Skip to Main Content

DPR, which was not addressed in the report, is expected to have virtually the same treatment cost as IPR but without the significant transport and pumping costs associated with the IPR option (due to the fact that, for IPR, the storage is generally a distance away from the coast while the wastewater treatment plants are located near the coast). On this basis, and using the data in the report, DPR may be more cost-effective than both desalination and IPR (by 40–50%), and it also has the lower energy usage of the two – as is shown in Table 1 (Law 2008). The DPR option will also maximize the use of existing infrastructure.

Table 1

Comparison of water supply options (GHD 2007; Law 2008)

Supply optionTransport distance (km)Cost of water (AUD$/ML)Energy usage (kWh/kL)
IPR 100 1,300 1.9 
Seawater desalination 20 1,400 4.3 
DPR 20 800 1.5 
Supply optionTransport distance (km)Cost of water (AUD$/ML)Energy usage (kWh/kL)
IPR 100 1,300 1.9 
Seawater desalination 20 1,400 4.3 
DPR 20 800 1.5 

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal