SUSTAINABLE INTEGRATED

WATER MANAGEMENT
STATE OF THE KNOWLEDGE

As of December 2010
Sustainable Integrated Water Management: State of the Knowledge

1.0 Challenge Statement

To advance a paradigm shift in water management for cities and towns toward next
generation, integrated, sustainable systems. These systems would:
1) integrate wastewater, stormwater, drinking water, and other water resources;
2) maximize energy, materials and water recovery;
3) be safe and resilient to external impacts;
4) protect water quality for designated uses;
5) maximize triple-bottom line benefits;
6) leverage existing and emerging models for service delivery; and
7) incorporate integrated and comprehensive water planning and smart growth planning
at the national, regional and watershed/local level.

Working collaboratively with other water quality organizations, this research aims to
provide guidance through demonstrations, best practices, institutional studies, decision-making
tools, and other products for a paradigm shift towards sustainable and holistic water
management. Sustainability is defined as: “The continuous supply of clean water for human and
other uses without compromising the environment, economic and well-being of future
generations.” The research focuses on how wastewater and stormwater management practices
and technologies, and institutional changes, can fit into a sustainable integrated water
management model. New approaches will need to take into consideration changes that will affect
the entire system, including water conservation, water quality, regulatory development, service
delivery models, and water management.

2.0 History of the Challenge

At its March 2010 meeting, the WERF Research Council (RC) identified the topic of
“Next Generation Used Water” as its top-ranked research challenge. The RC indicated that this
challenge should aim to advance a new vision for conveying, treating, and reusing water and
achieve a step change towards more sustainable wastewater and stormwater systems.

WERF strives to be a leader in more sustainable “next generation” wastewater and

stormwater systems, and has conducted a number of workshops and reports on this topic. Future
research on next generation systems would build on and be a logical extension of this previous
work.

In parallel with the RC discussions, WERF and its partners in the Global Water Research
Coalition (GWRC) met in early 2010 to identify areas of mutual research interest. One topic
identified was “Rain and Graywater”. WERF volunteered to be the lead organization for a
GWRC research effort on this topic, which is being incorporated into this “Next Generation”
challenge.

2 – Sustainable Integrated Water Management Research Challenge Summary – 6HSWHPEHU 2011

3.0 Background
Rationale
The U.S. population will soar to 438 million by 2050, according to projections released
by the Pew Research Center (Figure 1). The world population is anticipated to reach 9 billion by
2050. Demand for water is expected to significantly rise in order to support increased
consumption by people, crops, energy, businesses and industries associated with this population
growth.

Figure 1. Projected U.S. Population Growth: 1990-2050.

The increased consumption of water will lead to growing water scarcity in the U.S., Australia,
and many other parts of the world. Increased hydrological variability caused by climate change
will also have a significant impact on the sustainability of water supplies in the future. Potential
effects of climate change include increased drought, smaller snowpacks, receding glaciers,
quicker evaporation of surface water, and reduced groundwater levels. A recent report by Tetra
Tech for the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) found that one-third of all counties in
the contiguous U.S. (more than 1,100 counties) will face higher risks of water shortages by 2050
as a result of global warming (Figure 2). Over 400 of these counties will face extremely high
risks of water shortages, a 14-fold increase from previous estimates. Water shortages can
severely impact economic development and agricultural production in affected communities.

3 – Sustainable Integrated Water Management Research Challenge Summary – 6HSWHPEHU 2011

 Coupled with increased population and growing water scarcity is an aging infrastructure.
The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) gave U.S. Drinking Water and Wastewater
Infrastructure “D-” in its most recent report card. The report card indicated that “the physical
condition of many of the nation's 16,000 wastewater treatment systems is poor due to a lack of
investment in plants, equipment, and other capital improvements over the years”. This
infrastructure is expensive to maintain. In 2008, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) indicated that the total investment needs of municipal treatment plants in the U.S. as of
2004 were $202.5 billion. Also, based upon an EPA gap analysis, there will be a roughly $6
billion gap between current annual capital expenditures for wastewater treatment ($13 billion
annually) and projected spending needs. Many systems have reached the end of their useful
design lives. Older systems are plagued by overflows of raw sewage into receiving waters during
heavy rainstorms and snowmelt.

Figure 2. Water Sustainability Index (2050) With Climate Change Impacts (Source: NRDC, 2010).

There is also growing concern over sustainability of the current water infrastructure
approach. The approach used today is based on solutions from the last century, which in turn are
based on concepts from millenia ago (e.g. ancient Rome). This approach typically uses large-
scale, municipal systems that take water from the environment, treat it to drinking standards
regardless of intended use, use the water once, and then discharge it to the environment.
This approach was developed as a solution during times when there was a lower
population living mostly in rural areas, water was more plentiful, and much of the modern
technology that we have today did not exist (Daigger, 2008). Why would we expect this older

4 – Sustainable Integrated Water Management Research Challenge Summary – 6HSWHPEHU 2011

solution to adequately address our needs for this century considering higher populations living
mostly in urban areas with more scarce water and resources?
Change is inevitable. Even though the perceived risk of change is often high, continuing
under the current water management approach or paradigm may be riskier as waterbodies
become more polluted, the cost of infrastructure increases, and resources are depleted. New
approaches are needed that develop new water sources including rainwater and reclaimed used
water, that are less intensive in energy, chemicals, and capital, and that take advantage of current
and emerging technologies as well as natural processes.
A recent WERF/EPRI project “Sustainable Water Resources, Volume 3: Case Studies on
New Water Paradigm” outlined the principles of a new water paradigm. The new paradigm
emphasizes integrated, multi-use, flexible water systems that can adapt and evolve over time.
Table 1 summarizes a number of the key differences between operating under the new and old
paradigm principles.

5 – Sustainable Integrated Water Management Research Challenge Summary – 6HSWHPEHU 2011

 Table 1. Summary of What’s Different Under the New Paradigm.
(WERF/EPRI, 2010, adapted from the Rocky Mountain Institute, 1999)

Topic Current Practice New Paradigm

Water Use Single use – water is used only once before Greater emphasis is placed on water reuse and
treatment and disposal reclamation, use water multiple times (e.g.,
household graywater for irrigation), and reclaim
treated water for the supply side of the
infrastructure.

Water Quality Treat all supply-side water to potable standards Apply “right water for right use” – level of water
quality supplied is based on the intended use.
(supplied)

Wastewater After one-pass use, treat the resulting “waste” Cyclical/”Close the Loop” – recognize the value in
water, and return it to the environment. “wastes”; recover resources (reclaimed water,
nutrients, carbon, metals and biosolids) for
beneficial uses including potable water offsets,
fertilizers, and generating power.

Stormwater Convey stormwater offsite as quickly as possible Harvest stormwater for water supply, irrigation,
with no regard for maintaining hydrological and/or infiltration benefits.
integrity of ecosystem.

Increase System Add capacity to water and wastewater facilities Implement cost-effective demand side and green
Capacity and collection/distribution systems as water infrastructure before increasing gray
demand increases. infrastructure.

Type of Water Primarily use gray infrastructure – engineered and Integrate the natural capacities of soil and
Infrastructure constructed materials (pipes and treatment vegetation to capture, infiltrate and treat water
facilities and pumps). (green infrastructure) with gray infrastructure.

Centralized Preference for large, centralized treatment and Favor distributed approach evaluating the
Infrastructure distribution systems that focus on economies of spectrum from small decentralized systems to
scale at the treatment facility without considering larger centralized systems, including
the whole system, which includes collections and combinations, based on local needs and the triple
distribution systems as well. bottom line.

Complex Design Administrative programs tend to favor more well- Since today’s problems cannot always be solved
known (established), less complex, standard with today’s standard solutions; new technologies
infrastructure designs and technologies. and strategies are encouraged (tested at
demonstration scale as appropriate).

Infrastructure Water, stormwater and wastewater are typically Water is water – integrate infrastructure and
Integration managed as separate systems (creating management of all types of water regionally, as
management “silos”). appropriate.

Public Involvement Stakeholders are informed when approval of pre- Stakeholders are engaged in the decision-making

6 – Sustainable Integrated Water Management Research Challenge Summary – 6HSWHPEHU 2011

 chosen solutions is required. system from the beginning.

Monitoring and Water and wastewater facilities use computerized Moves smart systems out to end users to provide
Maintenance Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition real-time feedback regarding energy use and
(SCADA) to monitor and control processes. water use rates to build understanding, modify
behavior for higher efficiencies, and notify for
maintenance.

Cost-benefit Analyses Use estimates of capital and recurring costs as the Develop an understanding of the full cost and
primary quantitative factor for cost-benefit benefits of infrastructure, including externalities.
analyses.

Research Gaps and Opportunities

In the face of growing population, increasing demand for water to support progressive
development of communities, and increased hydrological variability caused by climate change,
water in any form is considered as a valuable resource. In this context, recycling/ reuse of
various types of water is increasingly considered to be essential part of an integrated water
management approach.
Many water authorities around the world have started developing integrated plans to
manage the water in several forms. However, the water authorities are finding themselves in a
situation where there are severely limiting tools and case studies. The ET identified the following
three focus areas for next generation, sustainable water management:
1) Institutional Structures and Adoption of a One Water Paradigm
2) Management of Water in the Natural and Built Environment
3) Science and Technology to Produce Clean Water for Reuse

Each focus area is discussed briefly below, along with gaps and opportunities that form a
basis for the research plan.

Focus Area I. Institutional Structures and Adoption of a

One Water Paradigm

Today’s urban water managers are faced with an unprecedented

set of issues that call for a dramatically different approach to urban water
management. Although an unprecedented set of tools are now available
to water professionals to address these challenges, to make a “step
change” in the development and implementation of an integrated urban
water management paradigm, water professionals need to be able work
within the larger city context, where water supply and recycling Figure 3. Water and other infrastructure
solutions are jointly developed and implemented not just by the water is often managed in “silos” impeding
agency, but also by the local institutions responsible for development. more holistic approaches and system
optimization.

7 – Sustainable Integrated Water Management Research Challenge Summary – 6HSWHPEHU 2011

 In the past, at scales ranging from individual sites to cities and nations, water has been
managed through what are often clashing governance structures, rules and organizations. Some,
if not many of these frameworks constrain the emergence of reuse as a significant component in
more sustainable water management. The management of various water resources is often under
the control of several different agencies or departments at the local, regional, state and national
level. Additionally, although water demand and storm water impacts can be significantly
impacted by local land use plans and development regulations at the site, building and
neighborhood level, traditional water/wastewater/storm water and flood control agencies do not
normally factor these resources into their plans.
Presently, the ability to manage resources in a holistic manner – in which resources
appropriate in quantity and quality can be matched to end use to achieve a broader sustainability
outcome – is virtually impossible. This section discusses assessment areas under regulatory
schemes that merge outcomes (including costs) to societal aspirations within a governance
structure that can facilitate the leap forward to the next generation of used water.

Gaps/Opportunities
A. Regulatory and Institutional Frameworks. To effectively manage water reuse at any scale,
water (in water supply, wastewater, stormwater, agriculture, natural resource and energy
production, navigation and recreation, and ecosystem services) needs to be addressed as “one
water”. This “one water” paradigm implies water is valued and managed as a single, finite and
global asset, and would most effectively be managed by one entity, although some mix of
effective coordination across the current silos (see Figure 3) managing water is a possibility.
Problematic areas to address so as to achieve water reuse include:

• The legislative landscape in which “used water” appears.

• Regulatory classifications (water quality and narrative) applicable to “used water” and
their impact on water reuse opportunities.
• Water rights, ownership laws impacting the ability to reuse water, while considering the
affects this would have on the aquatic environment, water quality, and/or downstream
water users.
• Institutional and regulatory arrangements for water trading and pricing, that have enabled
effective and interactive use of multiple water sources (e.g., catchments, stormwater,
wastewater, seawater).
• Development of governance and institutional structures necessary to affect a global
paradigm shift towards sustainable water management, including watershed scale
planning and management.
• Ways of integrating planning, service delivery and capital investments of existing water,
wastewater, stormwater, and flood control agencies to promote sustainability, efficiency,
water reuse and coordination with land use planning and development efforts.

B. Planning Frameworks. Planning frameworks must consider all potential sources of water as a
water resource, appropriately matched to its end use and community and stakeholder needs that
evolve over planning cycles. This means that costs external to the organization must be included,
and that more than just the water utility(ies) must be included in the planning process. Issues that
must be addressed in order to embrace this planning concept include:
8 – Sustainable Integrated Water Management Research Challenge Summary – 6HSWHPEHU 2011
 • Integrated and comprehensive water planning and smart growth planning at the national,
regional/watershed and local level.
• Development of decision-making tools for integrated water cycle management (IWCM).

C. Valuing Water. Having an agreed-upon framework for selecting

water system options (including water reuse) that address the needs of
a society, its institutions and regulations, the next step is to
evaluate/select more sustainable local water management options. All
of this is critical, as while legislative and regulatory evolution can
create a decision-making environment that facilitates adoption of
water reuse, it will not be implemented unless utilities and industry,
regulators and the pubic perceive a value of “used water” that
significantly exceeds the costs of implementation. In this section, we
look at both the costs and benefits of “used water” versus other means
of providing water services through improved metrics that include
human health risk assessment, life-cycle assessment, life-cycle costing, technological function,
and other societal and natural resource impacts.

• Moving beyond current valuation and pricing models so that full life-cycle costs of all
materials used for water production, wastewater and stormwater collection and treatment,
reuse infrastructure and residuals management are included, along with ecosystem
services costs.
• Development of robust cost-benefit models [Comparison of the cost, natural resource
investment, environmental impact and implementation challenges of all available water
sources and mitigation strategies to meet end use needs and create a diverse and robust
water supply portfolio].
• Indirect factors impacting investment in water reuse (e.g., risk perception and the cost to
change public perceptions)
• National, state, regional and local water performance measures including methods to
enhance adaptive management in light of sustainability assessments and community
engagement.
• Improved metrics for sustainability.

D. Educational Approaches. The evolution to a “one water” paradigm will require a fundamental
shift in how water professionals and the wider community view water and its role in more
sustainable built and natural environments. Hence, societal and educational aspects are integral
to the integrated water reuse framework/tools described above. A recent WERF-EPRI paper
called for investing in intellectual and human capital so as to bring about a more integrated urban
water management paradigm.

• Interdisciplinary professional curricula/symposia/summits for investing in the present

generation of professionals along with the development community (architects, planners,
landscape architects—Generation pre-S).
• Academic curricula for cultivating the “Sustainability Generation” (Generation S)
generally, and for a next generation of sustainable water professionals in particular.

9 – Sustainable Integrated Water Management Research Challenge Summary – 6HSWHPEHU 2011

 • Enhanced community engagement and public education is critical. Societal and cultural
attitudes towards water reuse and
opportunities/impacts for social
marketing.

Focus Area II: Management of Water in the

Natural and Built Environment
It is important to investigate the nature of
water in sustaining both the natural and built
environments and the human enterprise, and
particularly the role of “used water” at all scales
(process, site, neighborhood/community,
region/nation, global) in promoting sustainability.
It is possible that water demand can be cut
anywhere from 50-80% (Otterpohl and others)
through compact growth, neighborhood or on-site water reuse and storm/rainwater alternatives.
At the same time these efforts reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions.

Gaps/Opportunities

• Hydrology, geology, biota and natural water cycles (noting most water & imbedded
energy cycles within the soil/plant system), their variations (both current and future) and
their impact on water reuse decisions.
• Development of standardized tools to model population growth and density changes.
• Development of standardized tools to model the impacts of climate change and other
stressors.
• Impact of the built environment on sustainability of natural water systems including
source water selection/development/landscape management, wastewater management,
and stormwater management.
• Minimizing the human water footprint through integrated supply and demand
management and reuse.
• Utilizing the city as a catchment (“one catchment concept”) where entire stormwater
flows can be collected for local reuse. Considering this option, a number of subjects
could be developed in the area of aquifer recharge management in terms of hydraulics,
hydrology, and water quality (e.g. what level of water quality is required, what is the
short/long term impact on the aquifer, etc.).
• Optimizing the future built environment through sustainable community and
infrastructure planning, infrastructure enhancement, green construction technologies, and
restorative opportunities for reuse.
• Maximizing water, nutrient and energy “mining” at the utility level; community and
site/building level for beneficial reuse.
• Optimizing storage of recovered resources (water, nutrients, energy) for use in addressing
peak demand and stressors (i.e., extended drought).

10 – Sustainable Integrated Water Management Research Challenge Summary – 6HSWHPEHU 2011

Focus Area III: Science and Technology to Produce
Clean Water for Reuse
The water community is increasingly recognizing that all water
is, in some sense, “used water”. The vast majority of water is
continuously reused in natural or man-made cycles. It is important to
investigate water quality as it pertains to sustaining both water
resources for human activities and the natural environment. Advancing
the state of science and technology in enabling the detection,
identification and quantification of chemical and microbial contaminants of concern, as well as
the subsequent removal, transformation or inactivation of such contaminants and pathogens, is
also important. There is a clear need for innovative treatment technologies to enter the market,
better maximize resources within the water (energy, nutrients) and better minimize the use of
energy for treatment.
To allow for innovations to progress rapidly, a new business model may be required that
allows the rapid diffusion and adoption of new ideas.

Gaps/Opportunities

• Risk assessment (identification/management/minimization) strategies technologies, and

their translation into water quality/system performance standards for both discharge and
reuse options.
• Opportunities for emerging risk assessment approaches, including various genomics-
based approaches.
• Contaminant/surrogate detection and quantification technologies for real-time system
management and decision support.
• Efficacy/limitations of existing treatment technologies to meet reuse options. The reuse
of highly treated wastewater is commonplace and existing technologies are protective of
public health. Higher human exposure scenarios (from contact to drinking) require further
levels of treatment. The efficacies of the increased treatment are proven. It is the
limitations of high energy use and high installation cost that require study.
• Emerging treatment technologies, including application of genomics, ultra-fine nano-
technology based selective adsorption, heterogeneous catalysis and hybrid
chemical/biological systems.
• Emerging chemical, photocatalytic and hybrid disinfection approaches to pathogen
deactivation and minimization of disinfection byproducts.
• Infrastructure (collection, treatment, storage, conveyance systems) impact on “used
water” quality and reuse opportunities.
• The effect of low impact development and smart growth opportunities on water
management philosophies and water quality.
• Enabling integrated infrastructure through the development and use of (advanced)
technology, including: sensors, membranes, and materials that reduce infrastructure costs
and improve performance.
• Demonstration of smart, clean, and green technologies and approaches for water
management.

11 – Sustainable Integrated Water Management Research Challenge Summary – 6HSWHPEHU 2011

 1. Low Cost Satellite Treatment Challenge
2. Large Scale Agricultural Reuse

The various gaps and opportunities noted above are discussed in more detail in the full
State of the Knowledge report.

4.0 Research Plan

The ET conducted a brainstorming session via conference calls and e-mails to identify
potential research needed to address the challenge objective. Each ET member then selected their
top three ideas from the report for discussion in a face-to-face meeting in January 2011. Over 50
critical topics were identified. These topics were grouped under four research focus areas as
shown in Figure 4. The focus areas collectively address the major needs of the challenge.

Figure 4. Four Research Focus Areas for Next Generation Water Management.

Each of the four research focus areas has a goal or desired end state that supports the
overall objective for the challenge. The goals for each focus are provided in Table 2.
At its January 2011 meeting, the ET discussed the various research topics in order to
identify which were most critical; refine, clarify, and add ideas as needed; and develop a list of
topics for prioritization. A number of ideas shared common themes. Thus, ideas were combined
into groups.

12 – Sustainable Integrated Water Management Research Challenge Summary – 6HSWHPEHU 2011

 Table 2. Research Focus Area Goals/Desired End State.

Research Focus Area Goal/Desired State

I. Institutional/Regulatory • Water and development professionals understand the need for an

integrated water management approach.
• Water agency planning and operations are integrated with each other,
with other city services, and with development planning to support
water recycling, nutrient and energy recovery, integration of water
features into the design of the city, and the replication of the natural
water cycle insofar as possible. Regulations/policies allow and support
new, improved approaches.

II. Decision Making Tools • Water and development professionals possess and routinely use the
tools needed to make sustainable water management a central part of
the urban land use planning process.
• Decision makers have access to data and decision support tools
sufficient to enable fully informed decisions, and all direct and indirect
costs are fully considered.

III. Best Practices/Case Studies • Water professionals and communities have vision and
insight into what is achievable and how it can be accomplished with
regards to next generation water management through case study
examples and best practices that are currently in use, but not widely
practiced.

IV. Technology/Demonstrations • Lab, pilot, and field scale demonstrations further the development and
adoption of emerging technologies and infrastructure configurations to
enable next generation water management.
• Water withdrawal from the natural environment is minimized through
optimal design of the built environment and through renewal of used
water in tiered opportunities based on tiered water quality objectives.

13 – Sustainable Integrated Water Management Research Challenge Summary – 6HSWHPEHU 2011

Exploratory Team and Collaborating Partners
Exploratory Team (ET)
Nick Ashbolt, U.S. EPA, OH
Vicki Elmer, University of California, Berkeley, CA
Paul Fleming, Seattle Public Utilities, WA
Dharmappa (Dharma) Hagare, University of Western Sydney, Australia
Joseph Kozak, MWRDGC, IL
Sean Lieske, City of Aurora Water Department, CO
Douglas Owen, Malcolm Pirnie, Inc., NY
Owen Phillis, Melbourne Water, Australia
Michael Simpson, City of Los Angeles, Bureau of Sanitation, CA
Rich Sustich, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, IL
Bob Weaver, Kelly & Weaver, PC, DC

Temporary ET Members (through Phase 1 only, “State of the Knowledge”, Sept. 2010)
Jim Crook, Environmental Engineering Consultant, MA
Eugenio Giraldo, American Water, NJ
Chris Kloss, The Low Impact Development Center, Inc., MD
Joan Oppenheimer, MWH, CA
Andrew Salveson, Carollo Engineers, CA
Bahman Sheikh, Water Reuse Consultant, CA

WERF Research Council Liaisons

John Barber, Eastman Chemical Company, TN
David Jenkins, University of California, Berkeley, CA
Lloyd Johnson, Aqua-Aerobic Systems, Inc., IL

Collaborating Agency Liaisons

David Halliwell, Water Quality Research Australia Ltd., Australia (Alt: Michele Akeroyd)
Jay Bhagwan, Water Research Commission, South Africa
Karl Glucina, Suez Environnement, France
Bert Palsma, STOWA, The Netherlands
Emmanuel Soyeux, Veolia Environnement Recherche & Innovation, France
Caroline Sherony, WateReuse Research Foundation, VA
Jennifer Warner, Water Research Foundation, CO
CSIRO (TBD)

WERF Staff
Jeff Moeller, P.E.

14 – Sustainable Integrated Water Management Research Challenge Summary – 6HSWHPEHU 2011

Key Literature
Armitage, N., Vice, M., Dunstan, J., 2009, Alternative technology for stormwater management,
D1: Draft Literature Review, University of Cape Town, March 2009.
Asatekin, A.,E.A. Olivetti A.M. Mayes; “Fouling resistant, high flux nanofiltration membranes
from polyacrylonitrile-graft-poly(ethylene oxide);” J. Membrane Sci., 332 (2009).
Bakahin, O., A. Noy, F. Fornasiero, C.P. Grigoropoulos, J.K, Holt, J.B. In, S. Kim and H.G Park,
“Nanofluidic Carbon Nanotube Membranes: Applications for Water Purification and
Desalination, in Savage, et.al., (eds.), Nanotechnology Applications for Clean Water, Savage,
et.al. (eds.) 77-93, William Andrew / Elsevier, Norwich, NY, 2009.
Bhagwan, J. 2010, A High Level Scoping Investigation into the potential of energy saving and
production/generation in the supply of water through pressurized conduits, University of
Pretoria, March 2010.
Binney, P., Donald, A., Elmer, V., Ewert, J., Phillis, O., Skinner, R., Young, R. 2010, Spatial
Planning and Institutional Reform Conclusions from the World Water Congress, IWA Cities of
the Future Program, September 2010.
Bowers, D., et al. 2002, Emerging Challenges and Opportunities for EPA, A Report from the
National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT), September
2002.
Burton, S., Cohen, B., Harrison, S., Pather-Elias, S., Stafford, W., van Hille, R., von Blottnitz, H.
2009, Energy from Wastewater – A Feasibility Study, Technical Report, University of Cape
Town, Report to the Water Research Commission, July 2009.
Champion, D. Jr., et al., 2010, Managing One Water, The Clean Water America Alliance’s
National Dialogue Report, November 2010.
Choi, H., S.R. Al-Abed, D.D. Dionysiou, “Nanostructured Titanium Oxide Film- and
Membrane-Based Photocatalysis for Water Treatment,” in Savage, et.al., (eds.), Nanotechnology
Applications for Clean Water, Savage, et.al. (eds.) 39-46, William Andrew / Elsevier, Norwich,
NY, 2009.
Cooper, C., Retamal, M., Cordell, D., Giurco, D., Riedy, C., McKibbin, J., Fane, S., Davis, C.,
Adams, T., Barraclough, C, Drangert, J., Fane, T., Flapper, T., Howe, C., Jensen, P., Lindell, C.,
Lucey, P., Moddemeyer, S., Morrison, G., Nelson, V., Rabaey, K., Spicer, A., Stonebridge, J.
2008, Development of Qualitative Decentralised System Concepts for the 2009 Metropolitan
Sewerage Strategy, Volume 2: Concepts and Case Studies, Institute for Sustainable Futures and
University of Technology Sydney.
Covello, V. and P. M. Sandman. Risk Communication: Evolution and Revolution. August 2004
NRC, Issues in Potable Reuse, The Viability of Augmenting Drinking Water Supplies with
Reclaimed Water, Washington, D.C., National Academy Press, 1998.
Crawford, G.V. 2010, Technology Roadmap for Sustainable Wastewater Treatment Plants in a
Carbon-Constrained World, Water Environment Research Foundation, June 2010.
15 Sustainable Integrated Water Management: State of the Knowledge – 6HSWHPEHU 2011
Daigger, G. 2010, Evolving Urban Water and Residuals Management Paradigms: Water
Reclamation and Reuse, Decentralization, and Resource Recovery. Water Environment
Research, Volume 81, 2009.
Elmer, V. 2010, Blue-Green Wastewater Technologies, Sage Series on the Green Society,
Volume 10, Green Technology, August 2010.
Gasteyer, S., Vaswani, R.T., (2004), Still Living Without the Basics in the 21st Century, Rural
Community Assistance Partnership, Washington, D.C.
Herrmann A. (Chairman), et. al. 2009. 2009Report Card for America’s Infrastructure. American
Society of Civil Engineers. March, 2009.
Hoekstra et al, 2008.
Jeffcoat, S., Baughman, D., Thomas, M. 2009, Total water management – strategies for utility
master planning, Journal for American Water Works Association, February 2009, p 56-64
Kenway, S.J., Priestley, A., Cook, S., Seo, S., Inman, M., Gregory, A., Hall, M. 2008, Energy
use in the provision and consumption of urban water in Australia and New Zealand,
Commonwealth Scientific Industrial and Research Organisation (CSIRO), Australia and Water
Services Association of Australia, November 10, 2008.
Kenway, et al, 2010,
Kirksey, W. 2011. Employing Ecosystems as Infrastructure for Green Building. Green Building
Pro. Feb. 2011.
Komaki, Y., J. Pals, E.D. Wagner, B.J. Marinas, M.J. Plewa, “Mammalian Cell DNa Damage
and Repair Kinetics of Monohaloacetic Acid Drinking Water Disinfection By-Products;
Environmental Science and Technology, vol. 43, (8437-8442), September 8, 2009.
Li, Q., P. Wu, J.K. Shang, “Nanostructured Visible-Light Photocatalysts for Water Purification,”
in Savage, et.al., (eds.), Nanotechnology Applications for Clean Water, Savage, et.al. (eds.) 17-
37, William Andrew / Elsevier, Norwich, NY, 2009.
Livingston, D., Ashbolt, N., Colebatch, H. 2006, Institutional Barriers to Decentralised Systems,
Water, March 2006, p. 84-86
Lundie, S., Ashbolt, N., Livingston, D., Lai, E., Kärrman, E., Blaikie, J., Anderson, J. 2008,
Sustainability Framework – Part A: Methodology for evaluating the overall sustainability of
urban water systems, Centre for Water & Waste Technology, University of South Wales, Water
Services Association of Australia, February 2008.
Lundie, S., Peters, G.M., Ashbolt, N. 2008, Sustainability Framework – Part B: A review
comparing WSAA Sustainability Framework to the Gold Coast Waterfuture process, Centre for
Water & Waste Technology, University of South Wales, Water Services Association of
Australia, February 2008.

16 Sustainable Integrated Water Management: State of the Knowledge – 6HSWHPEHU 2011

Maheepala, S., Blackmore, J., Diaper, C., Moglia, M., Sharma, A., Kenway, S. 2010, Integrated
Urban Water Management Planning Manual, Water Research Foundation (WRF) and
Commonwealth Scientific Industrial and Research Organisation (CSIRO), Australia.
Mazumdar D, J. Lie, Y. Lu, “Functional Nucleic Acid-Directed Assembly of Nanomaterials and
Their Applications as Colorimetric and Fluorescent Sensors for Trace Contaminants in Water,”
in Savage, et.al. (eds.), Nanotechnology Applications for Clean Water, Savage, 427-446,
William Andrew / Elsevier, Norwich, NY, 2009.
McKinsey 2030 Water Resources Group. Charting our Water Future; Economic Frameworks to
Inform Decision Making.
Mehan, G.T. III 2010, How can we finance urban water challenges to come: Do we need a new
business model? Remarks, Delivered to the Metropolitan Water Sustainability Forum, World
Water Congress and Exhibition, International Water Association, September 20, 2010, Montreal.
Nancarrow, B.E., Leviston, Z., Po, M., Porter, N.B., Tucker, D.I. 2008, What drives
communities’ decisions and behaviours in the reuse of wastewater, Water Science &
Technology, Volume 57 No 4, p. 485-491.
Page, M.A., J.L. Schisler, B.J. Marinas, “Kinetics of Adenovirus Type 2 Inactivation with Free
Chlorine; Water Research 43(11), 2916-2926, 2009.
Pamminger, F. 2008, Urban Metabolism – Improving the Sustainability of Urban Water Systems,
Journal of the Australian Water Association, February 2008, p. 45-46.
Passel, J., Cohn, D. U.S. Population Projections 2005-2050. Pew Research Center. February
2008.
Roy, S., Chen, L, Girvetz, E., Maurer, E., Mills, W., Grieb, T., Evaluating Sustainability of
Projected Water Demands under Future Climate Change Scenarios. National Resources Defense
Council. July 2010.
Sadik, O. “Advanced Nanosensors for Environmental Monitoring,” in Savage, et.al. (eds.),
Nanotechnology Applications for Clean Water, Savage, 391-415, William Andrew / Elsevier,
Norwich, NY, 2009.
Taylor, T., Goldstein, R. 2010, Sustainable Water Resources Management, Volume 3: Case
Studies on New Water Paradigm, Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).
U.S. Government Accountability Office, Water Infrastructure: Information on Financing, Capital
Planning, and Privatization, GAO-02-764, August 2002.
Wang, J. and Y. Lin, “Nanomaterial—Based Biosensors for Detection of Pesticides and
Explosives,” in Savage, et.al. (eds.), Nanotechnology Applications for Clean Water, Savage,
377-390, William Andrew / Elsevier, Norwich, NY, 2009.
World Bank Group (2010).

17 Sustainable Integrated Water Management: State of the Knowledge – 6HSWHPEHU 2011

Xu, J., L. Bachas, D. Bhattacharyya, “Synthesis of Nanostructured Bimetallic Particles in
Polyligand-Functionalized Membranes for Remediation Applications,” in Savage, et.al., (eds.),

Nanotechnology Applications for Clean Water, Savage, et.al. (eds.) 311-335, William Andrew /
Elsevier, Norwich, NY, 2009.

18 Sustainable Integrated Water Management: State of the Knowledge – 6HSWHPEHU 2011

 APPENDIX A

LIST OF ET TOP RESEARCH TOPICS

BY CATEGORY AND GROUP

Next Generation Sustainable Integrated Water Management

19 Sustainable Integrated Water Management: State of the Knowledge – 6HSWHPEHU 2011