Grantee Research Project Results
2016 Progress Report: Community-enabled Lifecycle Analysis of Stormwater Infrastructure Costs (CLASIC)
EPA Grant Number: R836173Title: Community-enabled Lifecycle Analysis of Stormwater Infrastructure Costs (CLASIC)
Investigators: Zhang, Harry , Throwe, Joanne M , Buzzard, Angela , Pomeroy, Christine , Sharvelle, Sybil
Current Investigators: Zhang, Harry , Sharvelle, Sybil , Throwe, Joanne M , Pomeroy, Christine , Buzzard, Angela
Institution: Water Research Foundation , University of Maryland - College Park , Wichita State University , Colorado State University , University of Utah
Current Institution: Water Research Foundation , Colorado State University , University of Maryland - College Park , University of Utah , Wichita State University
EPA Project Officer: Packard, Benjamin H
Project Period: April 1, 2016 through March 31, 2020 (Extended to March 31, 2021)
Project Period Covered by this Report: April 1, 2016 through March 31,2017
Project Amount: $1,949,785
RFA: National Priorities: Life Cycle Costs of Water Infrastructure Alternatives (2015) RFA Text | Recipients Lists
Research Category: Water Quality , Water , Water Treatment
Objective:
The goal of the Community-enabled Lifecycle Analysis of Stormwater Infrastructure (CLASIC) Platform is to develop a transparent, robust, peer-reviewed, end-user informed and accessible Life Cycle Cost (LCC) / Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) framework model for stormwater infrastructure alternatives that can accommodate regional and scale variations to support integrated planning. This will be accomplished through five integrated objectives:
- LCC/LCA Framework Model development to develop an integrated, standardized approach.
- Data collection of existing data sources on construction, operations, maintenance, and replacement costs of grey and green infrastructure solutions based on protocols and structure developed under the LCC/LCA Model.
- Data analysis and standardization to analyze, standardize, and compile the data collected in a relational database with structure consistent with the LCC/LCA Model that can be used to support tool development.
- Decision support tools that are publically available in an enduring and enabling platform for use by the urban water community that works easily at scale, fosters innovation, and promotes collaboration.
- Community engagement to ensure all products developed are scientifically sound, accurately reflect community needs, and supported and implemented by end users.
Progress Summary:
The Water Connect tool has been developed via the eRAMS platform (https://erams.com/water-connect/) as a Community Content Management System (CCMS). This is a comprehensive content management system that facilitates data sharing for urban water systems via a geographic information system (GIS) interface. The system allows users to publish new datasets as citable digital assets and connect those datasets to modeling tools for analysis. The project team will be able to publish data on green and gray infrastructure systems in cities throughout the United States as those data sets become available. In addition, the team will be able to readily share data collected for cities internally via the GIS-enabled management systems available through eRAMS. This will enable the team to share location-based information and data in a secure and user-friendly format. The features of eRAMS and Water Connect that enable rapid data sharing both internal to the team and to broader audiences were demonstrated at the November 2016 team meeting hosted at CSU.
A vision for the CLASIC tool was developed, user groups were defined, and a preliminary list of primary and secondary benefits that need to be included in the tool was generated. The following working definition was developed and is expected to be revised through the project period:
Vision: The CLASIC tool will serve as a screening tool to guide decision making by utilities on when, how, and where to install green infrastructure, hybrid green-gray systems, and gray infrastructure. The tool will include scenario analysis to assess the LCC of gray and green infrastructure from the neighborhood to watershed scales and include multi-criteria decision analysis to enable comparison of scenarios based on user-defined priorities for criteria and
Municipal Cost Databases and Case Study Data: The proposed community interview questions and the list of communities proposed for engagement with CLASIC were reviewed. Feedback was provided to WSU on this list, including some additional communities for consideration. The data include (1) an Excel spreadsheet of all cost data from the International Stormwater BMP Database and (2) a document from September 2016, titled Green Infrastructure Maintenance Cost Research Summary, prepared by the Municipal Water Infrastructure Council of the Environmental and Water Resources Institute of the American Society of Civil Engineers.
We conducted a literature review to determine the size and type of communities most in need. Also, we reviewed a few municipal budgets to see how projects are planned and developed a master list of communities and recorded identifying characteristics in coordination with the whole project team, and selected 33 for initial interviews.
Future Activities:
In the next period, we will finalize the list of the targeted communities to provide long-term engagement including community characteristics and obtain contacts. We also will develop the final interview questionnaire and coordinate interviewing the 33 identified communities, as well as interview a select number. We will summarize the interview information for distribution to the team and assist with determining if there are any course corrections needed for the overall project scope.
Journal Articles:
No journal articles submitted with this report: View all 27 publications for this projectProgress and Final Reports:
Original AbstractThe perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.