Pacific Institute, Oakland, California, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2020 Mar 24;15(3):e0230549. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0230549. eCollection 2020.
Urban stormwater is increasingly being considered a viable alternative water supply in California and throughout the southwestern U.S. However, current economic analyses of stormwater capture do not adequately examine differences in stormwater project types and do not evaluate co-benefits provided by the projects. As a result, urban stormwater capture is undervalued as a water supply option. To advance economic analyses of stormwater capture, we determined the levelized cost of water in U.S. dollar per acre-foot of water supply (AF; 1 AF = 1233.5 m3) for 50 proposed stormwater capture projects in California, characterizing the projects by water source, process, and water supply yield. In addition, we incorporated reported co-benefits of projects into the analysis to determine the net benefit of proposed projects. Proposed urban stormwater capture projects were more expensive than non-urban stormwater capture projects on a per-volume basis ($1,180 per AF and $531 per AF, respectively); however, this was primarily driven by the relatively large size of the non-urban stormwater capture projects examined. When incorporating the limited number of reported co-benefits of the projects, the expected levelized cost of water from urban stormwater capture projects decreased dramatically. For projects that reported even a limited number of additional benefits, the net levelized cost decreased from $1,030 per AF to $150 per AF, with some of the projects demonstrating a net benefit. Thus, scaling urban stormwater capture projects to capitalize on economies of scale and incorporating co-benefits of projects can dramatically improve the economic feasibility of these projects. This work demonstrates that stormwater capture can present a cost-effective water supply option in California, and that beyond California, fairer comparisons among projects and inclusion of co-benefits can provide decision makers with adequate information to maximize investments in water management.
城市雨水正逐渐被视为加利福尼亚州乃至美国西南部的一种可行的替代水源。然而,当前对雨水采集的经济分析并没有充分考察雨水项目类型的差异,也没有评估项目提供的共同效益。因此,雨水采集作为一种供水选择被低估了。为了推进雨水采集的经济分析,我们确定了加利福尼亚州 50 个拟议雨水采集项目的单位水供应成本(以美元/英亩英尺计;1 英亩英尺=1233.5 立方米),按水源、工艺和水供应产量对项目进行了分类。此外,我们将项目报告的共同效益纳入分析,以确定拟议项目的净效益。与非城市雨水采集项目相比,拟议的城市雨水采集项目每单位体积的成本更高(分别为 1180 美元/英亩英尺和 531 美元/英亩英尺);然而,这主要是由于所考察的非城市雨水采集项目规模相对较大。当纳入项目报告的有限数量的共同效益时,城市雨水采集项目的预期单位化成本大幅下降。对于报告了有限数量额外效益的项目,净单位化成本从 1030 美元/英亩英尺降至 150 美元/英亩英尺,其中一些项目显示出净效益。因此,扩大城市雨水采集项目规模以利用规模经济,并纳入项目的共同效益,可以极大地提高这些项目的经济可行性。这项工作表明,雨水采集可以在美国加利福尼亚州提供一种具有成本效益的供水选择,而且在加利福尼亚州之外,通过更公平地比较项目和纳入共同效益,可以为决策者提供足够的信息,以最大限度地投资于水资源管理。