2013
DOI: 10.3390/en6010220
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Evaluation of the Water Scarcity Energy Cost for Users

Abstract: Abstract:In systems experiencing water scarcity and consequent intermittent supply, users often adopt private tanks that collect water during service periods and supply users when the service is not available. The tank may be fed by gravity or by private pumping stations depending on the network pressure level. Once water resources are collected, the tank can supply users by gravity if it is located on the rooftop or by additional pumping if underground. Private tanks thus increase the energy cost of the water… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
(44 reference statements)
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, in most of the sites of Sicily, users nowadays have to pay a large amount for energy needed to draw water from the public network because of private storage tanks and pumping systems [54]. With regard to the benefits related to the RWH system installation, only the benefits due to the potable water saving have been considered.…”
Section: Cost-benefit Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Therefore, in most of the sites of Sicily, users nowadays have to pay a large amount for energy needed to draw water from the public network because of private storage tanks and pumping systems [54]. With regard to the benefits related to the RWH system installation, only the benefits due to the potable water saving have been considered.…”
Section: Cost-benefit Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, the users are prepared for unexpected interruption of the supply service. Therefore, in most of the sites of Sicily, users nowadays have to pay a large amount for energy needed to draw water from the public network because of private storage tanks and pumping systems [54]. Table 4.…”
Section: Cost-benefit Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Average water losses are in the range of 40%: the Scillato water supply system is characterised by higher losses (52.5%); Gabriele and Jato systems are newer and characterised by lower leakage volumes (27.8% and 24% respectively). Details about the system and about Palermo water supply may be found in Fontanazza et al [21][22][23]. The current baseline showed that GHG production is mainly due to energy consumption (for pumping and treatment) and to direct production of GHG during treatment that can be neglected in the present study.…”
Section: The Water Supply System In Palermomentioning
confidence: 61%
“…The users' local tanks are often larger than necessary. Therefore, this configuration, coupled with intermittent distribution, contributes to inequalities among users in term of both water volume [12] and energy cost [13]. In addition, the periodic emptying and filling periods stress the pipe network by causing the number of leaks and, consequently, the amount of energy consumed by the water utility company to increase [11].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%