Of Dreamliners and Drinking Water: Developing Risk Regulation and a Safety Culture for Direct Potable Reuse

Abstract

Direct potable water reuse (DPR), the injection of highly purified wastewater into drinking water systems, is among the newest, and most controversial, methods for augmenting water supplies. DPR is garnering increasing interest, but does not come without risks. This paper examines the notion that emerging regulation of DPR may lack sufficient attention to a particular class of risks: catastrophic risks with low probabilities of occurrence, but high consequences. It may be instructive for proponents of DPR that such consequences have materialized in other industries, with damage to human welfare and to the industries themselves. We develop brief histories of risk regulation from the aviation, offshore oil and nuclear industries, drawing out relevant lessons for the emerging DPR field. We argue that proponents of DPR could benefit from proactively developing a safety culture in DPR utilities and establishing an effective industrywide auditing organization that investigates unanticipated system failures. Developing independent oversight for DPR operation could ensure that stringent quality and management requirements are set and enforced, and that any system failures or "near misses" are investigated and adequately responded to.

From Acceptance Snapshots to the Social Acceptability Process: Structuring Knowledge on Attitudes Towards Water Reuse

“…Long-term impacts of water reuse on human health and the environment particularly soil are arguably at the forefront of research and public debates. However, evidence from state-ofthe-art applications shows that, with appropriate monitoring and multi-barrier technology, public health risks are quite low (Ong 2016;Binz et al, 2018). Successful case studies such as Singapore, or Windhoek in Namibia, confirm the importance of comprehensive regulatory frameworks and clear technological guidelines (Cotruvo 2016;Lee and Tan 2016).…”

“…While the United States might have more reuse regulations than some EU countries, some national and local regulations require revisions and adaptation to more direct uses as well as emerging issues such as climate variability (Sanchez-Flores et al, 2016). Particularly in the case of DPR, it is important to develop a safety culture in the reuse industry as well as comprehensive regulations for different risks and probabilities (Binz et al, 2018).…”

“…Similarly, use adaptation entails a private debate concerned with the technology used to recycle water. Consumers try to acquire information about the quality of delivered water and the associated risks (Binz et al, 2018). They form their opinions on the use safety and the required measures before the final use, e.g., filtration mechanisms or heating of water, depending on the source.…”

“…Binz et al (2018),Meehan et al (2013) Clear water reuse criteria for environmental and human healthParanychianakis et al (2015) Specific legal frameworks at national and local levelsSanchez-Flores et al (2016),Kayhanian and Tchobanoglous (2016) The need for systematic assessments including hazard identification, control measures, monitoring, incident protocols and regulation surveillance World Health Organisation(2017)Market-related issues Adequate rates for reused water Jensen and Yu(2016), Aleisa and Al-Zubari (2017) Lack of economic feasibility or Willingness to Pay (WTP); Need for subsidies to achieve cost recovery; Demand management of reused water Molinos-Senante et al (2013), Sgroi et al (2018), Ravishankar et al (2018), Duong and Saphores (2015) Lack of adequate competition policies Horne (2016) The need for incentives for water reuse projects and public leadership Garcia and Pargament (2015), Miller (2006) Infrastructure and distribution Inadequate infrastructure and distribution networks van Rensburg (2016), Aleisa and Al-Zubari (2017), Brown et al (2018) Path dependence on centralized, large-scale infrastructure Bichai et al (2018) Participatory and comprehensive reuse strategies Lack of stakeholder engagement, public participation and communication Lautze et al (2014), Sanchez-Flores et al (2016), Aldaco-Manner et al (2019) Lack of embeddedness within larger water security plans and water supply strategies; The need for expanding strategies to incorporate wider circular economy concepts van Rensburg (2016),Sgroi et al (2018) …”

Risk of regulatory failure of “risk-based regulation” while using enterprise risk management as a meta-regulatory toolkit

“…New Zealand, Canada and the USA in the areas of food safety, health safety, financial services and pension regulation (Rothstein, 2006;Black, 2010;Beaussier et al, 2016). In recent times, risk-based regulation is also entered in aviation, offshore oil and nuclear industries (Binz et al, 2018), cybersecurity management (Boehm et al, 2019), mining industry (Rudakov et al, 2021), anti-money laundering regime (Pellegrina et al, 2021), personal data protection regulation in the EU (Gonçalves, 2020) and the environmental protection (Knol-Kauffman et al, 2021).…”