Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Perspective
  • Published:

Evaluating the hidden costs of drinking water treatment technologies

Nature Water volume 1, pages 319–327 (2023)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Drinking water treatment technologies are largely evaluated on the basis of metrics such as contaminant removal efficiency, capital costs and health impacts. However, the potential for safe water technologies to lead to positive health outcomes depends greatly on user satisfaction, consistent and sustained operation, and financial viability. In this Perspective, we argue for the importance for engineering, public health and economics researchers to assess the ‘hidden’ costs of drinking water treatment technologies, including affordability, labour burden, user acceptance, and the (often) gendered nature of these. Neglecting these factors results in an underestimation of the full costs of drinking water treatment technologies and an overestimation of the potential for treatment options that require substantial behaviour change and time to succeed. Here we present a set of user-centric evaluation criteria for water service providers, practitioners, governments and other stakeholders to consider when deciding which drinking water treatment technologies to implement, scale up or take to market.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Progress on Household Drinking Water, Sanitation and Hygiene 2000–2020: Five Years into the SDGs (WHO and UNICEF, 2021); https://washdata.org/reports?reports%5B0%5D=date%3A2021&reports%5B1%5D=monitoring-category%3Awater&reports%5B2%5D=report-type%3Aglobal%20updates

  2. McGuigan, K. G. et al. Solar water disinfection (SODIS): a review from bench-top to roof-top. J. Hazard. Mater. 235–236, 29–46 (2012).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Amrose, S., Burt, Z. & Ray, I. Safe drinking water for low-income regions. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-031411-091819 (2015).

  4. Luby, S. P., Mendoza, C., Keswick, B. H., Chiller, T. M. & Hoekstra, R. M. Difficulties in bringing point-of-use water treatment to scale in rural Guatemala. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 78, 382–387 (2008).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Arnold, B., Arana, B., Mäusezahl, D., Hubbard, A. & Colford, J. M. Jr. Evaluation of a pre-existing, 3-year household water treatment and handwashing intervention in rural Guatemala. Int. J. Epidemiol. 38, 1651–1661 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Amrose, S. E., Cherukumilli, K. & Wright, N. C. Chemical contamination of drinking water in resource-constrained settings: global prevalence and piloted mitigation strategies. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 45, 195–226 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Pickering, A. J. et al. Effect of in-line drinking water chlorination at the point of collection on child diarrhoea in urban Bangladesh: a double-blind, cluster-randomised controlled trial. Lancet Glob. Health 7, e1247–e1256 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cumming, O. et al. The implications of three major new trials for the effect of water, sanitation and hygiene on childhood diarrhea and stunting: a consensus statement. BMC Med. 17, 173 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Ahuja, A., Kremer, M. & Zwane, A. P. Providing safe water: evidence from randomized evaluations. Annu. Rev. Resour. Econ. 2, 237–256 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality 4th edn, incorporating the first addendum (WHO, 2017); https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241549950

  11. Results of Round I of the WHO International Scheme to Evaluate Household Water Treatment Technologies (WHO, 2016).

  12. Results of Round II of the WHO Household Water Treatment Evaluation Scheme (WHO, 2019); https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241516037

  13. International scheme to evaluate household water treatment technologies WHO https://www.who.int/tools/international-scheme-to-evaluate-household-water-treatment-technologies (2014).

  14. A Toolkit for Monitoring and Evaluating Household Water Treatment and Safe Storage Programmes (WHO and UNICEF, 2012).

  15. Household Water Treatment Filters—Product Guide (UNICEF, 2020); https://www.unicef.org/supply/reports/household-water-treatment-filters-product-guide

  16. Santos, J., Pagsuyoin, S. A. & Latayan, J. A multi-criteria decision analysis framework for evaluating point-of-use water treatment alternatives. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 18, 1263–1279 (2016).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Sobsey, M. D., Stauber, C. E., Casanova, L. M., Brown, J. M. & Elliott, M. A. Point of use household drinking water filtration: a practical, effective solution for providing sustained access to safe drinking water in the developing world. Environ. Sci. Technol. 42, 4261–4267 (2008).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Clasen, T., Schmidt, W.-P., Rabie, T., Roberts, I. & Cairncross, S. Interventions to improve water quality for preventing diarrhoea: systematic review and meta-analysis. Br. Med. J. 334, 782 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Wolf, J. et al. Effectiveness of interventions to improve drinking water, sanitation, and handwashing with soap on risk of diarrhoeal disease in children in low-income and middle-income settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet 400, 48–59 (2022).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Clasen, T. F. et al. Interventions to improve water quality for preventing diarrhoea. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD004794.pub3 (2015).

  21. Crider, Y. S., Tsuchiya, M., Mukundwa, M., Ray, I. & Pickering, A. J. Adoption of point-of-use chlorination for household drinking water treatment: a systematic review. Environ. Health Perspect. 131, 16001 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Chirgwin, H., Cairncross, S., Zehra, D. & Sharma Waddington, H. Interventions promoting uptake of water, sanitation and hygiene (WASH) technologies in low‐ and middle‐income countries: an evidence and gap map of effectiveness studies. Campbell Syst. Rev. 17, e1194 (2021).

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Pearson, J. & McPhedran, K. A literature review of the non-health impacts of sanitation. Waterlines 27, 48–61 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Whittington, D., Briscoe, J., Mu, X. & Barron, W. Estimating the willingness to pay for water services in developing countries: a case study of the use of contingent valuation surveys in southern Haiti. Econ. Dev. Cult. Change 38, 293–311 (1990).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. McConnell, K. E. & Rosado, M. A. Valuing discrete improvements in drinking water quality through revealed preferences. Water Resour. Res. 36, 1575–1582 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Vásquez, W. F., Mozumder, P., Hernández-Arce, J. & Berrens, R. P. Willingness to pay for safe drinking water: evidence from Parral, Mexico. J. Environ. Manage. 90, 3391–3400 (2009).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Smith, D. W. et al. Effective demand for in-line chlorination bundled with rental housing in Dhaka, Bangladesh. Environ. Sci. Technol. 55, 12471–12482 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Luoto, J. et al. Learning to dislike safe water products: results from a randomized controlled trial of the effects of direct and peer experience on willingness to pay. Environ. Sci. Technol. 46, 6244–6251 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Blum, A. G., Null, C. & Hoffmann, V. Marketing household water treatment: willingness to pay results from an experiment in rural Kenya. Water 6, 1873–1886 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Vásquez, W. F. Willingness to pay and willingness to work for improvements of municipal and community-managed water services. Water Resour. Res. 50, 8002–8014 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Powers, J. E. et al. Design, performance, and demand for a novel in-line chlorine doser to increase safe water access. npj Clean Water 4, 4 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Whittington, D., Lauria, D. T. & Mu, X. A study of water vending and willingness to pay for water in Onitsha, Nigeria. World Dev. 19, 179–198 (1991).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kayser, G. L., Moriarty, P., Fonseca, C. & Bartram, J. Domestic water service delivery indicators and frameworks for monitoring, evaluation, policy and planning: a review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 10, 4812–4835 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. WASHCost Theory of Change: Reforms in the Water Sector and What They Mean for the Use of Unit Costs(WASHCost, 2010); https://www.ircwash.org/resources/washcost-working-papers

  35. Whittington, D. Administering contingent valuation surveys in developing countries. World Dev. 26, 21–30 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Hutton, G. Monitoring ‘Affordability’ of Water and Sanitation Services After 2015: Review of Global Indicator Options (UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights: Geneva, 2012); https://washdata.org/sites/default/files/documents/reports/2017-07/Hutton-2012-monitoring-affordability-of-water-and-sanitation-services.pdf

  37. Kessides, I., Miniaci, R., Scarpa, C. & Valbonesi, P. Toward Defining and Measuring the Affordability of Public Utility Services (World Bank, 2009).

  38. Goddard, J. J., Ray, I. & Balazs, C. Water affordability and human right to water implications in California. PLoS ONE 16, e0245237 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Nganyanyuka, K., Martinez, J., Wesselink, A., Lungo, J. H. & Georgiadou, Y. Accessing water services in Dar es Salaam: are we counting what counts? Habitat Int. 44, 358–366 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Amit, R. K. & Sasidharan, S. Measuring affordability of access to clean water: a coping cost approach. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 141, 410–417 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. García-Valiñas, M. A., Martínez-Espiñeira, R. & González-Gómez, F. Affordability of residential water tariffs: alternative measurement and explanatory factors in southern Spain. J. Environ. Manage. 91, 2696–2706 (2010).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Martins, R., Cruz, L., Barata, E. & Quintal, C. Assessing social concerns in water tariffs. Water Policy 15, 193–211 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Verhoeven, J. et al. WASHCost Data Organization and Coding Protocol (WASHCost, 2010); https://www.ircwash.org/sites/default/files/20100810_washcost_data_protocol.pdf

  44. Heller, L. The Human Rights to Water and Sanitation (Cambridge Univ. Press, 2022).

  45. Kutty, N. K. A new measure of housing affordability: estimates and analytical results. Hous. Policy Debate 16, 113–142 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Udas, P. B., Roth, D. & Zwarteveen, M. Informal privatisation of community taps: issues of access and equity. Local Environ. 19, 1024–1041 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Nagar, R., Lawson, V., McDowell, L. & Hanson, S. Locating globalization: feminist (re)readings of the subjects and spaces of globalization. Econ. Geogr. 78, 257–284 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Gleick, P. H. The human right to water. Water Policy 1, 487–503 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Wutich, A. Estimating household water use: a comparison of diary, prompted recall, and free recall methods. Field Methods 21, 49–68 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Kumpel, E., Woelfle-Erskine, C., Ray, I. & Nelson, K. L. Measuring household consumption and waste in unmetered, intermittent piped water systems. Water Resour. Res. 53, 302–315 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Blackden, C. M. & Wodon, Q. Gender, Time Use, and Poverty in Sub-Saharan Africa (World Bank, 2006).

  52. World Survey on the Role of Women in Development 2014: Gender Equality and Sustainable Development (UN Women, 2014).

  53. Human Development Report 2006—Beyond Scarcity: Power, Poverty and the Global Water Crisis (UN Human Development, 2007).

  54. Hawkins, R. & Seager, J. Gender and water in Mongolia. Prof. Geogr. 62, 16–31 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Rickert, B., Schmoll, O., Rinehold, A. & Barrenberg, E. Water Safety Plan: A Field Guide to Improving Drinking-Water Safety in Small Communities (WHO, 2014).

  56. Ray, I. Women, water, and development. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 32, 421–449 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Pederson, A., Greaves, L. & Poole, N. Gender-transformative health promotion for women: a framework for action. Health Promot. Int. 30, 140–150 (2015).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Sorenson, S. B., Morssink, C. & Campos, P. A. Safe access to safe water in low income countries: water fetching in current times. Soc. Sci. Med. 72, 1522–1526 (2011).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Venkataramanan, Geere, Thomae & Stoler In pursuit of ‘safe’ water: the burden of personal injury from water fetching in 21 low-income and middle-income countries. Br. Med. J. Glob. Health. 5, 003328 (2020).

  60. Norton, D. M. et al. Flocculant-disinfectant point-of-use water treatment for reducing arsenic exposure in rural Bangladesh. Int. J. Environ. Health Res. 19, 17–29 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Doocy, S. & Burnham, G. Point-of-use water treatment and diarrhoea reduction in the emergency context: an effectiveness trial in Liberia. Trop. Med. Int. Health 11, 1542–1552 (2006).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Rangel, J. M., Lopez, B., Mejia, M. A., Mendoza, C. & Luby, S. A novel technology to improve drinking water quality: a microbiological evaluation of in-home flocculation and chlorination in rural Guatemala. J. Water Health 1, 15–22 (2003).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Winter, J. C., Darmstadt, G. L. & Davis, J. The role of piped water supplies in advancing health, economic development, and gender equality in rural communities. Soc. Sci. Med. 270, 113599 (2021).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Devoto, F., Duflo, E., Dupas, P., Parienté, W. & Pons, V. Happiness on tap: piped water adoption in urban Morocco. Am. Econ. J. Econ. Policy 4, 68–99 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Silva, B. B., Sales, B., Lanza, A. C., Heller, L. & Rezende, S. Water and sanitation are not gender-neutral: human rights in rural Brazilian communities. Water Policy 22, 102–120 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Burt, Z., Ercümen, A., Billava, N. & Ray, I. From intermittent to continuous service: costs, benefits, equity and sustainability of water system reforms in Hubli-Dharwad, India. World Dev. 109, 121–133 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Razavi, S. The Political and Social Economy of Care in a Development Context: Conceptual Issues, Research Questions and Policy Options (UN Research Institute for Social Development, 2007); https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=veQESQAACAAJ

  68. Kremer, M., Leino, J., Miguel, E. & Zwane, A. P. Spring Cleaning: Rural Water Impacts, Valuation and Property Rights Institutions. NBER http://www.nber.org/papers/w15280.pdf(2009).

  69. Pattanayak, S. K., Yang, J.-C., Whittington, D. & Bal Kumar, K. C. Coping with unreliable public water supplies: averting expenditures by households in Kathmandu, Nepal. Water Resour. Res. https://doi.org/10.1029/2003WR002443 (2005).

  70. Budlender, D. Measuring the Economic and Social Value of Domestic Work: Conceptual and Methodological Framework (ILO, 2011).

  71. Mullainathan, S. & Shafir, E. Scarcity: Why Having Too Little Means So Much (Macmillan, 2013).

  72. Ray, I. & Smith, K. R. Towards safe drinking water and clean cooking for all. Lancet Glob. Health 9, e361–e365 (2021).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Pooi, C. K. & Ng, H. Y. Review of low-cost point-of-use water treatment systems for developing communities. npj Clean Water 1, 11 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Bailey, E. S. et al. Methods, protocols, guidance and standards for performance evaluation for point-of-use water treatment technologies: history, current status, future needs and directions. Water 13, 1094 (2021).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  75. Schmidt, W.-P. & Cairncross, S. Household water treatment in poor populations: is there enough evidence for scaling up now? Environ. Sci. Technol. 43, 986–992 (2009).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Shaheed, A. et al. Adherence to point-of-use water treatment over short-term implementation: parallel crossover trials of flocculation–disinfection sachets in Pakistan and Zambia. Environ. Sci. Technol. 52, 6601–6609 (2018).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Parker Fiebelkorn, A. et al. Systematic review of behavior change research on point-of-use water treatment interventions in countries categorized as low- to medium-development on the human development index. Soc. Sci. Med. 75, 622–633 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Rosa, G. & Clasen, T. Consistency of use and effectiveness of household water treatment among Indian households claiming to treat their water. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 97, 259–270 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Enger, K. S., Nelson, K. L., Rose, J. B. & Eisenberg, J. N. S. The joint effects of efficacy and compliance: a study of household water treatment effectiveness against childhood diarrhea. Water Res. 47, 1181–1190 (2013).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Brown, J. & Clasen, T. High adherence is necessary to realize health gains from water quality interventions. PLoS ONE 7, e36735 (2012).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Levy, K. Invited perspective: environmental health interventions are only as good as their adoption. Environ. Health Perspect. 131, 11303 (2023).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Reygadas, F., Gruber, J. S., Dreizler, L., Nelson, K. L. & Ray, I. Measuring user compliance and cost effectiveness of safe drinking water programs: a cluster-randomized study of household ultraviolet disinfection in rural Mexico. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 98, 824–834 (2018).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  83. Daniel, D., Marks, S. J., Pande, S. & Rietveld, L. Socio-environmental drivers of sustainable adoption of household water treatment in developing countries. npj Clean Water 1, 12 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  84. Brown, J., Hayashi, M. A. L. & Eisenberg, J. N. S. The critical role of compliance in delivering health gains from environmental health interventions. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 100, 777–779 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  85. Rainey, R. C. & Harding, A. K. Acceptability of solar disinfection of drinking water treatment in Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. Int. J. Environ. Health Res. 15, 361–372 (2005).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  86. Gruber, J. S. et al. A stepped wedge, cluster-randomized trial of a household UV-disinfection and safe storage drinking water intervention in rural Baja California Sur, Mexico. Am. J. Trop. Med. Hyg. 89, 238–245 (2013).

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  87. Murray, A. L. et al. Evaluation of consistent use, barriers to use, and microbiological effectiveness of three prototype household water treatment technologies in Haiti, Kenya, and Nicaragua. Sci. Total Environ. 718, 134685 (2020).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  88. Pickering, A. J. et al. The WASH benefits and SHINE trials: interpretation of WASH intervention effects on linear growth and diarrhoea. Lancet Glob. Health 7, e1139–e1146 (2019).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  89. Albert, J., Luoto, J. & Levine, D. End-user preferences for and performance of competing POU water treatment technologies among the rural poor of Kenya. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44, 4426–4432 (2010).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Burt, Z. et al. User preferences and willingness to pay for safe drinking water: experimental evidence from rural Tanzania. Soc. Sci. Med. 173, 63–71 (2017).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Ojomo, E., Elliott, M., Goodyear, L., Forson, M. & Bartram, J. Sustainability and scale-up of household water treatment and safe storage practices: enablers and barriers to effective implementation. Int. J. Hyg. Environ. Health 218, 704–713 (2015).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Amin, N. et al. Field trial of an automated batch chlorinator system at shared water points in an urban community of Dhaka, Bangladesh. J. Water Sanit. Hyg. Dev. 6, 32–41 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  93. Onjala, J., Ndiritu, S. W. & Stage, J. Risk perception, choice of drinking water and water treatment: evidence from Kenyan towns. J. Water Sanit. Hyg. Dev. 4, 268–280 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  94. Alfredo, K. A. & O’Garra, T. Preferences for water treatment provision in rural India: comparing communal, pay-per-use, and labour-for-water schemes. Water Int. 45, 91–111 (2020).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  95. MICS7 Tools—UNICEF Multiple Indicator Cluster Surveys (UNICEF, 2023); https://mics.unicef.org/tools

  96. Boil water. WHO https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/155821 (2015).

  97. Making water safe in an emergency. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/emergency/making-water-safe.html (2022).

  98. How to make water safe using Aquatabs 67 mg blue or black packet [Haiti] (US Center for Disease Control, CDC, 2013); https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/pdf/global/posters/10_219282-H_waterguard_haiti.pdf

  99. How to make water safe using WaterGuard [Southeast Asia](US Center for Disease Control, CDC, 2012); https://www.cdc.gov/healthywater/pdf/global/posters/water_treatment_waterguard_SEAsia_508.pdf

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank L. Clark for helping to gather the data for Table 2. K.C. and A.J.P. were supported by a grant from Open Philanthropy during the writing of this Perspective. A.J.P. is a Chan Zuckerberg Biohub Investigator.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA

    Katya Cherukumilli & Amy J. Pickering

  2. Energy and Resources Group, University of California Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA

    Isha Ray

  3. Chan Zuckerberg Biohub, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Amy J. Pickering

Authors
  1. Katya Cherukumilli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Isha Ray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amy J. Pickering
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors conceptualized the study and contributed to the writing of the first draft, generation of tables and editing of the Perspective.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Isha Ray or Amy J. Pickering.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Peer review

Peer review information

Nature Water thanks Abisola Osinuga and the other, anonymous, reviewer(s) for their contribution to the peer review of this work.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cherukumilli, K., Ray, I. & Pickering, A.J. Evaluating the hidden costs of drinking water treatment technologies. Nat Water 1, 319–327 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44221-023-00055-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s44221-023-00055-y

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing