Capacity factor analysis for evaluating water and sanitation infrastructure choices for developing communities.

40% of the world's population lacks access to adequate supplies of water and sanitation services to sustain human health. In fact, more than 780 million people lack access to safe water supplies and about 2.5 billion people lack access to basic sanitation. Appropriate technology for water supply and sanitation (Watsan) systems is critical for sustained access to these services. Current approaches for the selection of Watsan technologies in developing communities have a high failure rate. It is estimated that 30%-60% of Watsan installed infrastructures in developing countries are not operating. Inappropriate technology is a common explanation for the high rate of failure of Watsan infrastructure, particularly in lower-income communities (Palaniappan et al., 2008). This paper presents the capacity factor analysis (CFA) model, for the assessment of a community's capacity to manage and sustain access to water supply and sanitation services. The CFA model is used for the assessment of a community's capacity to operate, and maintain a municipal sanitation service (MSS) such as, drinking water supply, wastewater and sewage treatment, and management of solid waste. The assessment of the community's capacity is based on seven capacity factors that have been identified as playing a key role in the sustainability of municipal sanitation services in developing communities (Louis, 2002). These capacity factors and their constituents are defined for each municipal sanitation service. Benchmarks and international standards for the constituents of the CFs are used to assess the capacity factors. The assessment of the community's capacity factors leads to determine the overall community capacity level (CCL) to manage a MSS. The CCL can then be used to assist the community in the selection of appropriate Watsan technologies for their MSS needs. The selection is done from Watsan technologies that require a capacity level to operate them that matches the assessed CCL of the community.

A decision model for selecting sustainable drinking water supply and greywater reuse systems for developing communities with a case study in Cimahi, Indonesia.

Capacity Factor Analysis is a decision support system for selection of appropriate technologies for municipal sanitation services in developing communities. Developing communities are those that lack the capability to provide adequate access to one or more essential services, such as water and sanitation, to their residents. This research developed two elements of Capacity Factor Analysis: a capacity factor based classification for technologies using requirements analysis, and a matching policy for choosing technology options. First, requirements analysis is used to develop a ranking for drinking water supply and greywater reuse technologies. Second, using the Capacity Factor Analysis approach, a matching policy is developed to guide decision makers in selecting the appropriate drinking water supply or greywater reuse technology option for their community. Finally, a scenario-based informal hypothesis test is developed to assist in qualitative model validation through case study. Capacity Factor Analysis is then applied in Cimahi Indonesia as a form of validation. The completed Capacity Factor Analysis model will allow developing communities to select drinking water supply and greywater reuse systems that are safe, affordable, able to be built and managed by the community using local resources, and are amenable to expansion as the community's management capacity increases.

Risk characterization for nanotechnology.

Nanotechnology is a broad term that encompasses materials, structures, or processes that utilize engineered nanomaterials, which can be defined as materials intentionally designed to have one or more dimensions between 1 and 100 nm. Historically, risk characterization has been viewed as the final phase of a risk assessment process that integrates hazard identification, dose-response assessment, and exposure assessment. The novelty and diversity of materials, structures, and tools that are covered by above-defined "nanotechnology" raise substantial methodological issues and pose significant challenges for each of these phases of risk assessment. These issues and challenges culminate in the risk characterization phase of the risk assessment process, and this article discusses several of these key issues and approaches to developing risk characterization results and their implications for risk management decision making that are specific to nanotechnology.

Nano risk analysis: advancing the science for nanomaterials risk management.

Scientists, activists, industry, and governments have raised concerns about health and environmental risks of nanoscale materials. The Society for Risk Analysis convened experts in September 2008 in Washington, DC to deliberate on issues relating to the unique attributes of nanoscale materials that raise novel concerns about health risks. This article reports on the overall themes and findings of the workshop, uncovering the underlying issues for each of these topics that become recurring themes. The attributes of nanoscale particles and other nanomaterials that present novel issues for risk analysis are evaluated in a risk analysis framework, identifying challenges and opportunities for risk analysts and others seeking to assess and manage the risks from emerging nanoscale materials and nanotechnologies. Workshop deliberations and recommendations for advancing the risk analysis and management of nanotechnologies are presented.

Conceptualization of a robust performance assessment and evaluation model for consolidating community water systems.

Community water systems (CWS) face significant competing forces for change from decreasing water resource availability, stricter water quality regulations, decreasing federal subsidies, increasing public scrutiny, decreasing financial health, and increasing infrastructure replacement costs. These competing forces necessitate increasing consolidation responses among financially stressed CWS. Consolidation responses allow financially stressed CWS to increase levels of service by taking advantage of economy of scale benefits, such as eliminating service duplications across administration and operational functions. Consolidation responses also promote improved financial accountability among consolidating CWS, especially when operating as integral subsystems of a larger regional drinking water supply (RDWS) system. The goal of this paper is to propose a conceptual model for robust performance assessment and evaluation (PAE) among consolidating CWS. The objectives of this paper are to conceptualize methods for: (1) consistent performance assessment and (2) uniform summative performance evaluation among consolidating CWS. The expected outcome from implementing robust PAE among consolidating CWS is increased levels of service through transparent benchmarking and improved financial accountability. The proposed robust PAE model provides the basis for constructing decision support system (DSS) tools that estimate efficient solutions for allocating limited financial resources among consolidating CWS. The paper is a significant departure from current CWS PAE approaches in two ways. First, it provides a goal-oriented approach for robust PAE among consolidating CWS. Second, it constructs efficiency-based performance metrics to temporally and spatially monitor the degree of attainment of the RDWS systems' goal.

Risk and opportunity in upgrading the US drinking water infrastructure system.

This paper presents a practical risk assessment methodology to provide drinking water infrastructure (DWI) decision-makers with an objective risk assessment tool. The purpose of this risk assessment tool is to maintain the desired level-of-service or systems reliability [r(f)], while managing the financial uncertainty of the expected budgetary impact within the capital improvement program (CIP). The goal of this paper is to demonstrate the value of an objective risk assessment tool for estimating the DWI decision-maker's sensitivity to the risk of systems failure (R). The objectives are to: (1) incorporate probability of systems failure [p(f)] into the CIP budgetary analysis process and (2) evaluate the affects of p(f) on the expected CIP budgetary outcome. The magnitude of the expected budgetary impact is managed through the DWI decision-maker's sensitivity to R, which is represented by the level of the rate of reinvestment (RR). The expected result of the proposed risk assessment tool demonstrates that by proactively managing R to maintain a desired r(f) will effectively manage the impact of uncertainty on the expected budgetary outcome within the CIP. The expected contribution of the practical risk assessment methodology is to provide DWI decision-makers with the ability to reduce budgetary uncertainty when allocating limited financial resources among competing operational, repair, maintenance, and expansion activities within the CIP. The conclusions of the paper reveal that if DWI decision-makers assume risk-avoidance positions through proactive asset management (AM) strategies, they will achieve positive affects on expected budgetary outcomes.

A historical context of municipal solid waste management in the United States.

Municipal solid waste management (MSWM) in the United States is a system comprised of regulatory, administrative, market, technology, and social subcomponents, and can only be understood in the context of its historical evolution. American cities lacked organized public works for street cleaning, refuse collection, water treatment, and human waste removal until the early 1800s. Recurrent epidemics forced efforts to improve public health and the environment. The belief in anticontagionism led to the construction of water treatment and sewerage works during the nineteenth century, by sanitary engineers working for regional public health authorities. This infrastructure was capital intensive and required regional institutions to finance and administer it. By the time attention turned to solid waste management in the 1880s, funding was not available for a regional infrastructure. Thus, solid waste management was established as a local responsibility, centred on nearby municipal dumps. George Waring of New York City organized solid waste management around engineering unit operations; including street sweeping, refuse collection, transportation, resource recovery and disposal. This approach was adopted nationwide, and was managed by City Departments of Sanitation. Innovations such as the introduction of trucks, motorized street sweepers, incineration, and sanitary landfill were developed in the following decades. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA), is the defining legislation for MSWM practice in America today. It forced the closure of open dumps nationwide, and required regional planning for MSWM. The closure of municipal dumps caused a 'garbage crisis' in the late 1980s and early 1990s. Private companies assumed an expanded role in MSWM through regional facilities that required the transportation of MSW across state lines. These transboundary movements of MSW created the issue of flow control, in which the US Supreme Court affirmed the protection of garbage under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. Thus MSWM in America today is largely managed by municipalities, and operated by a relatively small number of private companies. It consists of a mixture of landfill, incineration, recycling, and composting, and is regulated under RCRA, the Clean Air Act and other related federal and state laws.