Among island communities, water security and access continue to be a critical issue. In the US Virgin Islands (USVI), 90% of households are capable of collecting roof-harvested rainwater, whereas less than 25% of households are connected to a municipal water system serviced by desalination plants. Rainwater collection leaves the household in charge of managing and treating their own water. Therefore, understanding current barriers to accessing water treatment technologies and the costs of a water storage and treatment program at scale are critical in developing a territory-wide program. In this study, we evaluate (1) household-level barriers to accessing water treatment technologies, (2) a cost breakdown of a UV water treatment pilot program, and (3) potential estimates of program costs at a territory-wide scale. The results suggest that for households, key barriers include knowledge of the problem or solution and capital and installation costs. From the programmatic cost evaluation, the water treatment technology and water testing services were the most expensive. However, given key adjustments, a territory-wide program is estimated to cost $30.4 M covering 50% of households. These data can be used by a coalition of stakeholders in allocating financial and managerial responsibility for a territory-wide water storage and treatment program in the USVI.
UV water treatment can be a viable option for point-of-entry
applications
among households utilizing contaminated private water sources, including
roof-harvested rainwater. However, limited data is available on UV
system effectiveness and costs. Therefore, Love City Strong, an NGO
in the US Virgin Islands, piloted a UV access program which included
free UV systems with prefiltration along with installation and monthly
household visits for up to 12 months, including water quality testing.
In addition, a pilot study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness
of UV systems without prefiltration. Results from the UV access program
demonstrated that E. coli was not detected
in 95.1% of tap or spigot samples (n = 268). Among
water quality parameters, household characteristics, and premise plumbing
dynamics, no factor was significantly higher among samples with detections
of E. coli or total coliforms. Among
all samples from the pilot study of UV systems without prefiltration,
no E. coli was detected (N = 24). Finally, there was a wide range of costsfirst year
and annualwhen comparing different types and configurations
of UV systems. Given these data, UV systems may be a viable option
for generating potable water; however, clear purchasing and operational
guidelines are important to reduce user error.
UV water treatment can be a viable option for point-of-entry applications among households utilizing private water sources. In the US Virgin Islands (USVI), the primary water source is roof-harvested rainwater, collected in large cisterns and supplied to household taps via a pump. While diversification of water sources provides increased resilience to climate change, literature suggests rainwater catchment systems are at high risk of microbial contamination. One option USVI households have is UV systems. However, limited data is available on UV system effectiveness for USVI installations while these systems can be expensive. Therefore, Love City Strong, a local NGO, piloted a multi-year UV access program which included free UV systems with prefiltration along with installation and monthly household visits for up to 12 months including water quality testing. In addition, due to the significant costs associated with the prefiltration portion of the system, a pilot study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the UV systems without prefiltration.The results from the UV system access program demonstrated thatE. coliwas not detected in 95.2% of tap samples (n=271). Among samples with detectable levels ofE. coliand total coliforms, turbidity was lower compared to samples with non-detections. Field teams reported user error was often identified in association withE. colidetections (e.g., bypass was opened). Among all samples from the pilot study of UV systems without prefiltration, noE. coliwas detected (n=24). Total first-year costs for locally available UV systems with and without prefiltration ranged from $1,059-$1,645 and $927-$1,183, respectively, while operation and maintenance (O& M) costs ranged from $166-$266 and $142-$146, respectively. Given these data, UV systems may be a viable option for generating potable water; however, clear purchasing and installation protocols are needed as well as simple O&M guidelines for households to reduce user error.SynopsisPoint-of-entry UV systems were able to produce water for domestic use with no detectable E. coli in 95.2% of samples among USVI households using roof-harvested rainwater.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.