2018 ASHS Annual Conference

Water is becoming a more scarce resource. Domestically, reduced potable water supplies may endanger current and future landscape plantings. Water recycling, the process whereby water undergoes treatment for reuse, could contribute to lessening the impact of impending water crises and mitigate economic damage to the horticulture industry. Positive (and accurate) consumer perceptions, and ultimately use, of recycled water is essential to its adoption for watering landscapes. Yet, consumer perceptions of differences between terming such water as reclaimed versus recycled water have not been investigated. Our study objective was to fill the gap in the literature regarding consumers' perceptions of the content, perceived risk, and potential uses for recycled and reclaimed water. Funded by a USDA-SCRI grant, we developed an online survey (Qualtrics platform) with informed consent. We obtained 1265 complete responses from U.S. residents in September, 2017; half (n=634) responded to questions about reclaimed water and half (n=631) responded to identical questions regarding recycled water. Results showed mean ratings of the risk of using recycled water (versus reclaimed water) had significantly lower perceived risk (as rated on a 5-point Likert scale with 1=extremely risky and 5=extremely safe) for use in cooking (2.61 v. 2.77, p=0.009), bathing/showering (2.99 v. 3.14, p=0.016), watering lawn (3.77 v. 3.92, p=0.003), flushing toilet (3.97 v. 4.10, p=0.020), washing car (3.86 v. 3.97, p=0.049), and watering public park areas (3.72 v. 3.85, p=0.016). Analyses also showed that subjects' mean rating for risk in using recycled compared to reclaimed water for drinking and fire-fighting were similar. When asked what contents were in either recycled or reclaimed water, a lower percentage of participants perceived that reclaimed water contained 12 potentially harmful items (dyes, harmful chemicals, heavy metals, human waste, herbicides, insecticides, hormones, prescription drugs, pesticides, animal waste, composted plants, and composted animal waste). A similar percentage believed that recycled or reclaimed water contained chlorine, disinfectants, harmful bacteria, helpful bacteria, plant nutrients, pathogens, sanitizers, vitamins, and salts. We also found that a greater proportion of participants believed reclaimed water contained “nothing harmful”. The findings have substantial policy and educational implications. While perceptions drive behavior, education about water contents and potentially safe uses may help bring the U.S. closer to a tipping point where recycling water for non-potable uses can become more acceptable.