Stephen Cook

Dr. Stephen Cook

CSIRO Land and Water, Clayton South, VIC 3169, Australia
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

17Years (2010-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 December 2013 in Water Research
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DMDavid R. Marlow
David R. Marlow
Magnus MogliaMagnus Moglia
Magnus Moglia
SCStephen Cook
Stephen Cook
David BealeDavid Beale
David Beale

1 November 2019 in Science of The Total Environment
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
WAWarish Ahmed
Warish Ahmed
Kerry HamiltonKerry Hamilton
Kerry Hamilton
Simon TozeSimon Toze
Simon Toze
SCStephen Cook
Stephen Cook
Declan PageDeclan Page
Declan Page

28 June 2016 in Water
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Ashok SharmaAshok Sharma
Ashok Sharma
DPDavid Pezzaniti
David Pezzaniti
BMBaden Myers
Baden Myers
SCStephen Cook
Stephen Cook
GTGrace Tjandraatmadja
Grace Tjandraatmadja
AWAndrea Walton
Andrea Walton
Large scale centralised water, wastewater and stormwater systems have been implemented for over 100 years. These systems have provided a safe drinking water supply, efficient collection and disposal of wastewater to protect human health, and the mitigation of urban flood risk. The sustainability of current urban water systems is under pressure from a range of challenges which include: rapid population growth and resulting urbanisation, climate change impacts, and infrastructure that is ageing and reaching capacity constraints. To address these issues, urban water services are now being implemented with Integrated Urban Water Management (IUWM) and Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD) approaches. WSUD systems can deliver multiple benefits including water conservation, stormwater quality improvement, flood control, landscape amenity and a healthy living environment. These systems can be provided as stand-alone systems or in combination with centralised systems. These systems are still novel and thus face knowledge gaps that are impeding their mainstream uptake. Knowledge gaps cover technical, economic, social, and institutional aspects of their implementation. This paper is based on the outcomes of a comprehensive study conducted in South Australia which investigated impediments for mainstream uptake of WSUD, community perceptions of WSUD and potential of WSUD to achieve water conservation through the application of alternative resources, and in flood management. The outcomes are discussed in this paper for the benefit of water professionals engaged with WSUD planning, implementation, community consultation and regulation. Although the paper is based on a study conducted in South Australia, the comprehensive framework developed to conduct this detailed study and investigation can be adopted in any part of the world.

15 April 2017 in Applied and Environmental Microbiology
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
BHB. Hughes
B. Hughes
David BealeDavid Beale
David Beale
PDP. G. Dennis
P. G. Dennis
SCStephen Cook
Stephen Cook
WAWarish Ahmed
Warish Ahmed
Detection of human wastewater contamination in recreational waters is of critical importance to regulators due to the risks posed to public health. To identify such risks, human wastewater-associated microbial source tracking (MST) markers have been developed. At present, however, a greater understanding of the suitability of these markers for the detection of diluted human wastewater in environmental waters is necessary to predict risk. Here, we compared the process limit of detection (PLOD) and process limit of quantification (PLOQ) of six human wastewater-associated MST markers ( Bacteroides HF183 [HF183], Escherichia coli H8 [EC H8], Methanobrevibacter smithii nifH , human adenovirus [HAdV], human polyomavirus [HPyV], and pepper mild mottle virus [PMMoV]) in relation to a fecal indicator bacterium (FIB), Enterococcus sp. 23S rRNA (ENT 23S), and three enteric viruses (human adenovirus serotypes 40/41 [HAdV 40/41], human norovirus [HNoV], and human enterovirus [EV]) in beach water samples seeded with raw and secondary-treated wastewater. Among the six MST markers tested, HF183 was the most sensitive measure of human fecal pollution and was quantifiable up to dilutions of 10 −6 and 10 −4 for beach water samples seeded with raw and secondary-treated wastewater, respectively. Other markers and enteric viruses were detected at various dilutions (10 −1 to 10 −5 ). These MST markers, FIB, and enteric viruses were then quantified in beach water ( n = 12) and sand samples ( n = 12) from South East Queensland (SEQ), Australia, to estimate the levels of human fecal pollution. Of the 12 sites examined, beach water and sand samples from several sites had quantifiable concentrations of HF183 and PMMoV markers. Overall, our results indicate that while HF183 is the most sensitive measure of human fecal pollution, it should be used in conjunction with a conferring viral marker to avoid overestimating the risk of gastrointestinal illness. IMPORTANCE MST is an effective tool to help utilities and regulators improve recreational water quality around the globe. Human fecal pollution poses significant public health risks compared to animal fecal pollution. Several human wastewater-associated markers have been developed and used for MST field studies. However, a head-to-head comparison in terms of their performance to detect diluted human fecal pollution in recreational water is lacking. In this study, we cross-compared the performance of six human wastewater-associated markers in relation to FIB and enteric viruses in beach water samples seeded with raw and secondary-treated wastewater. The results of this study will provide guidance to regulators and utilities on the appropriate application of MST markers for tracking the sources of human fecal pollution in environmental waters and confer human health risks.

1 May 2017 in Sustainable Cities and Society
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
Magnus MogliaMagnus Moglia
Magnus Moglia
SCStephen Cook
Stephen Cook
JMJames McGregor
James McGregor

25 October 2018 in Water
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
Magnus MogliaMagnus Moglia
Magnus Moglia
SCStephen Cook
Stephen Cook
STSorada Tapsuwan
Sorada Tapsuwan
This paper reports on a review of international water conservation efforts, but with a particular focus on the Australian context. The aim is to take stock of the current understanding of water conservation, in particular: what influences people’s decision to conserve water, what influences whether people persist with water conservation behavior and what contributes to awareness and familiarity of water conservation behaviors. We also explore how all these factors jointly can achieve water savings over time, and the efficacy of past efforts to save water. Subsequently, this is used to identify where leading practice for managing water conservation is heading, which we argue is the application of recent developments in behavioral science and advances in smart metering to personalize water conservation programs. To support individualized water conservation efforts, we need more longitudinal studies of water conservation behavior, a greater focus on behavioral science, as well as the development of modelling tools that embed insights and lessons of this research into decision support capability. This can help to develop the capacity to better implement water conservation programs that respond to short-term water scarcity crises, such as droughts, while also providing persistent reductions in per-capita water demand that can help meet strategic water planning needs, such as deferring or downsizing capital investment in supply infrastructure to accommodate demands associated with population growth.