Multi-objective waste load allocation in river system under inflow uncertainty
Tóm tắt
Discharging excessive pollution into rivers that exceeds their self-purification capacity decreases the quality of water and threatens the aquatic ecosystem. In such water systems, polluters and environmental protection agencies are involved parties that often have opposite interests. This research proposes a method to enhance the water quality of rivers while satisfying the interests of both parties. It allocates waste loads to polluters and requires them to pay the treatment cost in order to remove pollution. The proposed methodology employs a combination of QUAL2Kw and non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm-II to minimize wastewater treatment costs and dissolved oxygen violation from the standard level. The river inflow uncertainty is considered by Latin hypercube sampling to give more real insights to decision makers through a stochastic approach. As a result, the Pareto sets act as strategies that can be used to meet the objectives, but they show the contradiction between parties’ interests. According to the waste load criterion, this methodology reduces waste load from 145.5 to 79, 107.15 and 115 units for dry, normal and wet months. Also, it decreases treatment cost from the range of [160,000–180,000 $] to [100,000–130,000 $] considering the water quality and dischargers’ interest. According to the results, considering river inflow uncertainty can increase the concentration of dissolved oxygen even more than the standard level, and point sources treat their wastewater more than non-point ones. Generally, it is a suitable tool to find solutions for minimizing the treatment cost in favor of dischargers and improving water quality.
Tài liệu tham khảo
Aghasian K, Moridi A, Mirbagheri A, Abbaspour M (2019) A conflict resolution method for waste load reallocation in river systems. Int J Environ Sci Technol 16:79–88. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-018-1993-3
Anile AM, Cutello V, Nicosia G, Rascuna R, Spinella S (2005) Comparison among evolutionary algorithms and classical optimization methods for circuit design problems. IEEE Congress Evolut Comput 1:765–772. https://doi.org/10.1109/CEC.2005.1554760
Bowers MC, Tung WW, Gao JB (2012) On the distributions of seasonal river flows: lognormal or power law? Water Resour Res 48:W05536. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011WR011308
Burn DH, Lence BJ (1992) Comparison of optimization formulations for waste-load allocations. J Environ Eng 118:597–612. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9372
Chapra SC, Pelletier GJ, Tao H (2003) QUAL2K: a modeling framework for simulating river and stream water quality: Documentation and users manual. Civil and Environmental Engineering Dept., Tufts University, Medford, MA. 25: 121
Cho JH, Lee JH (2018) Automatic calibration and performance evaluation of a water quality model for a river greatly influenced by wastewater treatment plant effluent. EPiC Series Eng 3:447–455
Deb K, Agrawal S, Pratap A, Meyarivan T (2000) A fast elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm for multi-objective optimization: NSGA-II. International conference on parallel problem solving from nature. Springer, Berlin, pp 849–858. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45356-3_83
Eheart JW (1980) Cost-efficiency of transferable discharge permits for the control of BOD discharges. Water Resour Res 16:980–986. https://doi.org/10.1029/WR016i006p00980
Estalaki SM, Abed-Elmdoust A, Kerachian R (2015) Developing environmental penalty functions for river water quality management: application of evolutionary game theory. Environ Earth Sci 73:4201–4213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-014-3706-7
Ghosh S, Mujumdar PP (2010) Fuzzy waste load allocation model: a multiobjective approach. J Hydroinform 12:83–96. https://doi.org/10.2166/hydro.2010.028
Hojjati A, Monadi M, Faridhosseini A, Mohammadi M (2018) Application and comparison of NSGA-II and MOPSO in multi-objective optimization of water resources systems. J Hydrol Hydromech 66:323–329. https://doi.org/10.2478/johh-2018-0006
IWPC (Iran’s Water and Power Resources Development Company))2013(“(Available in Persian).” Technical Rep., IWPC Research Dep., Tehran, Iran
Langat PK, Kumar L, Koech R (2019) Identification of the most suitable probability distribution models for maximum, minimum, and mean streamflow. Water 11:734. https://doi.org/10.3390/w11040734
Liu D, Guo S, Shao Q, Jiang Y, Chen X (2014) Optimal allocation of water quantity and waste load in the Northwest Pearl River Delta, China. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 28:1525–1542. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00477-013-0829-4
Loucks DP, Revelle CS, Lynn WR (1967) Linear progamming models for water pollution control. Manage Sci 14:166. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.14.4.B166
Macdonald IA (2009) Comparison of sampling techniques on the performance of Monte-Carlo based sensitivity analysis. In Eleventh international IBPSA conference. pp 992–999
Manache G, Melching CS (2004) Sensitivity analysis of a water-quality model using Latin hypercube sampling. J Water Resour Plann Manage 130:232–242. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2004)130:3(232)
Manache G, Melching CS (2008) Identification of reliable regression-and correlation-based sensitivity measures for importance ranking of water-quality model parameters. Environ Model Softw 23:549–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2007.08.001
McKay MD, Beckman RJ, Conover WJ (2000) A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics 42:55–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.2000.10485979
Moridi A (2019) A bankruptcy method for pollution load reallocation in river systems. J Hydroinform 21:45–55. https://doi.org/10.2166/hydro.2018.156
Murty YS, Bhallamudi SM, Srinivasan K (2006) Non-uniform flow effect on optimal waste load allocation in rivers. Water Resour Manage 20:509–530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-006-3084-3
Nikoo MR, Beiglou PH, Mahjouri N (2016) Optimizing multiple-pollutant waste load allocation in rivers: an interval parameter game theoretic model. Water Resour Manage 30:4201–4220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-016-1415-6
Niksokhan MH, Kerachian R, Amin P (2009) A stochastic conflict resolution model for trading pollutant discharge permits in river systems. Environ Monitor Assess 154:219–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-008-0390-7
Pebesma EJ, Heuvelink GB (1999) Latin hypercube sampling of Gaussian random fields. Technometrics 41:303–312. https://doi.org/10.1080/00401706.1999.10485930
Pelletier GJ, Chapra SC, Tao H (2006) QUAL2Kw–A framework for modeling water quality in streams and rivers using a genetic algorithm for calibration. Environ Model Softw 21:419–425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2005.07.002
Pimpunchat B, Sweatman WL, Triampo W, Wake GC, Parshotam A (2007) Modelling river pollution and removal by aeration. In: MODSIM 2007 international congress on modelling and simulation. land, water & environmental management: integrated systems for sustainability. modelling and simulation society of Australia and New Zealand, pp 2431–2437
Saberi L, Niksokhan MH (2017) Optimal waste load allocation using graph model for conflict resolution. Water Sci Technol 75:1512–1522. https://doi.org/10.2166/wst.2016.429
Verma N, Kumar B, Bajpai A, Mishra DD (2007) Lake Aeration Systems: Bhopal. Proc. Taal. 1960–1966
Yandamuri SR, Srinivasan K, Murty Bhallamudi S (2006) Multiobjective optimal waste load allocation models for rivers using nondominated sorting genetic algorithm-II. J Water Resour Plann Manage 132:133–143. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9496(2006)132:3(133)
Yazdi J, Zahraie B, Salehi Neyshabouri SA (2016) A stochastic optimization algorithm for optimizing flood risk management measures including rainfall uncertainties and nonphysical flood damages. J Hydrol Eng 21:04016006. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)HE.1943-5584.0001334