4.3 Article

Setting Future Water Rates for Sustainability of a Water Distribution System

出版社

ASCE-AMER SOC CIVIL ENGINEERS
DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)WR.1943-5452.0001313

关键词

Asset management; Water price elasticity (WPE); Pipe replacement; Aging infrastructure; Optimization; Financial planning; Water price adjustment; Hydraulic modeling; System dynamics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study presents an approach to plan future water rates for achieving sustainability targets in water distribution systems. Through three demonstrations, it was found that factors such as water price elasticity and pricing strategies have significant impacts on the system's sustainability. The proposed method can provide useful insights for analyzing future water rates to maximize sustainability in WDS.
This study introduces an approach to plan future water rates to achieve water distribution system (WDS) sustainability triple-top line (TTL) targets. The WDS components are modeled by connecting the EPANET hydraulic model with multiple interconnected subsystem models in a hybrid-system dynamics configuration. The approach is demonstrated with the hypothetical network, U-City, to optimally set the user fee to maximize a TTL sustainability index (SI). Overall, three demonstrations were performed to test the model: (1) identifying the influence of water price elasticity (WPE); (2) SI sensitivity to a water price adjustment in rate and time; and (3) optimal planning of a water price adjustment strategy. The first demonstration illustrated that neglecting WPE leads to an overestimation of revenue. The second demonstration confirmed that aggressive water pricing does not lead to increased SI. Finally, the third demonstration showed that frequent and lower water price increases are more favorable for a higher WPE to create a sustainable system. In summary, the proposed approach can provide a useful way to analyze future water rates to maximize the sustainability of a WDS. (c) 2020 American Society of Civil Engineers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据