WATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESEARCH SERIES • 1B110 FRU 12/71-1
The River Basin Model:
AN OVERVIEW
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
-------
WATER POLLUTION CONTROL RESEARCH SERIES
The Water Pollution Control Research Series describes the
results and progress in the control and abatement of pollu-
tion in our Nation's waters. They provide a central source
of information on the research, development, and demon-
stration activities in the water research program of the
Environmental Protection Agency, through in-house research
and grants and contracts with Federal, state, and local
agencies, research institutions, and industrial organizations.
Inquiries pertaining to Water Pollution Control Research
Reports should be directed to the Chief, Publications Branch
(Water), Research Information Division, R&M, Environmental
Protection Agency, Washington, D. C. 20460
-------
The RIVER BASIN MODEL:
An Overview
by
Envirometrics, Inc.
1100 17th Street, N.W.
Washington, B.C. 20036
for the
Office of Research and Monitoring
Environmental Protection Agency
Project #16110 FRU
Contract # 14-12-959
December, 1971
-------
EPA Review Notice
This report has been reviewed by the Environmental
Protection Agency and approved for publication.
Approval does not signify that the contents necessarily
reflect the views and policies of the Environmental
Protection Agency, nor does mention of trade names or
commercial products constitute endorsement or recommenda-
tion for use.
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, B.C. 20402 - Price $1.00
11
-------
ABSTRACT
The RIVER BASIN MODEL is a man-machine model that can be use
to represent in a suggestive fashion the interactions that
take place within a real or hypothetical regional area be-
tween the local water system and the economic, social, and
governmental sectors of that area. The computer portions oi
the model are a synthesis of several hundred sub-programs
that deal with such regional phenomena as migration, housinc
selection, water supply, water quality, physical deteriora-
tion, employment, transportation, leisure time allocation,
public school allocations, shopping patterns, and terminal
use.
The human portions of the model allow its users to make de-
cisions that deal with population and economic growth, watei
pollution abatement, recycling of water, salaries, rents,
prices, land transfers, leisure time allocations, voting,
boycotts, property assessment, tax rates, budget appropria-
tions, school operation, highway operation, public construc-
tion, utility service, municipal service, water service,
recreation availability, zoning, and many more. Through the
computer and human portions of the model, the holistic
workings of a regional river basin area may be represented
for purposes of training decision-makers, simulating the
aggregate impacts of alternative decisions, and performing
research on the regional system itself.
When used in a gaming format, the economic decision-makers
represent major corporations that allocate financial re-
sources, operate existing businesses, and exercise the eco-
nomic power associated with the control of economic assets.
Social decision-makers represent population groups in one of
three socio-economic classes who reside in different parts
of the regional area. Government decision-makers represent
local government departments and elected officials who pro-
vide either a departmental service or exercise budgetary
power.
The RIVER BASIN MODEL in its present form is not usable as
a predictive device. Rather, its primary function is to
replicate the dynamic and interactive decision-making en-
vironment that faces persons from all interest groups who
are concerned with doing something about water pollution
control and the quality of the regional environment.
-------
CONTENTS
Sections Page
I CONCLUSION 1
Summary 1
Strengths and Limitations of the River 3
Basin Model
II RECOMMENDATIONS 7
III INTRODUCTION 9
IV BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE MODEL 11
Regional Area (The Local System) 13
Activities 17
Water Component 21
The River Basin Model As a Systemic Model 22
V USES AND USERS OF THE MODEL 25
Using the Model 28
Model Features 30
VI MODEL OUTPUT 33
Maps 33
Tabular Computer Output 36
Indicators 40
The River Basin Model as a Set of Regional 40
Accounts
VII MODEL INPUTS 45
Initial Director Inputs 45
Player Inputs 46
Periodic Director Inputs 51
Summary 51
VIII EXPLANATION OF THE WATER COMPONENT 55
Water Quality Ratings 55
Water Use and Sources of Water 55
Pollutants Generated 62
Pollution Monitoring 62
Pollution Treatment 65
Effects of the Water Quality Index 65
The Water and Sewer Office 68
v
-------
CONTENTS (Continued)
Sections Page
IX THE INTERACTION OF THE WATER SYSTEM WITH 69
THE REMAINDER OF THE MODEL
Operating Programs 74
Interrelated Activities (Subsystems) 79
APPENDICES 83
VI
-------
FIGURES
Figure Page
1 Economic Activity Map 14
2 Water Component Map 15
3 Economic Activities in the River Basin Model 18
4 Example of How Population Units Are Affected 20
by the Major Operating Programs of the Model
5 Inputs to the River Basin Model 26
6 Economic Status Map 34
7 Map Output 35
8 Tabular Output 37
9 Summary Migration Statistics 39
10 River Quality During Surface Water Process 41
11 Quality of Life Index 42
12 Water Quality Map for TWO CITY 43
13 Available Decisions 47
14 Sample of Inputs and Edits 50
15 Interaction Between the User and the 52
River Basin Model
16 Interaction Between the Water Module and 56
Other Parts of the River Basin Model
17 Water Quality Ratings and Pollutants 57
18 Definition of the Nine Comprehensive Water 58
Quality Levels
19 Water Quality Map 59
20 Water Requirements for Private Economic 60
Activities
21 Pollution Generated by Economic Activities 63
VI1
-------
FIGURE (Continued)
Figure Page
22 Examples of the Ambient and Point Source 64
Sampling Stations Reports
23 Effectiveness of Treatment Types: Percent 66
of Pollutant Removed
24 Components of the Quality of Life Index 67
25 Interaction Between the Water Component 70
and the Three Sectors of the Model
26 Interactions of the Water Quality Agency 71
With Parts of the Local System
27 Concerns of the Water and Sewer Office 73
VI11
-------
SECTION I
CONCLUSIONS
Summary
The water sub-model contains a number of elements desired
in a model that is to be used to illustrate the comprehensive
decision-making environment within which water resource de-
cisions are made.
First, water is used in varying amounts by all of the dif-
ferent private activities in the model. Some of the indus-
trial activities (surface water users) demand such large
quantities of water that they can only be satisfied by drawing
water directly from the same parcel of land on which they are
located. Agricultural activities use ground water and may
pollute nearby water bodies through run off as a function of
the farm type and fertilizer used. All other private activi-
ties have the potential for creating water pollution through
their dumpage into the municipal sewer system.
Second, many of the physical features of water are represented.
For example, the percent of the surface of a parcel consumed
by water may be dealt with. Water volume, rate of flow, and
direction are also shown. Construction costs for roads are
increased (representing bridges and/or tunnels) when they
cross rivers. Flooding probabilities are represented and
damage to activities located in the flood plain are a pos-
sibility.
Third, transportation terminals linking the local system to
outside markets are able to be located on bodies of water,
thereby representing in an approximate way shipping ports.
Fourth, water quantity and quality affect the amount of busi-
ness generated at major recreation areas (which serve tourists
and generate business for local commercial establishments.
Fifth, the pollution generated by industries, businesses, res-
idences, and municipal sources is measured, and the impacts
on the rest of the system are represented.
Sixth, the hazards to health (dollar costs and time lost)
and to the physical environment (deterioration of buildings)
resulting from pollution and flooding are represented.
-------
Seventh, the location of treatment plants (intake and outflow,.
separately) and the level of treatment (chlonnation, pri-
mary, secondary or tertiary) is represented.
Eighth, the local water quality agency will be able to un-
dertake legal, treatment, and/or public relations approaches
to the water quality problems of the local area. Seven
types of pollution are represented in the model. These indiv-
idual pollution types are combined into a single water quality
index for ease of understanding on the part of the model
users.
Ninth, comprehensive planning and controls may be undertaken
by the users of the model. This planning may relate to land
use, development zones, utilities, zoning, transportation,
and many other government services.
Tenth, a number of other regional level planning activities
(such as multi-county cooperation, utility service, water
supply, transportation, economic growth, and areawide pol-
lution control) may be dealt with by the users of the model.
In sum, the River Basin Model is a general man-machine simu-
lation of a regional environment. The model interrelates
and calculates the effects of decisions made for the regional
area represented by the model on a year to year basis.
The model is not designed to show its users what ought to be
or to indicate what policies should be made. Rather, the
model generates information on and indicators of many types
of economic, governmental, social, and physical phenomenon
for the represented area. It is up to the users of the model
to decide which of the indices and measures are important to
them. Therefore, even though the model does not set a standard
for "good performance" or "success", it does contain many
measures and indices necessary to evaluate "good performance"
and/or "success" once the users have defined what these nor-
mative terms mean. Thus, the users provide the real norma-
tive input into the model through their interpretation and
evaluation of the status of the area and its water subsystem
at various points in time.
Comprehensive regional systems modeling is still in its in-
fancy. The River Basin Model represents an early point
along what will probably be a continuum of evolutionary com-
prehensive models that deal with the" regional environment
(in a broad sense of the term) and with water resources as
a subsystem within this larger system.
-------
Two forms of evolution can be made in the River Basin Model.
The first is evolving good model accounts, parameters and coef-
ficients. This will involve empirical research. Unlike most
modeling efforts, the River Basin Model is a model that has
been completed without any original data collection and with
very little equation fitting. With a comprehensive and
holistic model it is preferable to have a complete and oper-
able model before large sums of money are spent on data col-
lection. This does not mean that the model was completed
without reference to the past empirical research performed
by others. Quite to the contrary, the River Basin Model in-
corporates the findings of others in many parts of the model.
However, it must be realized that the model deals with many
relationships that have not yet been researched at all. For
instance, studies do not exist that deal with employment
selection on a micro level. On the other hand, some previous
work has been done on such things as industrial land consump-
tion by industry type and employment needs by business type.
The results from these studies have been incorporated into the
design of the River Basin Model.
A second type of evolution is to modify and add to the basic
relationships represented in the River Basin Model. It is
not claimed that the model contains every factor that a re-
gional decision-maker or water resource planner wants to con-
sider when making a decision. It does, however, contain
many factors — more than most previous models. Because of
the modular design of the model it may be modified and ad-
ditions to it may be made with a minimum of difficulty. An
advantage of the River Basin Model is that new modules are
made a part of an operable holistic model and the phenomena
represented are not treated in an isolated fashion.
Strengths and Limitations of the RIVER BASIN MODEL
Two of the strengths of the River Basin Model are that it is
a very general model and a very flexible model. It is general
in that it can be used to represent innumerable different
starting positions. It is flexible in that is may be used
by its director and players for a large number of purposes.
The limitations of the model are that the representations of
actual areas and specific problems are yet to be researched
and use of the present model with the hypothetical data base
cannot be used for forecast or prediction purposes. This
certainly does not mean that:the basic model form of the
River Basin Model could not be used to represent given areas.
-------
But the present data base of the model contains too much ag-
gregation and untested parameter values to realistically be
employed as a simulation of a particular area (as this term
in normally used) or to gain reliable estimates of future
impacts from present decisions. At best, the present con-
figuration can be said to yield results which tend to be in
the right direction and of the correct magnitude.
The model can, however, be used to represent at various levels
of sophistication the census year status of American regions
and urban areas. One of the two sample starting positions for
the River Basin Model is an area called RAYWID CITY. The data
for this regional area was derived from 1960 census data and
other sources for the Cleveland-Akron metropolitan areas in
Ohio. The following table indicates a few of the similar-
ities and differences between the local system represented
by the River Basin Model in the form of RAYWID CITY and the
actual Cleveland-Akron Region (originally chosen because the
Cuyahoga River Basin lies within its six-county boundaries).
Cleveland-Akron RAYWID CITY
Characteristic SMSA (Actual (the Cleveland
1960 Data) Akron area as
represented by
the model)
Population 2,515,000 2,508,000
Counties 6 3 aggregated
jurisdictions
Land Area (square miles) 2,424 2,519
Total Personal Income 5,658 5,600
Earned (millions)
A moderate amount of time (about six man-months) was spent
collecting and loading actual data to get a starting position
that represented the Cuyahoga River Basin to the extent that
RAYWID CITY does. More time could have been spent and a
slightly more accurate starting position could have been a-
chieved. The important point, however, is that no matter how
much time was spent on the data collection and fitting, the
River Basin Model with its present aggregation assumptions is
not able to represent the Cuyahoga River Basin as closely as
all might like, and certainly not closely enough to deal with
all of the very detailed regional problems and their solutions.
-------
For example, the smallest increment of industrial employment
is 10,000 workers. The smallest increment of land (when the
land from all six counties is included) is 40 acres. The
-mallest school facility is for 20,000 children from all age
levels. Total water pollution is represented by seven pol-
lutant types and a single pollution index is assumed to have
some value as an indicator of water quality- For a good
many purposes, these assumptions are too heroic. On the other
hand, for a number of other purposes, these assumptions allow
the model to collapse time and complexity so that the users
of the model (be they professionals, laymen, or students) are
able to grasp the interrelatedness of decisions in the economic,
social, and government spheres of a regional area.
In the Cuyahoga area, for example, the model could be used to
bring decision-makers together to look at and try to solve
the problems of a river basin that very much looks like their
own. They see and take part in the financial concern for
jobs, the interaction among separate political jurisdictions,
the legal problems of enforcement, and the multiple alter-
natives to water quality control.
The first benefit of the model in this case is the partici-
pation in a simulation of a local system over "a number of
years in which they collectively have the opportunity to de-
fine problems, develop strategies, implement plans, act upon
feedback, and evaluate the changing status of the local system
and all in a laboratory environment.
As a laboratory, the model provides an opportunity for its
users to practice making decisions for a simulated area be-
fore they are forced to do so in real life. This can be a
service to water resource planners who may need to be aware
of the broad impacts of their water resource decisions. This
can be useful to local professionals who seldom look at
their impacts on the total system. It is useful to citizens
who need to see the complexity of decision-making. It is
useful to students, who seldom get the chance to make policy
decisions during their academic careers.
The use of real data may assist some of the above types of
users to benefit from the model but even the use of a hypo-
thetical starting configuration (such as for the TWO CITY
starting position) can provide many insights into the com-
plexities of and interrelatedness among regional decisions.
Ultimately, the strength of the River Basin Model is that it
places water management decision-making into a realistic de-
cision-making environment in which the same conflicts that
emerge in real life are likely to emerge and the same types
of solutions may be developed and implemented.
-------
SECTION II
RECOMMENDATIONS
This final report and the RIVER BASIN MODEL manuals (those for
the player, director, and computer operator) should be dupli-
cated in large quantities and be distributed to the following
types of recipients:
1. EPA Training Officials
2. EPA personnel who deal with citizen action groups
3. Higher level schools that have environmental
studies programs and water resource programs
4. Multi-County Planning Agencies
Critical evaluations and suggested changes should be
encouraged from all recipients of these materials.
Several demonstration runs of the model should be
undertaken on differnet user groups:
1. Researchers - to determine if this holistic model-
ing technique has any immediate usefulness in developing a
more comprehensive approach to water quantity and quality
i s s ue s .
2. Educators (EPA and universities) - to compare the
use of the RIVER BASIN MODEL with alternative educational
techniques in 1) getting students to see the complexities of
water management decision-making in a regional context,
2) stimulating students in their outside readings, 3) devel-
oping a systematic approach to community-wide goal setting
and evaluation, and 4) generating an interest in delving
deepter into the study of water quality indexes, environmental
indexes, social dissatisfaction, costs associated with
treatment, and regulatory alternatives to control water quality
3. Multi-county Planning Agencies - to test the model as
a device for bringing persons from adjacent jurisdictions
together to look at problems in a simulated environment that
are similar to the ones they face in their own area. Also to
test the model's ability to help people of diverse backgrounds
to communicate to one another using the common language
contained in the model.
It is also recommended that if the preliminary response
to the model is favorable, EPA consider going ahead with the
further evolution of the model by fine-tuning many of its
parameters using a ten year test with actual 1960 to 1970
data. This would bring the model to the point where it would
be dealing with parameters based upon the most recent data
possible, rather than on 1960 data.
-------
SECTION III
INTRODUCTION
Water resource planners have been accustomed to devel-
oping and using computer models that focus to a large extent
on the water subsystem of the entire river basin or regional
system. This focus has been so strong that the models have
not been able to deal simultaneously with a wide number of
concerns that are directly or indirectly related to water
resource planning, such as the effect of pollution regula-
tions on employment of different segments of the labor force,
employment by different segments of the business and govern-
ment community, percent of incomes spent for various types
of water uses, externalities (market values of homes, land
use activity, assessed value of land, etc.) associated with
water quality and use, and the financing of alternative
water resource plans. In short, previous water models have
not been models of an entire regional system with the water
subsystem realistically interacting with all the other major
subsystems.
The River Basin Model is a water resource model, but it
is also a labor market model, a commercial allocation model,
a migration-housing model, a land use and assessment model,
a government operations model, and several more. It is a
regional systems model. It deals with a full range of fac-
tors that impact on the water subsystem and a wide range of
factors that are in turn affected by water resource"planning
decisions.
The River Basin Model deals vrith groups of people, cor-
porations, and government departments as they interact with
one another within a spatially constrained environment. It
differs from other water models in that it generates much
of the data used as inputs to water models as a result of
complementary processes that are a part of the regional
system. For example, a typical water model might need
inputs as to where industries are located, how much they earn,
what their tax payments are, and how many people they employ.
In other words these are normally exogenous inputs to the
model. The RIVER BASIN MODEL makes these and other factors
that relate to the local water subsystem endogenously deter-
mined factors that are either human inputs or generated by
computer simulations.
The River Basin Model recognizes that many concerns of
the water resource planner"may be handled only within the
confines of a holistic model of the regional system. To
deal with the economic, social, and governmental impacts of
water resource planning calls for a model that incorporates
-------
and simulates the interaction of many subsystems other than
that for water. Some of these subsystems are directly re-
lated to the water subsystem while others are related in only
an indirect way. The River Basin Model is an attempt to repre-
sent in an operational model all of these major subsystems,
and thereby place water resource planning within its realistic
perspective.
The River Basin Model, given its present data base, does not,
however, represent the workings of an actual regional system
with enough accuracy to be used as a predictive device. It
has been built using aggregated representations of people,
businesses, and government activities. Its primary purpose
is to give a holistic view of the workings of a hypothetical
regional system and its water subsystem and to allow its users
to interact in a dynamic decision-making environment.
10
-------
SECTION IV
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE MODEL
In a sense, the River Basin Model is a misnomer, because if
one places an emphasis on 'River" it leads one to believe
that the model is primarily concerned with water management.
The emphasis should be placed on "River Basin", and that term
should be interpreted in its broadest context as meaning a
geographical area of land. Through its two major components —
human interaction and computer simulation -- the model repre-
sents the economic, social, and governmental activity that
takes place within the geographical boundaries defined by the
river basin or more simply by a group of contiguous counties.
The model is unlike most other simulation or human interaction
models. It was not designed to accomplish any one specific
purpose. Rather it was designed to let its users represent
the major economic, social, and government interests that cause
a regional system to function and change. As part of the func-
tioning of this regional system, water is demanded by in-
dustries and municipal water suppliers and pollution is gen-
erated by manufacturing and commercial activities, by people,
and by farm activities.
The model is a computer-assisted decision-making tool, in
which a number of computer programs simulate major processes
that take place in the local system such as migration, housing
selection, employment, transportation, shopping patterns, the
actual allocation of leisure time, and water quality deter-
mination. Users of the model provide inputs to these pro-
grams on behalf of business activities in the economic sector,
and government departments in the government sector.
Normally, the users of the model are assigned decision-
making responsibility for businesses, population units, and
departments in a gaming format. This means that users become
members of teams that are assigned control of:
1. Economic Assets: cash, land, manufacturing plants,
commercial activities, and/or residences.
2. Social Assets: population units that are designated
as high income, middle income, and/or low income.
3. Government Assets: power of the budget, taxing and
assessing authority, service responsibility, and
planning power.
11
-------
The computer print-outs in time period T provide a detailed
description of the regional area represented by the model,
and the users of the model evaluate this status as individuals
as team^members, and collectively to define problems, estab-
lish objectives, develop strategies, implement plans, and
react to feedback from the new computer printout for time
period T+l.
12
-------
Regional Area (The Local System)
Since the River Basin Model is a holistic decision-making
model for a geographical area that has been pre-loaded into
the computer, the choice of the initial regional configuration
to be represented is very important.
The model deals with any geographical area and many of its
associated economic, social, governmental, and water resource
characteristics. Many of these characteristics are repre-
sented on a grid map that measures 25 square parcels of land
on a side. All of the 625 possible land parcels are of equal
size, so the length of a parcel side determines what overall
geographical size area may be represented. Or conversely,
once the total area to be represented is known, the length
of a parcel side may be determined.
The latter approach was used to set the initial parcel side
lengths for the model. It was decided early in the project
to represent the Cuyahoga River Basin area as one of the two
initial starting configurations turned over to EPA.
The Cuyahoga River Basin is located within a six county area
that also happens to be contiguous with the Cleveland and
Akron Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas. To fit that
six county area on the 25 by 25 grid resulted in a choice of
2 1/2 miles for the length of a parcel side for that particular
load configuration. Thus each square was equated to 6.25
square miles in area.
The length of a parcel side may be changed rather easily when
the model is loaded, but a realistic range of lengths would
be from about .1 to 4 miles and a number of other model para-
meters should be simultaneously altered to correspond with the
areal scale change.
Figure 1 shows a map of the economic activity represented by
the model for the Cleveland-Akron area. The area is actually
called Raywid City in order not to mislead users of the model
that a full-fledged attempt had been made to represent that
actual area. A research plan has been devised, however, that
would fine-tune the model to represent an actual river basin
area using 1970 census data. The scope of this project would
be about four man-years and a moderate amount of computer time.
Figure 2 shows the representation of the water component with-
in the Raywid City area. Note the map shows that rivers flow
through the centers of parcels of land, each parcel length of
13
-------
1AYHIO CITY
Figure 1
WATER QUALITY MAP
9fl 100 102 104 10d 1(18 110 112
11* 118
12-
14
16
19
20
22
24
2R
30
32
34
36
40
4?
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
4
1...,
1. 5.
1
. f>.
f 3
r 3
1 1
. S.|. S.I
— 1 — 1
— 1 — 1
. . . . 1 — 1
1 1
— 1 — 1
— 1 — 1
1 1
. S.I. 5.|
1 1
1 |
1 1
1 1
. 6.1. 6.1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 t
1 1
\ \
1 f 51
1 1
1 1
1 F S|
1 1
1 1
f 11 1
1 1
1 1
r 11 F i|c
1 1
1 1
r 11 F 1|r
1 1
1 1
F M F 11
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
TO 72 74 7ft
TOP PnK: tens'1*
1..
. 5.1.
....!..
....!..
1..
1..
1 ..
1 ..
....!..
.5.1.
1..
....!..
1 ..
1..
.6.1.
1..
IKA
1
1
-.1.
5. 1.
.. 1.
..1.
.. 1.
..1.
-.1.
.. 1.
s. 1 .
.. 1.
.. 1.
»-. 1.
.. 1.
.. 1 .
6. 1.
..1.
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
lull1! 3I1L 4|nr> IMF IIP', 3IR«lB|Rflll|RA?OIRA21 1 1 1
1 1 1 6 | | | 1 | 1 1 1 1
1 -1 man | | | 1 1 1 1 1 1
3|RH13I«S 4|F(1 1 IRC11 lnr,l7|o'523|R|)12|PS S|FO 11 IRA27I
1 1 1 6 1 | | | | | 1 | |
1 1 |«nn | | | 1 I | I I I
In Alr>|°A31|ant7IRH72|RA17IR016|I!Al?|PG 3I»A1S| f 4ISA10I
1 1 1 1 |7<7| | 1 | | 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 l»on A 3 1 3 A 4 1 1 1 P. A 7 1 |RA6|F1
1 1 1 1 1 1 " 1 1 | 1 151'
1 1 1 1 1 I^O 1 1 1 1 IMUTRI
51 F 51 1 F 5| | | |EL 1 |R A 1 0 1 AV< DIRECTION OF FLOW
F 51 F 51
1 1
1 1
F 31 F 11
1 1
1 1
F 1| F 11
1 1
1 1
F 3|OA 9|
1 1
1 1
F 31 F 11
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
F 11 1
1 1 1
1 1
f 11 1
1 1
1 1
A 7| |
1 1
1 1
F 51 F 51
1 1
1 1
F 51 F 51
1 1
1 1
1 1
t 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
114 116
F
f
F
F
F
F
F
f
F
f
r
...
F
F
1
1
1 16
1
1
1 It
1
31
1 20
1
11
1 2?
1
11
1 24
1
1 26
1
1
1 2S
1
51
1 30
1
51
1 32
1
51
1 34
1
51
1 36
1
31
1 36
1
31
1 40
t
1
1
31
1 44
1
1
1 46
1
1
1
— *
1 50
1
1
1 52
1
51
1 54
•1
51
I 56
1
1
1 58
1
1
| 60
1
118
AND PPEP .'tT ING I F.
FA»^ TVPL IF F-ftfy ON PARCFL
°pw: S!PFACr W(\TCI> nijfltlTY RflTIMG
orn: unosr PTLLIJTAKT
NO WATER FinMING
BETWEEN PARCELS
X-4
-------
"Avjjn CITY
WA'fR HAP
101 10? in* 106 ton no 11? il« 11*
1....
1? I....
1
14 1....
I
1
1
1
11 1
1
1....
20 1
1 ....
1
?7 1
1
1 ....
24 1 ....
1 .
t
". 1
1
]
21 1
I
1
'•> 1
1
1
3? 1
1
1
14. 1
1
1
3* 1
1
l» 1
1
1
40 1
1
1
<•? 1
1
1
4» 1
1
1
46 \
1
1
44 1
1
1
<•> I
1
1
5' 1
1
1
'•i, 1
1
1
66 1
1
1
5 1
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
6001 1 1 1 1
111 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
600< 5111 1 1 1
11 < 11 1 1 1 1
< 1 1 1 1
1 5io< 501 1 4?|
1 1 1 < H I I 1 1 1
1 < 1 1 1
I 5101 45< 44< 411
1 11 1 H < 11 < 11 !
1 1 .< < 1
1 5in< -soil 1 1
1 11 < 11 1 I 1
1 < 1 1 1
1 1 4611 | |
1 1 11 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 4001 1 1
1 1 tl 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
1 • I ?ool I |
1 1 11 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
1 I Z5*< 255< 1R5< IBO
1 I 11 < 11 < It < 11 <
1 1 < < < <
1 1 1 711 1
1 ! 1 11 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
I | 1 70< 7<1< 71
I | I II < II < II
I I I < <
I I I I I
I I I I I
1 I I I I
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
I 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1- 1
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1
C l«1
' 1 1
•50
11
- 6B
175
1 1
175
11
4*.
IPO
11
no
11
?n
11
175
1 1
no
11
170
11
171
11
1
|
|
)
1
1
1
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
t
|
in 1
1 1 I
1
65 1
11 1
11 1
7"l 55
11 1 11
1
75| 60
11 1 11
I
151< 75
11 < 11
<
1511
11 1
1
1621
11 1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
5001 510
1
511 59
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
t
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
15
1 |
in
1 1
40
11
45
11
100 10? 104 10ft lOfl 110 11?
(MCO)
FL^W
QF MJR^Arp
FL TN HATTR
1.5
>fiv< niopr.Tirw OF FLO
NO HATER FLPWINO
^FTWEFN PfiPCELS
-------
the river has a water quality rating (a high number is less
desirable than a low number on this water quality scale), and
which of the seven major pollutants is most responsible for
the poor water quality rating. More about this will be said
later.
The users of the River Basin Model are assigned responsibility
for allocating all of the major economic, social, governmental,
and water resources for the local system (the area and its
activities represented on the grid map) on a year to year
basis. The director of the model (the person conducting the
run of the model) makes a number of decisions for the major
decision-makers that are outside the local system. A number
of computer programs are also available to simulate part of the
actions between this local system and the rest of the world.
The initial starting position will show a particular set of
allocations of the local system's resources and their effects
on the status of the local area. The users of the model eval-
uate their own particular status within the local system as
well as the status of the area as a whole. They then inter-
act with one another in a dynamic decision-making environment
in which they collectively have control over the local water
quality decisions that will be made, implemented, and reacted
to. Some of the model players may have apparently only mar-
ginal interest in the local water quality issues because they
are pre-occupied with running schools, building roads, earning
incomes, producing manufactured goods, building housing, arid
supplying local goods and services. Others will have maybe
more interest as they attempt to be elected into public office,
run the planning department, collect taxes, recreate, and de-
velop a generally pleasant environment for their new resi-
dential subdivisions. Still others might have a direct and
pressing interest in the local water quantity and quality as
they attempt to set and enforce water quality standards, sup-
ply municipal water, use surface water in their production
process, and benefit from major water-based recreation areas.
In short, the entire local system (at a certain level of de-
tail) is represented by the model and its users, and water
decisions are placed within their realistic context of having
different importance to different individuals as a function
of their occupation, location, resources, and personal in-
clinations.
16
-------
Activities
The major activities represented in the model may be divided
into three major sectors (economic, social, and governmental)
and one major subsector (the water component). Each of these
sectors has a number of activities that interact with the
activities of the other sectors.
The major economic activity is the business operation. Four
broad types of businesses are represented in the model: basic
industry (manufacturing mostly) that produces goods for export
to national markets, service industries that supply goods and
services to local system buyers, residential developers and
operators who make housing available to the local population,
and farming activity which consumes the majority of the land
in the region.
Figure 3 shows the detailed economic activities that fall under
each of these four broad headings. The economic assets of
the local system are divided up among economic teams for their
management. In addition to businesses, vacant land, cash, and
stock ownership may be given to teams for their use as they
see fit. Teams may be set up in such a way that they are
specialized (have only heavy industry, only residences, only
land, etc.) or diversified (a mixture of several types of
assets).
The Social Sector has one basic resource and that is people.
The local system's population is divided into clusters of
500 people (or some other size if a program change is made)
that are called population units (El's). These Pi's are
further characterized by an income class (high, middle, or low),
average educational level, average savings, number of regis-
tered voters, etc. Associated with income class are a number
of specific characteristics such as number of workers, number
of students, and many preference functions.
Social Teams are created by giving a team decision control for
all the Pi's of a given class on specified parcels. A good
number of the actions taken by Pi's during the course of a year
in the local system are determined by computer allocation
models, but the social teams may affect these by making time
allocation, boycott, cash transfer, and vote decisions for the
Pi's under their control.
A significant part of the River Basin Model centers around
how Pi's function within the local system during the course
17
-------
Figure 3
Economic Activities in the £IVER BASIN MODEL
Easic "Industry Csells output at markets outside the local
system}
Manufacturing (roughly equivalent to the 2-digit SIC code
industries)
FL - Furniture and Lumber
SG — Stone, Clay, and Glass
MP - Primary Metals
MF - Fabricated Metals
NL - Nonelectrical Machinery
EL - Electrical Machinery
TE - Transportation Equipment
FO - Food
TA - Textiles, Apparel, and Leather
PA - Paper
CR - Chemical, Plastics and Rubber
Non-Manufacturing
NS - National Services (such as insurance, research, etc.)
Local Commercial (sells output competitively to local system
demanders)
BG-- Business Goods
BS - Business Services
PG - Personal Goods
PS - Personal Services
Residential (provide housing space)
RA - Single Family
RB - Garden Apartments (6 times the housing space as
RA housing)
RC - High-rise Apartments (25 times the housing space as RA)
Agricultural (consume land and use varying amounts of fertilizer!
Fl - Fruit & Nut
F2 - Vegetable
F3 - Other Field Crops
F4 - Cash Grain
F5 - Tobacco
F6 - Cotton
F7 - Poultry
F8 - Dairy
F9 - Livestock
F10 - Ranchers
Fll - General
18
-------
of each round of play which represents one year of time in
the local area. Figure 4 shows the actions of Pi's as they
are affected by the major operating programs.
The Government Sector is comprised of decision-makers who are
responsible for a wide vareity of public activities: budget
making (appropriations and revenues), land and building assess-
ment, education, municipal services, transportation, planning
and zoning, and utilities. The latter activity contains within
it the water office that is responsible for the supply of
public water. The Water Quality Office may be a part of this
department of a separate agency.
19
-------
Figure 4
Example of How Population Units Are Affected by the
Major Operating Programs of the Model
Major Operating
Programs
Effect on Population Unit
Migration
Water System
Depreciation
Employment
Transportation
School Allocation
Park Allocation
Time Allocation
Commercial Allocation
Pi's move to the local system, find
and change housing within the local
system, leave the local system
Poor water quality incareses dis-
satisfaction and high coliform count
increases health costs and time lost
due to illness.
Housing that depreciates becomes less
attractive in the migration process.
Pi's are assigned to full and part
time jobs that maximize net income
(salary minus transportation costs),
employers search for best educated
workers.
Pi's travel to work by the mode and
route that minimizes total costs
(dollar plus time), Pi's travel to
shopping along the minimum cost routes
Students of Pi's are assigned to
public or private schools based upon
the quality of public schools.
Pi's are assigned to parks within a
specified distance of where they live.
Involuntary expenditures of leisure
time are calculated as a function of
the success of getting part time
jobs, public adult education and the
time spent on transportation.
Pi's are assigned to stores at which
the total costs are minimized (price
plus transportation to the store).
20
-------
Water Component
The water component is a subsector that, in a sense, cuts
across the other three sectors or is a part of each. For
example, some of the industrial activities in the economic
sector use Surface water in their production process and all
other economic businesses have some need for municipally
supplied water. Population units in the social sector use
water as a function of their income class and the type of
housing they inhabit. In the government sector, the Utility
Department is responsible for supplying the municipal water
needs of the residents of its jurisdiction.
Each of the surface water users requires a specified quality
of water and must either treat the water they intake or pur-
chase water from a source outside of the local system. Every
water user adds some pollutants to the water it returns to
the water system. If left untreated, these water discharges
may lower the quality of water of the body of water into which
they are dumped. Since water users and polluters are located
in a geographical space, activities upstream and downstream
are affected differently by the dynamically created water
quality conditions.
21
-------
The River Basin Model As A Systemic Model
The River Basin Model may be characterized as a systemic
model. That is, it is a model of the interactive workings of
the system it represents. The River Basin Model is not a pre-
dictive, projective, or normative model. It does not predict
a future state of the area represented, although it does show
the immediate status of the urban area given all the resources
of the system and the policies attached to the use of those
resources. Therefore, it is an impact model (one year at a
time) rather than any kind of predictive model.
The River Basin Model is not a projection model because it
does not extrapolate present circumstances and relationships
into the future. In other words, the user of the model does
not "turn it on" and generate a set of future states for the
area represented. The model cycles in one year increments,
and in a sense, it could be used for projection if the user
made the year to year decisions for the urban area for a
twenty or thirty year time period. But because of the broad
scope of the model and the wide range of decisions that are
based upon the results of previous decisions in the economic,
social, and government sectors, this particular use of the
model should not be looked on as a simple task.
Furthermore, the River Basin Model is not a normative or
optimizing model. It will not itself generate optimal policy
decisions. The model produces a thorough set of indicators
and measures of the regional status at discrete points in%
time (the end of each year) and it is up to the user of the
model to apply his own set of objective and subjective cri-
teria to evaluate the absolute or relative quality of the
environment. For example, the model will generate measures
of water quality along stretches of the river, pollution
dumped by various activities^ local water deficiencies, poor
schools, economic rates of return, housing quality, municipal
services quality, social dissatisfaction, etc. and the user
of the model must determine the values to be placed on these
measures as policy decisions regarding the use of the regional
resources are made for future years.
A systemic urban model such as the River Basin Model endeavors
to represent the workings of a regional system and its major
subsystems. This is done by selecting the major activities
that comprise the urban system (people in households, busi-
nesses, and government agencies) and representing the actions
that they pursue on a year to year basis. Population groups
reside in housing, earn incomes, purchase goods and services,
22
-------
take part in leisure activities, utilize government and in-
stitutional services, transport themselves as they interact
with activities that are spatially separated from their places
of residence, and use water. Businesses purchase goods and
services, hire labor, require utilities, produce output, sell
output, pay taxes, invest earnings, use the transportation
subsystem, use water, and generate pollutants that may be
treated. Government agencies receive funds, purchase neces-
sary goods and service, hire labor, provide service, and set
policy. Most of the departments compete with the water
quality office for a slice of the local budget.
23
-------
SECTION V
USES AND USERS OF THE MODEL
Broadly speaking, there are two types of users of the model
when it is employed using a gaming format: the director and
the players.
In each use of the model the director sets the major purpose
for which the model will be employed. Usually the specific
group of players he has in mind will determine his choice
of the executive options, such as the starting regional con-
figuration and any round 0 inputs to modify this basic con-
figuration.
As shown in Figure 5, the director may affect the simulated
region before play begins by selecting the basic configura-
tion and making changes in it. He may also affect the year
to year outside influences on the local system by, among other
things, acting as the Federal and State governments with re-
gard to granting aid and imposing regulations. For example,
the director could act as an outside government that imposes
rigid water quality standards. He could also act as a higher-
level government that grants financial aid for the construc-
tion of waste treatment facilities, for comprehensive water
resource planning, for enforcement and monitoring, etc. The
following list is a sample of the executive options available
to a director.
1. Choice of Initial Configuration: TWO CITY or RAYWID CITY
2. Round 0 Decisions:
a. Change Economic Team Holdings - many possibilities.
b. Change Social Team Holdings - many possibilities.
c. Change Government Service Levels - give schools and/
or municipal services higher or lower use indexes.
d. Change Local Tax Structures - many possibilities.
e. Change Salaries, Prices and/or Rents.
f. Change Maintenance Levels.
To achieve:
a. more or less team specialization or more or less
equitable starting positions among teams.
b. create more or less neighborhood and/or single-
class control.
c. make neighborhood attractiveness vary by altering
the quality of public services.
25
-------
Figure 5
INPUTS TO THE RIVER BASIN MODEL
DESIGNATION OF INITIAL
CITY STATUS0
REAL CITY
DATA
HYPOTHETICAL
CITY DATA
INPUTS ^
SELECTION OF
EXECUTIVE OPTIONS,,
MODULES
USED
PARAMETERS
USED
INPUTS k.
TECHNIQUE FOR
EVALUATION OF CITY STATUS,
SIMULATION
GAME
FORMAT
CITY STATUS,
ECONOMIC SOCIAL GOVERNMENTAL
TRANSPORTATION
26
-------
shift to or away from dependence upon property,
sales, and/or income taxes.
alter rates of return to economic sector or savings
for social sector.
make area as a whole or parts of it more or less
deteriorated.
27
-------
Using the Model
The River Basin Model is a tool that has utility which is de-
pendent upon the quantity and quality of data loaded into its
files, the executive options employed by the director, and
the technique used to evaluate the city status and generate
inputs to the model. These three types of inputs to the
model are illustrated in Figure 5.
Users will use the tool in a way that they find best suits
their purposes. It is a flexible model that will take on
different forms in the hands of different users. The River
Basin Model provides a framework that is common for all re-
gional planners (much as a chemistry lab and the associated
chemistry theory provide users of the lab with equal access
to the facilities and accumulated knowledge). It allows the
planner to use this framework and the computer programs as-
sociated with it to achieve a wide range of objectives (much
as the chemist may use the lab for instructional, research
or production purposes).
Although the River Basin Model as presently developed will not
satisfy every need of the planner, it does allow him the op-
portunity to deal with a large number of regional phenomena
which up to now he has not been able to deal with in a simu-
lated and collapsed-time environment.
Users of the model are given control over all the resources
of the iocal area being represented. Some of the local ac-
tivities use the water subsystem while others do not. As a
result of this, the water quantity and quality is of varying
importance to the various activities represented by the model.
The River Basin Model is oriented toward user requirements
such as generality of representation, flexibility of change,
ease of inputs, and readability of output. The model pro-
vides, among other things, detail on the repercussions of
various water quantity and quality levels and on the effects
of water resource decisions on people and business activities.
It also illustrates the impact of other decisions on the water
subsystem itself.
A wide range of decisions and their consequences may be illus-
trated by the model. For example, in the economic sector
the impacts of pollution regulation decisions may be shown.
In the social sector, the effect on housing selection, em-
ployment, shopping, and leisure activities are influenced
by water resource policies. The impacts of many government
28
-------
decisions may be shown: comprehensive planning programs,
quality of life improvements, and many more.
The users of the model may make a wide range of private and
public policy decisions which affect the water subsystem
and others. The detailed and summary computer output reveals
the interactions of these decisions and the collective impact
they have on the environmental quality of the represented
area. Since each cycle of the model represents the passage
of a year of time in the area being represented, the model
may be run for as many cycles as the users find desirable.
29
-------
Model Features
User interaction in the River Basin Model
requires fewer model assumptions on the part of the
designer than most previous models because the_users
provide much of the nonquantifiable relationships
and inputs to represented system
allows realistic human interaction and reaction
allows political repercussions associated with water
resource decisions, reversal of policy, etc.
allows human involvement in the decision process
The River Basin Model deals with:
External Inputs - area characteristics, including
the present water subsystem and quality levels
Internal Inputs - wide range of water resource,
economic, social, and government decisions
Internal Ofctputs - changes in the resources of the
individual decision-makers
External Outputs - changes in the area characteris-
tics, allocations, assignments, matching of supply
and demand, insufficiency of government services,
and complete status of the water subsystem.
The River Basin Model is useful to citizens as well as
planners because the model output is designed in such a way
that it is comprehensive, easy to understand, and quick to
retrieve. Thus, regardless of the sophistication of the user,
the model will provide the necessary le^zel of information upon
which evaluations can be made and decisions can be generated.
The cycles of the model (each set of computer output) repre-
sent one year in the life of the area represented by the model.
Users provide the evaluation of the current status of the
area (in its economic, social, governmental, spatial, and
water quantity and quality dimensions). Through a wide range
of decision alternatives, they are able to devise strategies
and implement policies in an attempt to achieve any set of
goals or objectives they devise, as individuals or collectively.
30
-------
These decision inputs may be generated in a simulation en-
vironment (in which a single user or group of users such as
water resource planners are given control over all the re-
sources of the local system) or in a game environment (in
which individual users such as local officials, students and/
or citizens are given control over various resources in the
local system).
The River Basin Model has been designed in a modular fashion,
so that new modules may be added or existing ones replaced
or modified at minimal expense. This modularity means that
it is relatively easy to:
redefine the model (change parameters and coef-
ficients)
load various regions
This modular feature of the River Basin Model allows it to be
truly evolutionary, thus making it a framework that can con-
tinually be improved and modified for specific uses.
31
-------
SECTION VI
MODEL OUTPUT
The model describes and interrelates many of the actual eco-
nomic, social, and governmental activities that comprise re-
gional areas. The metropolitan area represented by the model
is described by three types of computer output: maps, tabu-
lar statistics, and indicators.
The maps show the spatial characteristics of the represented
area. The tabular output shows general information of interest
to the users of the model as well as specific data concerning
businesses in the economic sector, groups of people in the
social sector, and government departments in the government
sector. The indicators are measures such as the economic
rate of return, the social dissatisfaction level, the quality
of local government services, and water quality indicators.
Of the dozens of maps, the Economic Status Map (Figure 6)
stands out as the one of single most importance. Any repre-
sented area may be defined by spatially locating land use ac-
tivity, the highway network and the water system in any de-
sired pattern on the grid map. Although this map does not
show the local water system, there ace a number of maps that
do.
All physical objects (industries, stores, housing, schools,
government facilities, roads, rivers, and treatment plants)
are located in a specified section of the regional area.
Most facilities are located on parcels of land (identified
by two even coordinate numbers). Roads are loacted (concep-
tually) along the boundaries (sides) of the square land par-
cels (identified by an even-odd or odd-even number). A road
on the map actually represents all the major and minor roads
that connect an origin and a destination at each end of the
transportation link. Transportation terminals are located
at the corners of parcels (identified by two odd-numbered
coordinates).
Other local system phenomena are also spatially located.
Population units are housed in residences on parcels, service
districts and farms are defined in terms of contiguous parcels.
Figure 7 is a list of the map output separated into ten cate-
gories.
33
-------
iwocnr
ECONOMIC ST»TUS MAP
70 T2
76 7fl
86 8« to 12
100 102 10* 106 108 110 11? 114
o too. too. too. ioo. 100. 100. ioo. ioo. 100. ioo. ioo. loo.
83. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 10". 1010
0
01
14 0
« « • .........
o ion. loo. loo. loo. 100. loo. 100. 100. 100. loo. 100. 100. MB si. loo. 100. too. loo. too. mo. 100. 101. ino. mo. looo
o ............................................... . ................ a [[[ °
0... ......... 8 ........... °
,6 0 ..... ....... H ........... °
o 100. loo. loo. 100. 100. loo. ioo. 100. loo. loo. 100. 100. sen sa. loo. too.6ioo. 100. ioo. 100. too. 100. too. 100. 1010
o [[[ o [[[ o
c ............ B ........... o
IS 0 ............ B .... * ...... 0
o loo. ioo. 100. 100. ioo. 100. 100. too. ioo. ioo. ino. ioo. «eo «i. ioo. ioo.6ioo. loo. too. in. ioo. ioo. to", too. 1000
D [[[ a [[[ 0
0
20 0
0 100. 100.
c. e
. H
ioo. ioo. too. too. too. too. ioo. ioo. too. loo.t enn
0
..........'020
.'too. 100.6100. too. loo. ioo. inn. too. 11?. too. 1000
0
O ......... .8 .£ .0 .8 40BC 40.G 40. F 41. ........0
270........... .«•» IUR4 l.P.4 2.14 4. ........ 0 2?
0 100. 100. 100. tOO. 100. 100. 100. 100.1 96.1 81.t 38.1 88.1 74ni 78.1 81.I 14. 100. 100. 100. 100. tOO. 110. 110. 100. 1000
3
-I.
0 . . . . . . .E .F .C . .C 40HF 41.C 41.C 4010 40. ....... 0
24 0.. ......... ,°» 10°1 Z.ftB 3.19 IIRA 4, . . . . . . . 3 74
o ioo. too. too. too. loo. ioo. too. 100.1 96. t ai.i pa. ip.i •i'.fii 21.2 i6.t 1211 a*, loo. ioo. ino. ion. 101. ton. too. 1003
.0
0
26 0
'
n
.& 41.F 41.F 41.F 4005 ?O.A
.0 4110 40
' 0 100. 100. tOO. 100. tOO. 100. 110. 100. 100.1 86.1 62.1 34.1 218» 12 31. 110. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 111. 101. lonj
0.*.'......F 40CO 41.F 41HO 41.C 41. .........0
)» 0 14 ICR4 1.1.'. 1H7A 4.P.4 3 .' . . .03!
o. ion. ioo. too. ioo. 100. no. ;oo. ioo. ioo. 100.1 9321 31.1 3om 40.1 46. too. ioo. ioo. too. ioo. ioo. ioo. no. ioo. 1003
0. •..*•'.
*0 8 i : i
D 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. tOO. 100. 100.
0 .0 HC
0 . H
tooo too.i mm
88. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 101. 100. 1030
42 0........
0 100. IOO. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100.
0 . H
O.H
too. too. tooo too. aiH
81. 110. 100. 100. 110. IOO. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100.
100. 100. 100. 100. 101. 100. 100. 100
81. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 100. 101. 100.
zn.Ntsr, i«\,i USE zcni^r, L-SE
tNTEHSECTtONS
» TYPE 1 TF»M!N«L
f TYPE 2 TFRMIN4L
• TYPE 5 TE11INAL
— II TYPE i an«o
• • HH TYPE 2 P-OAD
ft N< TYPE 3 10«0
ca oo jumsotcrioN
loo. ino. ioo. ioo. 100. ioo. no. ioo
0 100. IOO. 100. 100. 107. 100. 130. 100,
0
0
91 0. . • . . . . ,
o 101. too. loo. ion, 101. [oo, no. ioo,
Q...................... ...............
100. tOO. 1000 100.
.0
0
0
100. 100. 1000 100.
88. 100. 100. ion. 100. lOO. IOU. inil. luu. iiiu. tu^f. it*»-*
3
3
C if.
ni. ioo. loo. 100. ioo. too. too. ioo. too. ion. ioo. 1003
in. ico. lino ico. tan 89. loo. ino. loo. no. loo. ioo. ion. too. no. id. 1133
0.. ...... ..O.K.. ......... C
•0 0.....''...O.H........ ...3
-------
Figure 7
MAP OUTPUT
Map Category
Commercial
Government
Service
Water System
Farms
Property Values
Land Use and
Regulations
Parks
Social
Characteristics
Map Number
10.1
10.2
10.3
10.4
10.5
10.6
10.7
10.8
10.9
10.10
10.11
10.12
10.13
10.14
10.15
10.16
10.17
10.18
10.19
10.20
10.21
10.22
10.23
10.24
Physical 10.25
Characteristics
Government
Facilities
10.26
Map Name
Personal Goods Allocation Map
Personal Services Allocation Map
Business Commercial Allocation Map
Municipal Service Map
School Map
Utility Map
Water Usage Map
Water Quality Map
Municipal Treatment
Municipal Intake and Outflow Point Map
Surface Water Map
Farm Runoff Map
River Basin Flood Plain Map
Farm Map
Farm Assessed and Market Value Map
Market Value Map
Assessed Value Map
Economic Status Map
Highway Map
Planning and Zoning Map
Parkland Usage Map
Socio-Economic Distribution Map
Demographic Map
Social Decision-Maker Map
Topographical Restriction Map
Government Status Map
-------
Tabular Computer Output
The economic, social, and government teams receive computer
output that describes the details of the resources over which
they have decision-making power. In addition to this team-
specific information, general and summary statistics describing
the represented area are available as common information to
all teams. A list of all the tabular output is shown in
Figure 8.
To provide examples of the tabular output, the following de-
scriptions of migration and the water system are provided.
1. Migration - The basic population grouping in the model
is the population unit (Pi). A Pi is designated as being a
member of a socio-economic class (H, M, or L).
Pi's move into, within, and out of the local system in response
to available employment opportunities, housing.quantity and
quality, and a number of other factors. Figure 9 shown a
sample of the summary migration statistics for an area and
a portion of the detailed statistics.
The Migration-Housing computer routine calculates dissatis-
faction (environmental and personal); develops a pool of
movers comprised of the population displaced by housing demo-
lition, a percent of the most dissatisfied, a percent of the
total population (random movers), natural population growth,
and the in-migrants; and moves the members of this pool into
housing that has adequate capacity and quality.
A certain percentage of each income class that are either en-
employed or underemployed outmigrate from the local system.
Other movers who cannot find adequate local housing also be-
come outmigrants.
Referring to Figure 9, the Pi's living in the residences (or
considering to live in the residences) on parcel 9422 see a
health index of 50 (the higher the index the worse the situ-
ation) . The time indexes are calculated only for the income
classes actually living on the parcel. For example, on parcel
9422 there were PM groups living there and because of the dis-
tance and mode used to travel to work, 25 units of dissatis-
faction were added to the personal index. Another 59 units
were added to the index because of the amount of leisure
time that was spent in involuntary pursuits.
36
-------
Output
Category
Migration
Water System
Employment
Commercial
Allocation
Social
Sector
Economic
Sector
Social and
Economic Summaries
Figure 8
TABULAR OUTPUT
Code
Number Output Name
1.1 Environmental Indexes
1.2 Personal Indexes
1.3 Dissatisfaction Cutoffs
1.4 Migration Detail
1.5 Migration Statistics
1.6 Migration Summary
2.1 Water User Effluent Content
2.2 River Quality During Surface Water Process
2.3 Water User Costs and Consumption
2.4 Coliform and Pollution Index Values
3.1 Employment Selection Information for PL Class
3.2 Employment Selection Information for PM Class
3.3 Employment Selection Information for PH Class
3.4 Part-Time Work Allocation for PH Class
3.5 Part-Time Work Allocation for PM Class
3.6 Part-Time Work Allocation for PL Class
3.7 Employment Summary
4.1 Personal Goods Allocation Summary
4.2 Personal Services Allocation^Summary
4.3 Business Goods Allocation Summary
4.4 Business Services Allocation Summary
4.5 Government Contracts
4.6 Terminal Demand and Supply Table
4.7 Terminal Allocation Map
5.1 Dollar Value of Time
5.2 Social Decision-Maker Output
5.3 Social Boycotts
6.1 Farm Output
6.2 Residence Output
6.3 Basic Industry Output
6.4 Commercial Output
6.5 Economic Boycott Status
6.6 New Construction Table
6.7 Land Summary
6.8 Loan Statement
6.9 Financial Summary
7.1 Number of Levels of Economic Activity
Controlled by Teams
7.2 Employment Centers
7.3 Economic Control Summary for Teams
7.4 Social Control Summary for Teams
7.5 Social Control Summary Totals
7.6 Economic Graphs for Teams
7.7 Social Graphs for Teams
37
-------
Government Detail 8.1 Assessment Report
8.2 Water Department Reports
8.3 Sampling Station Report: Point Source
Quality
8.4 Sampling Station Report: Ambient Quality
8.5 Utility Department Report
8.6 Utility Department Finances
8.7 Municipal Services Department Report
8.8 Municipal Services Department Finances
8 ,'9 Municipal Services Department Construction
Table
8.10 Planning and Zoning Department Report
8.11 School Department Report
8.12 School Department Finances
8.13 School Department Construction Table
8.14 Highway Department Finances
8.15 Highway Department Construction Table
8.16 Rail Company Report
8.17 Bus Company Report
8.18 Chairman Department Finances
8.19 Tax Summary
8.20 Financial Summary
Summary 9.1 Demographic and Economic Statistics
Statistics
38
-------
Figure 9
iwor.i i Y
IM USllNM INIH XI S
MFAl TH INHhX
R'llIND P
>********»**»*»»**»*#*»********»*****»»0#$*f******
CROWDING KACTHIIA VHANSP. INVDL. PERSONAL
LOCATION MS rrrrcT CHFCT fFrrr.T TOTAL CLASS TIME RICH. TIME INOFX
9422
9622
50 LOW 0
MIDDLE. 25
HIGH 0
25
25 LOW
25
0 0
0 59
0 0
0 76
50
134
50
126
***»********«***«**»**«***«*«*«*******************«**«******««,«,****««***«**********«*****(>****»*«**»*«***************
TWOCITY
ENVIRONMENTAL INDEXES ROUND 2
*************** ** **********e*«*4 *************** ******************************«* *********«#***************************
NEIGHBORHOOD INDEX
U>
VO:
9422
9672
POLLUTION ' RESIDENCE WELFARE ENVIRONMENTAL
LOCATION INDEX CLASS QUALITY RENT MS SCHOOL OR TAXES TOTAL INDEX
0 LOW 19 0 100 0 12 131
MIDDLE 39 0 100 0 24 163
HIGH 49 0 100 0 24 173
0 LOW 44 0 100 0 16 160
MIDDLE 64 0 100 0 18 'l62
HIGH 74 0 100 0 18 192
131
163
173
160
182
192
******************************* te ******** ***********************************************************************************
TWOCITY
MIGRATION DETAIL ROUND ?
>*ft************************************************************t**********************************************************
SOCIAL NUMBER
DECISION OF
PARCEL OWNER TYPE MAKER PI'S
CLASS
QUALITY OF
LIFE
NUMBER
MOVED
FROM/TO
PARCEL
REASON FOR
MOVING
EMPLOYER
9422
G RA 1
LOW
MIDDLE
mi
297
1 CAME FROM 10030 DISPLACEMENT 9828
1 WEflT TO 9636 DISSATISFACTION 9626
9622
D RA 1
LOW
286
MIGRATION DDT TO PTRSriNAL OISSAT
LOW r.i ASS
JO1* -2
jim- i
nmsinf
n
14
o o
0 10
o o
o o
MIDDLE CLASS
FROM/TO JIIR-1 JUS-? JDR-3 OUTSIDE
JUP-1 IS 2 0 4
JIJII-? 0 0 O 0
JIIH-T 000 0 -
OUTSIDE 010 D
HIGH CLASS
r»OM/TO JUH-1 JUR-2 JUR-3 OUTSIOC
16 6 1 11
JIJR-1
JIIR-?
JIJR-1
nuisior
0
0
o
0
0
o
0
0
o
-------
Note that there are six items that comprise the environmental
index and their contributions to that index are listed in the
output. The number of population units that move to and from
each residential parcel and their reasons for moving are also
shown'in the output.
The purpose of showing Figure 9 is not to explain how the mi-
gration process works but to illustrate that the full results
of the process are illustrated on tabular computer output that
can be of great assistance to the users of the model in their
decision-making.
2. The Water System - Figure 10 shows some tabular computer
output for a local system river (River 2). This output shows
the location of each segment of the river, the quality rating
and major pollutant, the time period in the water's passage
through a parcel, the amount of each of the seven pollutant
types, and the volume of the water.
Once again, it is not important that the reader fully under-
stand this information at this time. It is illustrated here
only for the purpose of showing the type of tabular computer
output generated each round as part of the model operation.
Indicators
The model output is also expressed in some instances by indi-
cators. Major indicators in the economic sector are net
worth for teams and rates of return on individual investments.
Major indicators in the social sector are the per capita per-
sonal incomes and the quality of life indexes. Major govern-
ment indicators are the service use indexes for schools, parks,
and municipal services and congestion of highways. Major
indicators in the local water system are the water quality
ratings.
Figure 11 shows the average quality of life index for the
population units (by class) controlled by a social team.
Figure 12 shows the Water Quality Map for TWO CITY in Round 2.
The River Basin Model As A Set Of Regional Accounts
Since the River Basin Model is a model of an entire regional
system, there is the requirement that accounts balance within
the local system. For example, every expenditure for one
activity is an income for another activity. Similarly, lo-
cal sales and income from services rendered are actually
40
-------
Figure 10
T k'C C 1 TV
RIVER OUVLITY DURING SURFACE V.'ATFR PROCfSS: RIVER
LOCATION
9630
9630
"C.30
9430
9630
9630
9632
9632
9632
9632
9632
9432
9432
943?
9432
9432
9232
9232
9732
9232
9232
9132
9032
9032
9032
9032
8S32
8832
8432
8832
8432
8632
8632
A632
8632
8*32
643?
143?
8432
• 432
B232
8232
8232
8232
1232
• 032
"032
8032
803?
8032
7832
7832
7832
7832
7832
7612
7632
7432
7*32
7&32
7*12
7*32
7*37
741?
•7417
QUALITY TIKE
10
10
10
10
72
63
63
63
63
92
72
72
72
72
91
91
91
91
91
0
91
91
91
91
0
91
91
91
91
0
91
81
81
81
0
f}i
81
81
81
0
81
81
81
81
0
81
• 1
81
81
23
81
81
81
81
67
81
81
81
81
23
81
81
81
81
0
81
FROM OTHFH PARCELS
AFTER AGING
BFFOP.F BIO CHANGE
AFTER BIO CHANGE
EFFLUENT AOOEn
MOVED TO NEXT PARCEL
AFTER AGING
BEFORE BIO CHANGE
AFTER BIO CHANGE
EFFLUENT ADDED
MOVED TO NEXT PARCEL
AFTFR AGING
BFFORE BID CHANGE
AFTrR BIO CHANGE
EFFLUENT ADDED
MOVED TO NEXT PARCEL
AFTFR AGING
BEFORE 010 CHANGE
AFTER BIO CHANGE
EFFLUENT AOOEO
MOVED TO NEXT PARCEL
AFTFR AGING
BFFORE BIO CHSNGE
AFTER BIO CHANGE
EFFLUENT ADDED
MOVED TO NEXT PARCFL
AFTER AGING
BEFORE 810 CHANGE
AFTFR BIO CHANGE
FFFLUENT ADDED
MOVED TO NEXT PARCFL
AFTER AGING
3FFORE BtC CHANGE
AFTER ">IO CHANGE
EFFLUENT 403ED
AFTER AGING
BEFORE BID CHA'IGE
AFTFR BIO CHANGE
EFFLUENT ADDED
MOVED TO NEXT PARCEL
AFTER AGING
BEFORE Bid CHANGE
AFTER BIO CHANGE
EFFLUENT ADDED
MOVED TO NEXT PARCEL
AFTER AGING
BEFORE BIO CH^NGE
1FTFR BIO CHANGE
EFFLUFNT ADDED
MOVED TO NEXT PARCEL
AFTER AGING
BEFORE BIO CHANGE
AFTFR 310 CHANGE
EFFLUENT ADDED
H3VEO TO NEXT PARCEL
4FTEP AGING
BEFORE 310 CHANGE
• FTFR BIO CHANGE
EFFLUENT ADDED
MOVED TO NEXT PARCEL
AFTER AGING
BCFORE BIO CHANGE
AFTER BIO CHANGE
fFFUJFNT A^Of-'D
MOVED TO NCXT PACCEL
»00 CHLORIDES
(X 100) IX 1001
12118
1211B
566?
5404
999072
1004476
1004476
561375
515810
4500016
5035826
5015176
4561296
4353964
14711873
11073837
19073037
11073817
18206832
0
1B206832
1R706B1?
18706(132
17179248
0
17371248
173797.4B
17379248
16589283
0
16561233
165B92B3
165R1283
15815224
0
1583S774
15815224
15115441
0
15115441
15115441
15115441
14478175
0
14426375
14*28375
l**28375
13772539
0
13772539
13772539
11772539
131*6514
35
13146549
1114654";
13146549
12548978
0
12548978
1754B178
I254B97B
1197P569
0
11978569
3297
3217
1540
1185
1265412
1266797
1266(97
707116
617124
1912502
2541626
7 5'. 96 76
2109172
207«434
1180107
4058541
4058541
4058541
3652686
0
3652686
1f.526R6
36526R6
1287417
0
3787417
3287417
3J87417
2158575
0
2958675
2=58675
2158675
2662807
0
2662B07
2662107
2316526
0
2396526
2316526
2316526
2156873
0
2156873
2156873
2156873
11411B5
0
1941185
1141185
1941I»5
1747066
36
1747102
1747102
1747102
1572391
0
1572391
1572191
1572191
1415151
0
1415151
2
NUIRIFNTS COLIFORH TF MPEB ATIIRE
IX 1001 1 X TOO) IX 1001
213162
2111*7
IO^M
11104
?11700',8
30063152
30061152
16100412
1578???4
5675007
21407211
71407211
19191184
18214012
41051646
67274478
672744 78
672 744 78
63197216
0
63117216
61197216
6111771 6
59167072
0
51367072
51367072
51167072
55761056
0
55769056
55761056
55761056
52381104
0
57H1104
52319104
41214000
0
4921*000
49214000
41214000
46231128
0
46231328
46211328
46211178
43479424
96000
43575474
43525474
41525'.?4
40887520
96037
40991557
409B3557
40183557
38491696
16000
3B595696
38595616
38595696
16254560
0
36256560
22
22
10
9
*
13
13
7
6
4500
4506
4506
4081
3771
1470?
18473
1S473
13473
17073
0
17073
17073
17073
15771
0
15779
15779
15771
14583
0
14583
14583
14583
13478
0
I i*l ftt
13478
11478
12456
0
12456
12454
12456
11512
0
11512
11512
11512
10639
0
10639
10619
10639
9833
38
9B71
9871
9871
9123
0
9123
9123
9123
8431
0
8431
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
135000
135000
115000
122279
0
44100
44 I 00
44100
44100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
n
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
15
15
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
AGF OF
OFS
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0 .
0
0
0
0
6
6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
AGE OF
MLM
0
0
0
0
0
0.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
fl
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
n
0
0
0
0
n
1
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
a
n
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
ROUND 2
AMOUNT
(MGOXI101
*9700
50000
21360
21160
26640
51300
snoo
28500
?°501
22500
51000
57000
47110
47IOO
6 14 I
52000
51100
53000
53000
0
53000
54110
54100
54000
0
54110
55000
55010
55000
0
55000
54000
56003
56000
n
57100
57001
57000
0
57100
58000
51100
S"10P
0
5B100
59100
SOIflO
51010
1110
S9000
60001
60000
61000
3111
40000
41010
41010
3110
61011
42100
62100
62001
0
6->no
41
-------
Figure 11
**************************************************************«******
ROUND 2
t**********4
- QUALITY OF LIFE INDEX -.
10
42
-------
Figure 12
T HOC IT V •
WATER QUALITY MAP PO'INO 2
70 72 7* 74
98 100 102 104 106 10» 110 112 11* 116
1 1
12 1 1
1 1
1 1
14 1 I
I 1
1 . 1
It | |
1 1
1 1
IS 1 |
1 1
1 I
20 1 1
1 1
1 1
22 1 1
1 1
1 1
24 1 1
1 1
1 1
26 1 1
1 ' I
1 1
28 1 1
1 1
1 |
30 1 1
1 < <
32 1 6 < 8 <
1830 <309 <
1 1
34 t 1
1 1
1 1
it. | 1
1 1 1
1 1
38 1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
42 1 1
1 1
1 1
44 1 |
1 1
! 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 t
1 1 1
1 t 1
1 1 1
1 i 1
1 1 t
t 1 1
1 1 !
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 t 1
1 1 1
I 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
1 1 1
! 1 1
1 1 1
1 t 1
1 1 1
1 r n F n f i
1 ' l l
< F l< f l< f 1<
! < 9 < 8 < 9 <
aoo <900 <7
1
1
1 71
1
1
- 1 1 30
I
1 17
1
1
1 34
1
1
1 3S
1
1 3<<
1
1
1 in
1
1
1 42
1
1
1 44
1
72 74 74 75
100 102 104 106 108 110 117 114 116 118
TOP nowi FCCNO-ftc «rTivtTY TYPE
1NO flPFRATlNS LEVEL
FARM TYPE IF FARM ON PARCEL
MlODLf unw: SURFACE WATFR QUALITY RAIINC
BOTTOM KOK: WORST POLLUTANT
PARCEL Fnr.es
>AV< DIRECTION OF FLOU
NO WATER FLOWING
6FIHEEN PARCELS
ItKE PARCELS
-------
derived by totaling the expenditures made by the Pi's or busi-
ness activities for these goods and/or services. Therefore,
the impa: of water quality and cost decisions on the finan-
cial accc. nts for various population and business groups and
by location can be followed over time. Not only are water
usage figures calculated, but also expenditures for water,
pollution treatment and fines. In short, the River Basin
Model is a systems accounting framework as well as an inte-
gration of many market models within a spatial context.
44
-------
SECTION VII
MODEL INPUTS
Three types of model inputs should be distinguished: initial
director inputs, player inputs, and continual director inputs.
Initial Director Inputs
Some of the initial director inputs were discussed under the
chapter on users of the model. Briefly, he can choose a pre-
specified (two at this time) starting configuration. With
this configuration he may make any number of changes to alter
the starting scenario. Or, he can load into the computer a
starting configuration that he has fashioned out of real or
hypothetical data.
The initial starting position of the model is very flexible
in several ways. First, any desired initial land use pattern
may be represented. Thus, a model run could begin with devel-
opment ranging from a blank board to a fully occupied land
area. Also, from one to fifteen separate local governments
can be represented.
Second, the population classes placed into housing, rents
charged at housing, prices charged at stores, salaries of-
fered by employers, taxes charged by local governments, etc.
can be set in an infinite number of patterns. For example,
the five population classes could be distributed among the
housing stock in such a way that there was much or little in-
come segregation, overcrowding or under-occupancy, etc. Or
any transportation subsystem configuration could be represented,
Third, the control over the economic, social, and governmental
resources of the represented area can be allocated among users
of the model in any way desired. For example, if a single per-
son were using the model for research or simulation purposes,
all of the economic assets could be placed under the control
of a single corporation. If the model is being used for
citizen participation or educational purposes, the director
of the model might choose to have the resources of the commun-
ity allocated in such a way that some corporations own only
one type of economic activity (industry, commercial estab-
lishments, residences, or land) or several types of activities
(a mix of industrial, commercial, residential, and vacant
land).
45
-------
The economic, social, and government sector computer output
describes the details of the resources in these sectors. In
addition to this specific information, general and summary
statistics describing the represented area are available as
information common to all the model users.
Model users provide the evaluation of the status of the area
as a whole and of the individual sector resources in partic-
ular, develop goals and objectives, formulate strategies, and
make decisions for the coming calendar year. All the infor-
mation on the computer print-outs describes the represented
area at one point in the year. All decisions that are made
take effect at that time and their impact is not seen until
the decisions are processed through the computer and a new
status is generated for the next year.
A subset of the initial director decisions are those that
relate to the local water system. The director through the
load program may create a region that has any mix of water
quantity and quality characteristics. For example, a region
could be configured that had very low quality water and no
treatment facilities at the start of play. Or an initial
starting point could be developed that had all the pollution
created by activities in one jurisdiction have its major detri-
mental effects on activities and people in a downstream
jurisdiction.
Player Inputs
Players have available to them a wide number of possible formal
decisions(ones that require processing by the computer) and
they have an infinite number of informal decision options
open to them. The formal decisions available to the players
are summarized in Figure 13 under the three sector headings.
A subset of the player decisions are those that relate to the
local water system. Economic decision-makers may build waste
treatment facilities for their industries that dump into the
local water system. They may also cut back operating levels
of businesses in order to reduce the pollution they generate.
These two decisions do not fully indicate the impact that the
water component has or may have on the specific sections of
the local system because of inadequate water supply, high
municipal water costs, poor surface water quality, poor trans-
portation access caused by the absence of bridges to cross a
river, etc.
46
-------
Figure 13
1. Economic Decision-Makers
- buy and sell land
- set rents
- set prices
- set salaries
- set maintenance levels
- lend money
- borrow money
- buy and sell conservative stocks
- buy and sell speculative stocks
- build and demolish three types of residences,
twelve types of basic industries, and four types
of commercial establishments
- contract with construction industries
- transfer money to other economic and social and
government decision-makers
- boycott commercial establishments
- construct chlorination, primary, secondary and
tertiary effluent treatment facilities at basic
industries
- change the operating level of a business (without
demolishing the building)
- set the amount of water which is recycled at
basic industries
- construct residences which use ground water
- operate farms
2. Social Decision-Makers
- allocate time to extra work, education, politics
and recreation
- boycott work locations, commercial establishments,
and modes of travel
- vote for elected officials
- set the dollar value of time travelling to work
- transfer money to other social, economic and
government decision-makers
3. Government Decision-Makers
- grant appropriations
- grant subsidies
- transfer money to other government and social
and economic decision-makers
- set welfare payments
- set tax rates
- float bonds
47
-------
Figure 13 (Cont.)
assess land and buildings
buy and sell land
set the number of job openings in government
set the maintenance level of government facilities
set government service districts
request Federal-State aid
set the salaries offered government workers
build and demolish schools
build and demolish municipal service plants
contract with construction industries
grant contracts with local goods and services
establishments for government purchases
set the amount of public adult education offered
by the government
construct and demolish roads
construct and demolish terminals
zone land
build and demolish public institutional land uses
provide parkland
install utility.service
set prices for utility service
construct and demolish utility plants
locate bus. routes
buy and sell buses
set bus and rail fares
build rail lines
build rail stations
buy and sell rail rolling stock
locate rapid rail routes
set the amount of service on bus and rail routes
set prices for private use of publicly-provided
water
construct and demolish primary, secondary, and
tertiary sewage treatment plants
construct and demolish water intake treatment
plants
locate municipal water intake points
locate municipal sewage outflow points
locate water sampling stations
set dam priorities
change a business's operating level (without
demolishing the building)
construct and demolish bridges across rivers
48
-------
Social sector decision-makers may be very much affected by
the quantity and quality of water in the local system, but
they make no direct water decisions. They do vote for elected
officials, however, and to the extent that water issues are
an important local concern, the social sector might influ-
ence water resource decision-making a great deal indirectly
through the ballot box. These votes might be for water re-
lated referenda as well as for political officers.
The Utility Department in each jurisdiction (through its
Water Office) has a number of decisions that it may make.
It sets the price of municipal water for different types of
buyers. It may construct intake and outflow treatment plants
and locate them to best advantage taking into account water
supply and quality, downstream activities, land costs, and
local sentiment. It may choose where in the local water sys-
tem to remove water for public consumption and where to dump
the municipal wastes.
Furthermore, the water resources decision-maker may fund and
locate sampling stations (ambient or point source) and set
dam operating priorities (to favor recreation, flood control,
and/or pollution control). Other government departments com-
pete with the Utility Department for local citizen support
and possibly for outside government financial assistance.
The Highway Department is affected directly by the local water
system in that it costs more to put highways across parcels
that contain rivers. This higher cost represents the added
expense of building bridges and tunnels.
Figure 14 shows an example of a completed team decision form
and the computer "Edits" of a set of decisions for a round
of the model. Since collectively the teams comprise most of
the major local decision-makers of the represented area, most
of the change that will take place from one round to the next
will be a function of the number and type of decisions gener-
ated by the teams. The major decisions not made by the teams
are those made either by computer simulators which represent
the outside system impacts on the local system or by the di-
rector who may act as higher level governments or as Mother
Nature and cause floods, earthquakes, and/or other forms of
natural disaster.
Teams will often note that the decisions of other teams have
significant effect on their own output, especially on the in-
dicators. For example, the water quality rating for a par-
ticular section of the river might increase tremendously be-
cause of the creation of more housing with no increase in the
49
-------
Figure 14
SAMPLE OF INPUTS AND EDITS
I
Ul
o
Decision Decision-
Code Maker
R&
-r... — . .,
$ $V$Lb
$ FSA
$ FSA
$ T/ME
$
>/ =
/ =
/ =
/ =
/ =
£ ,
Scl /
Set /
B& x
/
' ?*/$*, r<
> 2. , 9
' i , m
> HZ , %
t
A , K> , "f , , t ,
O3"i t / / / /
'• £. i , f f f ,
° , ° , /r , 5- ; 5- ,
/ / t 1 1 t
$OUPLO'/ = A/7012,RBfO,1,50,60,0,145* NO UTILITIES
REQUIRES LEVEL 1 UTILITY SERVICE ONLY HAS LEVEL 0
$FSA/=SCl/2,9030*
AID REQUEST OF SCI FOR 903O GRANTED
-------
municipal treatment facilities. Rates of return might drop
because of increased local tax rates or assessments, higher
maintenance costs or service charges, increased competition,
etc. Or housing dissatisfaction might increase because the
housing stock has deteriorated, rents have gone up, or local
government services have decreased in quality.
The interactions among the various components of the urban
system that cause these interrelated movements of decisions
and indicators is generated by several major simulations
contained within the computer program of the model. The model
is indifferent as to how the inputs are generated. That is,
the inputs could be generated as a result of a game format
or by a single model user. The game format could be capital-
istic and democratic in nature or socialistic.
Periodic Director Inputs
The director may act as the outside system by controlling land
purchases, loans, cash transfers, exogenous employment, fed-
eral aid, the business cycle, and the effects of Mother Nature.
These effects on the local system require computer inputs on
the part of the director. A number of other influences he may
exert on the local system and its decision-makers are handled
in the gameroom and need no interface with the computer. For
example, the director could impose higher government regula-
tions on the local system in the form of water quality stan-
dards, school quality, or municipal service standards. The
director could also change player assignments (switch players
among several teams), make some computer information inac-
cessible (or acquired only at high cost), prevent or encourage
team interaction by their physical placement in the gameroom,
require rounds to be played in a specified amount of real
clock time, or a number of other things.
Each director will find that he can affect the play a great
deal and force the local system to deal with problems created
by him if he wishes to exercise some of these director op-
tions. On the other hand, the director is not forced to make
any of these periodic inputs. The model will continue to
function without his use of these prerogative director de-
cisions.
Summary
Figure 15 summarizes the user inputs to the model. This
figure shows the interaction of the user (as director or par-
ticipant) of the model with the game component and with the
phases of the model. First, as part of "Model Definition"
the director has the option to define parts of the model
51
-------
Figure 15
INTERACTION BETWEEN THE USER AND THE
RIVER BASIN MODEL
USER
PARTICIPANTS
GAME COMPONENT
TEAMS
DECISION-MAKERS
OBJECTIVES
LEGAL SYSTEM
MASS MEDIA
ETC.
DIRECTOR
MODEL PHASES
MODEL DEFINITION
DATA BASE INPUT
DATA IMPLEMENTATION
INITIALIZATION
MODEL OPERATION
POST MODEL OPERATION
OUTPUT
52
-------
(parcel size, jurisdiction boundaries, population-scale,
etc.). Second, as part of the "Data Base Input" he can input
two types of data — parameter values for the operating pro-
grams (for example, coefficients for migration, typical con-
struction costs, normal units of production for industries,
etc.) and the number and location of population units and
activities (for example, residences and the social class of
the occupants, businesses, government buildings, roads,
bodies of water, etc.).
The director makes these decisions once, and they define the
starting configuration of the system to be represented. The
geographical scope of the region represented by the director
is a function of the parcel size and the number of parcels
used to represent the system. Thus, a single county or a multi-
county river basin area could be represented. The director
also has the option to make no decisions and instead start
with one of the two pre-specified hypothetical configurations.
As a third type of decision (^Teams'1) , the director may af-
fect the game format by the allocation of resources to eco-
nomic, social, and governmental decision-making bodies that
are called teams. A final type of director influence is one
that he may choose to exert any time during the operation of
the model. By making inputs to the model (using the same in-
put format as the participants), the director can control the
outside system influences on the local system (federal-state
aid, business cycle, federal regulations, etc.) and some lo-
cal phenomena (flooding, federal employment, etc.).
The participants of the model are members of teams, and through
the teams they become the decision-makers of the local system.
As decision-makers, the participants establish individual and
collective goals, create any needed institutions (such as a
legal system, mass media, unions, etc.), evaluate the status
of the local system and its constituent parts, and make de-
cisions for the period of time represented by a cycle of the
model (one year).
These decisions are input at the "Data Implementation" phase of
the .model, and they interact with one another and with
the present status of the system to create a new status of
the system. The new status is illustrated on the computer
output, which then serves as the basis for new evaluation on
the part of the decision-makers and a new cycle of game play.
53
-------
SECTION VIII
EXPLANATION OF THE WATER COMPONENT
The water component can be looked at as a module that is
plugged into the other major modules of the regional model.
This module could be changed without changing other parts of
the model (and vice versa) as long as the links among the
modules were modified accordingly. Figure 16 shows the major
linkages between the water module and the other modules and
sectors that comprise the River Basin Model.
Water Quality Ratings
In order to summarize and simplify the concept of "water
quality" in the model, an index of water quality has been
created. The value of this water quality index at any location
in the system is determined by the concentrations of the seven
pollutant categories. Figure 17 lists the nine water quality
ratings and the seven types of pollutants dealt with by the
model. Note that the higher the quality rating, the lower
the quality of the water.
The average quality rating of water on a parcel is calculated
each round by taking the highest index caused by any of the
pollutants. Figure 18 shows the water quality level generated
by concentrations of each of the pollutants. An explanation
of the table is also included in the figure.
Each parcel of land that contains surface water (lakes or
rivers) has a water quality index calculated for it. The
water quality rating for a parcel affects the treatment cost
paid by users of that water. The quality rating also affects
the pollution index, the rate of depreciation for some devel-
opments, the usability of the water (level 9 water is not
usable), and major recreation activity. The Water Quality
Map (Figure 19) shows the water quality rating for each
parcel of land that has surface water, the direction of flow
of rivers, the location of economic activities (including
farms), and the individual pollutant responsible for the water
quality rating.
Water Use and Sources of Water
All private economic activities require water as part of their
normal operation. Figure 20 shows the consumption of water
in millions of gallons per day (MGD) for each of these ac-
tivities. Some of the manufacturing activities are surface
water users, and they must intake water from the parcels on
which they are located. All of the other activities use
municipally supplied water (except those few residences
which have private water supplies) .
55
-------
Figure 16
INTERACTION BETWEEN THE WATER MODULE AND OTHER PARTS
OF THE RIVER BASIN MODEL
pollution index —
t
water quality rating.
available water —-—-
Flooding
water standards
penalties-
coliform index
construction costs and
land requirement
cost of operation
extra cost to cross bodies
of water
recreation.
Migration-Housing Module
I-residential water use
Depreciation Module
J
Farm Operation
— fertilizer
Business Operation
water costs
intake treatment
outflow treatment
fines
— pollution
Social Operation
water costs
time allocation (sickness)
— pollution
Utility Department
water supply
operating costs
intake points
intake plants
intake treatment
waste disposal
outflow points
outflow plants
— pollution
sampling stations
Highway Department
road construction
M Major Recreation Areas I
Dam Operation
-------
Figure 17
Water
Quality
Rating
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Pollutants
BOD
Chlorides
Nutrients
Coliform
Bacteria
Temperature
Oil and
Floating
Solids
High-Level
Wastes
Description
Drinkable - best quality water
Drinkable - with minor treatment
Swimming - direct body contact possible
Boating and Fishing - indirect body contact possible
Fair esthetic value
Poor esthetic value - treatable at moderate cost
No esthetic value - treatable at high cost
Negative esthetic value - treatable at very high cost
Unusable water
Description
Biochemical Oxygen Demand
Chlorides are employed as an indicator of
persistent pollutants.
Phosphate, nitrite, nitrogen, and phosphorous.
Indication of the potential health hazard of
a given body of water.
The temperature deviation from the normal
temperature of the surface water.
Any oil and all floating solids such as refuse,
garbage, cans, boards, and tires.
Highly toxic, non-degradable substances.
57
-------
Figure 18
Definition of the Nine Comprehensive Water Quality Levels
Water Quality Levels
12345 6
Pollutant Types
BOD (LBS/MG)
Chlorides (LBS/MG)
Nutrients (LBS/MG)
Coliform
Bacteria (parts per MG)
Temperature
Oil & Floating Solids
High Level Wastes
Explanation of the Table
In order to determine the water quality level or index of given amounts of water, take the
concentrations of each of the seven pollutant categories and calculate the water quality level
based upon each pollutant separately. For example, a BOD concentration of 25 LBS/MG would yield
an index of 3, coliform bacteria of 169 parts per MG would yield an index of 9, and the presence
of oil and floating solids would allow the water quality to be no better than 6. The worst
(highest) water quality index that was calculated using the pollutant types separately, is
assigned to the given amount of water. If the water on parcel x had the three pollutants
described above, it would be assigned water quality index of 9.
Looked at another way, water quality level 4 is attained when a body of water has concentra-
tions of BOD that exceed 30 but fall below 41, coliform bacteria concentrations above 12 but
below 21, etc.
10
5
25
2
0
0
0
20
10
50
6
0
0
0
30
15
100
12
1
0
0
40
20
200
20
2
0
0
60
30
400
40
4
0
0
100
40
800
70
7
> 0
0
150
60
1600
120
3-0
> 0
0
300
80
3200
160
14
> 0
> 0
> 300
> 80
> 3200
> 160
> 14
> 0
•7- 0
-------
Figure 19
tMTFP QiiAL | TV
1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 — 1 1 1 1 1 1 . 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
12 1. 5.1. S.I. l.j. 1.|. s. . s.j. 1.1. s.t. s.|. 5.1. s.|. s.|. S.I. 5.1. s.|. S.I. 5.1. 5.
I....I 1 I....I....I....I....I I....I....I.. ..!....!.. ..!....!.. .1.1 .1 . .
14 1. 5.1. 5.1. S.I. s.|. S.I. s.l. S.I. S.I. S.I. 5.1. S.|. S.I. 5.1. S.I. 5.1. S.I. S.I. 5.
I....I 1 1 1 1.... I....I | | | | | | | 1,... I....I
1 1 1 1 | | | | 1 | | | |. | | | | |
16 1. S.I. S.I. S.I. s.|. s.|. s.|. S.|. S.I. S.|. S.|. S.|. S.|. -,.|. 5.1. 5.1. 5.1. S.I. 6.
1 1 1 1 | | I....I | | | |.. ..| | I....I | |
I06 IOB IIO U2 114 1I6 IID
. 5. I. 5. I. 6. I . 6. |. 6. I I I 12
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
. 6.1. 6.1. 6.1 1 | 1 1 14
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
|OA30I"A11| 1 1 1 1
.6.1 1 1 1 1 1 1 16
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 | | | | | | | | | | | | | IRA30IPS 1IRA O|PA 31 F 71 F 21 1
15 . 5.1. S.|. s.|. S.|. S.I. s.|. S.|. 5.1. S.|. S.I. 5.1. S.I. S.|. 5.1. S.I. S.|. ,, . | . 6.
1 1 1 1 1 1 | | | | | | | | | | ] |
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IB
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 . . .. 1 . .. . 1 .. . . 1 1 . 1 . . . . 1. . . . 1 .. . . 1 1* | .1 .I....I....I | | INL 1IRA17IRA 4ICR II F 21 F 21 F 31 F 31
l---.l....l....l....l....l....l....l....l....|....|....|....|....|....|....|....|....|
1 1 1 | 1 1 | | | | | | | | |....| IMP 11
22 1. S.I. S.|. S.|. s.|. S.I. s.|. s.|. ,.|. s.|. S.|. S.I. s.|. S.I. 6.1. 6.1. 6.1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 | | | | | | | | | | |
1 1 1 1 1 | | 1 | | 1 1 1 | IRAI1I |R>1 7IOA 5
24 1. 6.1. «..!. 6.1. 4.1. r,.}. I.I. 6.1. 6.1. 6. 1 » 1 •> 1 1 | K | | | | |
1 1 l l 1 | i i i |i\im lain lino i&nu 1 1 1 1- 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I....I i»m ti-n 1 1 I 1 1 l 1
2" 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 | | | | | | 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 '"in I 1 | l l i l
1 1 1 1 1 I"A21 IHAIBIT: 3|i>nnlliS 4|rn llscil lRCl?|ol23|Rni2l PS SIFO 11
30 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 | 1 6 1 | | | | | |
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l«nn 1 1 1 1 1 l 1
32 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 < 7 | 1 1 1 | 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l l«on <°n.T 1 l 1 1 1 1
34 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7 < 7 | 1 | | 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 linn <*nn 1 1 1 1 1
36 1 . 1 | | 1 1 | 1 1 1 1 1 1 f. r 0 | 111 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 linn < 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 l»nn |nii AV< DIRFTTION OF FLOW
---- NO Wft TFR TL nwt*!'".
59
-------
Figure 20
Figure III-5
Water Requirements For
Private Economic Activities
(S=Surface Water User)
Manufacturing
FL - Furniture and Lumber (S) ---- - ---- - -------- 61
SB - Stone, Clay, and Glass ---- - ---------- • ---- 10
MP - Primary Metals (S)-- ------------------- 225
MF - Fabricated Metals ------------------------ 9
NL - Nonelectrical Machinery ----------------- 12
EL - Electrical Machinery --------------------- 5
TE - Transportation Equipment -------------- - --- 8
FO - Food (S) -------------- • --- < ----------- ' ---- 49
TA - Textiles and Apparel (S) ------- ------ < ---- 17
PA - Paper (S) ------------------------------ 333
CR - Chemical and Rubber (S) ----------------- 31
Commercial
NS - National Services ---------------------- .18
BG - Business Goods ----- • --------- • ----------- .13
BS - Business Services-- --------- • — < ---- - — --- .17
PG - Personal Goods ------------------------- .23
PS - Personal Services ---------------------- .18
Residential
HA - High Income and Single Family .'08
HB - Garden Apartments (PH) .07
HC - Highrise Apartments (PM) .06
MA - Single Family (PM) .07
MB - Garden Apartments (PM) .05
MC - Highrise Apartments (PM) .03
LA - Single Family (PL) .03
LB - Garden Apartments (PL) .03
LC - Highrise Apartments (PL) .02
60
-------
Surface water users pay for the cost of treating the water
they take from the local water system. Municipal water users
pay the price charged by the Utility Department. The Utility
Department must construct intake facilities and treat the
water if necessary to supply the water needs of each utility
district.
There are four possible sources of water, although no single
type of user has an option to use all of these.
Water Users
Commercial
Activities &
Industries Industries
Using Sur- Water Using Muni-
Sources face Water Department Residences cipal Water
Surffice Water x x
Municipal Water x x
Outside Water x x x x
Ground Water x
Residents use ground water if private utilities are installed.
Residences are the only activities that may satisfy their
water needs through the use of we&ls.
Surface Water Industries and the Water Department use water
from the outside system if there is an inadequate amount of
water on the parcel from which they withdraw or if the water
quality level is 9. Both residences and businesses using
municipal water will use outside water if the water depart-
ment serving them has inadequate supply.
Three types of surface water are represented in the model:
rivers (flowing bodies of water), small lakes and large
lakes. Large lakes are full parcels or combinations of full
parcels of water. Large lakes have an unlimited volume of
water and a loaded water quality level that does not change
during the course of a run of the model.
Small lakes are fractions of a parcel of land. They are de-
fined as having a specified water volume and percent of
parcel consumed. Their water quality level is calcualted in
the same manner as for rivers.
Rivers are loaded as being on a particular parcel, having a
specific volume, flowing at a specific rate, and emptying
61
-------
into a designated adjacent parcel. Rivers may or may not
consume a significant (one percent or more ) portion of land
or parcel. In other words, the land area consumed by a river
may not be large enough to take into account.
All volumes are expressed in millions of gallons per day
(MGD), and rates of flow are expressed in parcels of land
traversed in a day by a particle of water in the river.
The following table summarizes the types of water and their
characteristics.
Water
Quality
Types of Surface Water Volume Level Rate of Flow
Rivers Specified Calculated Specified
Small Lakes Specified Calculated Not Applicable
Large Lakes Unlimited Specified Not Applicable
Pollutants Generated
All economic activities return their used water to the local
water system. Surface water users may opt to treat all or
part of the water they return to the system with one of four
types of treatment. The other economic activities return
their water to the water system via the outflow point of
the utility district in which they reside.
The specific amounts of pollution generated per level one
activity and per million gallons of water for each of the
types of economic activities is shown in Figure 21. Note
that the pollution generated by residences is a function
of both the type of housing and the income class living there.
Pollution Monitoring
The Water Office of the Utility Department may find out the
detailed components of the water quality rating for any
water parcel (the ambient water quality) or for any point
source of water outflow (from surface water industries or from
the municipal outflow point). Figure 22 shows examples of
the ambient and point source sampling station reports. Note
that the point source information includes the economic
owner of the economic activity, the type of economic activity,
and the type and level of treatment facilities, if any.
62
-------
Figure 21
POLLUTION GENERATED BY ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES
0
S
_ \
Q co
o 03
pq 3
Manufacturing — -
FL
SB
MP
MF
NL
EL
TE
FO
TA
PA
CR
600
500
1000
500
400
800
500
6000
6000
3000
2000
CO
cu
•o —
-H 0
n a
o \
H CO
S3
100
100
170
150
150
200
180
400
130
380
600
CO
-P
d — »
0) O
-H a
M\
-P CO
3 ffl
^d
1000
1000
500
700
100
200
100
10000
4000
3000
800
fi S
O \
m co
•H H
H rt
o t> CO
-H CU (0
a ^ £
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
Commercial
NS
BG
BS
PG
PS
100
200
150
250
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
20
10
15
20
15
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Residential
HA
HB
HC
MA
MB
MC
LA
LB
LC
1250
1250
1250
1100
1100
1100
1000
1000
1000
50
50
50
40
40
40
30
30
30
100
100
100
80
80
80
70
70
70
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
500
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
63
-------
Figure 22
SAMPLING STATION RFPORT: AMBIENT QUALITY
JURISDICTION Z
CTi
LOCATION!
96??
96?4
96? 6
961 2
9614
9616
961 *
96?°.
9610
961?
941?
BOD
UBS/MG)
0.0
0.0
0.0
106.90
0.0
0.0
. 0.0
0.0
131.41
424.74
401.90
967.50
CHLORIDES
(L RS/MG)
0.0
0.0
0.0
53.45
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
50.92
135.72
127.26
153.13
NUTRIENTS
(LBS/MG)
10.20
9.22
7. 86
861 .^4
0.0
6.67
9.70
1 1.29
799. 11
11SO. 1 1
112S. 40
1982.20
BACTFR IALS
(PARTS
PFR KG)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.05
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.43
1 .08
0.98
29.53
TEMPERATURE
DEVI ATION
(DFGPEES)
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.43
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
10.66
7.45
5.15
OIL AND
FLOATING
SOLIDS
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
HIGH
LEVFL
WASTES
NO
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
NO
NO
YES
YES
YES
YES
AMOUNT OF
WATER
(MOO)
260.00
254.00
2. R 0.00
290.00
100.00
150. 00
200.00
250.00
300. 00
500.00
510.00
520.00
WATER
QUALITY
RATING
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
8
-------
Pollution Treatment
Surface water using industries and the municipal water of-
fices may treat their water outflow to reduce its concen-
trations of pollutants. Figure 23 shows the effectiveness of
the four types of treatment in removing the seven types of
pollutants. For example, chlorination is effective against
only coliform while tertiary treatment is effective against
all of the pollutants.
Effects of the Water Quality Index
The Water Quality Index on a parcel of land has direct effects
on the following factors.
1. Treatment costs of water withdrawn from that parcel by
the Water Department.
2. Treatment cost of water withdrawn by an industrial
surface water user on that parcel.
3. The amount of personal consumption emanating from Major
Recreation Areas located on or near that parcel.
4. The pollution index for that parcel.
The Pollution Index is a part of the Environmental Index which
is used as a basis for determining the attractiveness of a
residential parcel of land for potential in-migrants. A high
Pollution Index also affects the probability of population
units moving away from a residential parcel.
The Health Index for a parcel of land influences the amount
of money spent by population units for health services and
the amount of time lost from leisure activities. It also
affects the Personal Index, which in turn influences the
amount of dissatisfaction experienced by population units on
a parcel. The Health Index for a parcel of land is based
upon the concentration of coliform bacteria in the water.
This is the only case in which a single component of the
water quality index is handled separately.
All of the dissatisfaction indexes and quality of life in-
dexes are calculated in such a way that a high value indi-
cates high dissatisfaction or low quality of life. In Figure
24 the components of the Quality of Life Index are illustrated,
For each of the indexes, the corresponding dissatisfaction
term is provided in parentheses.
65
-------
Figure 23
EFFECTIVENESS OF TREATMENT TYPES:
PERCENT OF POLLUTANT REMOVED
Chlorination Primary Secondary Tertiary
Pollutant (CL) (PT) (ST) (TT)
BOD - 50 80 99
Chlorides - - 50 90
Nutrients - - 20 99
Coliform 99 99 99 100
Temperature - - - 100
Oil and Solids - 100 100 100
High Level Wastes - - 100
66
-------
Figure 24
COMPONENTS OF THE QUALITY OF LIFE INDEX
Pollution Index
(Pollution Dissatisfaction]
Dependent upon
. Water Quality Rating
Neighborhood Index
(Neighborhood Dissatisfaction)
Dependent Upon
. Housing Quality
. Rent Charged
. School Quality
. MS Quality
. Tax Rates or Welfare Payment}
r
Environmental Index
(Environmental
Dissatisfaction)
1
Health Index
(Health Dissatisfaction)
Dependent Upon
. Coliform Count
. Residential Crowding
. MS Quality
Quality of Life
Index (Total
Dissatisfaction]
Time Index
(Dissatisfaction with
Time Allocation)
Dependent Upon
. Involuntary Time
. Transportation Time
. Recreation Time
Personal Index
(Personal
Dissatisfaction);
67
-------
Note that both of the components of the Environmental Index
are indexes which are based entirely upon locational quality
factors outside the direct control of the social decision-
makers. For example, social teams can only indirectly af-
fect water quality, school quality and local tax rates.
The Personal Index, on the other hand, is comprised of two
indices, one of which is based on locational quality factors
while the other is based upon time allocation decisions that
are largely within the control of the social decision-maker.
The Water and Sewer Office
The Water and Sewer Office is contained within the Utility
Department, and it is charged with the responsibility of
supplying the municipal water requirements within each of the
utility districts. The water and sewer districts are iden-
tical to the utility districts.
The water office supplies water for a district by building
a certain level of intake treatment plant on a parcel lo-
cated within the same jurisdiction. The intake point does
not need to be on the same parcel as the intake treatment
plant. In fact, the intake point may be outside the utility
district or even outside the jurisdiction. It must, however,
be on a surface water parcel.
It is assumed that the cost of treating a unit of water (an
MGD) is directly related to the quality level of the water.
That is, it costs more to treat a unit of 8 quality water
than a unit of 3 quality water.
If the total demand for municipal water within a utility
district is larger than the amount that can be supplied by
the intake plant, the municipal water users are obliged to
purchase the needed amount of water from the outside system.
The total amount of municipally supplied water must also be
returned to the local water system. It is up to each utility
district to determine the amount of its water effluent that
will be treated and the type of treatment. The four types
of outflow treatment and the percent of each pollutant that
is removed appeared earlier in Figure 23.
68
-------
SECTION IX
THE INTERACTION OF THE WATER SYSTEM WITH
THE REMAINDER OF THE MODEL
The following description illustrates some of the features of
the water component and the interaction between it and the
rest of the model.
Figure 25 shows the relationships between the water component
and the three sectors of the model. In the economic sector,
the quantity and quality of water in the local system affects
some industrial^users, land values (indirectly through the
neighborhood index), major recreation facilities (and the
consumption they generate).
The Social Sector is affected by the water quality and quan-
tity through the health of the local population and the en-
vironmental index (which influences the outcome of migration).
Government operation interacts with the water component
through the fire protection process (which is dependent upon
adequate water supply), the water quality agency (the local
public body concerned with water quality), and the municipal
water department which in turn supplies businesses and resi-
dences .
Actually, there may not be a Water Quality Agency in the lo-
cal system, or there may be several that exist for different
political jurisdictions. The game part of the Water Model
allows much flexibility in the way this particular function
is handled. Figure 26 shows some of the interactions of the
Water Quality Agency with the local system, once such an agency
is in existence. The agency has legal options as well as the
promotion of water treatment options by the public water
and sower authority at its disposal. The agency may also use
its persuasive powers to line up support for its actions.
The mix of policy that the agency undertakes will have ef-
fects on businesses and their treatment of or payment for
effluent. The agency's policies will ultimately affect the
people of the community and their standard of life in the local
system. The Water Quality Agency will most likely be prompted
to action through the complaints brought about by the popu-
lation sector of the local community who find that sickness,
lack of recreation, and other adverse effects result from
water pollution. Complaints about poor water quality are also
likely to arise from major water users who find their own
inflow treatment costs to be increasing because of the de-
teriorating water quality.
69
-------
Figure 25
INTERACTION BETWEEN THE WATER COMPONENT AND THE
THREE SECTORS OF THE MODEL
User
ECONOMIC SECTOR
Potential Polluter
Quality Affects ^
Residential *^
Attractiveness
Quantity & Qualify
Affects Income
Earned
Potential Polluter
BUSINESS
LAND VALUES
RECREATION FACILITIES
AGRICULTURE
SOGFAL SECTOR
Pollution Causes^
Dollar & Time Cost
User
Potential Polluter
Pollution Causes ^Index
To Get Worse
HEALTH
PEOPLE
ENVIRONMENTAL INDEX
GOVERNMENT SECTOR
Quantity Affects^
Protection Level*
Pollution Causes,
Concern
cnooses Policy Mix to
Improve Water Quality
cost ot Bridges and
Tunnels
FIRE PROTECTION
WATER QUALITY AGENCY
HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION
70
-------
Figure 26
INTERACTIONS OF THE WATER QUALITY AGENCY WITH PARTS
OF THE LOCAL SYSTEM
WATER
QUALITY-
AGENCY
LEGAL SYSTEM
1 LAWS
ENFORCEMENT
COURTS
PUBLIC TREATMENT
INTAKE
• OUTFLOW
-PUBLIC RELATIONS
BUSINESSES
EFFLUENT TREATMENT
•HIGH INFLOW TREATMENT COSTS OR
PURCHASE OF OUTSIDE WATER
COMPLAINTS FROM PEOPLE
— SICKNESS (Time Lost and Health Costs)
LACK OF RECREATION
ENVIRONMENTAL INDEX
71
-------
The supply of municipal water in the local system is handled
by a Water and Sewer Office. This department is concerned
with the hydrological features of the local environment. As
shown in Figure 27 the location of water, its amount, rate of
flow, and quality is of concern to the department which has
the responsibility to supply water to local demanders. To
supply water, the department builds and operates intake
treatment plants (at specific locations and of designated
capacities) and specifies the water intake point associated
with each plant. As part of the sewer responsibilities of
the Water and Sewer Office, it also builds and operates
water sewage outflow treatment plants (once again giving the
location, treatment level, and capacity) and specifies an
outflow point at which the water flows back into the local
water system. The water supply authority sets a price on
water for the various local demanders of water — manufacturers,
commercial activities, and residents.
72
-------
Figure 27
CONCERNS OF THE WATER AND SEWER OFFICE
WATER
AND
SEWER
OFFICE
PHYSICAL FEATURES
WATER LOCATION
QUANTITY
RATE OF FLOW
QUALITY
SUPPLY FACILITIES
INTAKE TREATMENT PLANT
(.Location & Size)
INTAKE POINT
-X OUTFLOW TREATMENT PLANT
(Location & Size)
OUTFLOW POINT
DEMANDERS
MANUFACTURERS
COMMERCIAL
RESIDENCES - PEOPLE
TESTING STATIONS
POINT SOURCE QUALITY
AMBIENT QUALITY
73
-------
Operating Programs
Regardless of what format is used to generate the decision
inputs, the model executes the same major operating programs:
1. Migration-Housing
2. Water Quality Calculations and Effects
3. Depreciation
4. Employment
5. Transportation
6. School Allocation
7. Time Allocation
8. Commercial
9. Bookkeeping
Migration-Housing
The basic population grouping in the model is the population
unit (PI). A PI is designated as being a member of a socio-
economic class. The one thing the three classes have in
common is that 500 people comprise a PI. Pi's move into,
within, and out of the local system in response to avail-
able employment opportunities, housing quantity and quality,
and a number of other factors.
This computer routine calculates dissatisfaction (environ-
mental and personal); develops a pool of movers comprised of
the population displaced by housing demolition, a percent of
the most dissatisfied, a percent of the total population
(random movers), natural population growth, and the in-mi-
grants; and moves the members of this pool into housing that
has adequate capacity and quality. A certain percentage of
each income class that are either unemployed or underemployed
outmigrate from the local system. Other movers who cannot
find adequate local housing also become outmigrairfes.
Water quality affects migration through the environmental dis-
satisfaction (housing near polluted water becomes less at-
tractive) and through the personal dissatisfaction (bad
health resulting from nearby polluted water increases the
probability of moving).
Water Quality Calculation and Effects
The water quality on each parcel of land that contains water
is calculated by combining the pollution flowing into the par-
cel from up to three upstream sources (water from adjacent
parcels) with the quantity of water on the parcel. This
mixing process generates a water quality index for
74
-------
water on that parcel for all users on that parcel (industries,
municipal water systems, and major recreation areas).
That portion of the water which is not withdrawn has a
certain amount of pollution disappear based upon the rate of
flow of the water. All water returned to the water system
on that parcel (industrial waste, municipal outflow, and
farm run-off) is combined with the water not withdrawn,
and a calculation of the total amount of pollution sent to
the next parcel downstream.
This process is performed for each parcel of land that
contains a moving body of water. The operation of industries,
municipal water systems, farms, and dams affect the water
quality along different stretches of a river. The water
quality then affects next year's migration and this year's
depreciation and commercial activity (via major recreation
areas) as indicated in the following sections.
Depreciation
Buildings and roads depreciate in value and utility
each year as a function of the passage of time (obsolescence),
the amount of use they receive (wear and tear), and the qual-
ity of local municipal services (especially police and fire
protection). Local decision makers may choose to maintain a
constant value for their developments by expending the required
amounts of money for maintenance. This routine depreciates
all developments and calculates maintenance expenditures.
Three additional water-related factors can also contri-
bute to the rate of annual depreciation of developments. First,
industries that draw water directly from nearby water supplies
have an additional depreciation that is in proportion to the
water quality rating of the water they use. Second, for
utility districts that have insufficient supplies of water,
there is an additional depreciation that reflects above
average fire damage duetto inadequate water for fire fighting
purposes. Third, developments may experience increased
depreciation as a result of flood damage. This damage is
related to the severity of the flood (input by the director),
the type of building, its location in the flood plain, and
the flood control priority of dams for the river basin (if
there are any).
Employment
All Pi's in the local system compete with one another
for jobs in the local labor market. Likewise, all employers
compete to hire workers with the highest education levels.
There are two types of employment - full-time and part-time.
75
-------
The full-time employment routine assigns population
units (high income first and best educated first) to full
time jobs based on the assumption that workers will attempt
to maximize their net salary (salary received minus trans-
portation costs using last year's transportation cost figures)
Pl-'s will take jobs in the next lower class if none are
available in their class. The part-time employment routine
assigns part-time workers (80 time units in part-time work
equals one full-time job) to part-time jobs on the basis of
bes.t education first. The number of time units allocated
to part-time jobs is set for each group of Pi's on a parcel
by the social decision-makers. If time is allocated for
part-time work, but not enough part-time jobs exist, the
dissatisfaction of the Pi's is increased.
If plants that are causing water pollution are shut down
or forced to curtail output, then the reduction in the re-
quired labor force will have its repercussions throughout
the system. The employment routine treats the former em-
ployees of the shut down plant as unemployed at the start
of the routine and assigns them to other jobs if extra jobs
are available in the local system.
Transportation
Pi's that are employed are assigned to a mode of travel
and to a specific route by this computer routine. Taking
the origins (homes as determined in migration) and the des-
tinations (jobs as determined in employment) this allocator
assigns workers to transportation mode and routes in an ef-
fort to minimize total transportation costs (dollar costs
plus the dollar value of time spent) subject to the con-
straints imposed by public transit capacity, road congestion,
and transportation boycotts.
Each employer may offer a unique salary; Pi's from a
single parcel may be employed at several different locations,
and three transportation modes (auto, bus, and rapid rail)
may be considered. Government decision-makers may affect
the transportation access (and thereby indirectly affect
employment choices) by choosing where to build roads of
different capacities, where to run bus lines, what fare to
charge, and where to build and operate rapid rail service.
76
-------
School Allocation
Each PI contains a number of school age children who
attend public schools, if the public schools are available
and meet quality criteria that differ by income class.
This routine assigns students by class (low class first)
to public schools or private schools based upon school
quality criteria (quality of plant and equipmentr quality of
teachers, and the student-teacher ratio) and capacity of the
school serving their district. Population units who send
their children to private schools as a result of local
public school deficiencies must bear the cost of such private
education.
Another school allocation routine assigns adults from
Pi's to public adult education programs in proportion to the
amount of leisure time allocated by Pi's to such programs.
The local education authority provides public adult education
programs by hiring teachers and using existing educational
facilities. If Pi's are not able to spend as much in adult
public education programs as they wanted, then their personal
dissatisfaction increases.
Time Allocation
For each Pi grouping, time spent in transportation is
deducted from a total of 100 units; then time spent in part-
time employment is deducted; public adult education time is
deducted; private adult education costs are determined and
the time is deducted; voter registration is changed as a
result of the time spent in politics and the time is deducted;
and time is deducted for time spent in recreation, and consump-
tion of PG and PS is increased above the normal amount.
The remaining time is labeled "involuntary" time, which con-
tributes to the level of dissatisfaction calculated for the
following year.
Commercial
Each PI grouping must purchase units of personal goods
and units of personal services each year. Establishments
that sell personal goods and personal services must sell
exclusively to local system demanders. These establishments
compete with one another through locational advantages and
by prices for a unit of goods or services sold. In the
commercial routine, the purchases (normal and recreation-
related) of the population groups on a parcel and residential
maintenance expenditures are allocated to personal goods and
personal services establishments using the criteria that
establishments have a limited capacity and that shoppers
77
-------
attempt to minimize total costs (sale price plus transportation
charges).
rln a similar fashion, purchasers of business goods and
business services must buy annually from BG and BS esta-
blishments. These establishments compete with one another to
supply the local demand. I-n the commercial routine, the
purchasesof businesses (including personal goods and personal
services establishments) for normal operation and for main-
tenance are allocated to business goods and business services
establishments based upon the same criteria as above (an
infinite-capacity outside supplier sells goods and services
at prices in excess of normal local prices).
The amount of purchases from local personal goods and ser-
vices establishments is affected by the normal amount of bus-
iness generated by Major Recreation Areas and the present
quality rating of the water bodies serving those recreation
areas. Thus, consumption at local stores will rise some-
what with good water quality and fall with poor water quality.
This consumption is assumed to be made by tourists from
outside the local system.
Bookkeeping
This routine makes all the final calculations of incomes
and expenditures and of indicators for use in the detailed
computer output to the economic activities and teams, the
social decision-makers, the government departments, and the
summary statistics.
78
-------
Interrelated Activities (Subsystems)
The basic design assumption of the model is that if
the major activities that take place within a regional area
are represented and related to one another, then the actual
demands for water quantity and quality will result from
the operation of these activities. Furthermore, the realis-
tic way in which water resource decisions and their impacts
affect the urban system can only be represented in a holistic
model that incorporates public and private decision-making.
The major decision-making actors are business (the
economic sector), the local population (the social sector)
and public policy makers (the government sector). They
interrelate with one another in a physical and institutional
environment that takes into consideration spatial relation-
ships, ties to a larger outside system, and allocates goods,
services, labor, incomes, etc. by a number of market opera-
tions .
The major markets are:
1. Interrelationships with the Outside System
2. Migration and Housing
3. Employment and Transportation
4. Commercial and Transportation
5. Time Allocation
6. Public Goods and Services
7. Allocation of Financial Resources
8. Demand for and Supply of Water
The four basic building blocks of the model are business
types, population units, government functions, and parcels
of land. All of these factors are dealt with in a micro
manner. That is, an individual population unit (represent-
ing a given number of people with loaded or derived charac-
teristics) finds housing at a specific location, is employed
by a specific employer (.if in fact it is employed) , shops
at designated locations, etc..
79
-------
Basic Building Blocks
Much of the design effort associated with the devel-
opment of the RIVER BASIN MODEL was spent developing general
and usable concepts of land parcels, business activities,
population units and government functions. A general concept
is required so that any area in the continental United States
can be represented. The concepts must be usable in the sense
that the users of the model are able to understand the basic
system relationships of the model and the statistical output
generated by the computer within a relatively short period
of time.
Parcels of Land
The geographical area represented by the.model will be
comprised of land parcels. A parcel of land has the follow-
ing characteristics:
1. A place from which distance to other parcels
is measured.
2. A size (number of acres or square miles), a
shape (square) and a unique identification
number (pair of coordinates).
3. A number of constituent percents of land.
4. A single owner of the privately owned portion
of the parcel.
5. A single zoning classification.
6. A single private land use.
All geographical areas (such as political jurisdictions,
special districts, river basins, flood plains, etc.) are
defined in terms of full parcels of land.
An important characteristic of the sum of all the par-
cels, which define the map boundaries, is that they define
the geographical limits of the local system. All activities
and decision-makers that are outside of the regional boun-
daries comprise the outside system. There may be some
activities (Federal installations and state institutions)
and some decision-makers (at the Federal and state level)
that are physically within the boundaries of the region.
These activities and their employment impacts are part of
the local system, but their policy is made as part of the
outside system (exogenous).
80
-------
Business Activity
The RIVER BASIN MODEL contains business activity within
four categories: manufacturing, commercial, residential,
and farms. Within each of these categories there may be
many specific business types. For example, eleven types of
manufacturing may be represented, five types of commercial,
three types of residences and five types of farms. Busi-
ness activities must be located on parcels of land. The
production function for each manufacturing and commercial
business is dependent upon the quantity and quality of plant
and equipment, and the amount of labor hired.
81
-------
SECTION X
APPENDICES
Page
APPENDIX A - EXAMPLE OF THE CALCULATION OF THE 84
WATER QUALITY ON A PARCEL
APPENDIX B - PROGRAMS OF THE COMPUTER PROGRAM 93
APPENDIX C - SIMPLIFICATIONS IN THE MODEL 96
APPENDIX D - AGGREGATION IMPLICATIONS 101
APPENDIX E - SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY 103
APPENDIX F - UNITS OF MEASURE 106
FIGURES
Figure Page
A-l Visual Representation of Water Activity 85
on a Selected Parcel
A-2 Definition of the Nine Comprehensive 87
Water Quality Levels
A-3 Water Withdrawn, Not Withdrawn, and Added 88
To a Parcel
A-4 Elimination of Three Pollutants Due to 90
Time in the Water
B-l Alphabetical List of the Programs That 94
Comprise the River Basin Model
C-l Percent of Original Pollution Remaining 99
As a Function of the Number of Parcels
Downstream and the Rate of Flow of the
River (Time)
83
-------
APEENDIX A
EXAMPLE OF THE CALCULATION OF THE
WATER QUALITY ON A PARCEL
The workings of,the water system can be illustrated
by an example of how water quality in a river is treated on
a single parcel of land for a typical working day in the
year. Assume parcel A has been loaded to receive the flow
of water from B and C, and to empty into D (Figure A-l).
The loaded values for A are the MGD (millions of ..gallons).
per day) on the parcel (a measure of the maximum volume of
water on the parcel that may be tapped by users) and the
rate of flow of the water (in parcels per day). The percent
of the area of the parcel that is consumed by the river is
also part of the load data, but it is not systemically
related to the performance of the river.
The water volumes that flow into A from B and C do
not have to equal the volume that flows from A to D. It is
assumed that feeder streams and small rivers not explicitly
represented by the model may contribute to the increased
volume of water on parcel A.
1. Calculation of the Initial Water Quality on a Parcel
The values of water inflowing to .parcel A from parcels
B and C, in conjunction with the concentrations of each
pollutant type, are important in determining the water
quality on A. The product of the pollutant concentration and
the volume of the water yield the pollutants in each of the
seven categories that flow into A. These are mixed together
and related to the water volume on A to determine pollution
concentrations, which in turn yield the water quality level
on parcel A.
Assume the following numbers relate to parcel A
MGD A = 100
Rate of FlowA = 6 PARCELS/DAY
and the following pollutants are contributed by parcels
B and C
BODfi = 500 LBS/DAY
BODC = 2400 LBS/DAY
ChloridesB = 150 LBS/DAY
Coliformc = 65 PARTS/DAY
84
-------
Figure A-l
VISUAL REPRESENTATION OF WATER ACTIVITY
ON A SELECTED PARCEL
Withdrawn
by Water Dept
Parcel B
Water
Flow
Parcel C
Parcel A
CALCULATE WQI
Water
Flow
Used by I Not
Indus try j Withdrawn
CALCULATE POLLU-
TION
SENT TO NEXT PARCE
Parcel D
Water
Flow
Returned
by Water Dept
Farm Runoff
85
-------
If these were the only pollutants inflowing to A, then
the water quality index for parcel A would be calculated
as a function of these three pollutant categories.
The water quality level based upon each pollutant cate-
gory is calculated separately:
1) Calculation of quality level based upon BOD:
BODB + BOPC 500 + 2400
" MGDA = - = 29 LBS/MG
This concentration of BOD gives an initial water
quality level of 3. (See Figure A-2)
2) Calculation of quality level based upon chlorides:
Chlorides^ =? 150 =
B _ 1.5 LBS/MG (yields a water
MGDA IW quality level of 1)
3) Calculation of quality level based upon coliforms:
Coli forms,, 65
_ ^ = _ = . 65 parts per MG (yields a water
MGDA 100 quality level of 1!
Therefore, the actual water quality index for parcel A is
the highest of the above three calculations, or 3... This
means that the water users who use the water on parcel A
collectively have access to 100 MGD of water with a quality
level of 3. It is this quality level that is used to derive
the pollution index for parcel A. This is also the quality
level that determines the cost borne by water users who
use surface water from that parcel.
2. The Use of Water on the Parcel
Conceptually the water on a parcel can be looked at ?
as shown in Figure A- 3.
All of the water that is withdrawn by industries that
are surface water users is returned to the system before
the water leaves the parcel. The Water Department may with-
draw water from the parcel and dump it back onto the same
parcel, or it may dump it on a downstream parcel. Or the
Water Department could dump water onto parcel A that it with-
drew from an upstream parcel.
The types of activities that draw water from a parcel are:
86
-------
Figure A-2
Definition of the Nine Comprehensive Water Quality Levels
Water Quality Levels
345 6
foj-j-utant: Types
BOD (LBS/MG)
Chlorides (LBS/MG)
Nutrients (LBS/MG)
Coliform
Bacteria (parts per MG)
Temperature
Oil & Floating Solids
High Level Wastes
Explanation of the Table
10
5
25
2
0
0
0
20
10
50
6
0
0
0
30
15
100
12
1
0
0
40
20
200
20
2
0
0
60
30
400
40
4
0
0
100
40
800
70
7
> 0
0
150
60
1600
120
10
> 0
0
300
80
3200
160
14
> 0
> 0
> 300
> 80
> 3200
> 160
> 14
> 0
y o
In order to determine the water quality level or index of given amounts of water, take the
concentrations of each of the seven pollutant categories and calculate the water quality level
based upon each pollutant separately. For example, a BOD concentration of 25 LBS/MG would yield
an index of 3, coliform bacteria of 169 parts per MG would yield an index of 9, and the presence
of oil and floating solids would allow the water quality to be no better than 6. The worst
(highest) water quality index that was calculated using the pollutant types separately, is
assigned to the given amount of water. If the water, on parcel x had the three pollutants
described above, it would be assigned water quality index of 9.
Looked at another way, water quality level 4 is attained when a body of water has concentra-
tions of BOD that exceed 30 but fall below 41, coliform bacteria concentrations above 12 but
below 21, etc.
-------
Figure A-3
WATER WITHDRAWN, NOT WITHDRAWN,
AND ADDED TO A PARCEL
100 MGD
WITHDRAWN
SURFACE
WATER USER
NOT WITHDRAWN
This portion of
water not with-
drawn has its
concentrations
of pollution
biologically
changed as a
function of the
amount of concen-
tration and the
rate of flow of
the water.
-88
-------
Water Department (at an intake parcel)
Surface Water Users (at the plant location parcel)
The types of activities that pour water into a parcel are:
Water Department (at an outflow parcel)
Surface Water Users (at the plant location parcel)
Farms (at runoff parcels)
The intake and outflow parcels for the Water Department
plants are policy decisions. Surface water users intake and
outflow on the parcel on which they are located. Farm run-
off flows onto parcels that are pre-specified and do not
change.
3. Water Not Withdrawn
For that portion of the water on a parcel that is not
withdrawn for use, a chemical process takes place which
reduces the concentration of pollution in that portion of
the water.
In our example, assume that ninety percent of the water
was not withdrawn. Therefore, 90 MGD of the quality
3 water will go through this chemical process. The specific
pollutants of this water as it entered the parcel were:
BOD = 29 LBS/MG
Chlorides = 1.5 LBS/MG
Coliform = .65 parts per MG
Figure A-4 indicates the percentage of ,BOD and Coliform
that will remain in the unused water after it flows through
the parcel. The unused water is combined with the used
water as they both leave the parcel. With a Rate of Flow of
6 parcels per day, the concentrations of BOD and Coliform in
the unused water after flowing through the parcel are 27
LBS/MG and .56 Parts/MG, respectively. Chlorides do not
biodegrade, so the amount of chlorides is still 1.5 LBS/MG.
4. Water Withdrawn and Returned by Industry
Industrial surface water users draw water from the parcel
(if it is not the poorest quality water — level 9) and treat
it so that it is usable for their purposes. As a result of
their production process they add pollutants to the water
they use. It is the choice of these industries or, possibly
a legal requisite, to treat their outflow and thereby remove
all or part of the pollution in the water they return to the
water system.
89
-------
Figure A-4
Elimination of Three Pollutants Due to Time in the Water
Percent of Original
Pollutant Remaining at
the End of a Flow Through
a Parcel
Rate of Flow
of the River
(parcels per day)
BOD
Nutrients
Coliform
1
2
4
6
8
11
15
22
30
44
(sluggish)
(slow)
(average)
(fast)
(rapid)
50
75
89
92
96
96
97
97
98
99
33
67
83
89
92
94
96
97
98
99
17
58
79
86
90
93
95
96
97
98
90
-------
Assume that there is a surface water user which uses
10 MGD and returns that much watar with the following pollu-
tion concentration characteristics:
BOD = 100 LBS/MG
Chlorides = 50 LBS/MG
Coliform = 5 parts per MG
Since this industry uses 10 MGD its total pollution for
the day is 1000 LBS of BOD, 500 LBS of Chlorides, and 50
parts of Coliform. This pollution is added to the pollution
coming from other sources to calculate the pollution concen-
trations leaving parcel A.
5. Water Withdrawn by the Water Department
If water is withdrawn from a parcel by the Water Depart-
ment it need not be returned to that parcel. Assume that no
water was withdrawn from parcel A for use by the Water Depart-
ment.
6. Water Returned by the Water Department
The Water Department may or may not treat the outflow
from one of its plants that outflows onto parcel A. In any
case, the water returned will have an accompanying concentra-
tion of some or all of the pollutants. Assume that 20 MGD
of water were returned to parcel A by the Water Department and
that it had the following pollutants:
BOD = 50 LBS/MG
Chlorides = 10 LBS/MG
Coliform = 15 parts per MG
This pollution is added to the pollution coming from
other sources to calculate the pollution concentrations leav-
ing parcel A.
7. Water from Agricultural Sources (Runoff from Farms)
Although agricultural activities do not withdraw water
from the water system, it is possible for run-off from farms
to flow into the water system. Farms create pollution in
relation to the type of farms and the amount of fertilizer
used. Assume that the farm run-off to parcel A was 10 MGD
and it had a concentration of nutrients of 100 LBS/MG. This
pollution is added to the pollution coming from other sources
to calculate the pollution concentrations leaving parcel A.
91
-------
8. Calculation of the Final Pollution Concentrations on a
Parcel'
The concentrations of each of the pollutant categories
on parcel A are calculated so that they may be used to com-
pute the water quality level on the parcel into which they
flow.
The concentrations by pollutant category for parcel A
are as follows:
LBS/MG MGD
BOD:
Water Not Withdrawn
Industrial Water
Water Department Return
Farm Runoff
Total Pounds
Concentration (LBS/MG) ... 45.20
Chlorides:
Water Not Withdrawn
Industrial Water
Water Department Return
Farm Runoff
Total Pounds
Concentration (LBS/MG)
Coliform:
Water Not Withdrawn
Industrial Water
Water Department Return
Farms
Total Parts
Concentration (Parts per MG).
1.
50.
10.
•
5
15
0
5
0
0
0
8.
59
90
10
20
10
35
90
10
20
10
4.03
Nutrients:
Farms
Total
Concentration (LBS/MG)
100
10
LBS
28
100
50
0
90
10
20
10
2520
1000
1000
0
4520
135.0
500.0
200.0
0
835.0
53.10
50.00
300.00
0
403.10
1000
1000
10.00
92
-------
APPENDIX B
PROGRAMS OF THE COMPUTER PROGRAM
The computer program for the River Basin Model is com-
prised of 325 sub-programs. These programs are listed in
Figure B-l. Some of the programs are service routines used
a number of places in a cycle of the model, while others
are very specific programs that are used only once during a
cycle.
The modules of the model are composed of one or more
of these programs. For example, the Migration Modules uses
the following 12 programs to move population units into,
out of, and within the local system.
1. HSDSST - calculate and stores dissatisfaction indices
for all Pi's on board.
2. GETCUT - determines what personal dissatisfaction con-
stitutes a 20% cutoff point for each class.
3. MOUOUT - determines how many Pi's of each class on
each residence working at each employment location will
move out for reasons of (1) unemployment, (2) under-
employment, (3) mobility, or (4) dissatisfaction.
4. UNCRWD - calculates percent occupancy of each residence
and determines how many Pi's of each class on each res-
idence must move out as a result of overcrowding.
5. DISPLC - determines how many Pi's of each class on each
residence working at each employment location will move
out in order to move out enough to satisfy UNCRWD's
requirements.
6. INMIG - determines how many immigrants will move in and
how much natural population growth there will be.
7. SETUP - determines where Pi's will move into, using
PICKRS.
8. PICKRS - finds best available and acceptable housing.
9. MOVFN - does actual moving in of Pi's as determined by SETUP,
10. JANOUT - prints migration detail.
11. MIGSUM - prints migration summary.
12. KLEAR - tidies up after housing demolitions.
93
-------
Figure B-l
Alphabetical List of the Programs that
Comprise the RIVER BASIN MODEL
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7-
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37-
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
ACAUC
ACBLD
ACBMAIN
ACRID .
ADDBUS
ADDCTU
ADDPOL
ALCMAIN
APACK
APPROP
AS
ASSESR
ASSESS
ASSOUT
ASVMP
ASVSET
AUCTN
AVAILL
AVLDSB
BGBSCT
BLANK
BLC
BLDRR
BNDNTY
BNDPAY
BNDPT
BONDS
BOUND
BOYCOT
BSHMAIN
BSRROT
BTMBND
BUILD
BUS BMP
CHGUTS
CHKRTN
CHPAR
CHPVT
CHRTRN
CHTRK
CITEAM
CNTRCT
COLAP
COMCON
COMDIG
CONAC
CONGES
CONIN
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
94.
95.
96.
97-
98.
99.
100.
COUNTR
CTYLOD
CTYMAIN
DAMPR
DBND
DEMMP
DEPREC
DIS.T
DOBLDS
BS-TLB
DUMIES
ECBOY
ECNSTM
ECSUM
EDIT
EDLEVL
EDORD
EDTMAIN
EMP
EMPLOC
EMPMAIN
EMPRT
EMP SUM
EMP TAX
ENDS
FARES
FBUSS
FETCEN
FISTA
FMDATA
FNDLET
FNDTEM
FNDTYP
FORTPRE
FRMLND
FRMMAP
FRMOUT
FSA
FSAAMT
FSMAX
FTCHVK
FXDWTR
GAILMN
GETBLK
GETCUT
GETVAL
GOVMNT
GVTSMP
HBSDP
ADEN
REDE
HISTCK
101.
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
107-
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
114.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
.130.
131.
132.
133.
134.
135.
136.
137.
138.
139.
140.
141.
142.
143.
144.
145.
146.
147.
148.
149.
150.
151.
152.
HISTLD
HISTRE
HLTCST
RRTRN
HSDSST
HSDSSW
HWYMAP
HYWAY
IBCOR
IBIN
IBLIN
IBLOCK
IBNPY
ICOTRN
IDEMCI
IDEMEC
IDLIN
MAINPGM
IEF
IFIND
ILFACOM
ILFALL10
ILFCLAS
ILFCSAS
ILFEXT10
ILFFINT
ILFFORT
ILFGEN10
ILFLERF
ILFLEXP
ILFLLOG
ILFLSCN
ILFPARIO
ILFROL10
ILFSERF
ILFSEXP
ILFSLOG
ILFSSCN
ILFTRBK
ILFUNF10
ERMESG
IODF
CHARS
INRTNS
TNAME
NAMLU
SOCIAL
INMIG
I.NROAD
INRTN3
IOCF
IRLIN
153.
154.
155.
156.
157.
158.
159.
160.
161.
162.
163.
164.
165.
166.
167.
168.
169.
170.
171.
172.
173.
174.
175.
176.
177.
178.
179.
180.
181.
182.
183.
184.
185.
186.
187.
188.
189.
190.
191.
192.
193.
194.
195.
196.
197.
198.
199.
200.
201.
202.
203.
204.
JANOUT
JANOUW.
JURWRD
KLEAR
LANDO
LINT
LITR
LNDHWY
LNDMNS
LNDPAR
LNDPRK
LNDSCH
LNDTRM
LNDUNH
LNDUTS
LOADMS
LOADSC
LOANS
VECBLK
NLNCDS
CNTRL
VECTOR
LONSOT
LOSTA
LUTS
MAJREC
. MAPMAIN
MIGMAIN
MIGRAT
MIGSUM
MKVMP
MOVIN
MOVOUT
MSMAP
MSQUAL
MSREQT
MUMAP
MUNPLT
MUNPTS
MUSER
NAMET
NCHPVT
NCHPVT
NEWBND
NEWCOD
NEWCON
NEWJOB
NSPACK
NUMDT
NUMEDT
ODDS
OP CM
94
-------
205.
206.
207.
208.
209.
210.
211.
212.
213.
214.
215.
216.
217.
218.
219.
220.
221.
222.
223.
224.
225.
226.
227.
228.
229.
230.
231.
232.
233.
234.
235.
236.
237.
238.
239.
240.
241.
242.
243.
244.
245.
246.
247.
248.
249.
250.
251.
252.
253.
254.
255.
256.
OP CHAIN
OUTPCU
PARCRD
PBCMST
PBDEBT
PEOPLE
PGMP
PGMPS
POPCNT
PRCHED
PRCSET
PRINTY
PRIVAT
PRKLOC
PRYMAIN
PRYMAN
PRYOU
PU
PUBMAIN
PUNC
PUTNUM
PWS
PZ
PZMAP
RAIL
RAND
RANGUS
RCASH
RDMTLV
RDWEAR
RECCHK
REDE
REDIST
RENTS
RETER
RIVWAT
RLSBLK
ROUTES
RTBLD
RTEMP
SALTAX
SAMPL
SCECMP
SCHOUT
SCHPVT
SCMAP
SCRNCH
SDMMP
SETALL
SETCAP
SETCOM
SETDAM
257.
258.
259.
260.
261.
262.
263.
264.
265.
266.
267.
268.
269.
270.
271.
272.
273.
274.
275.
276.
277 .
278.
279.
280.
281.
282.
283.
284.
285.
286.
287.
288.
289.
290.
291.
292.
293.
294.
295.
296.
297.
298.
299-
300.
301.
302.
303.
304.
305.
306.
307.
308.
SETEMP
SETLAM
SETRSZ
SETSTF
SETUP
SINDEX
ECBOY
SOCNAM
SOCSUM
SORTEM
SPLIT
SPPTEM
START
STPTRN
TALOC
TAXES
TAXEZ
TAXSUM
TERMS
TMALC
TMCSH
TMVAL
TOPRES
TPRMP
TRCMAIN
TREAT
TRKWAP
TRMMAIN
TRNCMP
TRTRC
TRTST
TRTYP
TSBYC
TSCAN
TYMALC
UNCRWD
UNPRTX
UNUSE
UTCMP
UTMAP
UTS
VALU
VALUE
VECDEF
VECDFL
VECDMP
VOTES
VSTALL
WATOUT
WBUSS
WHD1
WLFSUB
309.
310.
311.
312.
313.
314.
315.
316.
317.
318.
319.
320.
321.
322.
323.
324.
325.
WPRYOU
WRBLD
WRCST
WRITM
WRPRC
WRRES
WRTBAL
WRYMAIN
WRYOU
W.TRHWY
WTRINP
WTRMAP
WTRPRC
WTRQUL
ZEREN
ZERO
ZRLL
95
-------
APPENDIX C
SIMPLIFICATIONS IN THE MODEL
In order to make the River Basin'Model practically usable,
and still not require that the players have previous water
management experience (or business or government experience,
either), it was necessary to simplify the complexity that
actually exists in the way water is used; the way pollutants
are generated, treated, and degraded in the water system;
the way water prices are set, and the way businesses and
government departments operate.
This means that a number of factors are.omitted or are
lost in the aggregation, linear relationships are employed
in cases where in reality a more complex functional rela-
tionship is involved, and attention is paid to making rela-
tionships understandable to the model users. This last
model-building guideline is difficult to achieve because
of the large number of factors involved and related to one
another in the model.
To illustrate some of the model-building trade-offs
that constantly cropped up in the RIVER BASIN MODEL, the
case of the biodegradation of pollutants will be discussed.
Biodegradation of Pollutants
Because of a lot of other considerations, the number
of pollutants that the model would deal with was reduced to
seven: BOD, chlorides, nutrients, coliform, temperature
deviations, oil and floating solids, and high level wastes.
Several of these pollutants tend not to disappear or
be reduced in magnitude as a result of the time they are in
the water (for example, chlorides, oil and floating solids,
and high level wastes).
Initially (Spring of 1971) it was decided that there would
be some dimunition of chlorides over time (due to settling
to the bottom of the water) and no dimunition in the other
two persistent pollutants. By late 1971, a complete reversal
had been made. As the result of a meeting with EPA personnel,
it was decided not to have chlorides biodegrade at all. The
other two pollutants, oil and floating solids and high level
wastes, were made to disappear after being in the water for
five parcels downstream from where they were dumped. There
is no way to rationalize the disappearance of these two types
of pollutants in such a short span (12 1/2 miles downstream).
The change was made because several runs of the model with
the assumptions of no disappearance and with disappearance
after 10 parcels gave results and water quality levels that
we felt were too much of a penalty for water users many
96
-------
parcels downstream. Therefore, the design staff made the
value judgment that for playability purposes these two pollu-
tants should disappear after being in the water for five par-
cels downstream from where they are dumped. Any model user
who does not agree with this value judgment (either on sci-
entific or playability grounds) will find that a systems analyst
can change that parameter with very little difficulty.
The temperature measurement is deviations from the normal tem-
perature (assumed to be 75 degrees F). Since heat dissipates
rather quickly, it was assumed that the temperature would
drop a certain number of degrees each parcel. This is reason-
able especially since a parcel is 2 1/2 miles in length.
Coliform bacteria actually has a period of multiplication
(about its first 1/2 day in the water) before dying off.
Rather than represent this, we made the assumption that the
coliform generated by residences and industries remained in
the internal sewers for the first 12 hours before being
released into the surface water system. In this way, it was
necessary to represent only the decay portion of the coliform
bacteria life cycle.
The same type of equation is used to represent the decay
of coliform bacteria, BOD, and nutrients. Only the co-
efficients of the equation are changed from one type of
pollutant to another. The basic equation is:
+ At_-L (1-
C*ROF
where
A = The amount of the pollutant (LBS or PARTS)
C = A coefficient that is different for each pollutant type
ROF = Rate of flow of the river (a measure of time)
Thus, the amount of each of these pollutants that remains
in the water at any point downstream from a discharge point is
dependent upon a coefficient value and the time that the
pollutant has been in the water.
Figure C-l shows the shape of the curve for this equation
for several values of ROF and with C=2. These curves are easy
to understand and easy for players to deal with.
The actual decay equation for BOD is of the form
r -kt. .
BODt = BODt_1 [e ] a)
a) Source:Robert Dorfman and Henry D. Jacoby, "A Model of Public
Decisions Illustrated by a Water Pollution Policy Problem, "The
Analysis and Evaluation of Public Expenditures; The PPBS System.
Government Printing Office, Washington, 1969.(p. 269)
97
-------
where
k is a constant
t = time
It would give shapes like those shown as dotted curves in
Figure C-l. There is not enough difference between the
shapes of these curves (they are not drawn to be as similar
to one another as possible) to make an appreciable difference
in the effects generated by the model and the playability
of the RIVER BASIN MODEL.
Simplifications in the Water Component
Several additional water relationships could have bein
included in the model (some were designed but not imple-
mented because it was thought that they would add more com-
plexity than benefit to the use of the model):
1. Synergism among poTLutants as they biodegrade.
For example, the temperature of the water affects the rate
at which nutrients biodegrade. Likewise, nutrients and BOD
interact when in the water together.
2. Water absorption by water users. It was assumed
for play ability purposes that all the water withdrawn by
industries is returned to the system whereas in the real
world CR would return only 95%, MP - 99%, TE - 92%, PA -
94%, etc. On the average, industries absorb about 6% of the wate
3. Seasonal differences in water use. The water
quality measured in the model is the average quality for
a typical work day. No attempt was made to show the vari-
ations that might take place within a year.
4. The effects of urbanization. The urban run-off gen-
erated by various densities of development are not measured
in the model.
5. Power plants. The tremendous heat generated by
nuclear power plants is not represented in the model because
the Utility Department is not provided with options for the
types of utility plants it may construct and operate.
It should be kept in mind, however, that all of these
items could be added to the model with very little trouble.
98
-------
Figure C-l
Percent of Original Pollution Remaining as a Function of
the Number of Parcels Downstream and the Rate of Flow of
the River (Time).
100-
d
•H
QJ
C
O
•H
-P
O
CM
(0
c
-H
tP
-H
M
O
-P
C
-------
Determination of Quality Levels
Estimates of what concentrations of pollutants in the model
caused a level 9 water quality rating were derived from
numbers contained in a paper entitled "A Water Quality Index
—Do We Dare?" by Robert M. Brown, et al. This ground-
breaking paper was prepared for the National Symposium on
Data and Instrumentation for Water Quality Management held
in July 1970 at the University of Wisconsin. In it the
authors used opinion research to determine the inclusion
and weighting of factors to be used in a comprehensive water
quality index.
The concentrations that would cause the worst quality stream
in their terms were used to define the quality level in the
RIVER BASIN MODEL terms. It may be that this was too re-
strictive a definition, especially since the model assumes
the quality level 9 water is unusable. Persons who disagree
with this formulation can make a minor design change to alter
the quality 9 level definition or to make quality 9 level
water usable at some treatment cost.
There are some disadvantages to having a water quality level
that cannot be used even at very high treatment costs as the
model assumes. But conceptually, the price of outside system
water can be viewed as the treatment cost for level 9 water.
100
-------
APPENDIX D
AGGREGATION IMPLICATIONS
The aggregation assumptions in the River Basin Model
allow the model to deal with something as complex as a
regional system in terms that are manageable. In the social
sector, the assumption of 500 people to a population unit
(PI) means that the Cuyahoga River Basin area has about
5000 population units. This large a number of Pi's causes
the running time of some of the computer programs to be
relatively large. If it were assumed that each PI were 50
people, the running time might increase by as much as a
factor of ten (assuming that the core storage could handle
50,000 Pi's).
An example of aggregation in the Government Sector is the
school facility. The smallest school facility has a design
capacity of 20,000 students (including all grades, 1 through
12) and 840 teachers. If the model were being used for school
planning purposes, this would be unacceptable. The impor-
tance of the school system at the general level of detail
contained in the RIVER BASIN MODEL is to provide the major
short run impacts of the educational facilities on the local
system: high operating costs, quality considerations for
residential selection, land use, employment impact, and
share of the local budget. When the model is being used by
water resource planners or others primarily concerned with
water quality in the represented river basin, the level of
aggregation employed with regard to the School Department is
probably acceptable.
In the Economic Sector, the eleven types of manufac-
turing are aggregated economic business that roughly repre-
sent average two-digit SIC (Standard Industrial Classification)
groupings of industry with regard to land consumption per
employee and employee mix by income class. The pollution
characteristics of these industries are also averages (nation-
wide, at that). This averaging within industry groups over-
looks the fact that there is more variation within a two-
digit SIC industry with regard to pollution generated than
there is across average SIC groupings. For example, within
the industry called CR (Chemicals and Rubber) in the model
there are such real life activities as manufacturers of
coal tar products, plastics, synthetic rubber, soaps, phar-
maceutical preparations, paints, fertilizers, and explosives.
101
-------
Example: Treatment Costs
Note that the c6st of building a treatment plant varies
per MGD for the Water Department but not for the indus-
tries. This means that economies of scale are represented
in the public sector but not in the private sector. The
rea-son for this is that a Waste Treatment Plant in the
public sector of the model closely approximates in size
the level of an actual real world facility. That is, treat-
ment plants of 3 MGD or 13 MGD capacity are not of un-
reasonable size.
Due to aggregations in the model, however, the common
factor to all of the level one industries in the economic
sector is that they employ 10,000 workers. Thus a level
one industry must be looked at as a conglomerate of smaller
real life businesses. It was decided, therefore, not to
represent economies of scale in the private sector because
the increase in operation from a level one to a level two
in the model must be viewed as the growth of a lot of small
scale industries and/or the addition of a group of indus-
tries, each employing less than 10,000 workers, in the real
world. The same reasoning explains why surface water users
that have widely different water needs still pay the same
cost per MG of treatment and treatment plant facilities.
Another assumption in the treatment cost for industries
is that it costs all of them the same amount of money to
improve the water quality of an MG of water. The only
treatment costs that are different is the cost needed to
treat water of the best quality and make it suitable for
their particular production process.
102
-------
APPENDIX E
SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY
The following bibliography is not meant to be exhaus-
tive. It is a selection of the research material that we
found most helpful in formulating the structure and some of
the numbers in the model. A good part of our insights into
the regional water management decision process was derived
from conversations with persons from the Environmental
Protection Agency and other environmental groups.
Man and His Environment - America's Water Crisis.
AFL-CIO Report submitted to US Senate, 91st Congress,
1st Session, Commission on Interior and Insular
Affairs - Apr.16, 1969.
A Framework for Action - The comprehensive report of the
Cleveland/Seven County Transportation/Land Use Study
Project No. 003414. 1st Edition: May 69. Second
Edition: Jun. 69.
A Water Quality Index - Do We Dare?
Robert M. Brown, Nina I. McClelland, Rolf A.
Deininger and Ronald G. Tozer
In Proceedings of the National Symposium on Data and
Instrumentation for Water Quality Management
University of Wisconsin, Water Resources Center
Madison, July 21-23, 1970.
"Projections of Water Requirements and The Economics of
Water Policy."
Ciriacy-Wantrup, S.U.
Journal of Farm Economics, Vol. 43 #2, May 61.
"New Horizons in Water Resources Administration."
Fox, Irving K.
Public Administration Review, Vol 25 #1, March 65.
Urban Planning Aspects of Water Pollution Control.
Institute of Urban Environment
Columbia University Press, New York, 1969-
The Ecology of Waste Water Treatment.
H. A. Hawkes
Pergamon Press, Oxford, 1963.
Quality of the Environment: An Economic Approach to
Some Problems in Using Land, Water and Air
Herfindahl, Orris C. and Kneese, Allen U.
Resources for the Future, Inc., Johns Hopkins Press,
Baltimore , 1965.
103
-------
"Water Resources and Regional Economic Growth in the
U.S., 1950-60."
Southern Economic Journal, Vol 33, #4, April 1968.
"The Economy, Energy and the Environment — A Background
Study."
J.E.C., Environmental Policy Division
Library of Congress, Sept. 1, 1970.
A Practical Guide to Water Quality Studies of Steams.
F. W. Kittrell, Special Consultant
National Field Investigations Center
Cincinnati, Ohio U.S. DOI-FWPCA, 1969
Water Pollution - Economic Aspects and Research Needs.
Kneese, Allen V.
Resources for the Future, Washington, D. C., 1962.
Approaches to Regional Water Quality Management.
Kneese, Allen V.
Resources for the Future, June 1967.
"Hydrology for Urban Land Planning - A Guidebook on the
Hydrologic Effects of Urban Land Use."
Leopold, Luna B.
Geological Survey Circular 554
U.S. Department of Interior, Washington, D. C., 1968
The Practice of Water Pollution Biology
Kenneth M. Mackenthun, Chief, Technical Studies Branch
U.S. DOI-FWPCA
Division of Technical Support, September 1969.
Estimated Use of Water in the U.S., 1950 Survey.
MacKichan, K. A.
Circular H5 (50 + 456 (61))
US Geological Survey Circular
"Price Policy and Land Value Taxation for Urban Water
Supplies."
Milliman, Jerome W.
American Journal of Economics for Sociology, Vol 25,
#4, Oct. 66, 379-383.
Waste Management and Control
National Academy of Sciences - NRC
Committee on Pollution, Washington, D. C., 1966.
Water Quality Criteria.
Report of the National Technical Advisory Committee to
the Secretary of the Interior, Federal Water Pollution
Control Administration, Washington, D. C. Apr. 1968
104
-------
The Economics of Industrial Waste Production and
DisposaT~~ ———
Smith, Frank A.
PhD Dissertation, Northwestern University, 1968
"Effects of Increased Water Demands on Three New England
Water Companies."
O'Connor, Leo F.
Journal of the American Water Works Association
Vol. 58, #11, Nov. 66, pp 1374-1375.
"Urban Area Water Consumption: Analysis and Projections."
Robert J. Saunders
The Quarterly Review of Economics and Business, Vol 9,
No. 2, Summer, 1969.
A Systems Analysis Model of Urbanization and Change.
Steinitz, Carl; Rogers, Peter.
MIT Report No. 20, MIT Press, Cambridge, 1970
The Cost of Clean Water and Its Economic Impact, Vol. IV.
Projected waste water treatment costs in the organic
chemical industry.
Cyrus W. Rice and Co., Pittsburgh, Pa.
U.S. DOI-FWPCA, June 1969.
The Nation's Water Resources
U.S. Water Resources Council
Washington, D.C., 1968
Major Uses of Land and Water in the U.S. with Special
Reference to Agriculture Summary for 1964.
US Department of Agriculture
Economic Research Service, Agricultural Economic
Report #149, Nov. 68.
Water Resources Activities in the US - Water Requirements
for Pollution Abatement
Select Subcommittee on National Water Resources
U.S. Senate, S. Res. 48, 86th Congress, July, 1960.
105
-------
APPENDIX F
The Units of Measure Used for Pollutants in the
RIVER BASIN MODEL
The seven pollutant types are represented in the RIVER
BASIN MODEL (RBM) with units of measure that were
thought to be easiest for a layman to deal with. That
is, the normal units of measure were not used when it was
thought a typical user of the model would not have a
"feeling" for the measure. Thus, metric system notation
was avoided.
To some users of the RIVER BASIN MODEL, these measurement
adjustments probably appear unusual and/or unrealistic.
In order to convert the simplified measures of the model
back to more standard notation, the following table may
be used:
Pollutant RIVER BASIN MODEL Corrected
Type Measure Measure
BOD LBS/MG .12 mg/1
Chlorides LBS/MG .12 mg/1
Nutrients LBS/MG .12 mg/1
Coliform PARTS/MG 5000/100 ml
The temperature measure used in RBM are deviations from
75°F. To convert these farenheit measures to centigrade
readings, the deviations would be as indicated below:
Manufacturing Present Altered
Type RBM (F°) RBM (C°)
FO (Foods) '9 5.04
TA (Textiles) 18 10.08
PA (Paper) 16 8.96
CR (Chemicals) 4 2.24
Using centigrade, the deviations would be from 24°C.
The standard conversion from F° to C° is:
C° = 5/9 (F°-32)
106
-------
Modification in Parameters for the RIVER BASIN MODEL
Brief inspection of the water parameters of the model by
several knowledgeable people at EPA has revealed that modi-
fications are called for in the amounts of pollution genera-
ted by land-use activities and in the effectiveness levels
of the various treatment types.
Pollution Generated by Land-Use Activities
Figure 21 in the RBM Overview shows the amounts of pollution
generated by each of the land-use types. A typographical
error was readily noticed in the coliform generated by
residential land uses vis-a-vis the other land uses. The
residential generation of coliform pollution should be
increased by a factor of 100.
A check against the IRT-229-R Study* showed that the BOD
generated per MG of water could be changed for the following
industrial activities:
BOB per MG
Industry RBM IRT Study
FL 600 0
SB 500 0
MP 1000 342
MF 500 0
NL 400 2000
EL 800 2000
TE 500 1700
*A new source of data on the water pollution generated by
various water users has been discovered that might improve
upon the numbers used in the present version of the RIVER
BASIN MODEL. The source is IRT-229-R, "Environmental Impli-
cations of Technological and Economic Change for the United
States, 1967-2000. An Input/Output Analysis." (June 1971).
The following water pollutants are measured by land-use type
in the IRT Study:
COD - substances with chemical oxygen demand
BOD - substance with biological oxygen demand
RO - refractory organics
SS - suspended solids
DS - dissolved solids
N - nitrogen
p - Phosphate compounds
The IRT Study omits toxic chemicals and atomic radiation (HLW)
and persistent pollutants (CL) which are accounted for in the
RIVER BASIN MODEL.
107
-------
BOB per MG
Industry RBM IRT Study
FO 6000 10000
TA 6000 4684
PA 3000 3333
CR 2000 4000
The IRT Study also indicates that in the RBM, BOD for
residential users is about half of what it should be per
millions of gallons of water used.
Effectiveness of Treatment Types
EPA personnel in the Water Quality Office thought that the
treatment effectiveness for BOD and Chlorides was overstated.
Therefore, it was decided when the model is changed to reduce
the effectiveness of primary treatment on BOD to 35 percent
and to increase the effectiveness of secondary treatment to
90 percent (these estimates are identical to those contained
in the IRT Study). Furthermore, the percent elimination of
chlorides will be reduced to zero for secondary treatment and
50 for tertiary treatment. Tertiary treatment effectiveness
on nutrients will be dropped from 99 percent to 95 percent.
Cost of Treatment
In RBM, the cost of treating an MG of polluted water is a
function of the type and size of the treatment facility for
municipal plants. The least efficient tertiary water
treatment plant (most expensive) costs $300 per MG and the
most efficient plant costs $195/MG. All industrial treat-
ment plants have the same cost per MG for each of the treatment
types. The IRT Study showed the following costs by type of
activity for secondary treatment:
FO $392/MG
TA 322
PA 405
CR 297
MP 301
NE 239
EL 270
TE 230
108
-------
The RIVER BASIN MODEL has a $50 cost per MG for chlorination,
$100 for primary, $200 for secondary, and $300 for tertiary.
These could be easily changed to be closer to the IRT figures,
The RIVER BASIN MODEL cost figures relate to the 1960 base
year prices, whereas the IRT study figures relate to the 1967
base year. Thus, part of the explanation for the higher
figures in the IRT Study is due to price inflation.
109
-------
1
Accession Number
w
5
2
Subject Field
Envirometrics
05 01
, Inc . ,
&c Group
SELECTED WATER RESOURCES ABSTRACTS
INPUT TRANSACTION FORM
Washington
D. C.
THE RIVER BASIN MODEL: AN OVERVIEW
1 A Authors)
1 House, Peter W.
Patterson, Philip D.
Cooper, Janice
O'Connell, Greg
I Z Project Designation
EPA, ORM Contract No. 14-12-959
21 Note
22
Citation
23
Descriptors (Starred First)
*Water Pollution, *Water Pollution Effects, ^Treatment, '-Computer Programs, *Water
Users, *Regional Analysis, '''Training, Waste Water Disposal, Recreation, Planning, Grid
Systems, Water Costs, Degredation, Population, Prices, Employment, Farms, Environ-
mental Effects, Floods, Jurisdiction, Economic Growth
25
Identifiers (Starred First)
*Land Uses, ^Population Migration, ^Social Dissatisfaction, ^Resource Allocation,
^Decision-Making Model,*Gaming-Simulation Model, Holistic Model,
27 Abstract
The RIVER BASIN MODEL is a man-machine simulation model that represents the supply
of, demand for, and quality of water within a geographical area that contains a full
range of economic, social, and government activities. The model may be used to repre-
sent any actual or hypothetical river basin area for educational and research purposes.
Users of the model are given control over all the resources of the local area being
represented. Some of the local activities withdraw, water directly from the water
system and return their effluent to that system (either treated or not). Most of the
businesses and population of the local system use municipally supplied water which also
must be withdrawn from thelocal water system and treated if necessary. The municipal
treatment of sewage is a decision that is made in light of local considerations, such
as cost, pollution levels, intergovernmental cooperation, etc.
The output from the operating programs of the RIVER BASIN MODEL computer package illus-
trate the impact that the water system has on such phenomena as housing selection, em-
ployment, time allocation and the activity pattersn that result, and government budgetary
activity (revenue collection and disbursement). The users of the model may make a wide
range of private and public policy decisions which affect the simulations for each of
these phenomena, and which impact the environmental quality of the represented area.
(Patterson - Envirometrics)
Abstrt
JPJl
ictor
i.li.p-1
I. Pat-1-gT.^Ti
Institution
.Envi
•pnmg^ri'if'-g; ) Inc- —
WR;102 (REV. JULY 1969)
WRSI C
»ITH COPY OF DOCUMENT. TO, WATI^ .-- -^^ ^ ^^ ,NTER|OR
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20240
*U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 197Z-484-484-/196
------- |