This Project is funded by the European Union

SWIM and Horizon 2020 Support MechanismWorking for a Sustainable Mediterranean, Caring for our Future

Presented by:

Dr. Maggie KOSSIDA, SWIM-H2020 SM NKE

Workshop on “Water Conservation and Resources Efficiency in Industries”

23rd January 2018, Cairo, Egypt

SWIM-H2020 SM EFS-EG-1 & 2

Overview of different technologies and options to introduce water conservation efficiency gains in industries

Presentation Outline

▪ Water efficiency technologies and practices

▪ Industry-specific processes (Textiles, Food & Beverages)

▪ Selected case studies

2

Industrial water use in Egypt

3

Industrial water

Includes: water used both in the manufacturing process, for cooling, for cleaning the facilities, and used from the employees.

In some cases industrial water use is included in the municipal (domestic) water use, and no separate measurements exist.

Facts: Growing sector, 5.4 billion m3/yr water demand. Petroleum sub-sector 35%, food industry 24%, textile industry 13%, engineering and electrical industries 13%

Responsible authority: Industrial water is provided through the municipal PWSS - HCWW. Self-supply for industrial purposes is also applicable (e.g. in Menofia Governorate), mainly from groundwater, MWRI permits

Monitoring & recording: Measured by the HCWW with water meters per factory and per month. Measured by MWRI with meters of what is abstrcated and returned in the groundwater

Basic Definitions

4

Water Demand > Water UseWater Demand > Water Supply

Unmet demand, water stress

Water Demand < Water Use Wastage of water (e.g. over-irrigation)

Water Abstraction > Water Demand Over-abstraction

Water Supply > Water DemandWater Supply > Water Use

Losses (e.g. leakage)

Climate change risks on industries

5

Climate

variable

Potential impact on industrial facilities Associated costs Risk

Temperature

changes

- Demand for energy to cool/heat facilities inresponse to seasonal periods or prolonged of warm/cool weather, and high/low temperatureextremes- Employees discomfort

- Minor to major operational costs - Minor to major capital costs for new equipment- Increased energy bills

Medium

to high

High/low temperatureextremes

- Thermal loading of structures and surfaces causing the expansion, buckling and stresses and the failure of building services

- Minor to major repair costs due to damage on building envelope, services, fixtures and fittings

Medium

to high

Water

Scarcity &

Drought

- Increased demand for scarce water resources

impacting operation processes and maintenance

(including landscape management)

- Water supply interruptions

- Electricity shortages also possible, requiring

energy generation

- Major operational costs

- Increased water bills

- Minor to major capital costs to

implement water savings

technologies, alternative sources

of water, etc.

High

Heavy/prolonged RainfallFloodsStorms

- Flood (pluvial and fluvial) water damage, power failures- Structural damage/ failure

- Minor to major repair costs due to damage on building envelope, services, fixtures and fittings- Major capital costs in case of structural damage/failure

Medium

to high

Water in industrial processes

6

Fresh water in industry is used for cooling, heating, cleaning, transport, washing and is finally part of the final product

Industry sector Main use / Water related processes

Paper & Pulp carrying/ transport/ dilution medium of the fibers (washing, screening, bleaching and forming)

Textile reaction medium (dyeing, finishing), washing/rinsing, bleaching, dyeing, heating and cooling

Food reaction medium, washing/rinsing, cleaning of equipment and heat transfer. Also water is used as raw material (e.g. as part of the product)

Leather (tanning) Curing, lime soaking, dehairing, deliming/bating, pickling, tanning, retanning/dyeing/colouring

Metal (surface treatment) mainly for cleaning/rinsing and as “solvent” for metals to be precipitated on the metal surface (electroplating/anodising, phosphating, conversion coatings), surface preparation steps (e.g. degreasing), passivating or pickling

Chemical/Pharmaceutical mainly for reaction medium/solvent, product washing, cleaning of equipment and heat transfer (cooling, heating).

Oil / Gas used in drilling activities

Mining used as drainage water

Share on water use in some industrial processes

7

Water intense vs. water efficient industrial sectors

8

Value added per cubic meter of water consumed and abstracted in Spain

Typical water use values in different industry sectors

9

The typical water use per inhabitant (median of country values), estimated from data for 13 EU MSs

Intensity of water use in some industry sectors (GVA in basic prices; m³ per thousand euro)

Industry type Median

(m3/inhabita

nt)

Minimum

(m3/inhabitant)

Maximum

(m3/inhabitant)

Manufacture of food products 4.9 1.7 (Malta) 15.8 (Netherlands)

Manufacture of textiles 0.3 0.0 (Cyprus) 5.4 (Latvia)

Manufacture of paper and paper products 3.0 0.0 (Malta, Cyprus) 180.6 (Finland)

Manufacture of refined petroleum

products, chemicals

10.9 0.2 (Cyprus, Malta) 205.8 (Finland)

Manufacture of basic metals 8.1 0.0 (Malta,

Lithuania)

40.7 (Sweden)

Manufacture of motor vehicles, trailers,

semi-trailers and of other transport

equipm.

0.2 0.0 (Cyprus) 1.1 (Sweden)

10

Water use for mining and quarrying by supply category, 2002-11 (m³ per inhabitant)

Self and other supply water use for energy production, 2006-2011 (m³ per inhabitant)

Self and other supply water use for energy production (for cooling purposes), 2002-2011 (m³ per inhabitant)

11

Water efficiency technologies and practices

Benefits of implementing water saving measures

12

▪ Water auditing of specific individual plants ✓ It is the starting point for identifying the areas where water can be

saved and the most appropriate strategy/range of actions to be put in place for reducing water demand and increasing industrial value added.

✓ It needs to consider both water quantity and water quality aspects as the need to reduce polluting discharges is often the key driver to water reuse and saving.

▪ Multiple benefits when implementing water saving measures:✓ Reduce water demand✓ Wastewater treatment savings✓ Less environmental impact✓ Cost savings (for water bills, wastewater treatment)✓ Achieve decoupling of water use vs. production✓ Improve resilience, sustainability

Water efficiency technologies and practices (overview)

13

Options Technology / Practice

Reduction in wastage and

leakages

▪ Engineering controls▪ Work practices▪ Water Audits

Changes in cooling

technology

▪ Eliminating once through cooling▪ Increase cooling tower optimization by increasing the cycles of concentration

Recycling and re-use of

water

▪ Use any water-consuming component on site as a potential source of water for

another component.

▪ Use municipal wastewater (alternative external source of water) solving wastewater BOD issues

▪ Use industrial wastewater from another Plant (alternative external source of water)

On-site rainwater

harvesting (RWH)

▪ Collect rain and storm water from roof and impervious surfaces

Desalinated water ▪ Explore if desalination/ brackish water use is an option

Water saving fixtures/

landscaping

▪ Install water efficient fixtures (WC, urinals, taps, etc.) in the bathrooms

▪ Use efficient landscaping & irrigation practices outdoors

Changes in production

processes

▪ Several options according to industry types and machines

▪ A very wide range of water saving measures can be considered for the industrial sector accounting for the large diversity in conditions and processes

Option 1 – Reduction on leakage and wastage

14

Typology (cont.)

15

Good practice % penetration

cleaning-in-place equipment

44

control flow rates to washing & cooling processes

30

immediate leak repair policy or steam

41

condensate management

33

water use monitoring 30

boiler management policy

26

▪ Install moveable water meters on the machines to document water use and evaluate improvements

▪ Install flow controls on washers and cooling water▪ Detection and repair of leaks▪ Proper scheduling, equipment maintenance▪ Perform frequent operations’ audit check

Example: Interface Fabrics Ltd.Among the measures to reduce water and energy consumption a computer-controlled management system was installed to perform routine metering and analysis of electricity, gas, water and effluent. Total cost for the system: ~ £15,500Pay-back period: 18-24 months

Penetration of good practices in the soft drink industry

(a sector that uses ~25 mio m3 of water for producing 10 mio m3 of soft-drinks)

Option 2 – Changes in cooling technology

16

Cooling Towers

Main components & Water losses from CTs

17

▪ CT Cycles of Concentration

= Conductivity of Blowdown Water ÷Conductivity of Make-Up Water(conductivity in parts per million of TDS)

= Make-Up Water ÷ Blowdown Water (water in gallons)

Evaporation losses: function of the load on the systemDrift & spillage losses: function of design and maintenanceBlowdown: function of TDS, water treatment

Water use (gal/hr) for a 100-ton CT at different cycles

Cooling Towers (CTs)

18

▪ Technologies Employed:Chemistry− Fifth generation polymer− On-line polymer monitor− Silica deposit control product− Third generation biofilm removal agent▪ Estimated Volume Saved: 0-40% of total

inlet water▪ Capital Cost: $0 to $50,000▪ Timelines for Implementation: Immediate

(

Option 3 – Recycling and Reuse of water

19

Option 3 – Recycling and Reuse of water (from alternative external sources)

20

Municipal wastewater as a source

Description : The concept behind this solution is using an alternative external source of water, municipal wastewater, to be reused, solving wastewater BOD issues. The cost of water will usually be lower using this solution. This kind of project will usually require high capital costs and long term time lines which will generate high water savings.Process Being Fed: Facility inlet waterTechnology Employed: Wastewater treatment solutions, pumping and infrastructureEstimated Volume Saving: 0 to 100% of total inlet waterCapital Cost: $1 to $10MM depending on existing infrastructure – Piping, pumping and inlet water treatmentOperating Cost: 25 cents/ m3Timelines for Implementation: yearsLevel of Difficulty in Execution: Difficult. This project will require government interaction, permits and infrastructure laying work

Industrial wastewater from another Plant as a source

Description: The alternative external source used in this case is industrial wastewater from another plant. The benefit of choosing this option is the low cost of water and diminished dependency on municipal sources. However, this solution does creates a dependency on production and wastewater quality of the source plant.Process Being Fed: Facility inlet waterTechnology Employed: Wastewater treatment solutions, pumping and infrastructure.Estimated Volume Saving: 0 to 100% of total inletwaterCapital Cost: $1 to $10MM depending on existing infrastructure – Piping, pumping and inlet water treatmentOperating Cost: 25 cents/m3Timelines for Implementation: 2 years,Level of Difficulty in Execution: Difficult. Thisproject will require government interaction, permits and infrastructure laying work.

21

Description: Use any water-consuming component on site, as a source of water for another componentInternal water sources: CT blowdown water; Boiler blowdown water; RO reject streams; Wastewater plant; Process unit wastewaterPower Industry: Ash pond discharge; Scrubber blowdown; Coal pile runoffFood Industry: Lost condensate recovery – reuse (dairy and food plants); Meat/poultry wash water reuseProcess Being Fed: Mostly CTs, but source water can be routed to any water consuming component (e.g. CT blowdown can be diverted to scrubbers)

Technologies Employed:• Biological treatment to reduce TSS, BOD, COD, organic content and other loads • Membranes - Reverse Osmosis (RO), Membrane bio-reactors, ZeeWeed UF membranes• Brine concentrator and evaporator for a zero liquid discharge• For food processors: Entrapped Air Floatation and RO/UF membrane, boiler cycles optimization using pretreatment before going into RO.

Estimated Volume Saved: 0-10% of total inlet waterCapital Cost: $0 to $150,000, depending on existing infrastructure – Piping, tanks, pumpsOperating Cost: Variable ($0 for power industry water reuse, $0-2 for food processing specific solutions, $250,000 in the case of using CT blowdown for scrubbers)Timelines for Implementation: Immediate (

Option 4 – On-site Rainwater Harvesting (RWH)

22

Option 4 – On-site Rainwater Harvesting (RWH)

23http://semmesco.com/harvest-time-for-rainwater/

▪ Rainwater harvesting (RWH) is a decentralized technique of the collection and storage ofrainwater for later use at, or near, the point where water is needed or used.

▪ Harvested rain water can be utilized for several purposes within the manufacturing processes andoutdoors

▪ Although rainwater is relatively clean and the quality is usually acceptable for many purposes,filtration and disinfection is usually appropriate

▪ A RWH system, which collects runoff from the roof, generally consists of a catchment area(generally the roof area), a filter, a storage tank, a supply network, pipes and an overflow unit(Environmental Agency 2008).

http://semmesco.com/harvest-time-for-rainwater/

Option 4 – On-site Rainwater Harvesting (RWH)

24

• Aim: Capture, store and use of rainwater to conserve water supplies, reduce the need for responding to demand peaks and reduce storm-water runoff

• Water saving potential: variable, depending on:

✓ The water quality demand within the industrial processes

✓ The amount of rainwater it is possible to collect

✓ Various costs (maintenance, energy for pumping, capital investment)

✓ Mains water supply charges

• Readiness/ Availability: medium

• Costs:

✓ RWH systems vary greatly in capital costs because of options (size & type of tank, necessity of pumps).

✓ They range from $1.50 - $3.00 per gal of storage ($0.4-$0.8 per lt) (for simple systems) to $3.5 - $8 per gal ($1-$2 per lt) for more sophisticated systems.

✓ The storage tank size is by far the largest factor of the total installation cost.

✓ Typical payback period 2 to 7 years

✓ Approximately 0.62 gal of water can be collected per square foot of collection surface per inch of rainfall (0.025 m3 per m2). In practice, we assume an efficiency of 80%. Some rainwater is lost to first flush, evaporation from the roof surface, or splash-out from the gutters.

✓ Annual production potential:

• m3= roof area (m2) x annual precipitation (in/yr) ×(0.025x 0.8)

Example: Renault car factory of Maubeuge (North of France) Currently consumption is 2.5 m3 per vehicle producedAbout 200,000 m3 of rainwater is now collected every year (=35% of the annual water consumption)At an average price for industrial water of 1.01 €/m3, this saving represents a potential reduction in the company’s water bill by 202,000 €/year.

Option 5 - Use of Desalinated water

25

Option 5 - Use of Desalinated water

26

Source Waters: ▪ Brackish Ground Water▪ Sea Water▪ Also applicable for: Surface Water, Municipal WW

Agricultural Runoff, Industrial EffluentsMain Processes Categories:▪ Thermal: 4 - 6 kWh / m3 + Steam (heating of

contaminated water under vacuum conditions to create pure water vapors)

▪ Membranes: 1 - 6 kWh / m3Energy Requirements are a function of:▪ Plant Capacity ▪ Feed Water Quality ▪ Pretreatment▪ Desalination Process/Technology▪ Level of TreatmentDesalination Technology of Most Interest Today:Reverse Osmosis

Desalination Methods▪ Distillation Multi-Stage Flash Distillation (MSF) Multiple-Effect Distillation (MED / ME)Vapor-Compression (VC)▪ Deionization/Demineralization/Ion ExchangeTypical Example: Home Water Softeners▪ Membrane ProcessesElectrodialysis & Electrodialysis Reversal (ED/EDR)Reverse Osmosis (RO)Nano-Filtration (NF)Membrane Distillation (MD)▪ Freezing Desalination▪ Geothermal Desalination▪ Solar Solar Humidification-Dehumidification (HDH)Multiple-Effect Humidification (MEH)

1 acre-foot (AF) = 325,853 gallons

Option 5 –Desalination and Renewable Energy Sources

27

Co

mb

inat

ion

of

RES

fo

r va

rio

us

des

alin

atio

n t

ech

no

logi

es MSF MED VC RO ED

Solar thermal

Solar PV

Wind

Geothermal

Energy Input Heat and electrical

Heat and electrical

Heat and electrical

Electrical Electrical

Feedwater More than 60% seawater (SW) plus brackish water (BW); Some high-salinity seawater may need pre-treatments for membrane separation

Energy use 80.6 kWhe/m3+

2.5–3.5 kWhe/m3

80.6 kWhe/m3(+

1.5–2.5 kWhe/m3

0 kJt /kg3.5–5.0

kWhe/m3

0 kJt /kg1.5–4.0

kWhe/m3

Typical total energy use

5 kWh/m3 2.75 kWh/m3 2.5 kWh/m3 2.75 kWh/m3

Operation temperature, °C

90-110 70 Room temp. Room temp.

Global capacity 72 million m3/day (about 65 million m3/day in operation) over about 15,000 plants

Option 5 – Use of desalinated water

28

✓ Desalination is an energy intensive process, but also an integral part of the future water supply portfolio

✓ Thermal Desalination & emerging technologies like Membrane Distillation appear to be more attractive to recycle strong industrial wastewaters

▪ Existing Technologies: mature, worldwide applications, room of improvement, but not a barrier anymore

▪ Economic feasibility:High Costs: Direct Costs (capital, O&M costs, mainly financing & energy costs)

Indirect Cost (e.g. permitting)Feasible on case-by-case basis, economical in many cases

▪ Environmental Considerations: significant (concentrate management, CO2 / GHG emission)

Institutional barriers: regulations, policy, permits requirements, financing (permitting process is complex & long, number of permits needed, number of Federal/State/Local Agencies involved…)

▪ Public Perception: energy intensive, expensive, environmental impacts

Option 6 – Water saving fixtures & Efficient landscaping

29Porous asphalt

Option 6 – Water saving fixtures & Efficient landscaping

30

Example: The Arenson Group (office furniture manufacturing) implemented a number of simple water saving measures in the non-manufacturing processes: installing passive infrared detectors in the urinals for example to prevent unnecessary flushes, on-going maintenance to maintain spring-loaded taps, check water meters to ensure no water being wasted from leaks, etc. The water use in factory/office washrooms was reduced by 45% (from 3,800 m3/year to 2,000m3/year), equivalent to cost savings of £3,000/year.

Water Using Product (WuP)

Consumption of

“traditional” WuPs(lt/use)

Consumption of

“efficient” WuPs(lt/use)

Water Saving Potential (%)

Unit Cost

Low flush WC 6-12 lt/flush 3-4,5 lt/flush 30-50% € 170

Faucet aerator 13.5 lt/min; 2.3-5.8 lt/use 2-5 lt/min 40-65% €15-25

Landscaping

Option (SUSs)

Installation Costs Maintenance Costs

Green Roofs 100-270 $/m2. (Extensive - intensive green roof) 8-16 $/m2.

Permeable paving Porous Concrete: 20-70 $/m2; Porous Asphalt:

5-10 $/m2; Interlocking Pavers:50-100 $/m2.

Annual maintenance costs about 1-2% of the construction cost

Swales/ Bioswales Swales: 15-20 $/m2; Swale bioretention systems: $100

-120/linear meter including vegetation($/m2/yr)

$2.50 Grass swale; $9.00 Vegetated swales (initial); $1.50 Vegetated swales (after 5 yrs)

Retention/

Detention ponds

$20-$40 per m3 of storage. Annual maintenance cost is 3-5% of construction costs

Convert Furrow irrigation to sprinklers or drip

Sprinklers: 40-345 €/ha as compared to furrow irrigation (estimated water saving is 15%)

Drip: 2,500-5,000 €/ha as compared to furrow irrigation (estimated water saving is 30%)

Irrigation controllers 40-80 €/ha (estimated water saving is 20-40%)

Overview of the benefits of the various options

31

32

Industry-specific

processes

Textile industry

33

▪ Water is used extensively throughout the processing operations

▪ The amount of water used varies widely, depending on the:✓ textile category✓ unit processes operated at the mill✓ machine types* ✓ prevailing management **

* e.g., Water consumption of a batch processing machine depends on its bath ratio (the ratio of the mass of water in a dyebath to the mass of fabric), on mechanical factors (agitation, mixing, turbulence…) and physical flow characteristics involved in washing operations.

** 10-30% reduction in water use can be accomplished by simple measures: fixing broken valves, leaks, turn-off running hoses or wash boxes

Textile industry – water saving options (1)

34

1. Reusing non-process Cooling Waterplumb the once-through non-contact cooling water back to the clean well (or water influent). Little or no treatment requirement, not contaminated from process chemicals

2. Process Water ConservationThe washing and rinsing stages require more water than the other stagesSimple low-tech measures for water conservation can save up to 55% of water use:✓ Properly regulating flows: 300 gal/hr savings.✓ Counter-flowing bleach to scour: 3,000 gal/hr savings✓ Counter-flowing scour to desize: 3,000 gal/hr savings✓ Shut-off water flow when machine is stopped.

3. Engineering controls & work practices✓ Moveable water meters can be installed on the machines to document water use /evaluate

improvements✓ Flow controls on washers and cooling water✓ Detection and repair of leaks✓ Proper scheduling, equipment maintenance, operations’ audit check

4. Process changese.g. Pad-batch dyeing offers several significant advantages, primarily cost, water and waste reduction, simplicity and speed. Water use typically decreases from 17 gal/lb to 1.5 gal/lb (90% reduction)

Textile industry – water saving options (2)

35

5. Water ReuseWater from many processes can be reused by a variety of methods.In a few operations, up to 50% of the treated wastewater is recycled directly back from the effluent to the raw-water intake system with no adverse effects on production.

Examples are: ✓ washwater reuse/recycle: mercerizer washwater for scouring, continuous scour washwater to batch scouring,

washwater to backgray blanket washing, scour rinses for desizing, etc.)✓ Counter-current washing: requires the addition of holding tanks and pumps. Capital cost

Food & Beverage Industry

36

Presentation of the divisions of food and drink industry according to NACE rev.2

Food & Beverage industry

37

▪ Water is a key input for the food and drink industry, used as: process water, cooling water, boiler feed-water

Uses of process water in the food and F&B industry▪ Water consumption in the food and drink

industry varies depending on:✓ diversity of each manufacturing sub-sector✓ number of end-products✓ capacity of the plant✓ type of applied processes✓ equipment employed ✓ level of automation ✓ system used for cleaning etc.

Food & Beverage Industry - Benchmarking

38

Benchmark water consumption indicators for the drink, meat, and dairy industries

Benchmark wastewater loads indicators for the dairy, fruit and oil industries

Water Efficiency Measures for the F&B industry

39

Techniques

Product

transport

▪ Avoid fluming for the transportation of materials and products

▪ Use conveyor belts, pneumatic conveying systems

▪ Use flumes with parabolic cross-sections rather than flat bottom troughs

Processes’ Optimization

▪ Segregation of outputs, to optimize use, reuse, recovery, recycling,

disposal

▪ Segregation of water streams to optimize re-use and treatment

▪ Adjust pumped cooling and flushing water to the minimum required

▪ Establish optimum depth of product on conveyors

▪ Optimize nozzle size and pressure

Alternatives to

water intensive

units

▪ rubber-disc scrubbing units vs. raw product cleaning and peeling

▪ steam rather than water blanchers

▪ evaporative coolers rather than water-cooled systems

Water Efficiency Measures for the F&B industry (2)

40

Techniques

Recycle/ Reuse of water streams

▪ Rechlorinate and recycle transport water where feasible▪ Divide spray wash units into two or more sections, and establish a counterflow

reuse system▪ Reuse water in the washing and rinsing cycles▪ Reuse water in clean-up processes (e.g. tank cleaning, filter backwash)▪ Collection of condensate water▪ Reuse in cooling towers and boilers

Controls/

Leakage

▪ Automated water start/stop controls to supply process

▪ Control of water supply pressure to normal levels, supply pressure-

controlled water via nozzles

▪ Control of overflows

▪ Check for and repair leaks within the process equipment e.g. flanges or

valve seals

Fruit & Vegetables; Meat and Poultry

41

Major water use and waste-generation

processes

Water conservation can be achieved by:

Fruit &

Vegeta

bles

▪ washing of raw and processed

produce

▪ peeling and pitting

▪ blanching

▪ fluming, sorting and conveying

▪ cooling after processing

▪ coring, slicing, dicing, pureeing and

juicing process steps

▪ Use of air flotation units to remove suspended

debris from raw materials

▪ Decrease of water volume use in peeling and

pitting operations

▪ Installation of low-volume, high-pressure cleanup

systems

▪ Recovery and reuse of process water throughout

the plant

▪ Separation of waste process streams at their

sources, for potential by-product use.

▪ Countercurrent reuse of wash and flume/cooling

waters

▪ Conversion from water to steam blanching

▪ Use of air cooling after blanching

Meat &

Poultry

▪ chilling, scalding, can retorting,

washing, cleaning and waste

conveying

Meat processors use about 1gal per

pound of processed hamburger meat.

▪ Changes in cleanup practices.

▪ Use of high-pressure, restricted flow hoses, which

can be fit with automatic shutoffs to prevent water

loss during inactivity.

▪ Eliminate wet transport (pumping) of wastes (for

example, intestines and feathers)

▪ Separate cooling waters from process and waste

waters and recirculate cooling water.

42

EPIs contribution to Water Efficiency

Economic Policy Instruments (EPIs)

43

EPIs are tools based on incentives and disincentives; they change conditions to enable economic transactions or reduce risk, aiming at delivering environmental and economic benefits

EPI Definition What can the EPI deliver?

TariffsPrice to be paid by a user for a given quantity of water or sanitation service

Encouraging technological improvements or changes in behaviour, leading to a reduction in water consumption or discharge of pollutants. They generate revenues for water services/infrastructures.

Taxes Compulsory payment to the fiscal authority for a behaviour that leads to the degradation of the water environment.

Encouraging alternative behaviour to the one targeted by the tax, for example the use of less-polluting techniques and products.

Charges (or fees)

Compulsory payment to the competent body (environmental or water services regulator) for a service directly or indirectly associated with the degradation of the water environment.

Discouraging the use of a service. For example, using charges in a licensing scheme may discourage users to apply for a permit.

Subsidies on products

Payments from government bodies to producers with the objective of influencing their levels of production, their prices or other factors.

Leading to a reduction in the price of more water-friendly products, resulting in a competitive advantage with comparable products.

Subsidies onpractices

Payments from government bodies to producers to encourage the adoption of specific production processes.

Leading to the adoption of production methods that limit negative impacts, or produce positive impacts, on the water environment.

EPIs related to PRICING

Water Pricing

44

Steps Required To Set Tariffs

Overview of Common Tariff Options

Economic Policy Instruments (EPIs)

45

EPI Definition What can the EPI deliver?

Trading of permits for using water

The exchange of rights or entitlements to consume, abstract and discharge water.

Encouraging the adoption of more water efficient technologies. May improve the allocation of water amongst water users.

Trading of

permits for

polluting water

The exchange of rights or entitlements to pollute the water environment through the discharge of pollutants or wastewater.

Encouraging the adoption of less water polluting technologies. Improve the allocation of abatement costs amongst water users

EPIs related to TRADING

EPIs related to COOPERATION

EPI Definition What can the EPI deliver?

Cooperation agreements

Negotiated voluntary arrangement between parties to adopt agreed practices often linked to subsidies or offset schemes.

Encouraging the adoption of more water-friendly practices.

EPI Definition What can the EPI deliver?

Insurance Payment of a premium in order to be protected in the event of a loss.

Water users’ aversion to risk and willingness to pay for income stabilisation. Insurance premiums can discourage behaviours that increase risk or exposure

Liability Offsetting schemes where liability for env. degradation leads to payments of compensation for environmental damage.

Liability as a means to incentivise long-term investments in water efficient devices.

EPIs related to RISK MANAGEMENT

Example 1: Viability of a RWH investments vs. water tariffs

46

Installation of RWH system in a mineral water plant (Turkey)

▪ Purpose: substitute part of the water supplied by wells that is used in the production and rinsing of the bottles

▪ System: collection of rainwater from a roofed area of 10,000 m2 and storage into a central tank

▪ CAPEX: € 100,000 (design, equipment, installation, pre-commissioning)

▪ Water savings: 7.06 Mlt/yr which represents 3.5% of annual consumption

▪ Energy saving: 3.5%

▪ Avoided costs: 190 €/yr from pumping/energy; no water costs

▪ Assessment of viability break-even point:

• - assuming a base tariff of 0.62 €/m³ water cost savings are 4,507 €/yr → 21 years payback time

• - assuming a base tariff of 1.85 €/m3 → IRR = 10%

47

Case Studies

Case Study 1: Canola Processor Uses RO System to save of water (Canada)

48

• Solution: A Reverse Osmosis (RO) system is used to supply

• high purity makeup water to the boilers.

• Results:

• After the 1st year the company saved 365,000 lt of water

• Water savings is due to the decreased demand for softener regeneration (13,250 lt of water required each time)

• Reduction in the use of salt (about 230 tons of salt)

• 15% reduction in fuel consumption in the boiler house (= reduction >3,000 tons of GHG/year)

• Cost savings by reducing the amount of water treatment chemicals added to the boiler by 80%

Challenge: Canbra Foods Ltd. is a canola oil producer.

• Manufacturing process demands large amount of steam, the plant requires large amount of water

• To maintain the necessary water quality a basic softening system (with sodium zeolite softeners) was used

• The system was inefficient: excessive consumption of water and salt (expensive + environmentally harmful)

Case Study 2:

Effluent Water Treatment Program to reduce water use (India)

49

Challenge:

• ST CMS Electric Company was consuming millions of gallons of cooling water blowdown every

year at the 250 MW lignite-fired plant for cooling purposes, which was then discharged

• The cooling water system is an open recirculation type, with a capacity of 26,400 m3/hr. The

makeup water consumption for the CT was at 15,000 m3/day.

• The company was using water from wells to meet its entire cooling and service water needs.

Solution:

• Recycle the ash pond water back to the CT makeup, and the cooling water blowdown for

ash handling.

• The water recycled to the CTs led to huge savings in water and in the electricity.

• After 11 months of recycle operation, the CTs’ condensers remained clean and well protected.

Results:

• Water savings are ~ 482 million US gallons, with daily water savings of 5,000 m3.

• Financial savings > $26K annually ($251 daily savings from the well pumps)

• The plant has become a model for others in India to follow, attracting attention from people

interested in replicating the recycle program.

Case Study 3:

Ford reduces water consumption & sewer disposal (Louisiville, USA)

50

Challenge:

• The wastewater de-foaming process was performing poorly at the Ford Motor Company Truck Plant (KTP)

• Wastewater (800,000 to 1mio gal/day) is collected and treated at KTP WWTP prior to discharge into the

Metropolitan Sewer District (MSD) system

• An anti-foam agent was applied to the discharge due to large amounts of foam generation. However, the

product was clumping up and clogging pumps and piping systems.

• 2 specially trained operators had to clean the feed lines every 3 days.

• Dilution of the antifoam agent prior to application was a labor intensive process, consuming large volumes

of water (1 quart of concentrated solution was combined with 120 quarts of water in mixing tanks, 6

times/day).

Solution: Convert to Antifoam Feed Conversion AF1440, a formulation that can be applied without dilution.

A 2-month pilot test was performed prior to the full-scale system operation.

The process is automated with two metering pumps, flexible tubing, and a remote control box.

Results:

• Clean the feed line every 3 months

• 242 hours of labor are saved each year, resulting into more than $10,800/year labor savings

• By eliminating dilution in the antifoam agent, KTP reduced its water consumption and sewer disposal by

230,400 gal/year. This figure does not include the water saved by the reduced flushing and cleaning

requirements.

Case Study 4: New Water Treatment Solution conserves water in Fluoroproducts Plant (Netherlands)

51

Challenge: DuPont de Nemours manufacturing complex at Dordrecht, NL

• The Cooling Towers (CTs) require large volumes of water: 265,000 m3/year of high-quality, purified water for

the production of Teflon™ and other fluoride-based materials

• CT makeup water equals the water consumed by 5,000 Dutch residents (purchased from the local municipal

water company)

• Need to find an alternative source of water of sufficiently high-quality to avoid biological contaminants,

corrosion, scale deposits that could harm the equipment, reduced cooling efficiency, intense cleaning efforts

involving significant labor, downtime and chemical usage

Solution:

• Utilize the outflow from a groundwater Purification Plant as an alternative source for the CT makeup

water

• This purified water was so far discharged into the Merwede River in the Rhine-Maas Delta

• Laboratory tests were performed to ensure that the water could be safely used in the CTs without any

adverse effects on the equipment

• A system was designed to link the Purification Plant to Fluoroproducts’ CT, with an automated monitoring to

ensure quality standards for the CT makeup water (measuring turbidity & conductivity of the groundwater

outflow and perform chemical dosing)

Results:

• Saving of €170,000/year in municipal water charges during 2005 (the 1st year of implementation)

• Estimated annual savings of €230,000 (the plant will avoid purchasing 265,000 m3/yr of municipal water)

• The groundwater Purification Plant will also avoid discharging 265,000 m3 into the Merwede River

• The total cost of the project was €445,000 → Payback period: ~ 2 years

General References

52

Alliance for Water Efficiency: http://www.allianceforwaterefficiency.org/

New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, Water Efficiency Practices, www.des.nh.gov/organization/commissioner/pip/factsheets/dwgb/index.htm

New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services, 2013. Environmental Fact Sheet “Water Efficiency: Industrial Water Users”, http://des.nh.gov/organization/commissioner/pip/factsheets/dwgb/documents/dwgb-26-7.pdf

Fact sheet “Water Efficiency: Business or Industry Water Use and Conservation Audit”, http://des.nh.gov/organization/commissioner/pip/factsheets/dwgb/documents/dwgb-26-16.pdf

US EPA. “Using Water Efficiently: Ideas for Industry”. www.epa.gov/watersense/docs/industry508.pdf

US EPA, 2011. Lean & Water Toolkit: Achieving Process Excellence Through Water Efficiency, October 2011, http://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2013-10/documents/lean-water-toolkit.pdf

Cooling Tower Institute. Listing of technical papers related to water reuse and recycling that may be purchasedfrom this site. Most papers cost $10. www.cti.org/tech_papers/water_reuse.shtml

New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission, 1996. MRI Water Conservation Technical Bulletin #4, Water Conservation Best Management Practices Cleaning Processes; NEIWPCC, Lowell, MA; 1996.

New England Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission, 1996. MRI Water Conservation Technical Bulletin #9, Water Conservation Best Management Practices for Non-Contact Cooling and Heating Processes; NEIWPCC, Lowell, MA; 1996.

U.S. Department of Defense, 1997. MIL-Handbook-1165, Water Conservation; U.S. Dept. of Defense; 1997; pp 38-49.

Vickers, A., 2001. Handbook of Water Use and Conservation; WaterPlow Press, Amherst, MA; 2001; pp 258-263, 288-303, 309-312.

GE Water & Process Technologies, 2007. Solutions for Sustainable Water Savings, A Guide to Water Efficiency. Bulletin 1040EN, December 2007

K. Valta, K. Moustakas, A. Sotiropoulos, E. Orli, E. Angeli, D. Malamis, K.J. Haralambous, 2014. Adaptation measures for the for and beverage industry to the impact of climate change on water availability. International Conference Adapt to Climate, 27-28 March, 2014. Athens, http://adapttoclimate.uest.gr/full_paper/VALTA.pdf

http://www.allianceforwaterefficiency.org/http://www.des.nh.gov/organization/commissioner/pip/factsheets/dwgb/index.htmhttp://des.nh.gov/organization/commissioner/pip/factsheets/dwgb/documents/dwgb-26-7.pdfhttp://des.nh.gov/organization/commissioner/pip/factsheets/dwgb/documents/dwgb-26-16.pdfhttp://www.epa.gov/watersense/docs/industry508.pdfhttp://www2.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2013-10/documents/lean-water-toolkit.pdfhttp://www.cti.org/tech_papers/water_reuse.shtmlhttp://adapttoclimate.uest.gr/full_paper/VALTA.pdf

This Project is funded by the European Union

SWIM and Horizon 2020 Support MechanismWorking for a Sustainable Mediterranean, Caring for our Future

Thank you!

Dr. Maggie KOSSIDA, maggie@ldksa.gr

mailto:maggie@ldksa.gr