A continental scale evaluation of rainwater harvesting in Australia
Resources, Conservation and Recycling, ISSN: 0921-3449, Vol: 167, Page: 105378
2021
- 32Citations
- 59Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Article Description
In this study, we have examined the viability of rainwater harvesting system in whole Australia in terms of water savings, reliability and financial viability. Three different cases of water use have been considered: (i) toilet flushing and laundry; (ii) irrigation; and (iii) combination of toilet flushing, laundry and irrigation (combined). The analysis is performed using data from 601 Australian rainfall stations. The results show that the reliability of a rainwater harvesting system is considerably high (80–100%) for ‘toilet flushing and laundry’ use. For ‘combined’ use, the reliability drops below 50% for most of the continent. We have presented the detail results of spatial distribution of reliability and water savings for a tank size of 7.5 kL. It is found that the benefit cost ratio for rainwater harvesting system over one can be achieved under certain conditions. The findings of this study will be useful in sustainable water resource management in Australia using rainwater harvesting system.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921344920306960; http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105378; http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85099209259&origin=inward; https://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0921344920306960; https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S0921344920306960?httpAccept=text/xml; https://api.elsevier.com/content/article/PII:S0921344920306960?httpAccept=text/plain; https://dul.usage.elsevier.com/doi/; https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105378
Elsevier BV
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know