Ecosystems as Infrastructure

By Eric Lohan and Will Kirksey

Living Machines Systems, L3C 1180 Seminole Trail, Suite 155 Charlottesville, VA 22901 434.973.6365 www.livingmachines.com

Overview: Nothing is as important to living organisms as water. Water also serves as a crucial design element to advance green building as an integrating element of natural and human ecosystems. In fact, recent innovations in integrated water resource design and advanced ecological wastewater treatment systems allow using Ecosystems as Infrastructure. Water has only recently become a consideration for green building. Individual facilities have usually been a part of a larger water infrastructure. Now in many regions, that larger infrastructure is overtaxed, aging, and expensive to maintain. At the same time, fresh water resources are being stressed as demand outpaces replenishment. New ecological engineering approaches such as Living Technology from Living Machine Systems allows green building advocates to directly address water problems at the facility and community level. The emerging ecological model of water and wastewater infrastructure is analogous to the structure of ecosystems. Natural ecosystems are decentralized and composed of large numbers of diverse, fractal components that use and reuse water, energy, and materials locally. The streams and rivers in a region display a decentralized structure of repeating patterns at different scales and nutrients are utilized and recycled all along the way with natural environmental processes. Likewise, human water and wastewater systems can be decentralized and can utilize ecological treatment technologies. To be successful this model requires maintaining and even improving on the public health advances that were obtained by the centralized municipal systems in the past. Work is underway in a variety of quarters to develop the new standards, new regulations, new tools, new partnerships, and new technologies that are necessary.

This new approach has the potential to fundamentally transform our relationship with water. The once-through centralized approach is giving way to an emerging movement toward decentralized wastewater treatment and reuse. This movement is spreading just like the succession process of new species in an ecosystem. These decentralized, ecological systems are saving water, energy, and money while supporting sustainable community development. Sustainably regenerating our watersheds requires a functional and effective water infrastructure using a full range of decentralized, cost-effective technologies. Advanced ecological wastewater treatment systems are especially appropriate in this role. Recent innovations allow the packaging of enhanced, complex ecosystems to be applied as reliable water treatment systems. These treatment systems offer significant advantages as fractal components of an integrated network of treatment units deployed to improve the regional ecosystems and watersheds. The Conventional Approach: The current centralized approach, with some exceptions, is focused on large-scale, centralized systems, using water once before sending it downstream, and treating all water to drinking standards regardless of intended use. In many areas, this approach requires moving water long distances, with obvious high consumption of energy, and using treatment technologies that also are large energy consumers and usually generate a large quantity of sludge needing further treatment and disposal. Many scientists, engineers, and community leaders are now aware that continuing this approach to water infrastructure isnt sustainable. It cant continue to deliver the quality, quantity and consistency of water we currently consume, much less meet the demands of the future. Furthermore, we cant afford to maintain and expand this system.

http://www.livingmachines.com 2

The current model outlined in Figure 1 is complex, energy intensive, and water inefficient. The explosive growth in population and economic activity over the past century is overwhelming the ability of centralized systems to serve the need. Limits are appearing that were unimaginable 100 years ago. For example: Water resources are declining in quality and quantity the once-through model of centralized treatment is outpacing watershed regeneration. The capacity of receiving waters is being exceeded the quantity of waste is so large in most places that dilution is no longer adequate. Centralized systems have large greenhouse gas impacts from energy consumption and gas emissions. Large quantities of sewage sludge are being produced, requiring further treatment and disposal Maintenance and new construction costs are becoming intolerable1 Simply put, our centralized water system is reaching the point of diminishing returns; resources have become constrained, and we cant sustain even current levels of performance in the future. We need to think about creating smarter, more natural wastewater treatment approaches. The Ecological Model Decentralized Infrastructure Systems: An alternative approach for wastewater treatment is to apply an ecological model to wastewater infrastructure. This model applies ecological concepts to both the design of the regional infrastructure and the design of the specific treatment processes. The ecological 1 Water systems are showing evidence of a basic
principle of general systems science: as size increases linearly, the cost to grow and maintain a system tends to increase exponentially. The USEPA estimates that if capital investment and O&M costs remain at current levels the gap in funding for 2010-2019 will be almost $600 billion for water and wastewater infrastructure.

model aims to integrate the best of existing infrastructure with new decentralized water management and treatment systems. This integrated network will be designed to supplement, protect, and restore natural water cycles by treating pollution near the source and reusing water locally. This promotes an integration of human and ecological communities into one water-based framework. Natural streams and rivers display a decentralized structure of repeating patterns at different scales. Small streams or brooks may transport entrained sediments or nutrients to wetland areas scattered throughout the upper reaches of the watershed, which help improve water quality. At other points in the watershed, when seasonal rains raise water levels, riparian floodplains slow the flow rate of the river and intercept large amounts of sediment and nutrients. If one component of this process is impaired there are numerous back up components at the same scale or different scales that can rebuild the lost capacity. Integrated strategies for decentralized wastewater treatment and water reuse at multiple scales can mimic this approach improving the overall effectiveness of our water infrastructure (Figure 2). A broader recognition and application of this new approach requires improving awareness of the possibilities among the major stakeholders. A new decentralized wastewater strategy must be put in place that is cost-effective, safe, technically sound, and sustainable economically and ecologically. Such a strategy will include and maintain the best of the current systems and existing tactics, such as low impact development and water conservation. In addition, continued, reliable access to water requires the new approach to be resilient in the face of changing regional conditions and help deal with ongoing drought and water scarcity challenges. Beyond being a well-conceived approach to

http://www.livingmachines.com 3

Figure 1. Conventional centralized wastewater treatment and disposal model Worrell Water Technologies

http://www.livingmachines.com 4

Figure 2. Ecological decentralized wastewater treatment and reuse model Worrell Water Technologies

http://www.livingmachines.com 5

providing water, the new water strategy must also contribute to addressing other interrelated issues such as energy, climate change, and economic strength. An ecologically based model of wastewater treatment infrastructure has the potential to meet all of these goals. Significant work is underway by a number of organizations and associations, notably including the Alliance for Water Stewardship and the Consortium of Institutes for Decentralized Wastewater Treatment. The Ecological Model Treatment Technologies The ecological model can be applied not only to the design of regional infrastructure but also to the design of wastewater treatment technologies that play a pivotal role in these larger systems. Most centralized or municipal treatment facilities use an activated sludge approach to wastewater treatment. This technology uses diffused air to accelerate the growth of bacteria and the removal of nutrients. It requires a very small footprint but uses a large amount of energy. This conventional process is most stable at larger scales. Smaller decentralized applications require much greater operational attention and may not be able to consistently meet the water quality standards required for wastewater reuse. The evolution of this technology over the last two decades has allowed decentralized treatment systems to be much more widely applicable. The activated sludge process has been modified with the addition of membrane filtration technology to create Membrane Bioreactors (MBRs). These membrane filters help polish effluent from the activated sludge treatment process creating consistent high quality effluent required for reuse and further shrink the footprint of activated sludge systems; but, they also increase the energy requirements of an already energy intensive process. Another approach has been adopted in the development of advanced wetland treatment systems. Wetland treatment systems mimic

natural treatment processes in nature using more complex communities of bacteria, other microorganisms, and plants living on rock aggregate to remove nutrients. Early systems were energy efficient but required a very large footprint and hence were not appropriate for suburban or urban applications. A new generation of advanced wetland treatment processes have been developed which turbo-charge wetland processes with the use of high efficiency pumps. These systems are high-performance and reliable combinations of ecological science, engineering, and information technologies. Tidal wetlands (see the Living Machine description in the appendix) are among the most efficient of ecological treatment processes. Tidal wetlands reduce the footprint of early wetland designs by 80%, yet require less than 25% of the energy of MBRs. These systems can be readily incorporated into urban and suburban sites due to the compact footprint. Because they are also beautiful in addition to being functional they have been incorporated into site design or even into building architecture as atria. Making the Transition Water issues are among the most complex facing our communities right now, combining environmental, economic, and human health factors. Addressing these issues with the conventional approaches isnt working, but the necessary evolution requires substantial, coordinated effort both bottom up and top down. In particular, we need to reexamine and update policies, design standards, engineering models and analysis tools, monitoring and control technologies, funding programs, and management structures to support decisionmaking and maintain quality and public health standards. These efforts are much too extensive to detail here, but the following areas need to be addressed:

http://www.livingmachines.com 6

 Design standards technical examination and expansion of existing design standards by engineering societies and research organizations; creation of new standards as necessary to ensure that there are clearly defined performance standards that protect public health and the environment. Engineering models and technologies develop new analytical tools, information systems, construction techniques, remote monitoring and control methods, and performance tracking approaches. These should improve the ability to evaluate, design, build, and operate individual treatment systems as well as integrated regional wastewater ecosystems. Funding programs examine government funding and grant programs to remove barriers, equalize subsidies, and provide a level playing field for funding decentralized, ecological treatment systems. Management structures experiment with new ways of management, ownership, and operations of regional systems. For example, centralized management and ownership of decentralized systems by a municipality or regional authority may offer advantages in cost effectiveness, quality control, and coordination of treatment. In other cases, ownership by a cooperative or by a DBOO (design, build, own, operate) private utility company could be appropriate. Policies review of the laws and regulations governing water and public health to identify and remove unwarranted barriers to adapting innovative technologies while continuing to ensure protection of the public. The lack of unified national or in many areas even state standards for water reuse has hampered development and implementation of new technologies and systems. 2 2 A recent report commissioned by the Cascadia
USGBC Code regulation and systemic barriers affecting Living Building Projects identifies seven important steps for modifying the regulatory environment to foster the

These efforts require the support of a diverse group of professionals who need to be educated on the current limitations of centralized systems and both the strengths and limitations of a decentralized ecological approach. New partnerships are required to develop and implement this approach. Professionals who will play a key role in this process include: 1. Municipal water and wastewater officials 2. Environmental and public health regulators 3. Environmental Engineers 4. Water resource specialists and planners 5. Architects and landscape architects 6. Engineering contractors and builders 7. Knowledgeable civic leaders 8. Progressive developers 9. Industry leaders 10. Wastewater treatment plant operators The complexity of natural water systems, the intricacies of existing water infrastructure and the complicated existing legal and regulatory requirements for water use, disposal, and reuse rule out simple prescriptive qualitative or quantitative standards for sustainable water use and reuse. Despite these challenges a few standards have been developed or are under development that attempt to provide a template for sustainable water infrastructure. 1. LEED The US Green Building Council (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) standards are the most widely adopted and most well developed standards for green building. LEED standards promote water efficient fixtures, xeriscaping, and water reuse for irrigation, toilet flushing, and other water reuse requirements. Although these standards have played a key role in launching the green building movement in the
adoption of sustainable systems and technologies. These steps are particularly relevant for supporting water reuse projects and are described in Appendix 2.

http://www.livingmachines.com 7

US, they have been criticized by water advocates as water credits are more difficult to achieve than others and are frequently passed over. 2. Living Building Challenge The Cascadia regional group of the USGBC has recently developed a new standard, the Living Building Challenge (LBC). LBC does not have elective credits but only prerequisites. The water prerequisites include: Prerequisite Ten Net Zero Water 100 percent of occupants water use must come from captured precipitation or reused water that is appropriately purified without the use of chemicals. Prerequisite Eleven Sustainable Water Discharge 100 percent of storm water and building water discharge must be handled on-site. These standards set a much higher bar for water reuse but may place unrealistic expectations on small buildings. The LBC is trying to solve watershed problems by focusing only on the building scale, which may not be the optimum approach. 3. Water Neutral The LEED and LBC approaches address the building industry but many other industries and development practices affect the water cycles in our communities. A UNESCO Working Group is developing criteria that reflect a more comprehensive approach to Water Neutral development and industries. They define three criteria: 1. Defining, measuring and reporting ones water footprint; 2. Taking all action that is reasonably possible to reduce the existing operational water

footprint; 3. Reconciling the residual water footprint by making a reasonable investment in establishing or supporting projects that focus on the sustainable and equitable use of water. 4. Alliance for Water Stewardship While the approach developed by the UNESCO group provides a general template there are no binding requirements to give the language credibility. New water standards are under development by the Alliance for Water Stewardship an umbrella organization that represents key water and environment NGOs including the Pacific Institute, The Water Environment Federation, World Wildlife Foundation, the Nature Conservancy, and the European Water Partnership. The goal of these standards is to apply the LEEDtype framework exclusively to water infrastructure from a holistic and global perspective. It could become a very important tool. Communities will need to draw from these approaches and others to develop standards that fit with their specific requirements. There is no one size fits all solution but it is hoped that tools developed will be flexible enough to become widely applicable. Adopting the Strategies The implementation of an integrated water strategy for a community or a facility requires a basis of detailed knowledge of water flows in community infrastructure and the in the surrounding environment. This information may be developed from a number of sources depending on scale. Regional GIS databases often contain a wealth of important information about soil conditions, land use, and development. Weather data can be applied to identify opportunities for rainwater harvesting.

http://www.livingmachines.com 8

Utilities are increasingly using information management systems to streamline utility operations. A variety of government agencies maintain important information about water and environmental quality including the USGS, EPA, NOAA, and the NRCS. Significant work is generally required by a trained analyst to integrate the various sources into an effective decision-making framework. In addition, a sustainable water reuse plan requires an understanding of the water usage demands and projections for the future. Once an accurate knowledge of water sources and uses is obtained, it is possible to develop a water budget or water footprint. This should detail the sources of water used in a community, including potential nontraditional sources such as rainwater or stormwater, and potential water reuse opportunities as well as a detailed view of water uses. By identifying water sources and sinks we can qualitatively match high quality sources with uses such as municipal water for potable applications and lower quality water sources such as reclaimed water with uses such as toilet flushing or cooling towers. The second goal of the water budget is quantitative and requires detailed calculations or estimations of water sources and sinks and allows the development of water efficiency and reuse strategies which accurately match water availability with water requirements. Water budgets are necessarily linked to design standards or goals. There are two common interpretations of how to balance a water budget, with respect to developed conditions or pre-developed conditions. In an example using the developed conditions interpretation, the Thames Gateway Project, a 40 mile redevelopment project along the Thames Estuary from the London Docklands to Essex, is proposing to increase density by 10 percent without increasing the total water use of the area by implementing efficiency upgrades in new and existing buildings. This interpretation

has been criticized because in many cases developed conditions are unsustainable and should not be used as a baseline even if new development doesnt make it worse. By contrast a water budget from the Sustainable Urban Design Plan for Lloyds Crossing, a 35-square-block mixed-use area of Portland Oregon, developed by Mithun and a team of green design experts targets pre-developed conditions. Design targets reference water flows and quality that would occur on a similar area of undeveloped Oregon forest providing a truly sustainable reference point (see Figures 3-5 for predevelopment, current conditions and proposed development water budgets). The water budget provides the framework for designing sustainable water infrastructure. This process entails designing infrastructure systems and selecting technologies that achieve the required flows and quality for each use. At present there is no systematic process for achieving this goal. As discussed above, this process will entail a variety of stakeholders and design professionals working closely together. Only a few communities have begun to address these questions so models are limited and what may be ideal in one community may be inappropriate in another. A few key considerations should drive the design of sustainable water infrastructure systems. 1. Infrastructure systems should be designed to optimize their interrelation with the natural hydrologic cycle. Utilizing low impact development practices such as bioswales and other natural stormwater retention or detention strategies is one example. 2. Sustainable infrastructure systems should be developed at multiple scales and should be mutually selfreinforcing across all scales. 3. Water infrastructure should be

http://www.livingmachines.com 9

designed to support local reuse of water and nutrients to avoid the high cost and energy consumption required for long-distance water movements. 4. Sustainable water infrastructure systems should utilize technologies that are also energy efficient and cost effective from a capital and lifecycle perspective. A number of technologies such as desalination sacrifice energy efficiency for water efficiency and thus are not likely to be successful long-term solutions in many areas. 5. Innovative technologies and systems must protect public health as well as or better than existing systems. These systems must also foster public acceptance of recycled or reclaimed water by eliminating all odor and color from water before reuse, even for nonpotable applications. Implementing Technologies At the core of sustainable water infrastructure systems are decentralized wastewater treatment systems. These systems are generally composed of six discrete steps as represented in Figure 6. Wastewater conveyance systems collect and transport wastewater from a variety of sources. Treatment processes include physical treatment such as filtration, screening, and clarification, which can remove inorganic materials or larger organic constituents. Biological treatment processes such as MBRs and advanced wetland systems remove suspended solids and dissolved organic constituents such as carbonaceous materials, and nutrients such as nitrogen, and phosphorus. After biological treatment, final filtration and disinfection may be required to remove any remaining viruses, bacteria or other harmful microorganisms Implementation of these technologies requires

selecting applications that are appropriate for a given scale. Figure 7 provides examples of water reuse process diagrams at three different scales: building scale, institutional or community scale, and municipal scale. Different technologies and water reuse goals are appropriate at different scales. The optimum overall performance from a cost and water efficiency perspective is achieved by developing appropriate projects at a variety of scales. For maximum effectiveness implementing new technologies must be appropriately targeted. The application of new decentralized treatment and reuse systems should be focused in areas of rapid growth or failing existing treatment (e.g. septic systems or package plants), in regional networks as a means of avoiding expansion of a centralized plant and the interconnecting infrastructure, and as stand alone applications to serve specific needs. In this way they help rehabilitate and extend the life of existing critical infrastructure by reducing the load on these systems. These decentralized systems should be constructed in the context of an integrated regional natural and human ecosystem, so that the design of specific wastewater treatment technology can help integrate natural water cycles with human and environmental needs. In some cases, it may be appropriate to undo or modify some of the existing infrastructure with strategies such as sewer mining to reuse water, removing water control structures, or restoring natural water channels. Environmental and infrastructure benefits can also be designed to enhance the local economy. The selection of wastewater treatment technology can be coupled with the creation of business opportunities and new jobs. By involving community interests in planning of water reuse opportunities it is possible to optimize the creation and maintenance of livelihoods and locally productive economic activity. Opportunities to implement sustainable

http://www.livingmachines.com 10

Figure 6. Decentralized wastewater treatment system components Worrell Water Technologies http://www.livingmachines.com 11

Figure 7. Example water reuse designs at three different scales: building scale, community or institutional scale, and municipal scale Worrell Water Technologies

http://www.livingmachines.com 12

infrastructure development and water reuse will be different in each community but will generally be easy to identify since we collectively waste a lot of water. Four different projects examples are described in Appendix 3 to illustrate projects in urban, suburban, and rural areas from the Southeast to the Southwest and the Rocky Mountains to the Northwest. Conclusion The members of the design community have long been practical visionaries seeing alternatives for improvement and bringing them to life, creating the future in the process. We know that there is no desirable, sustainable future without adequate, high-quality water flowing through human society and through the ecosystems that support it. Its time to accelerate the evolution of our water infrastructure to an ecological model that will be the basis of truly green building and green communities. Water is a common denominator demonstrating that Human communities and the natural environment are all part of the same ecosystem. That is a powerful concept offering a foundation for 21st Century design. Integrating green community design with Ecosystems as Infrastructure promotes viability, value, and resilience in the relationship of nature and human ecosystems.

Living Machine Systems, L3C, (and predecessor companies under the same ownership) has been developing advanced ecological wastewater treatment systems for 15 years. Our signature technology, called Living Machines, integrates tidal wetland ecosystems, engineering, and information technologies to create Living Technology These high efficiency technologies have been used to treat wastewater from a variety of sources, including municipal, zoos, animal shelters, and food production; and have been applied to a variety of reuse applications including irrigation, toilet flushing, cooling towers, and wash water. Clients have included M&M Mars, the Port Authority of Portland, Oregon, the San Francisco PUC, Furman University, the Esalen Institute, the US General Services Administration, Oberlin College, the US Navy, and the Emmen Zoo in the Netherlands. Eric Lohan is General Manager for Living Machine Systems. Eric has worked for ten years on the development of the Living Machine technology and is coauthor of five patents on advanced wetland technologies. Will Kirksey, PE is Global Development Officer for Living Machine Systems and Senior Vice President for WWT, the parent company. Will has over 35 years of experience in environmental engineering and policy, including senior roles with the Florida Governors Office, Battelle Labs, and the Civil Engineering Research Foundation.

http://www.livingmachines.com 13

Appendix 1

Appendix 2 The lack of unified national or in many areas even state standards for water reuse has hampered development and implementation of new technologies and systems. A recent report commissioned by the Cascadia USGBC Code regulation and systemic barriers affecting Living Building Projects identifies seven important steps for modifying the regulatory environment to foster the adoption of sustainable systems and technologies. These steps are particularly relevant for supporting water reuse projects. 1. Identify and address regulatory impediments. Byzantine and in some cases outdated standards for water reuse are hampering the adoption of new technologies and stifling innovation. 2. Create incentives matched with goals. Water savings that accrue from water reuse should result in direct economic savings similar to net metering approaches for solar energy. Unfortunately this is not always the case. 3. Develop education and advocacy programs. With proper training and support the regulatory community can become the strongest allies of appropriate sustainable water reuse technologies. Community leaders, developers, and design professionals would all benefit from understanding more about successful new technologies or applications. 4. Accelerate research, testing, development, deployment, and monitoring. States and particularly the federal government need to develop appropriate incentives to certify new technologies to assure their performance but also foster the development of new technologies. This should include appropriate consistency and reciprocity among jurisdictions. Every new cell phone does not have to undergo unique performance and safety evaluations in every US city in which it is sold.

http://www.livingmachines.com 14

5. Create Green Zones, designated sustainable development districts. There are always risks associated with the implementation of new technologies and systems. The Green Zone model allows new technologies to be demonstrated on a provisional basis with adequate regulatory oversight. 6. Facilitate the creation of a holistic integrated regulatory process. For water system approval there are frequently overlapping and conflicting water regulations for public health, environmental protection, and resource allocation. A holistic integrated regulatory process would allow social and environmental goals to be met most effectively. 7. Ensure social equity in policies that safeguard public health, safety, and welfare. Frequently water reuse practices are targeted at addressing the needs of the wealthy (irrigation of golf courses) while parks in working class neighborhoods do not have access to reuse water for irrigation. In the US and globally the poor have disproportionately born the cost of environmental pollution.

Appendix 3 Four different projects examples are described below to illustrate projects in urban, suburban, and rural areas from the Southeast to the Southwest and the Rocky Mountains to the Northwest. Example Projects: Oregon Health and Science University, Portland OR The Center for Health and Healing at the Oregon Health and Science University along the Willamette River in Portland is 16 stories tall and totals about 400,000 square feet. This structure uses a series of interconnected water systems designed by Interface Engineering to reduce municipal water use and to eliminate surges of stormwater. While all potable water comes from municipal supply, highly efficient sinks, showers, and toilets are used throughout the building, and rainwater is captured and stored in a 22,000-gallon cistern for fire suppression, HVAC (heating/ventilation/airconditioning) cooling towers, as well as radiant cooling. Collected rainwater is also used for a portion of the toilet flushing demand and building wastewater is treated onsite with an MBR in the basement. Treated and disinfected water is reused for toilet flushing as well as irrigation. All wastewater is disposed on site through the irrigation system. A green roof on the building collects a portion of the rainfall and reduces stormwater runoff. With these design changes, the buildings potable water demand is reduced by over 60% -- saving an estimated 5 million gallons of water per year. Guilford County Schools, NC When a suburban school district outside of Greensboro NC wanted to build a new middle school and high school campus they estimated

http://www.livingmachines.com 15

that sewer connection fees would be over $4 million dollars. They opted for a decentralized approach to water reuse at less than one quarter of that price. A 365,000 gallon concrete rainwater cistern was constructed to collect runoff from the roofs of both buildings. All toilet flushing on campus is provided with rainwater. The roof of the tank is used as a regulation size basketball court. All wastewater is treated by a Living Machine advanced wetland treatment system. The system is located between the two buildings and provides aesthetic and educational benefits in addition supplying irrigation water for all of the schools athletic facilities. Dallas Animal Shelter, TX The City of Dallas recently built a new city wide animal shelter to facilitate the care and adoption of stray animals. This large facility requires 10,000 gallons of water per day to clean animal kennels. A reuse system was built to collect and treat wash-down water from kennel cleaning with a Living Machine Tidal Wetland system and a three-stage disinfection system. Reclaimed water is then reused for kennel washing. By reducing the potable requirements for wash-down by up to 70 percent, this system saves approximately 1 million gallons of water per year, enough to supply 100 homes. BP, Casper WY Significant water reuse potential exists in industrial applications and in environmental remediation. In Casper, Wyoming BP is spending the next 100 years or more cleaning up petrochemicals that have leached into the soil and contaminated groundwater. They are using an advanced wetland system designed by North American Wetland Engineers that reclaims almost 1 billion gallons of water per year that is then used for irrigation of an adjacent golf course. This energy efficient process was also cost effective saving BP at least $12 million over other alternatives.

References Asano, T., F. Burton, H. Lerenz, R. Tsuchihashi, and G. Tchobanoglous. 2009. Water Reuse: Issues, Technologies, and Applications. McGraw Hill Books, New York, NY. Kadlec, R.H. and S. Wallace. 2008. Treatment Wetlands 2nd Edition. CRC Press Boca Raton, FL. Lohan, T. (ed) 2009. Water Consciousness. Alternet Books, San Francisco, CA. Vickers, A. 2001. Handbook of Water Use and Conservation. Water Plow Press, Amherst, MA. Nonprofit Organizations Water Environment Federation www.wef.org The Pacific Institute www.pac-inst.org Alternet Water Blog www.alternet.org/water/ Design Firms 2020 Engineering, Bellingham, WA, www.2020engineering.com Alliance Environmental LLC. , Hillsborough, NJ, www.allianceenvironmentalllc.com Interface Engineering, Portland, OR, www. interfaceengineering.com Mithun, Seattle, WA, www.mithun.com Naturally Wallace, Minneapolis, MN, www. naturallywallace.com Sherwood Design Engineers, San Francisco, CA, www.sherwoodengineers.com Worrell Water Technologies, Charlottesville, VA www.livingmachines.com Water Standards US Green Building Council www.usgbc.org Cascadia USGBC and Living Building Challenge www.cascadiagbc.org Alliance for Water Stewardship www. allianceforwaterstewardship.org

http://www.livingmachines.com 16

Living Machine STEP Sheet

Figure 1. Living Machine Process 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Influent wastewater is collected from a variety of sources and flows into the Primary Tank. Solids settle and are solubilized in the Primary Tank. Effluent flows through a filter into the Recirculation Tank. Influent is pumped to the Tidal Flow Wetlands (TFW) which alternately fill and drain providing an ideal environment for bacteria and plants which consume nutrients in the wastewater. After initial treatment in the TFW water is pumped to the Vertical Flow Wetlands (VFW). VFW remove any remaining solids and nutrients as water trickles through the wetland. After biological treatment in the Living Machine wastewater may be disinfected before reuse for toilet flushing, irrigation, cooling towers, washwater or other nonpotable applications.

Worrell Water Technologies/Interface Multimedia

http://www.livingmachines.com 17

Figure 2. Comparison of wastewater treatment technologies based on energy use and footprint requirements for a given volume of flow. Comparison was created at 100 m3 or 26,000 gallons per day Worrell Water Tech-

http://www.livingmachines.com 18

Figure 3. Example predevelopment water budget from the Lloyd Crossing Sustainable Urban Design Plan and Catalyst Project Mithun/KPFF

http://www.livingmachines.com 19

Figure 4. Example current development water budget from the Lloyd Crossing Sustainable Urban Design Plan and Catalyst Project Mithun/KPFF

http://www.livingmachines.com 20

Figure 5. Example proposed 2050 development water budget from the Lloyd Crossing Sustainable Urban Design Plan and Catalyst Project Mithun/KPFF

http://www.livingmachines.com 21