Energy and air emission effects of water supply

Life-cycle air emission effects of supplying water are explored using a hybrid life-cycle assessment For the typically sized U.S. utility analyzed, recycled water is preferable to desalination and comparable to importation. Seawater desalination has an energy and air emission footprint that is 1.5-2.4 times larger than that of imported water. However, some desalination modes fare better; brackish groundwater is 53-66% as environmentally intensive as seawater desalination. The annual water needs (326 m3) of a typical Californian that is met with imported water requires 5.8 GJ of energy and creates 360 kg of CO2 equivalent emissions. With seawater desalination, energy use would increase to 14 GJ and 800 kg of CO2 equivalent emissions. Meeting the water demand of California with desalination would consume 52% of the state's electricity. Supply options were reassessed using alternative electricity mixes, including the average mix of the United States and several renewable sources. Desalination using solar thermal energy has lower greenhouse gas emissions than that of imported and recycled water (using California's electricity mix), but using the U.S. mix increases the environmental footprint by 1.5 times. A comparison with a more energy-intensive international scenario shows that CO2 equivalent emissions for desalination in Dubai are 1.6 times larger than in California. The methods, decision support tool (WEST), and results of this study should persuade decision makers to make informed water policy choices by including energy consumption and material use effects in the decision-making process.