Water infrastructure systems worldwide use large amounts of energy to operate. Energy efficiency efforts are relevant because even relatively small gains in efficiency have the potential to bring significant benefits to these utilities in terms of financial savings and enhanced sustainability and resiliency. In order to achieve higher efficiency levels, energy usage must be measured and controlled. A common tool used to measure energy efficiency in water utilities and perform comparisons between utilities is metric benchmarking. Energy benchmarking scores are intended to measure how efficient water systems are among their peers, in a simple and accurate fashion. Although many different benchmarking methods are currently used, we chose to use the segregated benchmarking scores proposed by Carlson on his research report from 2007 (Carlson, 2007). The research objective is to improve these production energy use and treatment energy use benchmarking scores by analyzing the system's particular characteristics that might skew the results, such as topology, water loss and raw water quality. We propose that benchmarking metrics should be always used within a particular context for each specific utility being analyzed. A complementary score (Thermodynamic Score) was developed to provide context on how energy efficient is the utility not only compared with other utilities, but also compared with the potential maximum efficiency the utility can reach itself. We analyzed eight utilities from Virginia to obtain production and treatment energy use benchmarking scores and also thermodynamic scores using the minimum required energy approach. Benchmarking scores were skewed in 50% of the studied utilities. This means that benchmarking scores should never be used as a black box. The thermodynamic score proved to be useful for measurement of energy efficiency of a water utility on its production phase. In addition, some utilities can detect significant financial saving opportunities using the minimum required energy analysis for production operations. / Master of Science

<p> Inclement challenges of a changing climate and humanity's desire to explore extraterrestrial environments both necessitate efficient methods to obtain freshwater. To accommodate next generation water technology, there is a need for understanding and defining the energy efficiency for unconventional water sources over a broad range of environments. Exergy analysis provides a common description for efficiency that may be used to evaluate technologies and water sources for energy feasibility. This work uses robust thermodynamic theory coupled with atmospheric and planetary data to define water capture efficiency, explore its variation across climate conditions, and identify technological niches and development needs.  </p> <p><br></p> <p> We find that desalinating saline liquid brines, even when highly saline, could be the most energetically favorable option for obtaining water outside of Earth. The energy required to access water vapor may be four to ten times higher than accessing ice deposits, however it offers the capacity for decentralized systems. Considering atmospheric water vapor harvesting on Earth, we find that the thermodynamic minimum is anywhere from 0x (RH≥ 100%) to upwards of 250x (RH<10\%) the minimum energy requirement of seawater desalination. Sorbents, modelled as metal organic frameworks (MOFs), have a particular niche in arid and semi-arid regions (20-30%). Membrane-systems are best at low relative humidity and the region of applicability is strongly affected by the vacuum pumping efficiency. Dew harvesting is best at higher humidity and fog harvesting is optimal when super-saturated conditions exist. Component (e.g., pump, chiller, etc.) inefficiencies are the largest barrier in increasing process-level efficiency and strongly impact the regions optimal technology deployment. The analysis elucidates a fundamental basis for comparing water systems energy efficiency for outer space applications and provides the first thermodynamics-based comparison of classes of atmospheric water harvesting technologies on Earth.</p>