An innovative greywater treatment system for urban areas ... - SuSanA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

For the MAUT and AHP methods there are high demands on the preference articulation of the decision maker necessary, such as result “A” is better than “B”. The utility analysis in contrast requires only a medium rating on regulation of priority, equal scoring results without preference are possible. In classical decision theory there are always two alternatives comparable. The decision maker can always make a statement and a clear preference, which of the two alternatives is strictly preferred (strict preference), or if both are equivalent (indifference). Outranking procedures aim to give a decision aid in situations of uncertainty and vagueness (Schuh, 2001). One of the main tasks of this master’s thesis is to find a universally valid instrument for decision-making. Therefore, an assessment system is meant to find the preferential cases of MBR technology application and transfer. It shall identify whether it makes sense to implement an MBR system at a particular place and in a particular application, or not. After an in-depths literature review, the decision was taken to use the utility analysis. The main reason for this decision has been the moderate demand of the tool for preference articulation. In regard of the international transferability of membrane bioreactor treatment technology, there are no first choice decisions available. Worldwide, many hotspots can be identified for meaningful implementation of greywater recycling by MBR treatment. Due to a wide range of influencing factors within the decision-making process, utility analysis seems to be the most appropriate method, as it considers many aspects, not only economic ones such as cost-benefit analysis. Another advantage is the easy and heuristic application of the approach. An overview of further advantages, including completeness, transparency, influence of new alternatives, clearness, required data input, etc., is listed in Table 6. Table 6: Appraisal of utility analysis; (Schuh, 2001) Attribute of utility analysis Performance Completeness Yes Transparency, traceability, objectivity Transparency and accountability is obtained through the explicit disclosure of respective preferences in the form of criteria weights and aggregation procedures. This prevents that subconsciously factors are incorporated in the criteria rating. Objectivity will not be ensured by the procedure but at least traceability. Accuracy and validity Yes Reliability Yes Influence of new alternatives No influence of new alternatives on existing assessments Structural openness of method Yes, new criterion requires merely new weighting of all issues Convenience and efficiency Yes Clearness Yes Required data input According to the analysis method, quasicardinal data are necessary, but ordinal data are often regarded as sufficient if a fundamental transformability in benefit points is possible. The realisation of utility analysis was done as follows: In the first step, the applicable criteria for the decision making must be found. In respect of the international transferability of a MBR treatment plant, e. g. economic considerations and their associated sub items (e. g. acquisition cost, operating costs, etc.) are important. The sub criteria were weighted according to their importance for the objective of the decision making process. Here, percentages are given; the summary of all sub issues is 100% in total. This step results in a 18
matrix that shows all objective criteria in the rows. In the columns, there are respective projects to be evaluated. To perform the evaluation of a project, each sub point has been assessed regarding accuracy with the statement, e.g. for operating costs the estimation is “10” for high and “1” for low. In every assessment the sub criteria were multiplied by the weighting factors and summarised as a total value. The result is a percentage value that can be set in proportion with the optimal variant of 100% consensus (see Table 7). Table 7: Sample of a utility matrix; (by K. Löw) Assessment criteria Weighting Discretionary ∑= 100% A Criterion A 10 B Criterion B 20 C Criterion C 30 D Criterion D 20 E Criterion E 20 Rating input Project 1 Description of rating Rating Result high = 10, medium = 5, low = 1, n. a. = 0 10 10 high = 10, medium = 5, low = 1, n. a. = 0 5 10 high = 10, medium = 5, low = 1, n. a. = 0 10 30 high = 10, medium = 5, low = 1, n. a. = 0 1 2 high = 10, medium = 5, low = 1, n. a. = 0 1 2 Degree of fulfilment Result [%] 54 2.4.2 IDENTIFICATION OF DETERMINING FACTORS FOR THE ANALYSIS OF INTERNATIONAL TRANSFERABILITY OF GREYWATER TREATMENT To provide a basis for the identification of factors of international transferability the fundamental terms of ecology and economy serve the main preconditions. The fundamental aspects are based on the results of a study conducted by Kerpen and Zapf (2005), which identified the following economic parameters: � Charge for drinking water and wastewater � Accumulation of greywater in a building (number of residents, consumer habits) � Investment costs of the system (treatment plant, piping system) � Operating expenses (maintenance, energy, spare parts) � Government aid, subsidies, incentives, legal foundation Apart from economic reasons, criteria of sustainability were taken into consideration in order to ensure a meaningful use of greywater recycling. Especially for urban areas and fastgrowing economies, it is necessary to contemplate the environment, surrounding area, and living conditions. This examination caused an expansion of scope regarding ecological and social aspects (SuSanA, 2008). In regard to a sustainable water management, a framework of recommended action was identified by a research project of the Federal Ministry for the Environmental, Nature 19
Page 1 and 2: Master’s Thesis AN INNOVATIVE GRE
Page 3 and 4: ABSTRACT In its German headquarters
Page 5 and 6: 3.7 Identification of global hotspo
Page 7 and 8: LIST OF TABLES Table 1: Overview of
Page 9 and 10: ABBREVIATIONS AHP Analytical hierar
Page 11 and 12: 1 INTRODUCTION In regions of the wo
Page 13 and 14: 2 MATERIALS AND METHODS 2.1 LITERAT
Page 15 and 16: To get an overview of chronological
Page 17 and 18: Table 2: Microbiological load of gr
Page 19 and 20: 2.1.5 TREATMENT TECHNOLOGIES Genera
Page 21 and 22: Figure 7: Ground plot of GIZ main b
Page 23 and 24: Figure 10: Schematic view of preced
Page 25 and 26: 3. Storage tank for permeate: In th
Page 27: 2.4 GREYWATER TREATMENT VIA MBR TEC
Page 31 and 32: � Socio-cultural criteria o Gener
Page 33 and 34: Only the legislative requirements f
Page 35 and 36: An important factor for the assessm
Page 37 and 38: equirements of purity (Sieghart, 20
Page 39 and 40: 2.5 METHOD TO IDENTIFY IDEAL INTERN
Page 41 and 42: Population per km 2 arable land: 0
Page 43 and 44: such as in densely populated areas.
Page 45 and 46: Table 13: International greywater t
Page 47 and 48: Due to the complexities, involved i
Page 49 and 50: 3.3 PLANT TECHNOLOGY IN ESCHBORN As
Page 51 and 52: humins, which are high molecular or
Page 53 and 54: 3.4 SANIRESCH RESEARCH PROJECT AND
Page 55 and 56: ut in a hotel the drain from shower
Page 57 and 58: Cleaning water for preceeding scree
Page 59 and 60: Water costs: In contrast to energy
Page 61 and 62: treatment plants in different circu
Page 63 and 64: 3.6 INVESTIGATION OF INTERNATIONAL
Page 65 and 66: “Dead Sea Spa” hotel/Jordan; (a
Page 67 and 68: In this comparison of three project
Page 69 and 70: In the Near East and North Africa m
Page 71 and 72: Table 26: Water quality index (WQI)
Page 73 and 74: 3.7.4 URBANISATION Country populati
Page 75 and 76: Table 29: Ranking of countries idea
Page 77 and 78: e based on legal, economic, socio-c
Page 79 and 80:
3.8 FUTURE PROSPECTS 3.8.1 LEGAL FO
Page 81 and 82:
4 CONCLUSIONS The membrane bioreact
Page 83 and 84:
5 REFERENCES Ackermann, K. (2010).
Page 85 and 86:
Herbst, H. (2008). Bewertung zentra
Page 87 and 88:
Rohr, T. (2004). Einsatz eines mehr
Page 89 and 90:
Hauptgebäude. In S. fbr15, Wassera
Page 91 and 92:
6.5 ENERGY PRICE (GROSS) IN GERMANY
Page 93 and 94:
6.8 UTILITY ANALYSIS (TRIMMED-DOWN
Page 95 and 96:
Identification of ideal internation
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
6.9 POSTER 94
Page 103:
EHRENWÖRTLICHE ERKLÄRUNG Ich vers
show all

An innovative greywater treatment system for urban areas ... - SuSanA

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?