My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSP00652
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
WSP00652
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 12:27:07 PM
Creation date
10/11/2006 9:52:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8449.850
Description
Metro Water Supply Investigation - MWSI
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Date
8/1/1995
Author
Hydrosphere, HRS
Title
Phase II Interruoptible Supply Summary Report - Draft
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
60
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />MWSI Project <br />Phase II Effluent Management Summary Report - DRAFT <br /> <br />One advantage of direct reuse is being able to meet certain types of demands with <br />appropriately treated "second use" water thereby conserving high quality "first use" <br />supplies. Factors affecting the feasibility of direct reuse are primarily related to public <br />acceptability and economics. While it is technically possible to sufficiently treat effluent <br />to allow for direct potable reuse, concerns about the reliability, cost and public <br />perceptions of such technology have motivated most water providers to focus their <br />effluent management plans on nonpotable uses. The feasibility of nonpotable reuse is in <br />turn determined largely by I) location and timing of the reusable supply, 2) location of <br />the effluent demand, and 3) type of demand. These factors have a large impact on costs, <br />especially in the areas of treatment, storage, conveyance and distribution. <br /> <br />August 22, 1995 <br /> <br />Within the realm of direct reuse, two types of scenarios can be formulated (Figure <br />5). The first involves using one's own effluent supply and facilities to distribute and <br />possibly store and treat the effluent. Options in this category are generally being <br />developed and implemented by individual suppliers and are thus outside of the scope of <br />the MWSl study (although existing arrangements and plans are accounted for in Section <br />IV). The second involves using someone else's effluent supply or facilities to distribute, <br />store, and/or treat the water before it is delivered to the demand. Options falling under <br />this category involve the cooperation of more than one supplier and j1re within the scope <br />of this investigation. <br /> <br />DIRECT REUSE <br /> <br />Own SupplylFacilities Exclusively <br /> <br />Use Someone Else's SupplylFacilities <br /> <br />Figure 5: Direct Reuse Scenarios <br /> <br />Substitution <br /> <br />A substitution arrangement involves providing effluent to another water user in <br />exchange for water to which that user would otherwise is entitled. Within the realm of <br />substitution, two types of scenarios can be formulated (Figure 6). The first involves <br />upstream augmentation, exchange and first use situations where municipal supplies are <br />enhanced by increased diversions at upstream locations. The benefit is a direct increase <br /> <br />12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.