; Schonning, C; Stenstrom, TA; Ashbolt, NJ. QMRA (quantitative microbial risk assessment) and HACCP (hazard analysis and critical control points) for management of pathogens in wastewater and sewage sludge treatment and reuse. Water Sci. Technol 2004, 50, 23–30. [Google Scholar]
- NHMRC and NRMMC. Australian Drinking Water Guidelines; National Health and Medical Research Council and Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council: Artarmon, NSW, Australia, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- EPHC & NRMMC. National guidelines for water recycling - Managing health and environmental risks - Impact assessment; Environment Protection and Heritage Council: Adelaide, Australia; Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council: Artarmon, NSW, Australia, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Duranceau, SJ. Membrane practices for water treatment, 1st Ed. ed; American Water Works Association: Denver, CO, USA, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Rizak, S; Cunliffe, D; Sinclair, M; Vulcano, R; Howard, J; Hrudey, S; Callan, P. Drinking water quality management: a holistic approach. Water Sci. Technol 2003, 47, 31–36. [Google Scholar]
- Norman. Chemical analysis of emerging pollutants. Proceeding of Chemical analysis of emerging pollutants, Proceeding of the 1st thematic workshop of the EU project NORMAN, Maó, Menorca, Spain; Norman Inc: Radford, VA, USA.
- Oost, RVD; Heringa, M. A bioassay-directed monitoring strategy to assess the risks of complex pollutant mixtures in drinking water. In New tools for bio-monitoring of emerging pollutants, Amsterdam, Holand, 2007; Norman, Ed.; Norman Inc: Radford, VA, USA, 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Norman. Integrated chemical and bio-monitoring strategies for risk assessment of emerging substances. Proceeding of Integrated chemical and bio-monitoring strategies for risk assessment of emerging substances, Lyon, France, 2008; Norman Inc.: Radford, VA, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- CRCWQT. Review of endocrine disruptors in the context of Australian drinking water; Cooperative Research Centre for Water Quality and Treatment: Salisbury, South Australia, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Mills, LJ; Chichester, C. Review of evidence: are endocrine-disrupting chemicals in the aquatic environment impacting fish populations? Sci. Total Environ 2005, 343, 1–34. [Google Scholar]
- WERF. Fact sheet and technical brief: Endocrine disrupting compounds and implications for wastewater treatment; Water Environment Research Foundation: Alexandria, VA, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Gerhardt, A; Ingram, MK; Kang, IJ; Ulitzur, S. In situ on-line toxicity biomonitoring in water: recent developments. Environ. Toxicol. Chem 2006, 25, 2263–2271. [Google Scholar]
- Schlenk, D; Hinton, D; Woodside, G. Online methods for evaluating the safety of reclaimed water. Report No.: 01-HHE-4a; Water Environment Research Foundation (WERF): Alexandria, VA, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- U.S. EPA. Online Water Quality Monitoring; U.S. EPA: Rockville, Maryland, Washington, DC, USA, 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Devillers, J; Marchand-Geneste, N; Carpy, A; Porcher, JM. SAR and QSAR modeling of endocrine disruptors. SAR QSAR Environ. Res 2006, 17, 393–412. [Google Scholar]
- Gardner, T; Yeates, C; Shaw, R. Purified recycled water for drinking: The technical issues; Queensland Water Commission: Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, September 2008. [Google Scholar]
- Rodriguez, C; Weinstein, P; Cook, A; Devine, B; Buynder, PV. A proposed approach for the assessment of chemicals in indirect potable reuse schemes. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health A 2007, 70, 1654–1663. [Google Scholar]
- Hartley, TW. Public perception and participation in water reuse. Desalination 2006, 187, 115–126. [Google Scholar]
- WERF. Water Reuse: Understanding public perception and participation; Report No.: 00-PUM-1; WERF: Alexandria, VA, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- WRF. Best practices for developing indirect potable reuse projects; Report No.: WRF 01-004; The WateReuse Foundation (WRF): Alexandria, VA, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Marks, J. Situating trust in water reuse. In Oz-Aquarec Workshops 2003; University of Wollongong: Wollongong, NSW, Australia, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Holliman, TR. Communicating the risk of reuse - or what are the odds. J Amer Water Work Assn 2004, 1–9. [Google Scholar]
- Po, M; Nancarrow, B; Leviston, Z; Porte, N; Syme, G; Kaercher, J. Predicting community behaviour to wastewater reuse: What Drives Decisions to Accept or Reject; CSIRO: Perth, Australia, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- OCWD. Groundwater management plan; Orange County Water District: Fountain Valley, California, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- WBMWD. Annual report; West Basin Municipal Water District: California, USA, 2006. [Google Scholar]
- Sheikh, B. Indirect potable reuse through groundwater recharge and surface water augmentation: The gold standard of water recycling for California. In Water Recycling in Australia; Australian Water Association: Brisbane, Australia, 2003; p. 8. [Google Scholar]
- Australian Department of Health and Aged Care. Review of health issues associated with potable reuse of wastewater; Report No.: RFT200/00; Commonwealth Department of Health and Aged Care: Brisbane, Australia, 2001. [Google Scholar]
- Lazarova, V; Levine, B; Sack, J; Cirelli, G; Jeffrey, P; Muntau, H; Salgot, M; Brissaud, F. Role of water reuse for enhancing integrated water management in Europe and Mediterranean countries. Water Sci. Technol 2001, 43, 25–33. [Google Scholar]
- Lahnsteiner, J; Lempert, G. Water management in Windhoek, Namibia. Water Sci. Technol 2007, 55, 441–448. [Google Scholar]
- Lempert, G. Case study: New Goreangab water reclamation plant in Windhoek, Namibia. Goreangab Water Reclamation Plant: Windhoek, Namibia, 2007; p. 10. [Google Scholar]
- Van Houtte, E; Verbauwhede, J. Torreele's water re-use facility enabled sustainable groundwater management in de Flemish dunes (Belgium). Proceeding of the 6th IWA Specialist Conference on Wastewater Reclamation an Reuse for Sustainability, Antwerpen, France; 2007. [Google Scholar]
- Hattingh, W; Bourne, D. Research on the health implications of the use of recycled water in South Africa. S. Afr. Med. J 1989, 76, 7–10. [Google Scholar]
- Haarhoff, J; Merwe, BVD. Twenty-five years of wastewater reclamation in Windhoek, Namibia. Water Sci. Technol 1996, 33, 25–35. [Google Scholar]
- Soller, J; Eisenberg, D; Olivieri, A; Galitsky, C. Groundwater replenishment system. In Water quality evaluation Task 7: Conduct risk assessment; EOA, Inc: California, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
- Condie, LW; Lauer, WC; Wolfe, GW; Czeh, ET; Burns, JM. Denver potable water reuse demonstration project: Comprehensive chronic rat study. Food Chem. Toxicol 1994, 32, 1021–1030. [Google Scholar]
- Lauer, WC; Johns, FJ; Wolfe, GW; Myers, BA; Condie, LW; Borzelleca, JF. Comprehensive health effects testing program for Denver's potable water reuse demonstration project. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health A 1990, 30, 305–321. [Google Scholar]
- De Peyster, A; Donohoe, R; Slymen, DJ; Froines, JR; Olivieri, AW; Eisenberg, DM. Aquatic biomonitoring of reclaimed water for potable use: the San Diego health effects study. J. Toxicol. Environ. Health A 1993, 39, 121–141. [Google Scholar]
- Thompson, K; Cooper, RC; Olivieri, AW; Eisenberg, DM; Pettegrew, LA; Cooper, RC; Danielson, RE. City of San Diego study of direct potable reuse of reclaimed water: Final results. Desalination 1992, 88, 201–214. [Google Scholar]
© 2009 by the authors; licensee Molecular Diversity Preservation International, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open-access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).
Share and Cite
Rodriguez, C.; Van Buynder, P.; Lugg, R.; Blair, P.; Devine, B.; Cook, A.; Weinstein, P. Indirect Potable Reuse: A Sustainable Water Supply Alternative. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2009, 6, 1174-1203. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph6031174
Rodriguez C, Van Buynder P, Lugg R, Blair P, Devine B, Cook A, Weinstein P. Indirect Potable Reuse: A Sustainable Water Supply Alternative. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 2009; 6(3):1174-1203. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph6031174Chicago/Turabian Style
Rodriguez, Clemencia, Paul Van Buynder, Richard Lugg, Palenque Blair, Brian Devine, Angus Cook, and Philip Weinstein. 2009. "Indirect Potable Reuse: A Sustainable Water Supply Alternative" International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 6, no. 3: 1174-1203. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph6031174