Wastewater Reuse to Mitigate the Risk of Water Shortages: An Integrated Investment Appraisal
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper evaluates the financial and economic costs of reusing wastewater with reverse osmosis (R.O.) purification systems to mitigate the risks of near potable quality water shortages in an urban water system. A distributional analysis is also undertaken to identify those who bear the externalities of the system. A rich data set is available to conduct an ex-post analysis of such a system operating in Cyprus for several years. The levelized financial cost of the R.O. system if it operates at a 75% utilization rate is USD 1.18/m3, while the levelized economic cost that includes all the externality impacts is USD 1.20/m3. However, the closeness of these two values hides a large set of externalities that affect different groups in society in disparate ways. The analysis shows that reusing wastewater in conjunction with a system of R.O. is a very effective way to mitigate the risks of water shortages in a more extensive water system. It also highlights the importance of the nature of the electricity system that generates the electricity to power the R.O. plant in determining the ultimate economic cost of reusing wastewater.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".