| |
|||||||||||
|
|
![]() |
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
| Publicly owned wastewater treatment systems would be well served by large-scale, treatment wetlands to control nutrients. The Wetlands Initiative conducted an economic analysis of conventional treatment vis-à-vis treatment wetlands. Conventional technology was represented by biological nutrient removal; treatment wetlands were represented by restored riverine ecosystems. Cost functions for both technologies were constructed and are presented. These functions were used to compute and compare total, average and marginal costs. In addition, they were used to define supply and demand curves for nutrient credits. As required by these analyses, the necessary wetland area was estimated.
For explanatory purposes, a case study was structured using the seven wastewater treatment plants of the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago (MWRD). To treat the required nutrients of these plants, 189,000 to 322,000 acres of treatment wetlands would be necessary, depending on the effluent limit. In turn, wetland-based removal provides a savings of 51%-63% of the annual cost of conventional treatment with the savings increasing to 76-78% if surplus nutrient credits generated by the treatment wetland can be sold. A follow up study to assess the tax impact of nutrient farming on MWRD ratepayers was completed by The Wetlands Initiative and JPMorgan. This study considered how the two nutrient management strategies (wetlands vs. conventional treatment) would affect homeowners. The study shows that nutrient farming, or wetland-based nutrient removal, will reduce the tax bill impact on homeowners within the MWRD service area by 51% in comparison to the implementation of conventional wastewater treatment technology needed to meet pending Illinois water quality standards. The conventional treatment option would cause a tax bill increase of $88.42 for an owner with a $150,000 homean increase of more than twice as much as the nutrient farming alternative. Click here for more information. For a two page summary (PDF) of the economic comparison of nutrient management using wetlands vs. conventional treatment, click here. For a two page summary (PDF) of the tax impact study, click here. For the full report (58-page PDF), click here. To read other publications about nutrient farming, click here. To purchase a bound copy of the full study, contact The Water Environment Research Foundation, a not-for profit organization that funds and manages water quality research for its subscribers through a diverse public-private partnership between municipal utilities, corporations, academia, industry, and the federal government. WERF subscribers include municipal and regional water and wastewater utilities, industrial corporations, environmental engineering firms, and others that share a commitment to cost-effective water quality solutions. WERF is dedicated to advancing science and technology addressing water quality issues as they impact water resources, the atmosphere, the lands, and quality of life. |
|||||||||||
|
|||||||||||