SUSTAINABLE WATER SUPPLY FOR AUCKLAND  Craig BrownErgonomicsCentre for Ergonomics, Occupational Safety and Health, Department of Management, Massey UniversityGreywater systemsECOplusOn-site wastewater design/consultingCraig Brown Consulting

Myth #1

Sustainability is about the environment

Sustainability is anthropocentric

Sustainability is anthropocentric

Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (UNCED, 1992): Principle 1: Human beings are at the centre of

concerns for sustainable development. They are entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature

Even from a ‘strong sustainability’ viewpoint: People’s behaviour is the cause of unsustainability

…which leads us to…

…Myth #2

Sustainable water is about

new technologiesNot without attending to social/behavioural

systemsWithout accounting for users, the overall

design will be ‘sub-optimal’ (and may not work at all)

Sociotechnical system design

Moray, 2000

Human behaviour is key to demand management - The ‘socio’ part of the sociotechnical system - The bit that gets forgotten in design

Without ‘users’ there would be no ‘use’, no ‘demand’ Mental models

How do water systems appear to the user? How can we give them comprehensible and usable (and

salient and timely…) feedback?

Emotional design

Feedback!

Centralised systems give feedback… Generally

overall water consumption/wastewater production Or locally

water meters But not in a salient or timely manner (the water bill

being some time after the actual water use) Hard to match specific activities to specific outcomes

There is no ‘hard limit’ on water use/wastewater production

Charging for water and wastewater use at actual cost is effective

Increases relevance of the information

Feedback!

On-site systems give feedback… Locally In a timely manner Such that specific activities can be matched to

specific outcomes System performance

personally important to the user feedback is attended to and acted upon

There is a ‘hard limit’ in terms of water availability and wastewater treatment capacity

You can’t beat on-site systems for feedback, but…

…you can improve feedback in centralised systems We need a ‘litre-meter’, like a centameter

“Preliminary investigation indicates that customers with displays are more likely to use less water. Displays tailored to the specific needs of the user, such as those comparing current water use with neighborhood averages or with consumption in previous months, may help consumers further focus on conservation.” (“Smart metering for water utilities” - Oracle White Paper, September 2009)

Improving feedback in centralised systems In sociotechnical systems terms:

Provide feedback close to the source of variance

Not a bill at the end of the month to the parent Put a display in the shower so the teenage user

can see the use (and cost) as it happens

How to manage this demand?

Emotional Design:

•Visceral

•Behavioural

•Reflective

Emotional Design Visceral: wired in, response to physicalattributes

Genetic preferences Largely shared by all people Eg. children’s furniture, arts & crafts, spiders

Behavioural: use, performance Function, understandability (conceptual models, feedback),

usability, physical feel Classic HF/E Eg. the design of cook-top controls

Reflective: message, culture, meaning Self-image Learned preferences (eating bitter foods) Fashion Eg. riding a roller-coaster, holding a snake

Emotional Design

Reflectively, experience, culture and education can lead to water conserving choices…

Viscerally and behaviourally the Kohler water tower shower wins!

Myth #3

We don’t need to save water

“The country’s total annual precipitation is between 300,000 and 600,000 million cubic metres, and it has been estimated that New Zealand’s consumption of water only approaches 2,000 million cubic metres per year” (MoH)

Don’t need to save water?

In my inbox on the day I put this together, was the LGOL ‘what’s new’

I followed all the relevant links

and found…

Coromandel

Friday, 15 January 2010 Large increases in water consumption have put pressure on

some of the Coromandel Peninsula's hot spots and holidaymakers are still being asked to think twice before turning on the tap.

The amount of water used in Matarangi, Whangamata, Pauanui, Hahei and Tairua has risen by about a third between December 22nd and January 10th compared to a year earlier.

Hahei's water consumption was up by 49 per cent on average over last year, Matarangi up by 33%, Pauanui and Whangamata both up by 25% and Tairua up by 21% (over the period).

Total hose and sprinkler ban water restrictions were imposed in the five beach towns to maintain supply and comply with resource consent conditions over the last two weeks. 

increases in water consumption

up by 49 per cent

water restrictions were imposed

Northland

14 January 2010 Water restrictions loom if drought continues The drought rapidly tightening its grip on an increasingly parched

Northland may soon force the Northland Regional Council to limit the water taken from the region’s rivers and streams, its hydrologists warn.

Dale Hansen, the Council’s Water Resources/Hydrology Programme Manager, says the Far North, much of the east coast and central parts of Northland are bearing the brunt of three months of ongoing dry conditions.

With just 31mm – or 10 percent of its usual rain – falling there since November, rivers in the Kerikeri area are already at critically low flows and Mr Hansen warns many east coast and Far North areas will be in a similar position within the next fortnight.

drought

ongoing dry conditions10 percent of its usual rain

Drought! The Government is keeping close watch on the "big dry" in many

regions and will consider drought assistance if conditions worsen, Agriculture Minister David Carter says. Northern and eastern parts of the country are parched due to windy dry weather. Irrigation bans are in place in some regions. "Northland is rapidly approaching drought status and the eastern coasts of both islands are very dry, particularly parts of central Otago, coastal Canterbury, parts of Gisborne and inland Bay of Plenty," Mr Carter said. Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry staff were monitoring the situation and liaising with 14 local rural support trusts which provide farm management advice and other help in communities battling adverse conditions. "Expected rain in parts of the country this week will provide relief, but it may not be enough to remove the risk of drought in some regions," Mr Carter said. "Many farmers are still recovering from last year's drought and have been working hard to build feed reserves, restock their farms and improve stock conditions," he said. Drought could have a devastating effect on farmers, rural communities and the economy, with the impact felt by all New Zealanders. Federated Farmers has said the looming drought could drain several billion dollars from the economy, in terms of earnings farmers would have to forego. The last significant drought, two years ago, cost the country almost $3 billion in lost earnings.

(NZ Herald, 11 Jan 2010)

drought assistance

last year’s drought

drought, two years ago

drought status

Myth #4

Demand management is about saving water

There is always more water…

…is there always more energy? Auckland councils generate 25-40% of their carbon

emissions providing water and wastewater services RDC 35% Waitakere 39% Others??

This is set to increase

Rodney District Council (CCP-NZ Milestone 1 data)

…is there always more energy? Water provision requires energy

Embodied in infrastructure Resulting from operations

Mains: 61% life cycle energy and 28% life cycle carbon emissions (Mithraratne & Vale).

Different water sources require different amounts of energy In California, water efficiency programmes save twice as much energy

for the same cost as energy efficiency programmes (California Energy Commission, 2005)

In a world without fossil fuels, all energy will have to come from renewable sources (e.g. wind, solar, hydro, geothermal, marine, biomass), and that means there will be a limit to energy (and water) supply.Ghosh & Gabe, Landcare Research for ARC: Identification of Practical Applications for Localised Sustainable Energy and Water Systems within Intensified Centres of the Auckland Region

…and if there were sufficient fossil fuels? Fossil fuel consumption leads to greenhouse

gas emissions, leads to climate change A future problem?

Climate change already kills people 150,000 deaths globally per annum and five million

DALYsPatz, J.A., Campbell-Lendrum, D., Holloway, T. & Foley, J.A. (2005) ‘Impact of Regional Climate Change on Human Health’ Nature. 438, 7066, 310-317.

…is there always more money?

Taupo district council: “Despite having a huge lake right at out feet, the problem with such increases in water consumption is the load it puts on the infrastructure required to treat and turn lake water into the treated water and deliver it to your tap. It's not an endless supply as some would think”

…is there always more money? Of…importance to New Zealanders should be how we are going to

fund our water infrastructure. Because we've got a problem.Analysis of long-term council community plans for the period 2009-2018 indicates significant increases in capital and operating expenditure in the provision of water services throughout New Zealand.Department of Internal Affairs-commissioned analysis forecasts total expenditure will be $28.46 billion over this period, made up of $11.46 billion of capital spending and $17 billion of operational spending.The capital spending estimate now stands 30 per cent higher than estimates from the same plans for the 2006 15-year period, indicating an increasing infrastructure deficit. Unless this deficit is addressed, water infrastructure will deteriorate.

(Murray Gibb, CEO Water NZ, in NZ Herald, 19 Jan 2010)

…is there always more money?

What could the $1bn per annum* that could be saved nationally (on water infrastructure and operations) be used for instead?

Tax cuts Health care Education Environmental stewardship ?

* this would be a saving of less than a third of the

projected expenditure

Myth #5

One litre of water is the same as another

All water is not equal!

When is a leak not a leak? Indoor vs outdoor Hot vs cold Peak vs off-peak

Should we be trying to communicate this to ‘Joe Public’?

If so, then we need to start by conveying the ‘water use is energy use’, or Water Miles concept

www.watermiles.org

Myth #6 – getting a water efficient showerhead is a good idea Assumption: people understand that they should

conserve water and that replacing their showerhead(s) is a good way to do that

And they are motivated to do so And they are able to act on their intention Summary: they make and act upon a choice based on

their reflective system, relating to their self-image, fashion, culture, learned preferences and maybe a desire to save money

So: They install a low-flow shower head, which mixes in air to maintain the same feel as a ‘standard’ shower head

Thus saving water Great, right?

Maybe, but…

Mixing in air causes the water droplets to cool by the time they reach the user

So the person adjusts the shower to use a higher temperature (and maybe the hot water cylinder temperature)

So they’ve traded water use for energy use

Myth #7

Demand management is the best, cheapest way to save water

Myth #7 rephrased

Myth #7a: Demand management is the only feasible way to save water

Myth #7b: Demand management is sufficient to defer new infrastructure investment

Myth #7c: Rainwater use and greywater reuse is demand management It’s new infrastructure, providing new water sources Comparison: a new washing machine, which uses less water but

doesn’t supply more water But: it can have behavioural effects that can reduce demand also

Growing population means that additional water sources and infrastructure are required as well…

Solutions

Demand management Definitely cheapest (energy and expense) Essential but not sufficient in context of growing

population and ‘triple crunch’(peak oil, climate change, recession)

No new water supply Decreases wastewater production (base load, not

peak) Wastewater concentration increases – implications?

Solutions

Rainwater use Is a new water supply Increases wastewater volume (base load) BUT, properly configured, reduces peak loading

because it attenuates stormwater Hence no need to upgrade stormwater/wastewater

networks No need to introduce

Desalination Dams (Riverhead) Rivers (various, longish pipes)

Solutions

Water reuse/recycling Is a ‘new’ supply Decreases wastewater volume (base volume) Doesn’t reduce peak loading (due to stormwater), but

doesn’t increase it either Wastewater concentration increases Hence no need to upgrade stormwater/wastewater

networks No need to upgrade centralised water supply

infrastructure if on-site; otherwise third pipe required

Myth #8New reticulated supplies are cheaper than new on-site supplies

Water recycling cost-benefit analysis

Brown, C. (2009) Recycled Water: Risks, benefits, economics and regulation by system scale.NZLTC conference proceedings.

Rain tank cost

Indoor + outdoor: $0.62 - $2.34 m3 Outdoor only: $0.58 - $2.19 m3 Cost effective in Sydney, Gold Coast and

BrisbaneBecause they have more rain!(Auckland has more still)

Tam, V., Tam, L. & Zeng, S. (2010) Cost effectiveness and tradeoff on the use of rainwater tank: An empirical study in Australian residential decision-making. Resources, Conservation & Recycling, 54, 178-186.

Rain tank cost

Vale & Mithraratne (2007) NZSSES Talking and Walking Sustainability Conference paper Rainwater is 36% cheaper than the existing reticulated supply, if

used exclusively (no mains connection) Life cycle energy was lower too

Vale & Mithraratne (2007) Rainwater cheaper is used exclusively, then mains, then

combination of mains plus rainwater I.e. ‘doubling up’ increases cost… …but by how much compared with other new supply options?

Myth #8New reticulated supplies are cheaper than new on-site supplies

Rain Tanks in this range

Greywater recycling down here somewhere

Why the discrepancy?

Annualised vs levelised cost? Most large-scale infrastructure capacity is surplus for many

years (but money has been spent up front) New on-site capacity can be steadily added

(Lack of) accounting for benefits to stormwater/wastewater systems? Rain tanks can reduce peak flow in stormwater/wastewater

system Greywater reuse reduces base wastewater flow Neither requires an upgrade to wastewater collection/treatment

infrastructure Neither requires an upgrade to potable water delivery pipes

Why the discrepancy?

Differing assumptions on treatment standards/equipment required?

Or just dodgy assumptions? E.g. one recent study costing greywater systems

assumed: On-line chlorination and redox probe required $50/month for chlorine No increase in water prices over lifetime of product No savings in wastewater production

Myth #9

If we always do what we always did…

we’ll get the best results

Yarra Valley Water

Melbourne area 1.6 million customers 395 employees $381.5 million revenue $1.3 billion assets

Yarra Valley Water

Underwent deliberate managed cultural transformation from ‘defensive, old style public service instrument’ into a ‘dynamic, energized organisation’ with new systems, behaviours and approaches…

So what?

Culture

“One could argue that…centralised service delivery is a central paradigm embedded in water industry culture. From this perspective, some water practitioners consider alternative decentralised options as a problem. They argue that the environment will be worse off if we use more materials, that costs will increase, and that there will be greater risk to the community.”

Francis Pamminger, Yarra Valley WaterAdvancing the Infrastructure Selection Process – Case Study(All quotes, data and graphs reproduced from this case study)

Case study

“Along with targets for customer service, business culture, and efficiency, Yarra Valley Water aims to ‘provide services within the carrying capacity of nature and inspire others to do the same’.”

Case study

“There is insufficient water to meet growth”

“Port Phillip Bay [outfall for Melbourne’s sewage treatment] has reached its carrying capacity”

Case study

Work undertaken to help select more sustainable infrastructure options

Aimed to address perceived barriers to adopting systems different from conventional servicing options

Debate existed as to whether alternative servicing options could deliver improvements

Perception was that such options would cost more would require additional material and energy resulting in increased environmental burden, and increasing the business risks.

Unaddressed, this uncertainty stopped any future exploration of alternative servicing options

Case Study Yarra Valley Water engaged RMIT and CSIRO to find the most

environmentally sustainable solutions for their infrastructure works The analysis included Greenfield development on the city periphery,

infill development, and backlog areas

Options: Conventional

traditional centralised servicing with reticulated water and sewage pipes connected to an existing central network. NB: Water efficient (3A) appliances.

Third pipe from STP third pipe recycling using treated water from local sewage treatment plant.

Third pipe from stormwater third pipe recycling using treated stormwater.

Onsite water supply and greywater water supply solely from rainwater tanks and greywater treatment at each

property.

ResultsLife cycle assessment

(water efficient appliances)

ResultsCommunity cost

Results

Risk-cost for centralised systems was highest

why? Failure impacts more people, compared to decentralised systems

Total cost assessment (costing for risk included)

Myth #10

Not a lot of people use rainwater or greywater

And they’re unsafe

Alternative water supplies

Have a rainwater tank

19%66% of households without have considered it

?10% using rainwater only (i.e. rural use) – Stan Abbott

Reuse greywater

55%77% in Victoria

?36.7% Waiheke*22% extrapolated (see below)

Reuse just laundry greywater

25% 10% ‘habitually’**18% of over 65s

Australian Bureau of Statistics 4602.0, March 2007

*ARC survey, 2008

“ ”

**MfE household sustainability benchmark survey, Feb 2008

QUIZ:

How many homes…?

?

Why more greywater than rainwater use?

Greywater use – disease association?

Greywater use – disease association?

Highest rates

Lowest rates

Expected

associa

tion?

Rainwater unsafe?

First flush diverter+ Calmed inlet+ Outtake not at bottom of tank+ Concrete tank??

(?lowest life cycle impact too??)= High quality potable water?

Disease rates? Yarra Valley Water & Brown (2009): small number of

people at risk in the event of failure and reduces disease spread potential (wider population not affected)

Bright ideas

Reduce, reuse, recycle (plus rainwater) Watercare to switch to on-site

infrastructure provision Demand management is multidimensional Water Miles concept

Reduce, Reuse, Recycleplus Rainwater Reduce water use: demand management

Cheapest, but not sufficient in context of increasing population Reuse water with minimal treatment, locally

Greywater recycling On-site wastewater irrigation

Rainwater: a new source without knock-on infrastructure upgrades IUWM

Recycle: collect and highly process water before using it again Effectively it is another product

Watercare to provide on-site infrastructure Watercare (or contractor) install the rainwater

tank/greywater system and necessary fittings (e.g. first flush diverters, backflow preventers), plumbing

And maintain the systems as necessary Bill for it in the water bill, including interest cost The saving in water used will pay for the cost of the

tanks plus interest Watercare effectively install more on-site infrastructure

and fewer larger projects Savings in costs Savings in energy Reduced carbon emissions More jobs Why not?

Demand management is multidimensional

Behaviour change Costs least

Most effective?

Hardest to achieve?

New appliances, devices, technologies to reduce water use

Generally good value

Easier to gain uptake?

New infrastructure (greywater, rainwater)

Cost/impact less than represented??

Public acceptance easier than industry?

Not really demand management?

www.watermiles.org

Conveys message:Water services provision = Energy use

Encourages on-site systems:Lower water miles

Includes hot water / cold water distinctionWater heating being a bigger energy user

than water supply It’s about energy, not (just) distance

craig@greywater.co.nz

www.watermiles.org

Thank you