Premium
Life‐cycle energy analysis of performance‐ versus age‐based pipe replacement schedules
Author(s) -
Prosser Monica E.E.,
Speight Vanessa L.,
Filion Yves R.
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
journal ‐ american water works association
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.466
H-Index - 74
eISSN - 1551-8833
pISSN - 0003-150X
DOI - 10.5942/jawwa.2013.105.0157
Subject(s) - payback period , embodied energy , leakage (economics) , environmental science , energy consumption , energy (signal processing) , operations management , engineering , reliability engineering , production (economics) , economics , electrical engineering , mathematics , physics , thermodynamics , statistics , macroeconomics
Although many North American water utilities are upgrading their systems through both regular maintenance programs and additional pipe replacement, rarely does this process take whole‐of‐life considerations into account. This article details the development of a life‐cycle energy analysis that accounts for energy associated with reducing leakage through pipe replacement and describes its implementation at a large water distribution system. Energy used in pumping was compared with the embodied energy tied to pipe replacement in a baseline scenario and three replacement plans. Results indicated that the annual operational energy savings of 4.9 × 10 to 6.4 × 10 kW·h achieved by 2020 comes at a cost. The embodied energy invested in replacing pipe stock for ductile‐iron pipes with diameters of 6 to 16 in. would be 0.88 × 10 to 2.05 × 10 kW·h/mi, a significant expense that results in an initial energy payback period of 17.6 years for the most aggressive replacement plan.