Public perceptions of water shortages, conservation behaviors, and support for water reuse in the U.S.

Abstract

Reclaimed water programs treat wastewater to remove hazardous compounds, pathogens, and organic matter and provide reclaimed water for non-potable applications. Reusing water may significantly reduce demands on freshwater resources and provide sustainable water management strategies. Though production of reclaimed water is highly regulated, public acceptability has historically hindered the implementation of successful reclaimed water systems. The public generally opposes the use of reclaimed water due to the "yuck factor", which is the instinctive disgust associated with the idea of recycling sewage and the fear that exposure to reclaimed water is unsafe. This paper reports the results of an extensive survey that was conducted to evaluate the potential acceptability of reclaimed water use. A total of 2,800 respondents across the U.S. participated in the survey. Results demonstrate that a small percentage of the population is concerned about water shortages, the majority of the population practices some level of water conservation, and a substantial percentage of the population supports the use of reclaimed water. Climate, demographic variables, and financial incentives were tested for influence on attitudes and behaviors regarding water, including awareness, conservation, and support for water reuse. Sex, age, last monthly water bill, and location (as EPA region) showed no significant effect on the acceptance of water reuse, while ethnicity, education level, metro/non metro, and income showed significant effects. Drought conditions do not have a statistically significant effect on the number of reclaimed water supporters, but increase the number of respondents who are water concerned, the number of respondents who are the most active water conservers, and the number of respondents who limit their use of water for lawn and garden watering. Financial incentives influence the willingness of respondents to participate in water reuse programs, and a decrease in the monthly water bills increased the 3 likelihood that respondents would participate in a reclaimed water program. Support for the use of reclaimed water for various applications ranked positively, on average, except for the application of water reuse for food crop irrigation and use of reclaimed water at respondents' own residences. Results and conclusions of the survey can provide insight for implementing successful reclaimed water programs.

A review of reverse osmosis membrane fouling and control strategies

“…Water shortage is one of major challenges in many places around the world (Adeniji-Oloukoi et al, 2013;Avrin et al, 2015;Garcia-cuerva et al, 2016;Hibbs et al, 2016). It is exacerbated by water pollution from agricultural residues, sewage as well as industrial waste (Yao et al, 2016).…”

The impact of water information disclosure on the cost of capital: An empirical study of China's capital market

“…Not only environmental organizations, but also academics at home and abroad are paying special attention to water resources issues. At present, there are many studies focused on water resource pricing (Kanakoudis et al, 2016), the shortage of water resources (Garcia-Cuerva, Berglund, & Binder, 2016), water pollution (Hu & Cheng, 2013), water circulation (Mack-Vergara & John, 2017), water footprint (Li, Xu, Wang, & Tan, 2017), water resources management (Al-Saidi, 2017), water resource responsibility (Jones, Hillier, & Comfort, 2015), and water resources strategy (Barber & Jackson, 2012). This indicates that water risk has undoubtedly become one of the factors for investors and creditors to recalculate the value and return on corporate investment.…”

Coastal California Wastewater Effluent as a Resource for Seawater Desalination Brine Commingling

“…Each of these categories received a score from 0-3, with 3 representing the highest need for water. The scores were then totaled and used to rank the need for an alternative water source as low (0-4), moderate (5)(6)(7)(8) or high (9)(10)(11)(12).…”

“…SWRO is mostly limited to large-scale facilities due to the energy cost advantages of treating large flow rates [10]. Environmental concerns have caused negative public opinion about this relatively new technology and deterred the expansion of SWRO facilities in California [11]. Overall, the SWRO potential of California is constrained by sustainable power supplies, economies of scale and environmental impacts of seawater intake and brine discharge.…”