The environmental benefits of water recycling and reuse
Water Science and Technology: Water Supply Vol 3 No 4 pp 1–10 © IWA Publishing 2003
J. Anderson
Dept. of Public Works and Services, 2-24 Rawson Place, Sydney NSW 2000, Australia
(E-mail: [email protected])
Abstract The world’s supply of fresh water is finite and is threatened by pollution. Rising demands for water
to supply agriculture, industry and cities are leading to competition over the allocation of limited fresh water
resources. This paper examines how water reuse increases the available supply of water and enables human
needs to be met with less fresh water. The paper is illustrated with water reuse case studies in agriculture,
urban areas, industry and water resource supplementation in Australia and other countries. The links
between water reuse and sustainable water management are examined. Water conservation and water
reuse produce substantial environmental benefits, arising from reductions in water diversions, and
reductions in the impacts of wastewater discharges on environmental water quality. Some examples are
presented demonstrating the environmental benefits in quantitative terms. The paper also describes the
economic and environmental benefits identified in a number of recent integrated water cycle planning studies
in Australia.
Keywords Economics; effluent reuse; environmental benefits; water conservation
Introduction
The natural water cycle
In nature, water (like energy) is neither created nor destroyed but is converted from one
form to another. In the natural water cycle, rain falling on the land is mostly transpired by
the vegetation. But some percolates to groundwater and some runs off to the rivers and
flows to the oceans to evaporate and return as rain. Almost all of the world’s water (97%)
occurs as salt water. Of the remaining 3%, two-thirds occurs as snow and ice in the polar
and alpine regions. So only about 1% of global water occurs as liquid freshwater. More than
98% of the freshwater occurs as groundwater, while less than 2% is available in streams and
lakes. So the liquid freshwater is a finite and limited resource (Bouwer, 2000).
The modified water cycle
Mankind has significantly altered the natural water cycle by overlaying new water cycle
elements including: (a) extractions from rivers and groundwater for urban, industrial and
agricultural use, (b) urban and agricultural runoff, and (c) return of treated or untreated
wastewaters to streams. In many areas of the world, groundwater is the main water resource
and often rates of extraction greatly exceed the rates of recharge, so groundwater levels are
declining. An extreme example of the impacts of surface water diversion for irrigation has
been the decline of the Aral Sea in Central Asia. Once the home of thriving fisheries
employing 60,000 people, the Aral Sea has shrunk to a fraction of its former size. Former
foreshore towns are now many kilometres from the sea. The economic, social and environ-
mental impacts have been disastrous.
Urban development also has had a significant impact on the water cycle. Water drawn
for urban water supply reduces streamflows in rivers. At the same time, stormwater runoff
and wastewater discharges, which often carry high levels of pollution, cause a decline in the
water quality of rivers. Serious degradation has been observed in some rivers, which have
high levels of urban development in their catchments. 1
Emerging water shortages
The world’s supply of fresh water is finite and is threatened by pollution. Rising demands
for water to supply agriculture, industry and cities are leading to competition over the allo-
cation of limited fresh water resources. In many countries, the available fresh water
resources are already heavily committed and in some cases perhaps already over-
committed. To avoid a water crisis, many countries must conserve water, manage supply
and demand, pollute less and reduce the environmental impacts of growing population
J. Anderson
(Hinichsen et al., 1999). Two examples are:
(a) in the Nile Valley below Aswan, current water demands exceed the yield of the Aswan
High Dam by a considerable margin; the shortfall is being made up by reuse of waste-
water and irrigation drainage water discharges (Croce, 1998)
(b) indications are that a lack of sufficient water supplies will become the single most
important factor limiting South Africa’s socio-economic growth in the twenty-first
century; current projections indicate that water demand will exceed available supplies
soon after the year 2020 (Odendaal et al., 1998).
Water recycling in action
The mission of water suppliers is to provide reliable high quality services that meet cus-
tomer needs and protect the environment. In recent years they have implemented successful
water recycling projects in many countries. This experience has demonstrated the feasibili-
ty of water reuse on a large scale and its role in the sustainable management of the world’s
water. The examples are following as a small sample of the projects, which have been
implemented. These are referred to reuse of agriculture, urban reuse, industrial reuse, and
recycling to supplement water resources.
Reuse for agriculture
Monterey, California. The Monterey Regional Water Pollution Control Agency has con-
structed a scheme to use up to 20 Mm?/yr of recycled water from the Monterey and adjoin-
ing towns to irrigate 5000 ha of vegetable crops in the Lower Salinas Valley. Previously,
excessive use of local groundwater for irrigation had led to seawater intrusion into the
aquifers.
Mexico City. In Mexico, 90% of the wastewater from Mexico City is used for irrigation in
the Valley of Mexico and the adjoining Mezquital Valley, an area with low rainfall and
poor soils. About 45 m?/s is transferred to the Mezquital Valley where it is used to irrigate
an area of about 90,000 ha. The use of wastewater for irrigation has greatly increased crop
yields. A second benefit of this irrigation has been an increase in groundwater recharge in
the Mezquital Valley including the creation of a new shallow aquifer and an increase in the
base flow of local streams (Jimenez et al., 1998).
Dan Region, Israel. Israel’s total water needs exceed the available water resources which
total about 1,800 Mm3/yr. To help meet water needs, recycled water is used extensively for
agricultural irrigation. More that 60% of wastewater is reused. The wastewater discharge
from Tel Aviv (about 130 Mm3/yr) is treated then percolated into an aquifer which provides
further treatment. The water is then extracted from recovery wells and pumped through the
Dan Region pipeline to meet agricultural water needs in the Dan Region and the Negev
Desert.
Virginia, Australia. In South Australia, a major scheme has been constructed to supply up
2 to 30 Mm3/yr of recycled water, from the Bolivar sewage treatment plant in Adelaide, to the
Virginia area north of Adelaide for irrigation of horticultural crops. The scheme includes a
120,000 m3/d water reclamation plant that incorporates dissolved air flotation and filtration
processes (Marks, 1998).
Urban reuse
St Petersburg, Florida. The City of St Petersburg in Florida has constructed an extensive
urban water reuse scheme which has been in operation since 1977 and which now supplies
J. Anderson
approximately 10,000 properties including 9,300 residential properties. Reclaimed water
uses include urban and residential landscape uses, industrial uses, air conditioner chiller
water and a backup source for fire protection. The scheme supplies an average of about
80,000 m3/d of recycled water. The quantity used depends on weather conditions. In 1993,
more than 100,000 m3/d of recycled water were supplied to consumers. A further
70,000 m3/d is used for deep well injection to prevent saline intrusion into the City’s drink-
ing water aquifers (RWCC, 1993).
Irvine Ranch, California. The Irvine Ranch Water District (IRWD) commenced construc-
tion of a dual reticulation recycled water scheme in 1977. Recycled water is used for land-
scape irrigation including residential gardens (2,000 ha), irrigation of food crops (400 ha),
ornamental lakes, car washes and industrial uses including a carpet mill. IRWD has man-
dated the use of recycled water for toilet flushing in new high rise office buildings. The
IRWD dual reticulation system supplies 57,000 m3/d to 1,750 customers and delivers more
than 15 Mm3 of recycled water per year.
South Bay, California. In California’s Silicon valley, the San Jose and Santa Clara County
authorities were directed to limit fresh water discharges to the south end of San Francisco
Bay to not more than 450,000 m3/d to reduce damage to an environmentally sensitive salt
marsh environment. Rather than construct an ocean outfall, they have built the South Bay
Water Recycling Scheme to deliver recycled water for urban, industrial and agricultural
users. The 60,000 m3/d first stage has been in service since 1998 (Rosenblum, 1999).
Rouse Hill, Australia. In Australia water will be recycled for residential uses at Rouse hill,
a new housing development area in the north-western sector of Sydney. The area is ulti-
mately planned to have 300,000 people with the first stage of the development catering for
100,000 people in 35,000 houses. A second reticulation system has been installed to supply
recycled water for toilet flushing and garden watering. The first section of the scheme com-
menced operation in August 2001 and will supply 10,000 houses.
Homebush Bay, Australia. A water recycling scheme has been installed at Homebush Bay
in Sydney, Australia where the Sydney Olympic Games were staged. Up to 7,000 m3/d of
recycled water from stormwater and treated wastewater sources is used for toilet flushing in
sporting venues, irrigation of open space areas, and to 2,000 residential houses for gardens
and toilet flushing. Microfiltration and reverse osmosis treatment processes are used to
achieve the required water quality. The scheme will reduce demands on Sydney’s fresh-
water supplies by about 850,000 m3/yr (Cooney, 2001).
Mawson Lakes, Adelaide. The Mawson Lakes housing development in Adelaide Australia
will house 10,000 people in 3,700 houses and also serves a university and a commercial and
industrial estate. Wastewater from the estate will be treated and recycled for toilet flushing
and landscape irrigation. Stormwater from the site is collected, treated and recycled to
provide lakes and water features within the estate and supplementary water for landscape 3
irrigation. Aquifer storage and recovery will be used to store surplus winter flows of
recycled water and stormwater and supply peak irrigation needs during summer (Marks,
1998).
Industrial reuse
Power station cooling. Recycled water from the City Phoenix is supplied to meet the cool-
ing water needs of the Palo Verde Power Station, which is located in the Sonoran Desert,
J. Anderson
55 km west of Phoenix. Average rainfall in the area is about 175 mm/yr. The power station
has an installed of 3,810 MW. The water recycling scheme supplies has a capacity of
approximately 250,000 m3/d as cooling system make-up water.
Power station boiler feed. In Australia, recycled water from the Dora Creek sewage treat-
ment works is pumped to the 2,640 megawatt Eraring Power Station at Lake Macquarie,
about 100 km north of Sydney. There it is further treated by microfiltration and reverse
osmosis to produce a water of potable grade which is then further treated in the existing
demineralisation plant to produce purified water which is used as boiler feed to provide
steam for the power station turbines. This recycled water replaces 1.2 Mm3/yr of potable
water previously supplied from the town water supply system (Cole and Deans, 1994).
Steel production. Recycled water is supplied to steelworks for a variety of process water
uses including cooling water, quenching of the blast furnace slag and quenching at the coke
ovens. It is currently planned to expand the water recycling system at the Port Kembla steel-
works in Australia to at least 35,000 m3/d and possibly to 50,000 m3/d.
Oil refining. In Australia, a 14,000 m3/d dual membrane water reclamation plant has been
installed at the Luggage Point sewage treatment plant in Brisbane to supply process water
to the BP oil refinery (Don, 2001; Barr, 2002).
Semi-conductor manufacture. The Singapore Public Utilities Board has been conducting
the Singapore NEW Water project, a 10,000 m3/d demonstration project to demonstrate the
suitability of recycled water, which has received advanced treatment to supply high purity
water for high technology and semiconductor industries. The demonstration project, which
was commissioned in May 2000, includes extensive health studies. A dual membrane
process using microfiltration and reverse osmosis followed by ultraviolet light filtration
has been used. Following the success of the demonstration project, a further 72,000 m3/d
capacity is now under construction and is expected to be in service by December 2002.
Recycling to supplement water resources
Incidental or unplanned supplementation of water resources is widespread where treated
wastewater is discharged to rivers, lakes that are subsequently used for drinking water sup-
plies. Commonly quoted cases include the Thames and Rhine Rivers where multiple uses
occur between source and the ocean. In the USA, a 1980 study by the US.EPA reviewed
1,246 water supply systems serving 80 million people in towns over 25,000 population and
found that 26 million people were served from sources which contain between 5% and
100% treated wastewater during low flow periods.
South Africa. Water reuse has played a major role in matching demands and available raw
water supplies. The 1956 Water Act required treated wastewater flows to be returned to
stream of origin unless applied to beneficial reuse, a requirement that encouraged the intro-
4 duction of high standards of treatment. As a result, recycled water constitutes a substantial
proportion of the base flow in many rivers. For example, recycled water is now about 50%
of the inflow into Hartbeespoort Dam which supplies water to Pretoria and Johannesburg
(Odendaal et al., 1998).
Los Angeles, California. Since 1962, the Los Angeles County Sanitation District has been
using recycled water to recharge a groundwater potable water supply through surface
spreading basins at Whittier Narrows. The recycled water was initially disinfected second-
J. Anderson
ary effluent and was upgraded by addition of tertiary filtration in 1978. The amount of
recycled water recharged annually averages 16% of the total inflow to the groundwater
basin. Depending on location and aquifer characteristics, the proportion of recycled water
in the potable water wells ranges from 0 to 23%. After extensive data acquisition and
analysis, an independent scientific panel to the State of California concluded that the
Whittier Narrows groundwater recharge was as safe as commonly used surface water
supplies (State of California, 1978).
Orange County, California. Since 1976, Orange county in California has operated Water
Factory 21, a 57,000 m3/d water reclamation plant producing recycled water of drinking
water standard which is injected under pressure into a heavily used potable aquifer to pre-
vent salt water intrusion. After more than 15 years of intensive groundwater monitoring,
Orange County has observed no change in groundwater quality that would cause a public
health concern. The plant is currently being expanded to 200,000 m3/d using a dual mem-
brane process.
Upper Occaquan, Virginia. In Virginia, recycled water from the Upper Occaquan water
reclamation plant is discharged to the 42 Mm3 Upper Occaquan reservoir, which supplies
drinking water to about 1 million people in North Virginia. Typically recycled water repre-
sents 10% to 15% of the reservoir inflows and the average detention time in the reservoir is
26 days. The water reclamation plant was initially 55,000 m3/d capacity and has been
enlarged to 100,000 m3/d. Further enlargement to 200,000 m3/d is planned.
El Paso, Texas. Since 1985, El Paso in Texas has used recycled water from the 38,000 m3/d
Fred Harvey water reclamation plant to recharge the Hueco Bolson drinking water aquifer.
Detention time is approximately 2 years before water is drawn for supply from the El Paso
potable water wells. No negative effects on health related water quality parameters have been
observed but there has been some increase in total dissolved solids content in the aquifer.
Windhoek, Namibia. Windhoek, the capital city of Namibia, is situated in the central high-
lands of Namibia between the Kalahari Desert to the east and the Namib Desert to the west.
The nearest perennial river is the Kavango, 750 km away. As a result of severe water short-
ages during drought, the world’s first potable water reclamation plant of 4,800 m3/d capac-
ity was constructed in 1968. The plant has consistently produced water of acceptable
potable quality for 30 years. It has been upgraded on several occasions and is currently
being enlarged to 21,000 m3/d using dual membrane technologies. Overall since 1968,
recycled water has contributed 4% of the total water supply in Windhoek but has been up to
31% of the total supply during severe drought periods. The recycled water is blended with
treated water from the Goreangab water treatment plant before distribution, with the maxi-
mum blend being 1:1 during drought periods. The average blend since 1968 has been 1:3.5.
The blend from Goreangab is mixed with water from other sources in the service reservoirs
so that normally there is a maximum proportion of 25% recycled water in any zone in any
period (van der Merwe and Menge, 1996). 5
Drinking water supply sources are subject to close monitoring to ensure that the supply
is safe. As an overall goal, water reuse projects should provide at least the same degree of
public health protection as conventional water supplies. Water quality issues for resource
supplementation reuse projects are the same as with any potable water supply project.
Parameters to be addressed include pathogens, organics and inorganics. Due to the waste-
water origin of recycled water, treatment technologies must address the potential higher
levels of microbiological and chemical contamination. In the absence of specific standards
J. Anderson
covering potable reuse applications, the industry has developed a “multiple barriers”
approach to ensure the appropriate levels of safety and reliability. In this concept, multiple
unit processes or other mechanisms are provided to remove or inactivate each quality
parameter of concern, particularly the microbiological parameters.
Water reuse and integrated urban water planning
Traditionally, water authorities have managed their water supply, sewerage and stormwater
drainage systems as separate entities. Integrated urban water planning is a structured planning
process to evaluate concurrently the opportunities to improve the management of water, sew-
erage and drainage services within an urban area in ways which are consistent with broader
catchment and river management objectives. As discussed by Davison et al. (2001) catch-
ment management impacts directly and indirectly on all three components of the urban water
cycle, having effects on drinking water quality, wastewater treatment and stormwater man-
agement. A simple framework of hazard identification, assessment and management under-
pins the management of both catchments and urban water cycle elements.
The New South Wales Department of Land and Water Conservation (DLWC, 2001) has
developed an integrated urban water planning process through a number of recent pilot
studies conducted in partnership with local authorities in studies in the New South Wales
towns of Finley, Goulburn and Bombala. The process links urban water management
objectives to overall catchment and river management objectives. As a prelude to the inte-
grated urban water planning process, DLWC undertakes an assessment of water quality and
flow conditions, with particular focus on the sources of nutrients in catchment discharges.
This data assists in shaping appropriate urban planning responses, particularly when urban
discharges are a significant proportion of total nutrient discharges.
The pilot studies have shown that an integrated approach to urban water, sewerage and
stormwater planning can identify opportunities that are not apparent when separate strategies
are developed for each service. The pilot studies have shown that both water conservation
measures and water reuse are important contributors to environmental water quality improve-
ments, and can also reduce water supply costs. The result is better-integrated, more sustainable
solutions, and substantial cost savings for local communities. Savings of up to 50% of capital
costs have been identified in the pilot studies, but this may be exceptional. It is probably more
practical to set a modest target of 15% to 20% savings and to see if this can be bettered.
The conduct of an integrated urban water planning study is often a less costly process
than traditional separate water and sewerage strategy studies. The integrated urban water
planning produces a rapid screening and shortlisting of potential opportunities in partner-
ship with the community. The process can lead to significant savings in project investiga-
tion and development costs, as well as the sorts of capital and operating costs savings which
have been identified in the pilot studies (Anderson and Iyadurai, 2003).
Environmental benefits of water reuse
Water reuse to meet the world’s water needs
Felicia Marcus, former USEPA’s Regional Administrator for the dry western region of the
6 USA, has said: “Water recycling is a critical element for managing our water resources.
Through water conservation and recycling, we can meet environmental needs and still have
sustainable development and a viable economy.” Tom Hannigan, CEO of California’s
Department of Water Resources, has described water recycling as “the brightest star” in
meeting future water needs in California.
Given the water shortages which are now occurring, it is increasingly difficult to justify
the old wasteful “use once and throwaway” approach which has traditionally been used by
urban societies. Water conservation, reuse and recycling can greatly increase the benefits
J. Anderson
obtained from limited supplies of freshwater. This is shown in the following two diagrams
in Figures 1 and 2 which show the water balance in a river basin where 50% of the average
flow is used for agriculture and 25% for urban and industrial needs. The “status quo” case
of a “throw-away” city which diverts, uses water once and then discharges it is shown in
Figure 1.
The improvement in downstream river flows resulting from a 20% reduction in water
demands through water conservation and water efficiency measures in both agricultural
and urban use, coupled with beneficial reuse of 90% of reclaimed water flows for non-
potable uses is shown in Figure 2.
Many rivers are experiencing declines in water quality due to high discharges of pollu-
tants. It can be shown with simple modelling that downstream water quality is a function
not only of the amount of pollutants being discharged, but also a function of the amount of
freshwater being extracted from the river. It can be demonstrated that water reuse reduces
the amount of fresh water diverted and reduces the amount of pollutants being discharged
and therefore results in improvements in downstream water quality.
The corresponding improvements in downstream water quality as a result of the reduced
diversions and reduced discharges of treated wastewater in a hypothetical 120 km length of
a river containing two large cities are shown in Figure 3.
Recycled water is a valuable resource. Instead of being thrown away, appropriately
treated water can be recycled – used a second time – to reduce the demand on high quality
freshwater sources and improve environmental water quality. Water recycling increases
5000 Evaporation
50000 Agriculture
City
25000 12500 20000
50000 12500
20000 Discharge
Flow 100000 25000 45000
COD 5mg/L COD 48mg/L
Figure 1 Status quo – use and discharge. 75,000 m3 water use needs 75,000 m3 fresh water; net use
55,000 m3
4000 Evaporation
50000 Agriculture
10000
City
10000 12500 16000
35600
12500
4400 1600 Discharge
Flow 100000 54400 56000
COD 5mg/L COD 7mg/L
Better Water Quality
Figure 2 Benefits of water conservation, reuse and recycling. Conserve and 90% reuse: 75,000 m3 water
use needs 45,600 m3 fresh water; net flow reduction 44,000 m3 7
80
e & Discharge
Divert,DUs +20%
iv e rt, Water
U se & DSavings
is c h a rg e +90% Water
+20% Reuse
W a te r S a v in g s + 9 0 % W a te r R e u s e
70
60
City 2
Water Quality (mg/L)
50
40
City 1 Agriculture
J. Anderson
30
20
10
0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Distance (km)
Figure 3 Water quality benefits of water conservation and beneficial reuse
the available supply of water and enables greater human benefit to be achieved with less
freshwater. Therefore, water recycling can make a substantial contribution to meeting the
world’s water needs and to lessening mankind’s impact on the world’s water environment
(Anderson, 2001a; Anderson, 2001b).
Discussion
Identifying the benefits
In the past there has been a focus on the cost of implementing water reuse schemes, but
less consideration of the benefits side of the Equation. Often the indirect benefits and the
environmental benefits have not been accounted for in the evaluation of the merits of a
project.
Using reclaimed water in place of fresh water for existing uses can free up existing water
supply system capacity to cater for new water needs. This results in savings in the cost of
developing new water sources, water transfers, treatment and distribution systems. It can
also result in significant improvements in downstream river water quality. From an exami-
nation of the hypothetical case presented in Figures 1, 2 and 3, it is possible to identify a
wide range of benefits that result from water conservation and reuse. The benefits include:
(a) agriculture benefits such as: (i) reduced diversion costs, (ii) value of a secure “drought-
proof” supply of reclaimed water, (iii) increased farm production, and (iv) value of
reclaimed water nutrients = savings in fertiliser applications;
(b) urban water supply benefits such as: (i) savings in the capital cost of diversion
structures, drought storage, transfer systems and water treatment and (ii) savings in
operation and maintenance costs including pumping energy and treatment chemicals;
(c) urban wastewater benefits such as: (i) savings in discharge pump stations and pipelines
and (ii) savings in treatment and nutrient removal costs required for discharge to sensi-
tive waters;
(d) environmental water quality benefits such as:
(i) reduction in freshwater diversions
= more river flow for downstream users
= better downstream water quality
(ii) reduction in pollutant discharges
= better downstream water quality
(iii) better downstream water quality
8 = reduced environmental impact and improved river aesthetics
= reduced impacts on fisheries and aquatic life
= improved public health for downstream users
= lower water treatment costs for downstream users
= improved recreational values of waterways.
Economics and sustainability
In most coastal locations in Australia, the costs of developing new fresh water supplies
J. Anderson
often exceeds US 0.5 $/m3, and in drier inland areas the cost is often much higher. A con-
siderable amount of work is being done to evaluate water recycling projects in terms of
their economics and sustainability. A recent example is the Sydney Water Corporation’s
Water Recycling Strategy (SWC, 1999) which evaluates potential water recycling projects
in terms of levelised annual costs in $/m3 and Greenhouse gas impacts expressed in equiva-
lent kWh/m3 energy use. White and Howe (1998) have described the levelised annual cost
approach. The results of these analyses suggest the following.
(a) Selected large industrial reuse projects and urban landscaping projects which are locat-
ed close to the treatment plant are more economic than dual reticulation residential
schemes.
(b) Indirect reuse by supplementation of water resources would be more cost effective than
many non-potable reuse options but may have higher greenhouse gas impacts.
(c) Decentralised treatment and recycling systems may warrant further examination.
(d) The implementation of low cost water conservation measures can provide a 10 to 20
year window of opportunity in which in make informed decisions about implementing
advanced water recycling applications and to improve further the technology.
Conclusions
Successful water recycling projects have been implemented in many countries. This
experience has demonstrated the feasibility of water reuse on a large scale and its role in the
sustainable management of the world’s water. Both project experience and comprehensive
health studies have demonstrated the potential to use recycled water to supplement
drinking water supplies. An integrated approach to urban water, sewerage and stormwater
planning can identify opportunities that are not apparent when separate strategies are
developed for each service. The result is better-integrated, more sustainable solutions, and
substantial cost savings for local communities. Water conservation and water recycling
measures are key elements in integrated urban water planning.
Water conservation and beneficial reuse can reduce freshwater diversions from streams
and improve downstream water quality. There are many direct and indirect benefits which
result from reduced diversions and improved downstream water quality. These benefits
should be evaluated and taken into account when assessing the merits of implementing new
water reuse projects. Water reuse increases the available supply of water and enables
greater human needs to be achieved with less fresh water, thus lessening mankind’s impact
on the world’s water environment. A move from the old “use once and throw away”
approach, to a new sustainable “conserve, use wisely and recycle” water economy will ben-
efit the whole world. There is still much to do to improve water recycling technologies and
improve the evaluation of project economics and sustainability. While the World’s water
problems may seem great, we have seen enormous progress in water conservation and recy-
cling in the last 20 years. There is cause for optimism that, with focussed effort, mankind
can reverse the degradation of the planet’s water environment and meet the world’s water
needs in a sustainable way.
9
References
Anderson, J. (2001a). Ripples in the pond: Water recycling and integrated water management. Water 21,
Aug 2001, pp 16–21.
Anderson, J. (2001b). Water reforms and integrated water planning. Water 21, Oct 2001, pp 16–18.
Anderson, J. and Iyadurai, R. (2003). Integrated urban water planning: big picture planning is good for the
wallet and the environment. Wat. Sci. Tech., 47(7–8), 19–23.
Barr, K. (2002). Operating a water reclamation plant to convert sewage effluent to high quality water for
industrial reuse. Proc. IWA 3rd World Water Congress, Melbourne, Australia, 7–12 April 2002.
J. Anderson
Bouwer, H. (2000). Integrated water management: emerging issues and challenges. Agric. Wat. Manag., 45,
217–228.
Cole, C. and Deans, G. (1994). From effluent to power: A major recycling initiative by Hunter water and
Pacific power. Proc RWCC 4th NSW Recycled Water Seminar, Newcastle, May 1994, 28–35.
Cooney, E. (2001). Water reclamation plant a green winner for Olympic site. Proc. Aust Water Assn 19th
Federal Convention, Canberra, April 2001.
Croce, F. (1998). Policy formulation for sustainable reuse of wastewater: The Egypt case study. Preprints
AWT 98 Advanced Wastewater Treatment, Recycling and Reuse, Milan, September 1998, 781–788.
Davison, A., Schneider, P., Langdon, A. and Toop, P. (2001). Getting your priorities right: Assessing and
managing hazards. Proc. Aust Water Assn 19th Federal Convention, Canberra, April 2001.
DLWC (2001). NSW Water Reforms. NSW Dept. of Land and Water Conservation [Available online at:
www.dlwc.nsw.gov.au]
Don, L. (2001). Delivery and performance of the luggage point wastewater treatment plant water
reclamation project. Proc Aust Water Assn 19th Federal Convention, Canberra, April 2001.
Hinichsen, D., Robey, B. and Upadhyay, U.D. (1999). Solutions for a water-short world. Population Report,
Series M, No.14, John Hopkins University School of Public Health, Population Information Program,
February 1999.
Jimenez, B., Capella, A. and Landa, H. (1998). Advanced primary treatment: A new technology, AWWA-
WEF Water Reuse 98, Orlando Florida, February 1998, 269–279.
Marks, R. (1998). Development of Australia’s largest high quality effluent reuse scheme – Bolivar SA.
Proc. 11th IWSA-ASPAC Regional Conf. – Integrating the Urban Water Cycle, Sydney, November 1998,
564–570.
Odendaal, P.E., van der Westhuizen, J.L.J. and Grobler, G.J. (1998). Wastewater reuse in South Africa.
Wastewater Reclamation and Reuse. T. Asano (Ed.), Water Quality Management Library Vol. 10,
Technomics Publishing.
Rosenblum, E. (1999). Selection and implementation of nonpotable water recycling in “Silicon Valley”
(San Jose area) California. Wat. Sci. Tech., 40(4–5), 51–57.
RWCC (1993). NSW Guidelines for Urban and Residential Use of Reclaimed Water. NSW Recycled Water
Coordination Committee, 1st Ed., May 1993.
State of California (1978). Wastewater Reclamation Criteria. California Administrative Code Title 22,
Division 4, California Department of Health Services.
SWC (1999). Water Recycling Strategy. Sydney Water Corporation, December 1999.
van der Merwe, B. and Menge, J. (1996). Water reclamation for potable reuse in Windhoek Namibia. Aust
Water and Wastewater Assn Water Tech, Sydney, May 1996, 327–334.
White, S. and Howe, C. (1998). Water efficiency and reuse: A least cost planning approach. Proc. RWCC 6th
NSW Recycled Water Seminar, Sydney, November 1998.
10
