Next Article in Journal
Spatio-Temporal Variations and Socio-Economic Driving Forces for Wetland Area Changes: Insights from 2008–2017 Data of Yunnan Province, China
Previous Article in Journal
Numerical Simulation of Internal Flow Characteristics and Pressure Fluctuation in Deceleration Process of Bulb Tubular Pump
 
 
Article

Appraisal of Socio-Technical Water Loss Control Strategies Using Cost-Benefit Analysis in a Water Supply Network

1
Department of Civil Engineering Science, University of Johannesburg, Auckland Park, P.O. Box 524, Johannesburg 2006, South Africa
2
Directorate of Engineering the Future, School of Science, Engineering and Environment, The University of Salford, Newton Building, Greater Manchester M5 4WT, UK
3
Department of Town Planning, Engineering Networks and Systems, South Ural State University, 76, Lenin Prospekt, 454080 Chelyabinsk, Russia
4
Department of Civil Engineering, Water Sisulu University, Old Berlin Road, Fort Jackson, P.O. Box 1421, East London 5200, South Africa
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Academic Editor: Oz Sahin
Water 2022, 14(11), 1789; https://doi.org/10.3390/w14111789
Received: 21 April 2022 / Revised: 20 May 2022 / Accepted: 27 May 2022 / Published: 2 June 2022
(This article belongs to the Section Urban Water Management)
The authors conducted a socio-technical cost–benefit analysis (CBA) in Alexandra Township (Alex for short) by combining three water loss control investment strategies: (i) pipeline and infrastructure upgrades, (ii) repair and maintenance, and (iii) socio-domestic retrofitting capital. The researchers performed the CBA using sensitivity analysis methodologies such as marginal cost of capital (MCC), weighted average cost of capital (WACC), coefficient of variance (CV), the net present value (NPV) ratio, and cumulative and total cost methods. The findings for socio-domestic retrofitting capital investment showed that at an average investment cost of USD 5735 per household, consumption was reduced from 1369.4 m3/year to 301.99 m3/year, whereas a projected water savings average of 521.05 m3/household/year was achieved. The results show that the cumulative cost of water losses equaled USD 43.9 million per year, and that, if the water loss trend continues beyond the year 2026, almost 100% of the system input volume (SIV) will be non-revenue water (NRW) in the water balance. Using the MCC method, the integrated results for the socio-technical strategy showed that the economic level of leakage (ELL) was achieved at a WACC of 16.2, a CV of 0.66, and an NPV ratio or net capital risk of 0.246. This study demonstrates that the socio-technical approach is a viable alternative for water loss control and may be adopted in various parts of the world. View Full-Text
Keywords: cost–benefit analysis; economic level of leakage; customer consumption; marginal cost of capital; socio-technical strategy; water loss control cost–benefit analysis; economic level of leakage; customer consumption; marginal cost of capital; socio-technical strategy; water loss control
Show Figures

Figure 1

MDPI and ACS Style

Mathye, R.P.; Scholz, M.; Nyende-Byakika, S. Appraisal of Socio-Technical Water Loss Control Strategies Using Cost-Benefit Analysis in a Water Supply Network. Water 2022, 14, 1789. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14111789

AMA Style

Mathye RP, Scholz M, Nyende-Byakika S. Appraisal of Socio-Technical Water Loss Control Strategies Using Cost-Benefit Analysis in a Water Supply Network. Water. 2022; 14(11):1789. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14111789

Chicago/Turabian Style

Mathye, Risimati Patrick, Miklas Scholz, and Stephen Nyende-Byakika. 2022. "Appraisal of Socio-Technical Water Loss Control Strategies Using Cost-Benefit Analysis in a Water Supply Network" Water 14, no. 11: 1789. https://doi.org/10.3390/w14111789

Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Access Map by Country/Region

1
Back to TopTop