Evaluating Physical and Fiscal Water Leakage in Water Distribution System
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Methodology
2.1. Case Study Description
2.2. Methods to Assess the Data by Top-Down Approach
- Visual water loss detection, reason, and quantification of the loss water were studied for 15 blocks. Water loss (WLp, in liter/day) at each point was calculated using Equation (1) by converting from L/sec.
- Liter per capita consumption, water consumption per month, and total water loss in the study area per month from Equations (2)–(4).
- Amount of water consumed within the campus and amount spent on water bill per month in the dollar (January 2017 to June 2018).
2.3. Water Loss Analysis by BABE Methods
2.4. Water Consumption in the IoT, Campus
2.5. Water Tariffs Schemes
2.6. Population Forecasting
3. Result and Discussion
3.1. Analysis of Water Distribution System of the Campus
3.2. Water Consumption, Water Loss and Water Bill
3.3. Water Loss per Block, Localization and Major reason for the Leakage Source
3.4. Population Forecasting along with Financial Loss
4. Recommendations
- Awareness methods can bring remarkable changes to mitigate the WL problem to the project area without any physical measurement and much more involvement of skilled people are required [43]. The study area for the initial project work can be educational institutes since students and teachers will be more receptive to the need for water-saving ideology. From such kind of organization, awareness campaign can more effectively spread throughout the region, especially for developing country where there can be less funding and personals for campaigns. A case study of Hanoi showed a potential output via state estimation and awareness using systematically assessed minimum leak in the water distribution system [44]. Such measures can substantially reduce leakages by reducing careless and negligent mistakes.
- Leakage detection methods are concerned with its detection of frontline water leakage site [22]. Automated detection of pipe bursts approach came to the limelight, using different Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools to predict the leakage prior to its taking place with some variables like pressure and flow signal value [45]. AI has shown significance capability to deal with missing data, decreases the cost of testing [46,47,48], can easily classify the point source of the leakage [49], and predict the life of the distribution system components [50]. These advantages make the potential of AI models useful in developing countries where there are lacks of uniform and regular data, funding for data collection and testing, advanced sensors to pinpoint the leakage sources, and lack of regular maintenance system.
- Optimal pump schedule approved methods is to meet water demand and reliable water pressure along with minimization of the leaky system and power consumption as well as an economic benefit [51]. The physical measurement method such as pressure-dependent leak detection model, which is quite impressive to minimize the leakage as early as possible and save the revenue [52].
- Several small changes can make a significant sense to minimize water leakage. Longitudinal analysis qualifies changes in periodical report disclosures via description and visual to company performance and leads to prospective saving in line to water and energy [53]. Since water is a revenue using low-cost analysis can save lots of water and money. These techniques are easy to apply and learn, so people with a basic education can help in the data collection and analysis.
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Lambert, A. Assessing Non-Revenue Water and its Components: A Practical Approach; IWA Publishing: London, UK, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Committee, A.W.L.C. Committee Report: Applying worldwide BMPs in water loss control. J.-Am. Water Work Assoc. 2003, 95, 65–79. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Spulber, N.; Sabbaghi, A. Economics of Water Resources: From Regulation to Privatization; Springer Science & Business Media: Dordrecht, The Nertherlands, 2012; Volume 13, ISBN 940114866X. [Google Scholar]
- Loucks, D.P.; Van Beek, E. Water Resource Systems Planning and Management: An Introduction to Methods, Models, and Applications; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2017; ISBN 3319442341. [Google Scholar]
- Hunaidi, O.; Chu, W.; Wang, A.; Guan, W. Detecting leaks in plastic pipes. J.-Am. Water Work Assoc. 2000, 92, 82–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Venkatesh, G.; Brattebø, H. Energy consumption, costs and environmental impacts for urban water cycle services: Case study of Oslo (Norway). Energy 2011, 36, 792–800. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Baldocchi, D.; Falge, E.; Gu, L.; Olson, R.; Hollinger, D.; Running, S.; Anthoni, P.; Bernhofer, C.; Davis, K.; Evans, R. FLUXNET: A new tool to study the temporal and spatial variability of ecosystem-scale carbon dioxide, water vapor, and energy flux densities. Bull. Am. Meteorol. Soc. 2001, 82, 2415–2434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- WHO Water Safety in Bbuildings; World Health Organization: London, UK, 2011; ISBN 924154810X.
- Stenekes, N.; Colebatch, H.K.; Waite, T.D.; Ashbolt, N.J. Risk and governance in water recycling: Public acceptance revisited. Sci. Technol. Hum. Values 2006, 31, 107–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Farley, M.; Trow, S. Losses in Water Distribution Networks; IWA publishing: London, UK, 2003; ISBN 1900222116. [Google Scholar]
- Rosegrant, M.W.; Cai, X.; Cline, S.A. World Water and Food to 2025: Dealing with Scarcity; Intl Food Policy Res Inst: Washington, DC, USA, 2002; ISBN 0896296466. [Google Scholar]
- Frauendorfer, R.; Liemberger, R. The Issues and Challenges of Reducing Non-Revenue Water; Asian Development Bank: Mandaluyong, Philippines, 2010; ISBN 9290921935. [Google Scholar]
- UN-MDG. The Millennium Development Goals Report; UN-MDG: New York, NY, USA, 2015. [Google Scholar]
- Xin, K.; Tao, T.; Lu, Y.; Xiong, X.; Li, F. Apparent losses analysis in district metered areas of water distribution systems. Water Resour. Manag. 2014, 28, 683–696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lambert, A.O. International report: Water losses management and techniques. Water Sci. Technol. Water Supply 2002, 2, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Colombo, A.F.; Karney, B.W. Energy and costs of leaky pipes: Toward comprehensive picture. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 2002, 128, 441–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Covas, D.I.C.; Cláudia Jacob, A.; Ramos, H.M. Water losses’ assessment in an urban water network. Water Pract. Technol. 2008, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blokker, E.J.M.; Vreeburg, J.H.G.; Beverloo, H.; Klein Arfman, M.; Van Dijk, J.C. A bottom-up approach of stochastic demand allocation in water quality modelling. Drink. Water Eng. Sci. 2010, 3, 43–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Taha, A.-W.; Sharma, S.; Kennedy, M. Methods of assessment of water losses in water supply systems: A review. Water Resour. Manag. 2016, 30, 4985–5001. [Google Scholar]
- Mamade, A.; Loureiro, D.; Alegre, H.; Covas, D. Top-down and bottom-up approaches for water-energy balance in Portuguese supply systems. Water (Switzerland) 2018, 10, 577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MacKenzie, D.R.; Bgagwan, J.N.; Lambert, A.O. Leakage Reduction Software Developed through The Water Research Commission. Available online: http://www.geocities.ws/kikory2004/10_mckenzie.pdf (accessed on 20 May 2019).
- Puust, R.; Kapelan, Z.; Savic, D.A.; Koppel, T. A review of methods for leakage management in pipe networks. Urban Water J. 2010, 7, 25–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jensen, T.N.; Puig, V.; Romera, J.; Kallesøe, C.S.; Wisniewski, R.; Bendtsen, J.D. Leakage localization in water distribution using data-driven models and sensitivity analysis. Ifac-Papersonline 2018, 51, 736–741. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alonso, J.M.; Alvarruiz, F.; Guerrero, D.; Hernández, V.; Ruiz, P.A.; Vidal, A.M.; Martínez, F.; Vercher, J.; Ulanicki, B. Parallel computing in water network analysis and leakage minimization. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 2000, 126, 251–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fontana, N.; Giugni, M.; Portolano, D. Losses reduction and energy production in water-distribution networks. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 2011, 138, 237–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Auriol, E.; Blanc, A. Capture and corruption in public utilities: The cases of water and electricity in Sub-Saharan Africa. Util. Policy 2009, 17, 203–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jacobsen, M.; Webster, M.; Vairavamoorthy, K. The Future of Water in African Cities: Why Waste Water? The World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2012; ISBN 0821397214. [Google Scholar]
- Desalegn, W.B. Water Supply Coverage and Water Loss in Distribution Systems (The case of Addis Ababa); International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation Enschede: Overijssel, The Netherlands, 2005. [Google Scholar]
- Roy, M. Planning for sustainable urbanisation in fast growing cities: Mitigation and adaptation issues addressed in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Habitat Int. 2009, 33, 276–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Emana, B. Cooperatives: A Path to Economic and Social Empowerment in Ethiopia; ILO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2009; ISBN 9221225623. [Google Scholar]
- Leal, W. Climate Change Adaptation in Africa, 1st ed.; Filho, W.L., Belay, S., Kalangu, J., Menas, W., Munishi, P., Musiyiwa, K., Eds.; Springer International Publishing: New York, NY, USA, 2014; ISBN 978-3-319-84178-6. [Google Scholar]
- Liemberger, R.; McKenzie, R. Aqualibre: A new innovative water balance software. In Proceedings of the IWA and AWWA Conference on Efficient Management of Urban Water Supply, Tenerife, Spain, 2–4 April 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Charalambous, B.; Hamilton, S. Water balance - the next stage. Water Util. J. 2011, 1, 3–10. [Google Scholar]
- Singto, C.; Fleskens, L.; Vos, J. Institutionalizing participation in water resource development: Bottom-up and top-down practices in southern Thailand. Water 2018, 10, 781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Evarts, J.C.; Swan, L.G. Domestic hot water consumption estimates for solar thermal system sizing. Energy Build. 2013, 58, 58–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thornton, J.; Sturm, R.; Kunkel, G. Water Loss Control; McGraw Hill Professional: New York, NY, USA, 2008; ISBN 0071640991. [Google Scholar]
- Aymerich, I.; Rieger, L.; Sobhani, R.; Rosso, D.; Corominas, L. The difference between energy consumption and energy cost: Modelling energy tariff structures for water resource recovery facilities. Water Res. 2015, 81, 113–123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Hoque, S.F.; Wichelns, D. State-of-the-art review: Designing urban water tariffs to recover costs and promote wise use. Int. J. Water Resour. Dev. 2013, 29, 472–491. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marzano, R.; Rougé, C.; Garrone, P.; Grilli, L.; Harou, J.J.; Pulido-Velazquez, M. Determinants of the price response to residential water tariffs: Meta-analysis and beyond. Environ. Model. Softw. 2018, 101, 236–248. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Gans, H. Population Forecasting 1895–1945: The Transition to Modernity; Springer Science & Business Media: Dordrecht, The Nertherlands, 1999; Volume 5, ISBN 0792355377. [Google Scholar]
- Gleick, P.H. Basic Water Requirements for Human Activities: Meeting Basic Needs. Water Int. 1996, 21, 83–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- World Bank. The World Bank Data Catalog; World Bank: Washington, DC, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Azevedo, B.B.; Saurin, T.A. Losses in Water Distribution Systems: A Complexity Theory Perspective. Water Resour. Manag. 2018, 32, 2919–2936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gonza, J.; Mı, R. Probabilistic leak detectability assessment via state estimation in water transport networks. Stoch. Environ. Res. Risk Assess. 2018, 32, 2111–2128. [Google Scholar]
- Romano, M.; Kapelan, Z.; Savić, D.A. Automated Detection of Pipe Bursts and Other Events in Water Distribution Systems. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 2012, 140, 457–467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Salami, E.S.; Ehteshami, M. Simulation, evaluation and prediction modeling of river water quality properties (case study: Ireland Rivers). Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 12, 3235–3242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yaseen, Z.M.; El-shafie, A.; Jaafar, O.; Afan, H.A.; Sayl, K.N. Artificial intelligence based models for stream-flow forecasting: 2000–2015. J. Hydrol. 2015, 530, 829–844. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yaseen, Z.M.; Sulaiman, S.O.; Deo, R.C.; Chau, K.-W. An enhanced extreme learning machine model for river flow forecasting: State-of-the-art, practical applications in water resource engineering area and future research direction. J. Hydrol. 2019, 569, 387–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, S.P.; Pandey, U.K. Data Analysis, Visualization, and Leak Size Modeling for Water Distribution Network. In Soft Computing and Signal Processing; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 77–83. [Google Scholar]
- Li, X.; Khademi, F.; Liu, Y.; Akbari, M.; Wang, C.; Bond, P.L.; Keller, J.; Jiang, G. Evaluation of data-driven models for predicting the service life of concrete sewer pipes subjected to corrosion. J. Environ. Manag. 2019, 234, 431–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gao, J.; Qi, S.; Wu, W.; Han, A.; Chen, C.; Ruan, T. Leakage control of multi-source water distribution system by optimal pump schedule. Procedia Eng. 2014, 70, 698–706. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, Z.Y.; Sage, P.; Turtle, D. Pressure-Dependent Leak Detection Model and Its Application to a District Water System. J. Water Resour. Plan. Manag. 2010, 136, 116–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cooper, S.; Slack, R. Reporting practice, impression management and company performance: A longitudinal and comparative analysis of water leakage disclosure Reporting practice, impression management and company performance: A longitudinal and comparative analysis of water. Account. Bus. Res. 2015, 45, 4788. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diakité, D.; Semenov, A.; Thomas, A. A proposal for social pricing of water supply in Côte d’Ivoire. J. Dev. Econ. 2009, 88, 258–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Year | Month | Water Intake per Month in m3 | WC per Month in m3 | WL per Month in m3 | Fiscal Loss (Br) | Fiscal Loss ($) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2017 | January | 32,201 | 27,471 | 4730 | 42,573 | 1562 |
February | 25,641 | 20,911 | 4730 | 42,577 | 1562 | |
March | 25,849 | 21,119 | 4730 | 42,573 | 1562 | |
April | 25,849 | 21,119 | 4730 | 42,573 | 1562 | |
May | 23,541 | 18,811 | 4730 | 42,564 | 1562 | |
June | 24,497 | 19,767 | 4730 | 42,573 | 1562 | |
July | 35,200 | 30,470 | 4730 | 42,578 | 1562 | |
August | 26,763 | 22,033 | 4730 | 42,561 | 1562 | |
September | 23,942 | 19,212 | 4730 | 42,578 | 1562 | |
October | 24,153 | 19,423 | 4730 | 42,606 | 1563 | |
November | 23,541 | 18,811 | 4730 | 42,586 | 1563 | |
December | 20,150 | 15,421 | 4729 | 42,563 | 1562 | |
Total | 311,327 | 254,567 | 56,759 | 510,906 | 18,749 | |
Average | 25,944 | 21,214 | 4730 | 42,575 | 1562 | |
2018 | January | 21,980 | 17,250 | 4730 | 42,571 | 1562 |
February | 25,200 | 20,470 | 4730 | 42,570 | 1562 | |
March | 27,807 | 23,077 | 4730 | 42,570 | 1562 | |
April | 37,626 | 32,896 | 4730 | 42,566 | 1562 | |
May | 43,744 | 39,014 | 4730 | 42,570 | 1583 | |
June | 32,568 | 27,838 | 4730 | 42,560 | 1562 | |
Total | 188,925 | 160,545 | 28,380 | 255,986 | 9394 | |
Average | 31487.5 | 26,757 | 4730 | 42,664 | 1566 |
Block | No. of Student | Loss in m3 /day | Major Reasons |
---|---|---|---|
A | 282 | 21.12 | Busted Pipe and Joints (BPJ) due to unreliable pressure fluctuation (UPF) |
B | 288 | 42.58 | BPJ due to due to UPF and aged materials (AM) |
F | 408 | 1.98 | Corrosion and poor maintenance (PM) |
H | 282 | 14.38 | Broken gate valve (BGV), Broken Tap (BT) due to AM |
I | 276 | 3.49 | Broken cap of pipe due to PM |
J | 300 | 1.01 | Broken valve (BV) of tap |
K | 300 | 1.00 | Crack in pipe due to UPF and No shower fixture |
L | 282 | 0.22 | BV of tap |
M | 300 | 31.99 | UPF damaged valve of tap |
N | 520 | 16.74 | BV of tap |
P | 300 | 0.45 | Damaged shower fixture due to AM |
V | 288 | 0.62 | BV of tap |
W | 282 | 12.96 | BGV due to UPF |
X | 300 | 6.27 | BGV due to PM |
110 | 300 | 2.81 | Damaged shower fixture due to AM |
Year | Total Population | Average WC (m3/year) | Average WC (m3/day) | WC (LPCD) |
---|---|---|---|---|
2017 | 6810 | 311327 | 853 | 125 |
2018 (up to June) | 7023 | 224370 | 1496 | 177 |
Year | Population | Total | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Non-teaching Staff workers | Students | Teachers | Other workers | ||
2014 | 70 | 4022 | 221 | 229 | 4524 |
2015 | 72 | 5448 | 244 | 240 | 6004 |
2016 | 75 | 5864 | 276 | 258 | 6473 |
2017 | 77 | 6120 | 329 | 284 | 6810 |
2018 | 77 | 6186 | 382 | 378 | 7023 |
Year | Population | Predicted Water loss in m3 (Min Loss – Max Loss) | Fiscal Loss (Br) | Fiscal Loss ($) | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
2014 | 4524 | Data used for only population forecasting | NA | ||
2015 | 6004 | ||||
2016 | 6473 | ||||
2017 | 6810 | 8512 | 199,788 | 337,447 | 12,338 |
2018 | 7023 | 8779 | 206,037 | 348,002 | 12,724 |
2019 | 7077 | 8846 | 207,621 | 350,678 | 12,822 |
2020 | 7132 | 8915 | 209,235 | 353,403 | 12,921 |
2021 | 7187 | 8984 | 210,849 | 356,128 | 13,021 |
2022 | 7243 | 9054 | 212,491 | 358,903 | 13,122 |
2023 | 7299 | 9124 | 214,134 | 361,678 | 13,224 |
© 2019 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
Bhagat, S.K.; Tiyasha; Welde, W.; Tesfaye, O.; Tung, T.M.; Al-Ansari, N.; Salih, S.Q.; Yaseen, Z.M. Evaluating Physical and Fiscal Water Leakage in Water Distribution System. Water 2019, 11, 2091. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11102091
Bhagat SK, Tiyasha, Welde W, Tesfaye O, Tung TM, Al-Ansari N, Salih SQ, Yaseen ZM. Evaluating Physical and Fiscal Water Leakage in Water Distribution System. Water. 2019; 11(10):2091. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11102091
Chicago/Turabian StyleBhagat, Suraj Kumar, Tiyasha, Wakjira Welde, Olana Tesfaye, Tran Minh Tung, Nadhir Al-Ansari, Sinan Q. Salih, and Zaher Mundher Yaseen. 2019. "Evaluating Physical and Fiscal Water Leakage in Water Distribution System" Water 11, no. 10: 2091. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11102091