Innovations in UV Disinfection for Rainwater Treatment: System Design, Disinfection Efficiency, Pathogen Detection and Solar (PV) Power
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Harvested rainwater (HRW) is an alternative source of potable water used internationally to meet the world's growing water demand gaps. HRW has increased in popularity, with some resource-poor countries encouraging its use to increase water resilience. However, due to potentially poor microbial quality, disinfection may be required to make it suitable for consumption. While chlorine is a widely used and successful disinfectant, there is an aversion to its taste and smell, and households often need regular maintenance and technical awareness for proper disinfection year-round. Alternatively, UV treatment has emerged as a potential alternative, providing a chemical-free alternative to conventional disinfection methods for water treatment. This systematic review explored the use of UV disinfection for rainwater treatment, examining their past implementations and identifying the challenges encountered during their integration. This study employs a semi-qualitative approach to explore the relationship between the efficacy of UV disinfection and the factors shaping its performance. These factors include initial water quality, pretreatment stages, system specifications, and ongoing maintenance protocols. However, while analysis of that water quality determined that most of the UV systems installed had post-treatment concentrations of microbial indicators that met guideline values, a few studies had microbial concentrations exceeding the threshold. Additionally, there is inconsistent reporting of critical UV parameters, including ultraviolet transmittance (UVT) and operational UV dose. This disparity must be revised to provide a comprehensive overview of the influencing factors. Furthermore, a handful of UV systems encountered operational failures primarily due to deficient system management and inadequate maintenance practices. Consequently, this study advocates for establishing a minimum set of monitoring and reporting requisites for the UV system and water quality. This will give researchers and operators minimum reporting guidelines to monitor UV lamps' operation effectively.
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 | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".