Water and Energy - Draft Report of the GWRC Research ... - IWA

Global Water Research Coalition 

Alliance House 

12 Caxton Street 

London SW1H 0QS 

United Kingdom 

IWA affiliate 

Phone: + 44 207 654 5545 

www.globalwaterresearchcoalition.net 

Water and Energy 

Report of the GWRC Research Strategy Workshop 

DRAFT 

May 2008


Global cooperation for the generation of water knowledge 

GWRC is a non-profit organization that serves as a collaborative mechanism for water research. 

The benefits that the GWRC offers its members are water research information and knowledge. 

The Coalition focuses on water supply and wastewater issues and renewable water resources: 

the urban water cycle. 

The members of the GWRC are: the Awwa Research Foundation (US), CRC Water Quality and 

Treatment (Australia), EAWAG (Switzerland), Kiwa (Netherlands), PUB (Singapore), Suez 

Environment- CIRSEE (France), Stowa - Foundation for Applied Water Research (Netherlands), 

DVGW – TZW Water Technology Center (Germany), UK Water Industry Research (UK), Veolia- 

Anjou Recherché (France), Water Environment Research Foundation (US), Water Research 

Commission (South Africa), WateReuse Foundation (US), and the Water Services Association 

of Australia. 

These organizations have national research programs addressing different parts of the water 

cycle. They provide the impetus, credibility, and funding for the GWRC. Each member brings a 

unique set of skills and knowledge to the Coalition. Through its member organizations GWRC 

represents the interests and needs of 500 million consumers. 

GWRC was officially formed in April 2002 with the signing of a partnership agreement at the 

International Water Association 3rd World Water Congress in Melbourne. A partnership 

agreement was signed with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in July 2003. GWRC is 

affiliated with the International Water Association (IWA). 

GWRC Water & Energy - Draft report 

2

Disclaimer 

This study was jointly funded by GWRC members. GWRC and its members assume no 

responsibility for the content of the research study reported in this publication or for the opinion 

or statements of fact expressed in the report. The mention of trade names for commercial 

products does not represent or imply the approval or endorsement of GWRC and its members. 

This report is presented solely for informational purposes. 


Copyright © 2008 

by 


ISBN 90-77622-??????? 

3


Contents 

Acknowledgement ........................................................................................................................ 5 

Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... 6 

Introduction .................................................................................................................................. 7 

Knowledge gaps and research needs .......................................................................................... 9 

Research Strategy ...................................................................................................................... 14 

Conclusion and follow up .......................................................................................................... 17 

Appendixes 

A. Project Proposals 

B. Workshop Program 

C. List of Participants 

D. Overview of the Workshop Presentations 

E. Knowledge gaps and Research needs 

F. Data on Energy Use in the Urban Water Cycle 

G. Information on GWRC Members activities 

4


Acknowledgement 

The project team members wish to express their gratitude to all members of the Global Water 

Research Coalition and to the participants in the workshop who made valuable contributions to 

the project. 

Project Team 

Linda Reekie, AWWA Research Foundation (USA) 

Pauline Avery, UK Water Industry Research (United Kingdom) 

Lauren Fillmore, Water Environment Research Foundation (USA) 

Steve Kaye, Anglian Water (UK) 

Steve Whipp, United Utilities (UK) 

Frans Schulting, Global Water Research Coalition (NL) 

Participants 

Rob Renner, AWWA Research Foundation (USA) 

Carlos Peregrina, CIRSEE - Suez Environnement (France) 

Jan Hoffman, Kiwa Water Research (The Netherlands) 

Theo van den Hoven, Kiwa Water Research (The Netherlands) 

Harry Seah, Public Utility Board (Singapore) 

Lee Mun Fong, Public Utility Board (Singapore) 

Koh Tee Guan, Public Utility Board (Singapore) 

Bert Palsma, STOWA (The Netherlands) 

Tom Voskamp, Waterboard Regge and Dinkel (The Netherlands) 

Sebastian Sturm, DVGW Technologiezentrum Wasser (Germany) 

Mike Farrimond, UK Water Industry Research (United Kingdom) 

Elise Cartmell, Canfield University (United Kingdom) 

Issy Caffoor, Environmental KTN (United Kingdom) 

Gordon Wheale, UK Water Industry Research (United Kingdom) 

Jim Goodrich, US Environmental Protection Agency (USA) 

Chris Impellitteri, US Environmental Protection Agency (USA) 

Michel Gibert, Veolia Environnement (France) 

Francois Vince, Veolia Environnement (France) 

Gerhard Offringa, Water Research Commission (South Africa) 

George Crawford, WERF/CH2M-Hill (USA) 

5

Executive Summary 

Over the last decade(s) the energy consumption by the water and wastewater sector has 

considerably increased as a result of implementation of new technologies and approaches to 

safeguard water quality and to meet new regulations. Also the price of energy has substantially 

increased in the same period. Items like optimisation of energy use, more energy efficient 

equipment and technologies, and energy recovery has entered the research agenda. But, these 

days the emission of Green House Gases (GHG) and the use and/or production of renewable 

energy are as well part of the portfolio of the water and wastewater sector. 

A research strategy workshop was organised in London (February 2008) to review the present 

knowledge and ongoing activities and to develop a phased research strategy on Water and 

Energy that can be used by the GWRC members to identify collaborative research opportunities. 

The participants at the workshop consisted of about thirty representatives of GWRC’s 

organisations and invited experts. Countries represented at the workshop included France, 

Germany, Netherlands, Singapore, UK, USA and South-Africa. 

A three phase strategy with associated project proposals is developed to support the water and 

wastewater industry to achieve an energy and carbon footprint neutral urban water cycle by 

2030: 

Implement the present State of the Art: picking the low hanging fruit; 

Reduce the energy consumption by 20%: optimisation and innovation; 

Further reduction of the energy consumption with another 80%: a paradigm shift! 

From the 15 project proposals developed by the workshop participants, the project Energy 

Efficiency in the Water Industry: A Compendium of Tools, Best Practices and Case Studies and 

the development of the Toolbox of integrated Performance Evaluation would directly be 

supportive to the water and wastewater industry in its journey toward an energy and carbon 

footprint neutral urban water cycle. The project Revamp Wastewater Treatment Operations with 

20% energy reduction could be considered to coordinate and complement the present research 

activities by individual GWRC members and other related research initiatives. 


6

1. Introduction 

1.1 Background 

Over the last decade(s) the energy consumption by the water and wastewater sector has 

considerably increased as a result of implementation of new technologies and approaches to 

safeguard water quality and to meet new regulations. Also the price of energy has substantially 

increased in the same period. Items like optimisation of energy use, more energy efficient 

equipment and technologies, and energy recovery has entered the research agenda. But also the 

emission of Green House Gases (GHG) and the use and/or production of renewable energy are 

today part of the portfolio of the water and wastewater sector. 

At the meeting of the GWRC Board of Directors in Sydney (November 2007) it was agreed to 

add the area Water and Energy to the GWRC research agenda and to explore the potential for 

collaborative research with the GWRC framework. A workshop was organised to review the 

present knowledge and ongoing activities and to develop a phased research strategy. 

This report represents a research strategy on Water and Energy that can be used by the GWRC 

members to identify collaborative research opportunities. 

1.2 Objective and Approach of the Workshop 

1.2.1 Objective 

The objective of the workshop was to present the current state of knowledge on the water and 

energy nexus and to identify knowledge gaps and research needs. Based on the knowledge gaps 

and the missing links, a research strategy represented by a number priority research projects was 

developed. 

1.2.2 Approach 

As first step, information on ongoing and finish activities regarding water and energy by the 

members was collected including initial data regarding energy use in the urban water cycle in the 

member’ countries. 

A workshop was organised to exchange and discuss the available information, knowledge and 

know-how from various countries/regions of the world and to develop a research strategic within 

GWRC on water and energy. 

The workshop was held on 20 - 21 February 2008 hosted by UKWIR at the offices in London. 

The participants at the workshop consisted of about thirty representatives of GWRC’s 

organisations and invited experts. Countries and regions represented at the workshop included 

France, Germany, Netherlands, Singapore, UK, USA and South-Africa. 


7

1.2.3 The Workshop 

The program of the workshop is given in appendix B. 

The first part of day one of the workshop was dedicated to the review of the current state of the 

knowledge. After the overall introduction of the Water and Energy playfield, the links to 

Climate Change and the options for Energy and Resource Recovery by invited speakers, GWRC 

member’ representatives provided presentations on their available knowledge and research 

activities. The overview of the presentations of the workshop is given in appendix D. The 

presentations are available in a separate document and at the member section at the GWRC 

website. 

The overall gaps of knowledge and research needs were discussed and identified by the 

workshop participants in three breakout groups and subsequently summarized and clustered in a 

plenary session. 

On the second day, new breakout groups were constituted to identify the research priorities and 

develop project proposals around three overarching themes resulting from day one. Project 

proposals were plenary presented and discussed, and a first prioritisation and survey of member 

interest to support the projects was made. As result a charcoal sketch of an overall research 

strategy was made. 

The feedback by the participants of the workshop was overall very positive and included 

suggestions for further improvement of the GWRC processes. 


8

2. Knowledge gaps and research needs 

In today’s world, water and energy are tightly linked. The availability of adequate water supplies 

has a profound impact on the availability of energy, while the energy production and power 

generation activities affect the availability and quality of water. Energy is needed for the 

production and distribution of drinking water as well as the collection and treatment of 

wastewater: the urban water cycle. And water is essential for the generation of energy including 

hydropower and as cooling water in power plants. 

Both water and energy are confronted with a growing demand, limitation of resources, the 

impact of climate change and the development towards a more sustainable society. 

The scope of this workshop was limited to the energy aspects of the urban water cycle with focus 

on the water supply, sanitation and wastewater treatment (see figure 1) and the options for an 

energy efficient design and operation. 

Atmospheric Atmospheric water water vapor 

vapor 

Precipitation 

Precipitation 

Surface Surface water 

water 

Ground Ground water 

water 

Irrigation 

Irrigation 


Municipal 

Municipal 

use 

use 

Water 


treatment 

treatment 

Ground 

Ground 

water 

water 

Ground Ground water water recharge 

recharge 

Figure 1. Schematic picture of the urban water cycle. 

surface 

surface 

water 

water 

Potable 

Potable 

reuse 

reuse 

Industrial 

Industrial 

water water use 

use 

Waste Waste water 

water 

reclamation/reuse 

reclamation/reuse 

Water demand for energy production as well the energy aspects of the use of supplied water by 

customers was only indirectly addressed during the discussions. The main focus was on those 

aspects which can directly be controlled by the water and wastewater industry itself. 

However, it should be realised that the energy consumption by the end user (consumer) of water 

significantly exceed the energy used in the urban water cycle itself. Hence, water conservation 

by the consumer will result in a substantial decrease of energy use. 

Water conservation has a threefold effect on the energy use: 

- less energy needed for the production and distribution of drinking water 

- less energy use by the consumer (i.e. heating) 

- less energy needed for the collection and treatment of wastewater. 

9

2.1 Review of current knowledge and activities. 

Part of the workshop was dedicated to the exchange and review of the current knowledge. 

GWRC organisations have provided information regarding their finished and ongoing activities 

in advance of the workshop. The information is included as annex G of the report. 

They also provided - where available - data regarding the energy use in their countries for the 

different parts of the urban water cycle: water treatment and supply and wastewater collection 

and treatment. 

Table 1. Energy Data as provided by the GWRC members and partner (kWh/m3) 

USA NL SIN SUEZ GER UK ZA AUS 


Total Energy 0,43 0,47 0,45 0,57 1,01 0,1 - 0,5 

Treatment 0,05 0,47 0,10 0,1- 0,3 

Supply 0,40 0,10 0,91 

Wastewater 

Total Energy 0,56 0,52 0,67 0,4 - 0,9 

Treatment 0,45 0,36 0,42 0,43 0,64 0,39 

Collection 0,15 0,09 0,1 - 0,6 

It is interesting to noticed (see table 1) that the average energy data for the different countries is 

in a comparable range, despite the fact that the data relates to the various treatment options used 

in each country. All provided data is included as annex F of the report. 

The workshop included three key-note presentations regarding the Role of Energy in the Urban 

Water Cycle, Climate Change and Energy Connection, Energy and Resource Recovery. 

Together with the presentations by the GWRC organisations regarding their finished, ongoing 

and planned research activities and provided background material, they formed the building 

blocks to sketch the ‘map of knowledge’ (what do we know – what not) and the discussion on 

research needs and possible joint research projects. 

The presentations addressed a large variety of topics related to the energy aspects of the urban 

water cycle as illustrated in figure 2. The list of presentations made by the participants at the 

workshop is included as annex D. 


10

Climate change 

- Water patterns 

- GHG emissions 

Resource recovery 

- Energy 

- H2O, P, N, … . 

Figure 2. Different topics related to the energy aspects of the urban water cycle. 

The overall conclusion by the participants of the workshop was that an substantial amount of 

valuable information and knowledge is available within the GWRC membership and beyond. It 

was also concluded that of the current urban water cycle systems especially wastewater treatment 

systems have substantial opportunities for energy conservation and recovery. And that, with the 

present energy consumption and costs of energy, considerable cost savings are achievable. Cost 

savings, which in the long term will balance the investments needed in research and to 

implement the results in daily practice to realise a more efficient use of energy in the urban water 

cycle. Of course, this return on investment will be easier and faster realised in greenfield areas 

compared to the implementation in existing infrastructures. 


Level of Service 

- Product quality 

- Consumers 

Water Urban & Water Energy Cycle 

- Optimisation 

- New concepts 

Benchmarking 

- Methodology 

- Best practices 

Alternative sources 

- Brackish/sea water 

- Used water, … . 

Renewable energy 

- Fuel cells, algae oil 

- Solar, wind, … . 

11

2.2 From knowledge gaps to research needs 

Following the presentations and discussion of the current knowledge and activities, the 

participants identified in 3 break-out group the gaps of knowledge and possible topics for 

research to address the gaps. In the break-out groups both 'big picture' as well as ‘in depth' 

discussions were held. The 'big picture' discussion was used and needed to give focus to the 

rather broad area of water & energy (climate change, recovery and renewable energy, alternative 

water resources, optimisation/innovation, regulations, etc), the drivers and time scale to be 

considered for the possible activities. 

Some 63 topics were identified by the breakout groups and during the plenary discussion related 

topics were clustered in 12 categories (see table 1). All individual topics are listed in annex E. 

Table 2. Knowledge Gaps and Research Needs 

Knowledge exchange - State of the Science 

Capabilities and limitations of present systems 

Future concepts/innovation and scenario planning 

Implementing new concepts and making innovation happen 

Communication strategies, engagement and image (PR) 

Analytical toolbox, modelling 

Whole life carbon costing 

Benefit cost analysis (BCA) 

Technology improvement 

Energy recovery, content and management 

Small scale systems 

Infrastructure and other sectors 

To discuss and devise proposals for possible projects/actions, the 12 themes have been grouped 

around three more comprehensive categories: 

new technologies (included the results of the Energy Recovery/Sludge workshop and 

report in 2007); 

tools for performance evaluation (energy efficiency, GHG emission, costs, ..),; and 

future concepts and scenario planning. 


12

2.3 Project proposals 

The participants developed in three breakout groups 15 draft project proposals to address topics 

within the 3 categories resulting from the initial discussions during the workshop. The project 

titles and a first indication of the budget involved (in kEuro) are given in the table below. The 

full project proposals are presented in Appendix A . 

Table 2. List of project proposals 

Project Title 

Exchange of information 

Budget 

1 Energy efficiency in the water sector: a Compendium of Best Practice 

Future concepts and scenario planning 

150 

2 Define and understand the language 100 

3 Minimising energy of existing systems without compromising quality 50 + ? 

objectives 

4 External factors influencing process choice and optimisation 100 + ? 

5 An Energy efficient urban water cycle – concepts for the future 200 

6 Designing future concepts in existing systems 100 

7 Demonstrations of new concepts 

Tools for performance evaluation 

TBD 

8 State of the art review-gap analysis 100 

9 Performance assessment 300 

10 Water treatment, urban water cycle and wastewater treatment (3 projects) 3x 200 

12 Communication for decision making 

Technology 

100 

13 Revamp Wastewater Treatment Operations with 20% energy reduction TBD 

14 Revamp Wastewater Treatment Operations with another 80% energy TBD 

reduction 

15 Application of nanotechnology to membranes to improve energy 

utilization in water and wastewater applications 


TBD 

In the final plenary session, a category Exchange of Information was added to combine and 

address the different issues of the Water & Energy topic in coordinated manner. 

It was felt that the projects 1 and 8 have the highest priority and followed by project 13. 

Project 1 would enable the water and wastewater industry to make directly use of available 

knowledge and proven practices. Project 8 would initiate the development of a comprehensive 

toolbox for the performance evaluation of current and new concepts and systems. 

Project 13 in combination with results of project 1 would result in substantial reduction of the 

energy consumption by the wastewater treatment systems within a relative short timeframe. The 

project descriptions were detailed by the participants as follow up of the workshop. 

13

3 Research Strategy 

3.1 Water and Energy: a roadmap to the future 

As part of the global developments regarding the availability and cost of energy as well as the 

mitigation and adaption measures needed to face climate change, the water and wastewater 

industry is challenged to review its present way of operations. Optimisation of energy use and 

limitation of linked GHG emissions are issues to be considered. 

To address the above, the participants of the workshop formulated as a common goal and 

ambition of the water and wastewater industry for the coming era: 

An energy and carbon footprint neutral urban water cycle by 2030. 

The year 2030 is chosen as the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) indicates 

that year as critical (‘point of no return’) where 60% reduction of GHG emissions should be 

achieved to limited a global temperature increase to less then 3 o C. 

In achieving these objectives the water and wastewater industry will be able to realise substantial 

cost savings (after manpower, energy is the highest cost item on the balance sheet of the 

industry!), be less depended on availability and/or shortage of energy, and by minimising the 

carbon footprint deliver a considerable contribution to the reduction of GHG emissions. 

Moreover, with this challenging ambition the water and wastewater industry shows its leadership 

on the road to a more sustainable society (‘green frontrunner’) and illustrates the proactive 

attitude of the sector towards regulators. 

As spin-off of these developments, the water and wastewater industry advertises itself as a 

responsible but also eye-catching employer on the competitive market which supports to attract 

and keep a talented and skilled workforce. 

A three phase approach and related set of actions to be taken by the water and wastewater 

industry is formulated to achieve this goal and ambition: 

1. Implement the present State of the Art: picking the low hanging fruit; 

2. Reduce of the energy consumption by 20%: optimisation and innovation; 

3. Further reduction of the energy consumption with another 80%: a paradigm shift! 

The key items of the approach are highlighted in the next paragraphs and possible supporting 

actions and projects by the GWRC members are indicated. Figure 3 illustrates the impact of the 

approach over time. 

Step 1. Implement the present State of the Art – picking low hanging fruit 

During the discussions all through the workshop it became crystal that a vast amount of 

information, knowledge and practical know-how regarding the management of water and 

wastewater infrastructure in a more cost-effective, energy efficient manner is available 

somewhere in the global water community. Implementation of the current best practice in the 

today’s operations would result in a first, easy to make step and a significant contribution to 


14

achieve the above worded objectives: it is picking the ‘low hanging fruit’ to bring every utility 

on the same page. 

The GWRC members can support this activity by the water and wastewater sector making the 

information on the present State of the Art available with the project Energy Efficiency in the 

Water Industry: A Compendium of Tools, Best Practices and Case Studies. (See also chapter 2 

and annex A). 

Step 2. Reduce of the energy consumption by 20%: optimisation and innovation 

The existing systems in the water and wastewater industry haven’t reach the limits of 

improvement of its energy efficiency yet. It is estimated that thru optimisation of operations, 

retrofitting and innovation of the technologies used in i.e. existing wastewater treatment systems 

a reduction of the energy consumption by 20% is quite feasible. 

Within the global water community a number of substantial efforts are ongoing to explore the 

possible options including the recovery of energy during the processes, the use and/or production 

of renewable energy and energy conservation. Examples include the EU project NEPTUNE led 

by EAWAG and the WERF Optimisation Challenge. 

The GWRC members can support this activity with projects like Minimising energy of Existing 

Systems without compromising quality objectives and Revamp Wastewater Treatment 

Operations with 20% energy reduction to facilitate the development and implementation of new 

technologies and ways of working. 

Step 3. Further reduction of the energy consumption with another 80%: a paradigm shift! 

The current water infrastructures have been designed and constructed on the basis of views, 

requirements, conditions and technologies of decades ago. It is recognised that in the present 

systems wastewater treatment, water treatment and distribution are very energy intensive. 

It is emphasised that a new conceptual approach – a paradigm shift - of the urban water cycle is 

needed to achieve further reduction of energy use and achieved the objectives listed above. New 

concepts could include topics like alternative sanitation approaches (vacuum system, separation 

at the source), from waste towards resource (phosphor and nitrogen recovery; wastewater as 

nutrient for algal based biofuel), microbial fuels cells, tailored water quality and use of 

alternative resources etc. 

The water and wastewater sector could benefit for technology developments and breakthrough in 

related areas like i.e. energy production, sensor development, nanotechnology etc. 

During the workshop a number of project outlines are developed to support the paradigm shift 

needed. Topics included are An Energy efficient urban water cycle – concepts for the future, 

Designing future concepts in existing systems, Revamp Wastewater Treatment Operation (2030), 

Nanotechnology based Membranes, and Demonstrations of new concepts. 

Global mega events like i.e. the Olympic Games every four year could well serve as effective 

opportunities to develop, implement, and show case new concepts for the urban water cycle. 

At the workshop it became clear that the availability of a set of tools (‘toolbox’) for Integrated 

Performance Evaluation is a prerequisite for an adequate comparison of present and new 

systems, and possible options and opportunities for improvement. A set of project proposals are 

developed to create this toolbox. In an ideal world, the toolbox should be available from the start 

of the journey toward an energy and carbon footprint neutral urban water cycle. 


15

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

Figure 3. Energy use over time with and without optimisation and new approaches in the urban water 

cycle; 2008 as reference point (100%) 

Regarding the time scale, a differentiation can made between the low-hanging fruit (< 2010), 

optimisations/technological innovations (< 2015-2020) and a paradigm shift/new concepts (< 

2030). 

In a optimal timeframe, the supporting activities by the GWRC members of step 1 (picking low 

hanging fruit) with the project Energy Efficiency in the Water Industry: A Compendium of 

Tools, Best Practices and Case Studies) and the development of the Toolbox of integrated 

Performance Evaluation would start directly. 

As next action, the discussion on and the development of supporting projects and activities for 

step 2 and 3 should be initiated to detail and start the projects needed. The project Revamp 

Wastewater Treatment Operations with 20% energy reduction could be considered to coordinate 

and complement the present research activities by individual GWRC members and other related 

research initiatives (i.e. EU projects NEPTUNE and INNOWATECH). The year 2030 is nearby. 

A brief document Water and Energy: a roadmap to the future! that describes the overall goals 

and objectives and benefits, the drivers and background of the foreseen projects would be of help 

to communicate these activities by the water and wastewater sector as well support the 

discussions with possible co-funders of the projects at a national/international levels. 


New 

approaches 

Optimisation 

Paradigm shift 

1990 2008 2015 2030 

16

4 Conclusion and follow up 

The main goals of the workshop were the exchange of information and the review of existing 

knowledge and know-how within the GWRC membership and associated organisations and 

develop a phased research strategy and portfolio of projects. 

Based on the received feedback it can be concluded that the combination of a pre-workshop 

background information and in-depth discussion at the research strategy workshop were very 

supportive to successfully achieve this goal. 

A three phase strategy with associated projects by GWRC members is developed to support the 

water and wastewater industry to achieve an energy and carbon footprint neutral urban water 

cycle by 2030: 

Implement the present State of the Art: picking low hanging fruit; 

Reduce of the energy consumption by 20%: optimisation and innovation; 

Further reduction of the energy consumption with another 80%: a paradigm shift! 

In a optimal timeframe, the supporting activities of step 1 (picking low hanging fruit) by the 

GWRC members with the project Energy Efficiency in the Water Industry: A Compendium of 

Tools, Best Practices and Case Studies and the development of the Toolbox of integrated 

Performance Evaluation would start directly. 

As next action, the discussion on and development of the supporting projects and activities for 

step 2 and 3 should be initiated to detail and start the projects needed. The project Revamp 

Wastewater Treatment Operations with 20% energy reduction could be considered to coordinate 

and complement the present research activities by individual GWRC members and other related 

research initiatives (i.e. EU projects NEPTUNE and INNOWATECH). 

A brief document Water and Energy: a roadmap to the future! that describes the overall goals 

and objectives and benefits, the drivers and background of the projects would be of help to 

communicate these proactive activities by the water and wastewater sector with their 

stakeholders as well support the discussions with possible co-funders of the projects at a 

national/international levels. 

The Board of the Directors of the GWRC will discuss these proposals and finally will have to 

decide about the collaborative projects that will be executed within the framework of the Water 

and Energy research strategy. 


17

Annex A. Project Proposals 


18

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 1. 

Project Title Energy Efficiency in the Water Industry: A Compendium of Tools, 

Best Practices and Case Studies. 

Proposed by 

After manpower, energy is the highest cost item on the balance sheet of 

most water and wastewater companies. Over the last decade, energy 

consumption by the sector has considerably increased as a result of 

implementation of new technologies to meet new regulations. The price 

of energy has also substantially increased in the same period. In Europe, 

some water companies have reported increases in energy costs of over 

60% in recent years and with oil prices continuing to escalate, further 

substantial increases in operating costs are expected. Those increases will 

be compounded by the need to meet additional new regulations that will 

require energy intensive treatment processes to achieve tight standards. 

High energy consumption will affect the water industry world wide and is 

inextricably linked to the issue of Climate Change. 

In November 2007, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on 

Climate Change (IPCC), published its Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) 

‘Climate Change 2007’. i The report recognises that adaptation measures 

are already being implemented, and will be essential in order to address 

the projected consequences. There is, however, a limit to adaptation. 

Mitigation measures will also be needed in order to stabilise the 

concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere, and to reduce the severity of 

impacts. Rapid world-wide investments and deployment of mitigation 

technologies, as well as research into new energy sources will be 

necessary to achieve a stabilisation of the concentration of greenhouse 

gases in the atmosphere. 

The IPCC ii concludes that all stabilisation levels assessed might be 

achieved by deployment of a portfolio of technologies that are either 

currently available or expected to be commercialised in coming decades. 

All assessed stabilisation scenarios indicate that 60-80% of the reductions 

would come from energy supply and use, and industrial processes, with 

energy efficiency playing a key role in many scenarios. 

The water industry therefore has a responsibility to work to mitigate 

climate change by ensuring that it builds and manages its infrastructure in 

a cost-effective, energy efficient manner. In doing so, it will make a 

significant contribution to mitigating climate change by reducing its 

carbon footprint. 

Objectives The objective of this project is to develop a Compendium of best practice 

(worldwide) in the energy efficient design and operation of water industry 

assets. The expectation is that the output of the project will be a 

‘benchmarking tool’ that will be of value to GWRC’s members to guide them 

towards improving their own ways of working from an energy efficiency 


19

Research 

Approach 

Deliverables 

Potential 

Partners 

perspective. 

The scope of work will be wide, to cover the principal activities of water and 

wastewater businesses iii , and will focus on the identification of current best 

practice, tools and technologies. 

In addition to an overview of current best practice, the study is expected to 

identify the promising developments and future opportunities to help deliver: 

1. Incremental improvements in energy efficiency through optimisation of 

existing assets and operations 

2. More substantial improvements in energy efficiency from a ‘paradigm 


shift’ in the way that the industry meets its obligations. 

This work will be conducted through a desk top study, involving a 

comprehensive review of the literature and correspondence with key 

stakeholders such as water industry operators, regulators, academics, and 

manufacturers. 

Issues to be considered should include: 

• Design 

• Construction 

• Operation 

• Recovery 

• Generation 

Although the scope of the study is wide reaching, in order to maximise the 

value of the effort expended on the project, it is expected that the project will 

concentrate on those water industry activities that are most energy intensive. 

The majority of GWRC’s membership will be interested in scenarios that 

apply in industrialised, temperate regions- but the study should also discuss 

how their findings might apply to other less temperate regions of the world. 

Case studies, drawn from the practical experiences of GWRC’s members 

would be of particular interest. 

The study will include suggestions/possible approach to keep the 

Compendium up-to-date. 

Schedule 2008/09. (1year) 

Recommended 100,000 € 

Budget (euros) 

Comments 

A report and/or web-based portal. 

Knowledge transfer workshop for GWRC members (and others by 

invitation). 

i. http;//www.ipcc.ch 

ii www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr_spm.pdf 

iii Including water treatment and distribution; wastewater conveyance and treatment; water reuse; sludge treatment 

and disposal. 

20


Project Title Define and understand the language 

Proposed by Concepts group 

Background GWRC offers a platform to compare and learn from best practices of 

their membership in many areas including energy and water. 

Terminology, definitions and metrics vary among countries and 

sectors which hampers a proper comparison of operational practices. 

Objectives Define common terms, definitions and metrics for measuring energy 

efficiency and environmental impact of water cycles and process 

technology 

• understand the language, water/waste water 

• build a common platform 

Deliverables 


• set boundaries of the system 

• a common framework of terms, definitions and metrics 

describing energy demand and environmental impact of water 

cycles 

• Through the web accessible report for GWRC members 

Research Approach • Draw up inventory of existing terminologies, metrics 

• Agree on system boundaries and common framework of 

terminologies 

• Develop and disseminate common framework 

• Organise workshop with IWA 

Potential Partners IWA ( large stakeholder group) 

Schedule 1 y 

Recommended 


Comments 

100,000 € 

21


Project Title Minimising energy of existing systems without compromising 

quality objectives 


Background It is widely acknowledged that opportunities exist to further increase 

the energy efficiency of existing water cycle systems. Operators of 

systems around the globe are developing and implementing energy 

efficient technologies and practices for different parts of the water 

cycle. GWRC membership will benefit from drawing up, further 

developing and implementing these best practices. Clarity on the 

potential energy saving would be valuable. 

Objectives This project should identify and further develop energy efficient 

technologies and operational practices, both for water and waste 

water. This includes a cradle-to-cradle approach covering design 

build, operations and demolition. The project should also develop 

indicators to determine the potential energy saving. 

Deliverables 


• Tool to determine the potential energy saving 

• Inventory of best available technologies and practices 

• Series of workbooks/monographs for specified processes 

Research Approach • Questionnaires/interviews 

• Desk study 

• Stakeholder-workshop 

• Report 

Potential Partners IWA 

Schedule 2 y 

Recommended 


Comments 

Scoping study 50,000 € 

22


Project Title External factors influencing process choice and optimisation 


Background Practice shows an increasing influence of external stakeholders on 

the design and operation of water utilities. Regulators set more 

stringent guidelines for waste water quality, leading to enhanced 

energy demand of treatment systems. NGO’s and consumer groups 

put boundaries on system and technology choices of water utilities 

(desalination of brackish ground water in US, potable reuse in 

Australia). This may force utilities to less energy efficient solutions. 

Objectives Draw up an inventory of external factors influencing solution 

choices 

• Regulators (to integrate regulatory requirements) 

• Customers 

• NGO’s 

• Other stakeholders (e.g. farmers..) 

Deliverables 


• Inventory of external influencing factors 

• Compendium of illustrative cases 

Research Approach • Bring together hurdles and impacts 

• Analyse several case studies (e.g. CO2 sequestration, bio-solidshandling&disposal 

etc.), 

• Workshop(s) 

Potential Partners European & American WWA, Regulators, 

Schedule 2 y 

Recommended 


Comments 

100,000 € to start with scoping 

23


Project Title An Energy efficient urban water cycle – concepts for the future 


Background Current wate rinfrastructures have been designed and constructed on 

the basis of views, requirements, conditions and technologies of 

decades ago. Future drivers and current technologies might open the 

door for new concepts for the water cycle 

Objectives • Design of new water supply systems (‘eco-city’), new sanitation, 

treatment, distribution, pipe work, fire vs. potable 

• New approach to old ideas 

• Decentralisation and/or centralisation 

• Sustainable size 

• Centralised control / local action 

Deliverables Report on series of scenarios and concepts, 

Research Approach • Build on GWRC Trends study 

• “Eco-city –concepts worldwide” – desk study of water and 

energy related projects 

• Series of meetings and workshops 

Potential Partners SWITCH and TECHNEAU-project (EU), Tianjin (China/Singapore, 

starts 2008) 

Schedule 2-3 y 

Recommended 


Comments 

200,000 € 


24


Project Title Designing future concepts in existing systems 


Background Current waterinfrastructures do not allow a rapid adaptation to new 

views and technologies. There is a need to establish the potential and 

benefits of adaptation of current systems. 

Objectives • Explore paradigm shift with old assets 

• Establish options for conversion and modification of assets with 

energy efficient technologies, both for drinking water and waste 

water 

Deliverables 


Report on series of scenarios and concepts, 

Research Approach • Desk study of water and energy related projects 

• Series of meetings and workshops 

Potential Partners Cooperation with suppliers 

Schedule 2 y 

Recommended 100,000 


Comments 

25


Project Title Demonstrations of new concepts 

Proposed by Concepts group, Technology Group 

Background New concepts get value when proven in practice. Global cooperation 

offers the opportunity to identify locations to validate and 

demonstrate new concepts for the water cycle. 

Objectives • Identify sites for testing of new concepts (Olympics 2020 / 

Tienjin 2008,….) 

• Explore willingness of local stakeholders to offer site for concept 

testing 

• Set up of partnership with stakeholders including regulators 

Deliverables 

Report 

Research Approach To be filled in later … 

Potential Partners 

Schedule 3-5 y 

Recommended Depends on concept and technology to be demonstrated 


Comments 


26

Project description for the Tools for Performance Evaluation 

In the figure below the relations between the 4 project proposals (proposals 8 – 12) developed 

with the category Tools for Performance Evaluation are given. 

Water industry 


State of the art review 

Project 1 – identification of gaps and needs 

Performance assessment 

•Costing 

treatment 

•Greenhouse gas 

•Energy efficiency 

•Impact on bio-diversity 

• more……. 

Project 2 – developing the indicators and defining the data need 


Urban 

water 

cycle 

Wastewater 

treatment 

Project 3a Project 3b 

Project 3c 

Project 3 – creation and updating of process specific models 

Communication 

for decision making 

•Social perception 

Project 4 – identification 

of stakeholder needs and 

priorities 

Stakeholders 

27

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 8 (Toolbox #1 ) 

Project Title State of the science review-synthesis-gap analysis for process 

models, performance evaluation and impact assessment methods 

for urban water utilities (water, wastewater, storm water, and 

water reuse) to manage energy use and greenhouse gas 

emissions. 

Proposed by Reekie, Whipp, Tee Guan, Crawford, Vince, Palsma 

Background Globally, water utilities are faced with the ongoing challenge of 

providing a safe, adequate, affordable supply of drinking water and 

sanitation to their customers. The challenge is compounded as 

clean, available supplies of water continue to be impacted by effects 

of climate change, water demand by other sectors, ecological water 

requirements, environmental regulation, rising operation and capital 

costs, and increasing stakeholder expectations. Energy is a critical 

component of the ongoing challenge due to rising costs, increased 

energy demand of advanced treatment technologies, increasing 

uncertainty of reliable energy supply, and the greenhouse gas 

emissions associated with fossil fuel derived energy, 


Drinking water, wastewater, water reuse and storm water utilities 

(urban water utilities) increasingly collaborate in planning for and 

managing water resources as they recognize the water resource is 

one finite resource. A variety of models and methods are used by 

the water industry to inventory process inputs and outputs, evaluate 

performance, assess impacts of operations, and evaluate alternatives. 

To reduce energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, there 

is a need for the global water community to optimize its tools and 

capabilities for process modelling, performance measurement, and 

impact assessment by identifying and reviewing currently used 

process models, performance indicators, and assessment methods 

used to manage energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. 

The review of the science should identify how the models and tools 

are used for decision-making and risk reduction. 

Urban water utilities (water supply, wastewater, reuse, and storm 

water management utilities) use a variety of performance assessment 

methods to evaluate tradeoffs between economic, energy, 

environmental and community impacts of capital investment and 

operating decisions. Performance assessment generally relies on 

three phases: 

• Inventory: Technical process models have been developed to 

characterize the inputs/outputs (i.e., electricity consumption, 

chemicals doses, sludge discharge) for each type of treatment 

process (i.e., activated sludge, membrane treatment, etc.). The 

inputs/outputs of the processes required by the system under 

28


scrutiny (i.e., a given water treatment or wastewater treatment or 

storm water management alternative) define the global 

inventory. 

• Performance evaluation: Best practices, metrics, and indices 

have been developed to help utilities evaluate ongoing 

performance, through comparisons with themselves and other 

utilities. 

• Impact assessment: Impact assessment methods are used to 

convert the inventory inputs/outputs into environmental (i.e., 

GHG emissions), social (i.e., damages to human health) or 

economic impacts. Some methods or tools used for impact 

assessment include: life cycle assessment, least cost planning, 

embodied energy assessment, ecological footprint identification, 

conjoint analysis, social modelling, net present value analysis, 

least cost planning, life cycle costing, externalities valuation, etc. 

The attached figure, “Convention for integrated performance 

evaluation” helps to illustrate this. 

There is a need to identify and evaluate the models and methods 

used by urban water utilities to inventory process inputs and outputs, 

to evaluate performance, and to assess economic, environmental and 

social impacts and risks of urban water energy management 

decisions. The models and methods help utilities define the 

consumption of resources and the discharge of contaminants relative 

to urban water management, and to evaluate the impacts. There is a 

need to compare and contrast the models and methods and identify 

the gaps for the purpose of refining, synthesizing, harmonizing, or 

developing new models and methods. 

Objectives Review the state of the science of the urban water utilities (drinking 

water, wastewater, reuse, and storm water) to manage energy 

consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. This will include a 

review of process-specific models, performance indicators, and 

impact and risk assessment methods; synthesis of the methods and 

models generally used and accepted for evaluation of energy 

consumption and greenhouse gas emissions; description of how the 

methods and models are used for decision making and risk 

evaluation; identification of gaps and research needs for refinement 

and harmonization, or development of more robust models and 

methods; provision of a framework for proceeding with research 

Deliverables 

projects to meet the research needs. 

Provide a final report that summarizes existing process models, 

performance indicators, metrics, and indices, and impact assessment 

methods and tools, including a comparison and analysis. Summarize 

how the tools are currently used for energy management decision 

support and risk assessment. Develop a framework for harmonizing 

existing models, indicators, methods, and tools leading to a 

29

compendium of best practices and generally used and accepted tools; 

and provide recommendations for proceeding with future research 

projects. 

Research Approach The work will be done through a desk top study, involving a 

comprehensive review of the literature and correspondence with key 

stakeholders in academia, manufacturing, and utilities. Information 

and input will be solicited from all Global Water Research Coalition 

members and via the International Water Association network. 


Identify and define terms, language, and performance indicators 

commonly used by water utilities 1) to inventory process 

inputs/outputs, and 2) to evaluate the performance of existing urban 

water systems, and 3) to assess impacts of urban water management 

on energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, including 

water production, treatment and distribution; wastewater collection 

and treatment; water reuse; and storm water collection and 

treatment. (Create a common language and definitions for the water 

industry.) 

Identify the existing benchmarking and process models used by 

water utilities to characterize the inputs and outputs of specific 

processes in the urban water cycle including water production, 

treatment, and distribution; wastewater collection and treatment; 

water recycling; and storm water collection and treatment. 

Identify the methods used by water utilities to evaluate the 

economic, environmental, and social impacts of the urban water 

energy management decisions (water production, wastewater 

treatment, water reuse, storm water management). Identify the 

performance indicators and the type of information needed for the 

various performance assessment methods. 

Compare, contrast, and evaluate the methods and the data needs and 

develop a framework for harmonizing existing process models, 

performance indicators, and impact assessment methods and tools. 

Identify gaps and research needs for developing new assessment 

methods or refining existing assessment methods to help urban water 

utilities optimize energy use and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 

Provide recommendations for proceeding with future research 

projects. 

Potential Partners IWA Specialist Groups on performance indicators, benchmarking, 

etc. 

Schedule 9 to 12 months 

Recommended 


Comments 

EU 150 K 

30


PROJECT DESCRIPTION 9. (Toolbox #2) 

Project Title Performance assessment 

Proposed by Reekie, Whipp, Koh, Crawford, Vince, Palsma 

Background Based on the review of what is existing and on the needs of 

stakeholders, performance indicators should be evaluated and 

updated. 

Objectives • Define the performance indicators and the type of information 

that would be needed for the performance assessment. 

• Define the data needs for input to models for performance 

assessment evaluation. The model will provide decision support 

for selection between technologies, scenarios on energy and 

environmental criteria: 

• Water treatment, 

• Waste water treatment, 

• Urban water cycle planning. 

Deliverables 

Definition of data needs and development of performance indicators 

for the performance assessment methods including costing, GHG, 

energy efficiency, impact on biodiversity, etc.. 

Research Approach Through the synthesis of the state-of-the-art review and an 

understanding of the stakeholders needs, the requirements of 

the performance assessment will be identified. 

Identify existing performance assessment methods dedicated 

to water treatment, waste water treatment and more globally 

to urban water cycle. 

Identify gaps and new requirements. 


Schedule 18 months, starting 6 months after project 1 

Recommended 


Comments 

EU 300K 

31

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 10. ( Toolbox #3a,3b, 3c) 

Project Title Water treatment, urban water cycle and wastewater treatment 

Proposed by 

Background The project will define the consumption of resources and the 

discharge of contaminants to be input relative to the urban water 

cycle, water treatment, and wastewater treatment. This project will 

quantify consumption and discharge. 

Objectives Create and update process specific models including water 

treatment, wastewater treatment and urban water cycle models. 

Deliverables 


A detailed process model for each of the inputs needed for 

performance assessment (water treatment, urban water cycle, and 

wastewater treatment) 

Research Approach Update (or develop new models), test and verify the models. 

. 


Schedule 18 to 24 months, starting 6 months after project 

Recommended EU 200K (per model 


Comments 

32

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 12. (Toolbox #4) 

Project Title Communication for decision making 

Proposed by 

Background This project will inform and be informed by projects 2 and 3. 

Communications between research teams will be necessary. 

Objectives Identify tools for water utilities to identify stakeholders, needs and 

priorities. Provide a toolbox to facilitate communication of 

decisions to stakeholders. 

Deliverables 

Research Approach 


Schedule 18 months 

Recommended 


Comments 


Guidebook to include look-up tables or pick-lists to identify factors 

and issues to be considered in terms of communicating effectively 

with stakeholders about the detail of what should be considered in 

the performance assessment. 

EU 100K 

33

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 13 

Project title Roadmap to Revamp Wastewater Treatment Operations to meet 

2020 Goals 

Proposed by Technology Breakout Group 

Background Currently wastewater treatment and water treatment and distribution are 

very energy intensive. In recognition of climate change and the new 

carbon-constrained environment, over the near term (by 2020) the water 

industry needs to produce more renewable energy and/or conserve more 

energy below current baseline. 

Objectives Expand the use of renewable energy production from existing 

wastewater plants by 20% and/or increase energy conservation to 

reduce energy consumption by 20% 

Deliverables 1. Case studies of plants who made these changes and met goals 

2. Matrix of technologies or technology modifications to existing 

treatment train necessary to meet goals. What are the achievable 

efficiencies, depending on scale (small, medium, large) 

3. Demonstration projects for new technologies and technology 

modifications 

4. Stakeholder (public, regulators) dissemination 


Approach 

Potential 

partners 

1. Collect data focusing on utilities achieving these goals 

2. Analyze what processes they have: scale, treatment types, locality 

characteristics, energy efficiency of units 

3. Risk analysis of optimization measures 

4. Validate analysis (costs, water quality, performance) by selecting 

demonstration projects 

5. Differentiate scales 

6. Disseminate information to industry 

To be determined. There is considerable overlap with WERF 

Optimization Challenge projects and the EU project NEPTUNE. 

Schedule To begin immediately. (Although this was not one of the top-rated 

projects from the workshop.) 

Recommended 

Budget 

(Euros) 

600,000 € per year for 5 years 


34

PROJECT DESCRIPTION 14 

Project title Roadmap to Revamp Wastewater Treatment Operations to meet 

2030 Goals 


Background Currently wastewater treatment and water treatment and distribution are 

very energy intensive. In recognition of climate change and the new 

carbon-constrained environment, over the long term (by 2030 so that 

investment in new infrastructure can be included) the water industry 

needs to become a significant producer of renewable energy 

and/recovered products. 

Objectives Expand the use of renewable energy production from existing 

wastewater plants by 80% and explore new energy and resource 

recovery options. Wastewater treatment should become a self-sustaining 

operation. 

Deliverables 1. Identify new technology approaches and treatment chains. 

Examples include microbial fuel cells and algae as a feedstock for 

biofuels. 

2. Lab scale and pilot scale evaluation of emerging technologies 

3. Matrix of technologies, place in treatment train and achievable 

efficiencies, depending on scale (small, medium, large) 

4. Demonstration projects 

5. Stakeholder (public, regulators) dissemination 


Approach 

Potential 

Partners 

7. Identify technology developers and project funding 

8. Develop prototype technologies (e.g. fuel cells, anaerobic, 

hydrogen, algae, side stream treatment, …) 

9. Analyze processes performance and characteristics: scale, treatment 

types, locality related effects, energy efficiency of units 

10. Consider regulatory and infrastructural changes to implement 

solutions 

11. Integration or converting existing treatment systems 

12. Risk analysis of new technologies 

13. Validate analysis (costs, water quality, performance) by selecting 

demonstration projects 

14. Differentiate scales 

15. Dissemination 

Technology developers, University, Regulators, Utilities 

Schedule Start over next 5 years. Some preliminary investigation may begin 

before to inform process. 

Recommended 

Budget 

(Euros) 

Depending on phase and projects on roadmap, coming from technology 

developers and government. Estimated 10 fold of that for 2020 

roadmap. 

Comments This is a roadmap, not a project. Ultimately there will be dozens of 

projects. 


35



Project title Application of nanotechnology to membranes to improve energy 

utilization in water and wastewater applications 


Background Use nanotechnology to optimize performance characteristics of 

membranes, for applications such as 

- Desalination 

- Ultrafiltration 

- Fuel cells 

- Catalysis 

- Pathogen removal 

- Water reuse 

- Chemical Recovery 

- Bioreactors 

- Forward osmosis systems 

- Bubbleless aeration 

- Gas separation (biogas improvement) 

Objectives 1. Membrane improvement for reverse osmosis (50 % reduction in 

energy demand) 

2. Nanomembranes for forward osmosis 

3. Fouling prevention and control 

4. Application of nanomembranes for waste water fuel cells 

5. Water recovery from fuel cells 

6. Benefit-Costs-Performance-Risk analysis 

Deliverables 1. Identify State-of-art 

2. Application development 

3. Bench scale performance assessment (fouling, flux, energy demand) 

of new membrane materials for water and wastewater applications 

4. Proof of concept 


Approach 

Potential 

Partners 

Research has to deal with three key areas 

1. Durability 

2. Reliability 

3. Integrity 

Academics, Manufacturers, Government Agencies, Public Stakeholders 

Schedule To begin as soon as possible and last for 10+ years. 

Recommended 

Budget 

(Euros) 

Comments 

Unknown 

36

Appendix B 

Tuesday, 19 February 

Program of the GWRC Workshop on Water and Energy 

London, 20 – 21 February 2008 

18:00 Welcome dinner - 1 Queen Anne’s Gate, London 

Wednesday, 20 February 

8.30 Registration Tea/Coffee at Church House, Westminster 

9:00 Welcome and introductions by (Mike Farrimond) 

• Who is who 

• Workshop program and way of working 

9:25 Overall introduction of the playfield with keynotes on: 

• Role of Energy in the Urban Water Cycle by Elise Cartmell 

• Climate Change and Energy Connection by Rob Renner 

• Energy and Resource Recovery by Lauren Fillmore 

10:45 Tea & Coffee 

11:00 Presentation of activities by GWRC members 

12:45 Lunch 

13:30 Identify knowledge gaps and research needs in break-out groups 

• Break-out groups’ assignments 

• Break-out groups at work 

16:30 Break-out groups’ presentations 

17:15 Clustering and prioritisation of themes and topics 

18.15 Walking tour followed by dinner 


37

Thursday, 21 February 

8.30 Tea/Coffee 

9:00 Summary of priority knowledge gaps and research needs 

9:30 Development of project proposals in break-out groups 

• Discuss the topics assigned 

• Develop project proposals (format given) 

• Present/review the proposals 

10:45 Tea/Coffee 

11:00 Development of project proposals in break-out groups (cont.) 

12:30 Lunch 

13:15 Development of project proposals in break-out groups (cont.) 

14:45 Tea/Coffee 

15:00 Break-out group presentations of the project proposals 

Clarification questions 

16:15 Survey of member interest to support the projects 

16:30 Summary of actions and follow up 

16:45 Close 


38

Annex C. List of participants 

Name Organisation Country E-mail 

Rob Renner AwwaRF USA RRenner@awwarf.org 

Linda Reekie AwwaRF USA LReekie@awwarf.org 

Jim Goodrich EPA USA Goodrich.James@epamail.epa.gov 

Chris Impellitteri EPA USA Impellitteri.Christopher@epamail.epa.gov 

Theo 

Hoven 

van den Kiwa WR Netherlands Theo.van.den.Hoven@kiwa.nl 

Jan Hoffman Kiwa WR Netherlands Jan.Hofman@kiwa.nl 

Harry Seah PUB Singapore Harry_SEAH@pub.gov.sg 

Lee Mun Fong PUB Singapore LEE_Mun_Fong@pub.gov.sg 

Koh Tee Guan PUB Singapore KOH_Tee_Guan@pub.gov.sg 

Bert Palsma STOWA Netherlands palsma@stowa.nl 

Tom Voskamp WB Regge - Dinkel Netherlands t.j.voskamp@wrd.nl 

Carlos Peregrina Suez - CIRSEE France Carlos.PEREGRINA@suez-env.com 

Sebastian Sturm TZW Germany sturm@tzw.de 

Mike Farrimond UKWIR UK mfarrimond@ukwir.org.uk 

Pauline Avery UKWIR UK pavery@ukwir.org.uk 

Elise Cartmell Cranfield Univ. UK E.Cartmell@Cranfield.ac.uk 

Issy Caffoor Environmental KTN UK Issy.caffoor@btinternet.com 

Steve Kaye Anglian Water UK sKaye@anglianwater.co.uk 

Gordon Wheale UKWIR UK gordon@wheale.fsnet.co.uk 

Steve Whipp United Utilities UK Steve.whipp@uuplc.co.uk 

Michel Gibert Veolia France Michel.GIBERT@veolia.com 

Emmanuelle 

Aoustin 

Veolia France Emmanuelle.AOUSTIN@veolia.com 

Lauren Fillmore WERF USA lfillmore@werf.org 

George Crawford CH2M-Hill USA George.crawford@ch2m.com 

Gerhard Offringa WRC RSA gerhardo@wrc.org.za 

Frans Schulting GWRC Netherlands f.lschulting@freeler.nl 


39

Annex D. Workshop Presentations 

Frans Schulting (GWRC) Workshop Water and Energy - Introduction 

Elise Cartmell, Canfield University Role of Energy in the Urban Water Cycle 

Rob Renner, AwwaRF Climate Change and Energy Connection 

Lauren Fillmore, WERF Energy and Resource Recovery 

Chris Impellitteri, US EPA Overview of activities at EPA 

Carlos Peregrina, CIRSEE - Suez Overview of activities at CIRSEE 

Francois Vince, Anjou Recherche -Veolia Overview of activities at Veolia 

Harry Seah, PUB Overview of activities at PUB 

Jan Hoffman, Kiwa Water Research Overview of activities at Kiwa 

Sebastian Sturm, DVGW - TZW Overview of activities at TZW 

Bert Palsma, STOWA Overview of activities at STOWA 

Lauren Fillmore, WERF Overview of activities at WERF 

Linda Reekie, AwwaRF Overview of activities at AwwaRF 

Steve Whipp, United Utilities Overview of activities at UKWIR 

Frans Schulting (GWRC) Workshop W&E: Summary & Follow up 


40

Annex E. List of identified knowledge gaps and research needs. 

1. Knowledge exchange - State of Science 

• Clearinghouse that synthesises and shows what we all already know (map of knowledge) 

• Knowledge sharing with energy sector and other stakeholders (climate change) 

2. Capabilities and limitations of present systems 

• Guidance to apply standard methods, parameters and system boundaries 

• Workbook/guidelines on best practices for processes 

• Limits of current technologies: best practices, benchmarking (input data, metrics) 

• Benchmarking: capture and synthesize info, data, definitions on process energy 

consumption 

3. Future concepts/innovation and scenario planning 

• Starting from scratch 

• Shift from one-dimensional to multi-dimensional policy making 

• New concepts needed: this requires big steps and will not result for incremental change 

• Sector needs ambitious targets, with government incentives 

• Future planning scenarios must take into account uncertainties (e.g. demographics, 

demand, …), decision tools, etc 

• Paradigm shift: engineering and technological design of eco-city (partnering with WRF, 

EPRI, etc.); Stakeholder involvement needed! 

• Research to assist in evaluating, changing and creating a new wastewater treatment train 

in 2020 

• Small versus large systems: what is a sustainable size? 

• Reclassification of wastewater (used water) as a resource, not as a waste 

• Side effects of CO2 sequestration on water 

4. Implementing new concepts and making innovation happen 

• Global demonstrations; arena to expedite innovations and new applications 

• Adjust (increase) pace of R&D to make impact on policy makers (DSS, demo sites) 

• Financial, social and environmental framework to allow successful technology 

implementation 

• Verified demo projects are needed for stakeholder acceptance! 

• IPR/single source/ commercial stimulation 

• Procurement guidance 


41

5. Communication strategies, engagement and image (PR) 

• Reclassification of wastewater (used water) as a resource, not as a waste 

• Prove net environmental benefit of recycling products including known sanitary 

consequences (public perception) 

• Reference point GHG emissions with and without impact 

• Influencing the supply chain (imposing values) 

• Education schools and universities 

• Coordination between market for electricity generation technologies and product 

development by vendors 

6. Analytical toolbox, modelling 

• Energy efficiency rating 

• Wastewater process models (GHG emissions) 

• Drinking water process models (GHG emissions) 

• Benchmarking: capture and synthesize info, standards, metrics, definitions on process 

energy consumption, …. 

• Better models for LCA and whole life costing 

• Accounting methods/workbooks to easily assess environmental impact 

7. Whole life carbon costing 

• What are BATs in carbon constraint environment 

• Better models for LCA and whole life costing 

8. Technology improvement 

• Solids pre-treatment options prior to anaerobic digestion for increased biogas production 

• Treatment of biogas to improve marketability 

• Coordination between market for electricity generation technologies and product 

development by vendors 

• Improve efficient recovery of by-products 

• Alternative energy resources (blue energy, hydro-energy, wind & solar energy, heat 

pumps…) 

• Breakthrough in O2 transfer 

• Breakthrough in desalination technology 

• Alternative sanitations concepts and approaches 

• Better membranes (performance, costs, ….) 

• Application of nanotechnology 

• Water transfer systems (pumps or ….?) 

• Blower- and air transfer equipment 

• Smart pump control 

• Life Cycle issues of sludge co-generation of electricity 

• Demonstrate the use of volatile fatty acids, bio-diesel, butanol from sludge 


42

9. Energy recovery, content and management 

• Demonstrating sustainable options for sludge cogeneration 

• Investigate life cycle costs of small scale hydro turbines in distribution systems 

• Investigate life cycle costs (TBL) of other renewable sources : tidal, solar, wind,…. 

• Improve cost effectiveness of electricity generation options 

• Fuel cells, turbines, micro turbines, better utilisation of heat output 

• Explore reuse of waste water by-products as biofuels 

• Alternative energy resources (blue energy, hydro/wind/solar energy, heat pumps…) 

10. Benefit cost analysis (BCA) 

• TBL protocols 

11. Small scale systems 

• Investigate life cycle costs of small scale hydro in distribution system 

• BCA evaluation 

• Small versus large systems: what is a sustainable size? 

• High level of P removal (alternative carbon source needed to achieve high P removal) 

12. Infrastructure and other sectors 


43

Annex F. Energy Data as provided by the GWRC members and partner 

USA NL SIN SUEZ GER UK ZA AUS 


Population 

served (mio) 306,5 16,3 4,5 80 81,8 42 9,97 

Volume 

(Gm3/year) 37 1,11 0,449 3 3,75 3,5 1,42 

Total Energy 

(G kWh/year) 16 0,52 0,202 1,7 3,78 

WT (G 

kWh/year) 0,024 1,4 0,38 

WP (G 

kWh/year) 0,178 0,3 3,4 

Wastewater 

Population 

served (mio) 222,8 16,3 4,5 36 77,5 59,5 30 9,97 

Volume 

(Gm3/year) 46,5 1,87 0,58 2,3 5,2 5,8 1,1 0,995 


(G kWh/year) 0,327 1,2 3,49 

WwT (G 

kWh/year) 21 0,665 0,241 1 3,7 

WwC (G 

kWh/year) 0,086 0,2 


Volume 

(m3/year/cap) 121 68 100 38 46 83 142 


(kWh/m3) 0,43 0,47 0,45 0,57 1,01 0,1 - 0,5 

WT 

(kWh/m3) 0,05 0,47 0,10 0,1- 0,3 

WP 

(kWh/m3) 0,40 0,10 0,91 

Wastewater 

Volume 

(m3/year/cap) 209 115 129 64 67 97 37 100 


(kWh/m3) 0,56 0,52 0,67 0,4 - 0,9 

WwT 

(kWh/m3) 0,45 0,36 0,42 0,43 0,64 0,39 

WwC 

(kWh/m3) 0,15 0,09 0,1 - 0,6 


44

Annex G. Information on Member and Partner Activities 

Organisation: AwwaRF 

Contact person: Linda Reekie 

Email address: LReekie@awwarf.org 

Available reports 

Energy Management for Water and Wastewater Utilities (Reardon, 1994) 

The research was sponsored by AwwaRF and the Electric Power Research Institute Community 

Environmental Center (EPRI-CEC) and published by EPRI. It provides a detailed look at 

electricity consumption for several generic processes used in water and wastewater plants. It 

describes energy usage patterns for water and wastewater and identifies opportunities for a 

variety of energy management options. Included are energy management approaches and case 

study applications. 

Ozone System Energy Optimization Handbook (DeMers, Rakness, and Blank, 1996) 

The research was sponsored by AwwaRF and the Electric Power Research Institute Community 

Environmental Center (EPRI-CEC) and published by AwwaRF. It is the first publication of a 

three-phase collaborative research effort between the two organizations called the “Ozone 

Energy Optimization Project.” It reports on development of a standardized protocol for 

evaluating ozone system optimization. The protocol was established through conducting three 

ozone facility evaluations of about one-week duration and follow-up efforts. 

Ozone Facility Optimization Research Results and Case Studies (Rakness and DeMers, 1998) 

The research was sponsored by AwwaRF and EPRI-CEC and published by AwwaRF. It is the 

second publication of a three-phase collaborative research effort between the two organizations 

called the “Ozone Energy Optimization Project.” It reports on the evaluation of ten operating 

ozone facilities to expand the database of information about ozone facilities. It looks at case 

study examples and strategies for achieving optimization. 

Advancing Ozone Optimization During Pre-Design, Design and Operation (Rakness and 

Hunter, 2000) 

The research was sponsored by AwwaRF and EPRI-CEC and published by EPRI. It is the third 

publication of a three-phase collaborative research effort between the two organizations called 

the “Ozone Energy Optimization Project.” It condenses ideas for ozone optimization during predesign, 

design, and operation based on findings during Phases 1 and 2 and selected special 

studies during Phase 3. The study found potential for lowering capital cost through optimization 

during pre-design using redundancy and standby equipment. In addition, ozone demand and 

decay should influence generator and contact sizing decisions. Also, plant administration must 

make optimization a priority and staff must implement optimization strategies and monitor 

progress as well as keep meters in proper calibration and equipment in working order. 

Energy and Water Quality Management System (Curtice, Jentgen, and Ward, 1997) 


45

The research was sponsored by AwwaRF, EPRI-CEC, and East Bay Municipal Utility District 

and published by AwwaRF. The project concept was partially driven by electric utility 

deregulation, which presents an opportunity to lower energy costs for water utilities that can 

optimally manage and control their systems. ‘Quality and supply’ are the boundaries under 

which the optimization problem can be initiated and solved. 

A Total Energy and Water Quality Management System (Ladner, Talley, and van Buskirk, 

1999) 

The research was sponsored by AwwaRF and EPRI-CEC and published by EPRI. The report 

develops a generic model for an energy and water quality management system (EWQMS) for the 

water community, and defines standard specifications for software applications required to 

minimize energy costs within the constraints of water quality and operation goals. Eleven 

drinking water utilities provided input to the requirements of the EWQMS. 

Implementing a Prototype Energy and Water Quality Management System (Jentgen et. al., 

2003) 

AwwaRF and EPRI introduced the concept of an EWQMS in a February 1997 report. The report 

defined an EWQMS as a collection of application software programs that provide information 

used to develop plans that solve water quality, supply, and energy management problems. Users 

receive information and prepare plans for daily decision-making. These plans are developed 

using optimization and simulation techniques embedded in the software programs. The report 

describes the implementation effort at Colorado Spring Utilities. 

Optimizing Operations at JEA’s Water System (Jentgen et. al., 2005) 

The research was a tailored collaboration project with JEA Water and Wastewater, which 

extended the experience of the previous EWQMS projects to software implementation, 

installation, testing, calibration, and daily operations of an optimization system. The project 

expanded previously developed software for optimized system controls of aquifer resources 

(OSCAR) that was developed to minimize cost while improving water quality and better 

managing water resources; describes benefits of optimizing operations and includes functional 

software specifications; and documents experience and lessons learned in the implementation, 

calibration, and operation of the OSCAR software. 

Quality Energy Efficiency Retrofits for Water Systems (1997) 

The project was funded by the California Energy Commission, AwwaRF and EPRI-CEC and 

published by EPRI. The manual provides information that can help operations and engineering 

staff in water supply facilities successfully implement common energy efficiency improvements. 

The manual’s scope is limited to project implementation issues. 

Best Practices for Energy Management (Jacobs, Kerestes, and Riddle, 2003) 

The research developed and documented a consortium benchmarking process for water utility 

application, and tested the application of the process in an energy management benchmarking 

study. The project resulted in documentation of more than 20 best practices in energy 

management and a survey tool for utilities to use in assessing and planning their own energy 

management. The best practices included a description, metrics to measure them, obstacles in 

applying them, and benefits achieved in using them. 

Water and Wastewater Industry Energy Efficiency: A Research Roadmap (Means, 2004) 


46

Identifies and prioritizes research areas and/or projects that would advance emerging 

technologies and best practices to improve the energy efficiency, reliability, and costs for water 

and wastewater treatment facilities. Research partner: California Energy Commission. 

Water Efficiency Programs for Integrated Water Management (Chesnutt et al. 2007) 

Identifies direct and indirect costs and benefits of water efficiency incentives and measures in a 

format that is useful for capital and strategic planning efforts. Provides a framework to evaluate 

demand-side management options with supply-side options. Also establishes the role of water 

efficiency programs as a component of an integrated water resources management strategy. 

Includes a CD-ROM. Research partner: USEPA. 

Zero Liquid Discharge for Inland Desalination (Bond and Veerapaneni 2007) 

The project investigated technologies with the potential to reduce the cost and energy 

consumption for inland desalination with zero liquid discharge (ZLD). The hypothesis tested 

was that ZLD treatment costs and energy requirements could be reduced by adding intermediate 

concentrate treatment and secondary reverse osmosis steps to minimize the volume of 

concentrate to be treated with thermal desalination or pond evaporation. A method was tested 

that achieved ZLD at 50 to 70 percent less cost and 70 to 75 percent les energy than currently 

used ZLD methods. Research partner: California Energy Commission 

Energy Index Development for Benchmarking Water and Wastewater Utilities (Carlson and 

Walburger, 2007) 

The project developed metrics and a scoring method to allow comparison of energy use among 

wastewater and among water utilities. The rating can be used for water utilities to track energy 

performance over time, target specific facilities for energy efficiency upgrades and evaluate the 

success of energy efficiency projects. Research partners: California Energy Commission, New 

York State Energy and Research Development Authority. 

Water Consumption Forecasting to Improve Energy Efficiency of Pumping Operations 

(Jentgen et al. 2007) 

The research will identify, test, and evaluate available methods and tools for making short-term 

water consumption forecasts necessary for optimizing pumping schedules and energy use, to 

support the implementation of an Energy and Water Quality Management System (EWQMS). 

Research partner: California Energy Commission. 

Risks and Benefits of Energy Management for Drinking Water Utilities (Raucher et al. 2008) 

The project identified and assessed a broad array of energy management options for water 

utilities, including energy demand and supply alternatives. It applied practical risk management 

tools to help water utilities select, explain and implement suitable energy management practices. 

The final report is a reference on energy management strategies, a guidance manual providing a 

risk management framework for utilities, and a source of illustrative applications of the risk 

management framework. Research partner: California Energy Commission. 

“Evaluation of the Dynamic Energy Consumption of Advanced Water and Wastewater 

Treatment Technologies” Project #3056 in publication 

The research documented the energy use, cost, and efficiency of water and wastewater unit 

operations including UV disinfection, ozone disinfection, microfiltration/ultrafiltration, reverse 


47

osmosis, membrane bioreactors, and electrodialysis reversal. It includes a comparison with 

theoretical energy efficiencies and an identification of the factors affecting energy consumption 

at ten different treatment facilities. Project partner: California Energy Commission. 

Ongoing projects 

“Review of International Desalination Research” Project #3055 

The project will develop a searchable database of current international desalination technology 

research and development efforts that will include a list of organizations, abstracts, reference 

documents, potential impacts on cost and energy and an updated status of research efforts. 

Project period 2006 to 2009. Project partner: California Energy Commission. 

“Desalination Facility Design and Operation for Maximum Energy Efficiency” Project 

#4038 

The research will compile and analyze data from operating brackish (ground and surface), 

seawater, and wastewater membrane desalination facilities to result in recommendations for the 

design and operation of desalination facilities to maximize energy efficiency and reduce energy 

use and costs, and will also investigate the relationships between plant location, design, operation 

and maintenance, and energy use and cost. Project period: Project partner: California Energy 

Commission 

Decision Support System for Sustainable Energy Management” Project 4090 

The research project will compile a list of tools to assist water utilities with energy management 

and information gathered using the tools, as well as case studies to develop a decision support 

tool that will allow utilities to explore and quantify the economic, environmental, and social 

impacts of various energy management options. 

“Evaluating Effects of Climate Change on Water Utility Planning Criteria and Design 

Standards” Project 4154 

The tailored collaboration project will evaluate current planning criteria and design 

standards for effects due to future climate modification with the purpose of assisting water 

utilities in the engineering of new facilities. The purpose of the project is to evaluate current 

planning criteria and design standards for effects due to future climate modification with the 

purpose of assisting water utilities in the engineering of new facilities. This project will use four 

case studies from west coast agencies in Seattle, San Diego County Water Authority, Los 

Angeles and the San Francisco Bay Area. Energy and greenhouse gas emission reduction will be 

a component. Project period: 2008 – 2009. 

“Greenhouse Gas Emission Inventory Guidance, Specialty Protocol Development, and 

Management Strategies for Water Utilities” Project 4156 

The tailored collaboration project with Santa Clara Valley Water District will develop 

tools to assist water utilities across the United States and Canada to prepare greenhouse gas 

(GHG) emission inventories using a systematic and consistent methodology. The research team 

will coordinate with California Climate Action Registry (CCAR) so that the CCAR considers 


48

drafting the protocol as part of their GHG inventory and reporting process. Project period: 2008 

– 2009. 

“A New Water Source: Can Fuel Cells Provide Safe and Cost-Effective Potable Water 

Sources?” Project #4139 

This unsolicited research project will assess the viability of integrating fuel cell 

technologies into the toolbox of options for municipal water providers by quantifying the net 

water yield, water quality, and net energy output from different types of fuel cells. It will 

investigate whether fuel cells can be operated to maximize water production instead of energy 

production and will assess whether additional treatment of fuel cell water is needed to serve as 

potable water. 


49

Organisation: Kiwa Water Research c.s. 

Contact person: Theo van den Hoven 

Email address: Theo.van.den.Hoven@kiwa.nl 


Benchmark report ‘Water in zicht 2006’ Dutch waterworks (2007) 

Presents benchmark data of Dutch waterworks, including (trends) in energy consumption and use 

of renewable energy sources. 

Mimosa, a model for environmental impact assessment of the water cycle (2003) 

Excel model to assess environmental performance (including energy and GHG emissions) of all 

steps in the water cycle. Model contains default values for many processes. 

Softening to decrease scaling in hot water installations (various studies in 90s) 

Studies show that central softening prevents scaling in hot water installations, thus saving energy 

up to 50%! 

Environmental effects of pipe materials (1992) 

Kiwa report 91.023 (1992), paper in H2O 26, 22, 651 (1993), both in Dutch. 

Describes and compares environmental impact of pipe materials. The cradle-to-grave analysis 

addresses all environmental effects including greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption. 

Energy consumption for pipe systems, including coatings and joints, increases as follows (in GJ 

per 100m of a 100 mm 1MPa pipe): asbestos cement (5,5), GRP (6,9), PVC (6,9), GRE (12), 

cast iron (36), steel (37). Only qualitative data are reported on GHG emissions (CO2, NOx). 

Asbestos cement seems to have the lowest emissions. 

Memstill TM 

A very energy efficient membrane distillation process (Memstill) was developed by TNO, some 

SMEs and two water utilities (Waternet, Evides). Energy consumption and operation costs are 

below current RO costs for seawater desalination. The technology can apply low quality waste 

heat to drive the process. 


Climate neutral water cycle (2007- 2008) 

• Draws up inventory of climate footprint 

• Develops strategy for climate neutral water cycle 

• Applies strategy on two cases: Delft municipality and industrial area in Breda. 

Various studies on Aquifer Thermal Energy Storage (ATES) 

ATES systems are booming in the Netherlands as they substantially decrease energy 

consumption and related GHG emissions in buildings. These systems may stimulate microbial 

and hydro-chemical processes in the subsurface. This is interesting for attenuation processes in 


50

polluted areas. If it takes place in catchment areas risks may occur for water supply systems. 

Within the framework of Risk Assessment/Risk Management practices (Water Safety Plans) 

water utilities investigate these risks. 

Initiatives at Waternet (Amsterdam) 

- Cold water recovery from deep lakes 

- Energy recovery from domestic waste water 

- Biogas recovery and reuse from waste water sludge treatment 

- Integral approach for water and energy at large real estate projects (a.o. Zuid-As) 

Blue energy (2003 – 2010) 

Production of electricity at the interface of fresh and brackish water. Studies and lab- and pilot 

scale are ongoing. 

Biological fuel cell (2004 – 2008) 

Biocatalytic electrolysis to produce hydrogen gas from waste water. 

Low-pressure advanced oxidation with UV/H2O2 (2007-2010) 

UV/H2O2 Advanced oxidation using UV radiation as well as with hydroxyl radicals is an 

effective and aselective barrier for organic micropollutants in drinking water production. Due to 

high UV absorbance of hydrogen peroxide at low wavelengths, medium pressure lamps emitting 

a broad spectrum are generally used for this process. Recent research has shown that the use of 

low-pressure lamps can be as effective as medium pressure lamps for the production of hydroxyl 

radicals. Establishing the Electrical Energy per Order (EE/O) for relevant organic micro 

pollutants, it was found that low-pressure UV/H2O2 requires significantly less energy than 

medium-pressure UV/H2O2. This project with international partners is currently in the phase of 

pilot testing. 

Prevention of membrane fouling (2007 – 2009) 

A number on new innovative membrane concepts, applying techniques based on forward 

osmosis and air flushing, are under development. These technologies can control and reduce 

membrane fouling and therefore reduce the energy consumption of these processes significantly. 

Waste water desalination (2005 – 2009) 

Discharge of saline waste water streams are an increasing concern for sustainability and the 

introduction of the European Water Framework Directive. Still, because of technical and 

economical reasons, saline waste streams are being discharged. Great benefits would be 

achieved if the discharge of saline waste streams could be minimized or prevented against 

acceptable costs. Promising treatment concepts for the reduction of saline streams in 

combination with the application of the utilization of waste heat are investigated. 

Comparison of IEX and membrane filtration for demi-water production (2007- 2009) 

In this study a comparison is made between the application of IEX and membrane filtration for 

demiwater production. The study considers investment and O&M costs. Energy is an important 

factor in the comparison. 

Treatment scenario’s for fermentation broth (2007- 2009) 


51

Biomass fermentation is applied more and more in The Netherlands to produce “green” energy. 

An important point with a fermentation process is the remaining fermentation broth or digestate. 

The digestate discharge is expensive and is therefore an obstruction for further development. The 

research is looking for treatment possibilities that are economically and technically feasible. 

Water re-use at industrial laundry processes (2007 - 2009) 

The branch organization of industrial laundries in The Netherlands (TKT) investigates the 

possibilities of water re-use. The specific goal of this research is reduction of energy demand in 

the sector. The aim is to reach a reduction of 16 %. 


52

Organisation: PUB Singapore 

Contact person: Yunita Tan 

Email address: Yunita_TAN@pub.gov.sg 

Available reports & Finished projects 

Integrated Anaerobic and Aerobic Treatment of Wastewater – completed 

The present process to treat municipal wastewater uses physical settlement to remove most of the 

settleable solids followed by an aerobic process where micro-organisms are used to breakdown 

the remaining pollutants in the wastewater. This is an energy intensive process. In addition, it 

produces substantial quantity of sludge that has to be disposed of. The anaerobic process thrives 

in our tropical environment. It is a net energy and low sludge producing process. By itself, it 

could not produce the quality of effluent to our standards. However, used in combination with 

the aerobic process, it could meet standards, help to reduce energy requirements and produce less 

sludge. Preliminary calculations also show a potential 30% reduction in sludge production and 

aeration energy by coupling UASB and Activated Sludge. 

Ultrasonic Disintegration of Sewage Sludge – completed 

For a country like Singapore with limited natural resources, innovative technologies are required 

to reduce sludge disposal volume and increase biogas production to recover energy in the 

wastewater treatment process. The ultrasound disintegration technology has this feature, i.e., it 

disintegrates sludge solids and enhances anaerobic digestion. 

The technology was tested in the field under tropical conditions with a full-scale ultrasonic 

facility and two 5000 m3 egg-shaped digesters, each was fed with mixed primary (one-third) and 

thickened activated (two thirds) sludge of identical quality and volume up to 200 m3d-1. For the 

two digesters, all operation conditions were the same except one (test) with and the other without 

(control) the ultrasonic device to pretreat the sludge feed. 

Considering an electricity yield of 2.2 kWh m-3 for the biogas from the anaerobic digesters 

(from historical record of the wastewater treatment plant), the daily total power consumed by the 

ultrasonic reactor (approx. 288 kWh), the sludge pump (

In comparison with the control, the five-month field study showed that the ultrasound 

pretreatment of the sludge resulted in an increase in the daily biogas production up to 35%. 

There were no significant differences in compositions of the biogas from the two digesters. 

When translating the increases in the biogas production into its source – volatile suspended 

solids, a 25-30% increase in sludge solids removal is expected under optimal hydraulic retention 

time. 

Application of Anaerobic Selector at Jurong WRP and Kim Chuan WRP – completed 

Jurong and Kim Chuan WRP currently uses conventional aerobic process for treatment of 

wastewater. The anaerobic selector process can be incorporated into the aeration tanks by 

creating an anaerobic zone in the first pocket of the aeration tank. An anaerobic selector process 

has been documented to favour the growth of floc forming bacteria and improve sludge 

settleability. It is also known to be effective in removing phosphates and COD from the 

wastewater. 

A significant portion of (Soluble Chemical Oxygen Demand) SCOD in the settled sewage 

(including Acetic Acid) was removed concomitantly with PO4 3— P release in the anaerobic 

selector. SCOD removal under anaerobic conditioned is verified so savings in aeration energy is 

possible. The projected reduced in aeration energy of 8% (21 kW) is translated into annual 

savings of S$20,000 

Memstill – completed 

TNO developed within a Dutch consortium that includes Keppel Seghers Netherland, a 

membrane-based distillation concept in which multi-stage flash and multi-effect distillation 

modes are combined into one membrane module. This so-called “Memstill ® technology” is 

expected to improve the economy and ecology of the existing desalination technology for 

seawater and brackish water favourably. This is especially ascribed to the fact that a Memstill ® 

module houses a continuum of evaporation stages in an almost ideal counter-current flow 

process which makes a high recovery of evaporation heat possible. The energy requirement for 

Memstill ® technology can be fulfilled with low-grade thermal energy such as waste heat or 

renewable energy (e.g. solar energy), which makes Memstill an environmentally friendly 

process. 

In collaboration with both National Environment Agency (NEA) and Public Utilities Board 

(PUB), Keppel Seghers Engineering Singapore carried out testing for more than a year in 

Singapore on a pilot plant with an initially estimated capacity of 1 – 2 m 3 /hr. The testing results 

is shown in the table below: 

Parameters Memsing E-On Next Pilot Plant Targeted 

Flux (L/hr/m2) 0.25 2.5 5 

Energy efficiency 

Reasonable to assume even 

(%) 30 50 better performance judging from 80 

Heat input (MJ/m3) 

1000 - 

2000 

400 

improvement made from 

previous 2 pilot plants 

240 

Future Memstill modules with improved designs are expected to achieve even higher energy 

efficiency and less heat input. Thicker spacers are used to allow higher feed flow rate. A 

different type of membrane condensers are adopted to provide more efficient heat transfer. A 

third Memstill pilot has been manufactured to include these improvements and will be tested in 


54

AVR, Netherlands. The AVR pilot is expected to further link up the gap towards targeted 

performance parameters. Keppel Seghers intends to build a second Memstill pilot plant in 

Singapore to further its understanding and experience with Memstill technology and hopefully to 

demonstrated an improved performance. 


Membrane Bioreactor (Demo Plant) – in progress 

Baseline performance is being established. The plant has been in operation since Dec 06 and 

have stable operations at membrane flux of 25L/m2-h and energy consumption between 0.5 - 0.6 

kWh/m3. This is lower by 0.3 kWh/m3 compare to the normal operation of MBR. 

The 0.55 kWh/m3 includes the energy required by: 

• Drum screen 

• Blower for membrane 

• Blower for aerobic tank 

• Pump for sludge supply from aerobic tank to membrane tank 

• Pump for sludge circulation from aerobic tank to anoxic tank 

• Pump for membrane filtration 

• Permeate pump which pumps the MBR permeate to the product tank which is approx. 400 

meter from the MBR plant. 

• Valves 

• Measurement equipment 

• Energy consumption for the MBR control building (air-con, lightings etc). 

It does not include: 

• Raw water pump 

• Pumping energy usage to the industrial users after the product tank. 

Desalination Facility Design and Operation for Maximum Energy Efficiency (AwwaRF 

Project 4038) – in progress 

On July 2006, PUB has agreed to participate in this project together with Black & Veatch (lead 

agent). PUB will contribute as a participating utility. The energy usage at PUB desalination plant 

(SingSpring Desalination Plant) will be assessed and if required, will be visited for an evaluation 

of energy balance within various treatment processes. Any potential means of improving 

efficiency specific to the utility will be identified. The results will be used to develop general 

guidelines for similar facilities in future. The project is currently on going. 

Sludge Drying using Pulver Dryer – in progress 

PUB is currently testbedding a Three-Stage PulverDryer system to dry and resize municipal 

sewage sludge. This material is approximately 20% solids and 80% moisture. It is very sticky 

and hard to handle. The PulverDryer test unit is designed to mix the raw materials with dried 

materials at about 50% to 50%. That material is then processed through a three stage 

PulverDryer System that will reduce to total moisture of the final product between 65 to 75% 

solids. The drying and resizing of the material within the PulverDryer allows the PUB to rethink 

traditional methods of disposing the material in a landfill. Proper processing of this material in 

the PulverDryer also kills pathogens to EPA levels so the final product can be classified as 

fertilizer or disposed of in a much more inert state in a landfill. This material can also be 


55

homogenized and blended with waste wood and/or leaves to create a mulch, or even a fuel to be 

burned in boilers to create steam power for electrical generation. 

The PUB in Singapore currently processes over 800 tons of this waste material that is a burden to 

dispose of and costly to handle and transport. The PulverDryer offers PUB the opportunity to 

reduce overall production cost as well as create a valuable commodity from this waste material. 

The PUB project commenced operational testing in October of 2004 with all three stages running 

successfully. Target moisture levels and sizing of material was achieved during initial runs. 

PulverDryer management will utilize this test site during the next six months to perfect 

PulverDryer technology and equipment systems. 

Variable Salinity Plant (VSP) – in progress 

The Variable Salinity Plant (VSP) produces potable water from rainwater and seawater as well as 

smaller streams. By tapping on the canal water, the pressure required for the RO process is much 

lower than that is required for desalination. Thus resulted in energy savings. 

In addition to the above, PUB is also looking into the following projects: 

Hydrodynamic Study of Hollow Fiber Membrane Bioreactor to Minimize Energy 

Consumption and Membrane Fouling – under evaluation 

This project is a collaboration project between PUB, A-Star, and Siemens. The objective is to 

improve cost effectiveness of MBR Technology by substantially reducing energy use by 

optimizing energy use through fluid dynamic modeling within the MBR and by eliminating the 

addition of energy added for biofouling prevention with VLR (Vertical Loop Reactor) 

technology. 

Excess Biosludge Elimination and Trace Organics Removal Using Integrated Membrane 

Multi-reactor (IMMS) Water Reclamation System – under evaluation 

This project presents a critical important scheme for providing the solutions for excess biosludge 

elimination and trace organics removal using NTU’s newly patented IMMS technology. This 

multi-disciplinary research project is aimed to develop the knowledge based necessary to 

understand the minimization or elimination of biosludge produce, trace organic removal, 

membrane fouling mechanism and increase water quality. If successful, the project is potential to 

gain efficiency improvement in energy usage & land minimization for sludge incineration ash 

Pilot Testing of Membrane Distillation Bioreactor for Wastewater Reclamation – under 

evaluation 

The Membrane Distillation Bioreactor (MDBR) is a novel approach to wastewater reclamation 

developed at NTU through the Temasek Professor Programme with the help of IESE. Exploit 

(ASTAR) has taken out a patent on the technology, which has been taken to proof of concept 

stage from bench to small pilot plant (capacity 100 to 200 litres per day). The aim of this project 

is demonstrate the viability of the process at a scale of 500 to 700L per day; this is a scale up of 

10x requiring about 10 m 2 membrane area. 

The MDBR process replaces the membrane filtration membranes of conventional MBRs with 

Membrane Distillation (MD) membranes. The main advantages of the MDBR are, 


56

(i) The MD membranes only transfer permeate as vapour, so the quality of the product 

stream can be very high with negligible TOC. Indeed the quality can be as good as, and 

possibly better than, the product from RO in a conventional reclamation plant ; in 

essence the MDBR offers the potential for NeWater in one step; 

(ii) The MDBR process operates at ambient pressure and only requires a relatively low 

level of electrical power for circulation and air supply (in contrast to the RO step in 

conventional reclamation plant); 

(iii) Although the MDBR requires a thermal input it can be low grade waste heat as the 

process operates at

The Environment and Water Industry Development Council (EWI) aims to support the 

development of innovative/breakthrough technologies from its infancy to the commercialization 

stage. Novel, promising technologies will be funded in a coordinated manner so that there is 

holistic development in both technical and commercialisation aspects of the technology. 

The Domain for this call is Seawater Desalination. Applicants are requested to propose an 

innovative technology that can lead to a breakthrough in this domain and meet the following 

criteria: 

• Production of drinking water that meets World Health Organisation (WHO) Guidelines 

for Drinking-Water Quality, 3 rd edition, incorporating first addendum; 

• Total energy consumption of 1.5 kilo-watt hour (kWh) per cubic metre of water produced 

or less; 

• Using seawater as the feed water. 

The call for the challenge RFP has been closed and the proposals are being evaluated. 


58

Organisation: STOWA - Foundation for Applied Water Research 

Country: Netherlands 

Contact person: Bert Palsma 

Email address: palsma@stowa.nl 


STOWA report 2005.26 ; energy efficiency in wastewater management 

How to minimise fossil energy use for oxidizing COD in wastewater to CO2. Including nutrient 

removal (P-recycling) and sludge management. 

STOWA report 2005 W03 

The potential of biogas production on Wastewater Treatment Plants 

GWRC workshop on “Energy and Resource Recovery from Wastewater residuals solids” 

(see also WERF) 


STOWA is involved in a number of projects related to the energy topic including the examples 

below. 

Sneek 

Separate black water collection and digestion including energy recovery. Pilot project in 32 

houses in the city Sneek. 

Beverwijk 

Methane recovery in sludge digestion pilot project on Wastewater Treatment Plant Beverwijk of 

Water Board Hollands Noorderkwartier (350.000 i.e., 22.064.300 M3/year) 

Carbon footprint of urban water management (in cooperation with Kiwa) 

Information collection, benchmarking, and identification of possibilities for optimisation of 

operations 


59

Organisation: TZW - Germany 

Contact person: Sebastian Sturm 

Email address: sturm@tzw.de 


No reports available yet 


Overview of TZW activities regarding the topic water & energy that may result in conflicts 

between renewable energy production and protection of water resources 

Renewable raw materials/biogas plants and water pollution control – evaluation from the 

point-of-view of the water supply - DVGW project # W 1/03/05 

The European Union strives to increase the quota of renewable energy on the primary energy 

consumption. Thereby the greenhouse gas emissions shall be reduced and the dependency of the 

EU on energy imports shall be decreased as well. In Germany, this political target caused a rapid 

growth of the power-generation from biogas and an increase in bio fuel production. This 

development and the strong rise of grain crop prices are associated with an intensification of 

agriculture, resulting in a growing hazard potential for the drinking water resources and the water 

supply due to the use of fertilizers and pesticides. Another risk may result out of the agricultural 

use of fermentation residues of biogas plants. Depending on the type of co-substrates like waste 

grease, slaughter waste or composting bin wastes, fermentation residues may contain heavy 

metals or organic trace contaminates like pharmaceuticals or other substances, which have a 

potential to accumulate in the soil or to leach into the groundwater. The ongoing TZW project 

investigates possible risks for the water utilities but also the chances for protection of the 

drinking water resources. If, for example, aspects of an appropriate crop rotation are taken into 

account, the cultivation of energy crops can help to reduce the nitrate levels in groundwater. Also 

the use of herbicides can be reduced under certain circumstances. Project duration 7/2006 to 

3/2008 

Sustainable production of fermentation gas (biogas) and feed into gas distribution network 

- Evaluation of long-term effects on soil, plant, air and water - DVGW project # GW 1/01/07 

The total process chain from the biomass production to generation of Substitute Natural Gas 

(SNG) will be considered in the context of sustainability. Project duration 1/2008 to 12/2008 

Geothermal power and groundwater protection - current TZW activities 

The increasing number of geothermal drillings in some areas in Germany poses another threat to 

groundwater quality, especially in water protection areas. So water utilities have to keep an eye 

on the development in this energy related topic as well. Water suppliers have to warn other 

stakeholders if the groundwater resources face new possible hazards. TZW participates in the 

relevant German technical committee on standardization and a scientific panel to reduce the risks 

of groundwater contamination. 


60

Organisation: UKWIR 

Contact person: Pauline Avery 

Email address: pavery@ukwir.org.uk 


04/WW/04/9&10: Sustainable WWTW for Small Communities 

Vol I: Sustainability and the Water Industry 

Vol II: BPSO Methodology Handbook 

Sustainable development is of particular interest to the water industry which finds itself having to 

comply with increasingly stringent standards for wastewater effluent quality whilst being pressed 

to minimise the cost to the consumer. Treatment processes suitable for achieving these high 

standards of effluent quality are likely to involve increased costs, energy usage and greenhouse 

gas emissions. These issues are particularly relevant to small wastewater treatment works which 

are more likely to be located in remote situations where the application of complex high-energy 

processes are probably inappropriate. Volume I discusses the background to sustainability 

considerations within the water industry and presents the framework for the methodology. 

07/CL/06/5: Climate Change, the Aquatic Environment and the Water Framework 

Directive 

This project examined the likely effects of climate change on UK water industry compliance 

with the Water Framework Directive (WFD), set in the context of other expected changes, such 

as demographic shifts or changes in land-use. A range of other drivers were identified - changes 

in energy prices, new regulatory targets for energy efficiency, water conservation and flooding, 

demographic and land use changes, and new environmental legislation – that are likely to 

directly or indirectly affect the water industry.The report proposes a Conceptual Assessment 

Framework to identify linkages between different drivers and industry operations and specific 

aspects of performance. The framework of drivers and effects was then used to assess the effects 

of the WFD, climate change and other drivers, which, with further development, could be used 

by water companies to identify appropriate responses. 


Optimising Energy Efficiency at WWTW Sites 

The project will set the framework within which all other energy efficiency R&D projects at 

WWTW will take place. 

In terms of Biogas it will aim to achieve the following: 

• Full technological appraisal of the current and future possible uses for biogas with an 

informed cost-benefit analysis based on likely future movements in fuel prices. 

• Full review of digestion and biogas production to determine what options are available 

for improving both quality and quantity of biogas. 

• Assessment of the implications of moving towards waste management 


61

Organisation: United States Environmental Protection Agency 

Office of Research and Development 

National Risk Management Research Laboratory 

Contact person: James A. Goodrich, Christopher A. Impellitteri 

Email address: Goodrich.james@epa.gov, Impellitteri.christopher@epa.gov 


Reports/factsheets through EPA’s WaterSense program for water conservation (too numerous to 

list individually) available at: http://www.epa.gov/watersense/pubs/index.htm 

WaterSense is a partnership program sponsored by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 

USEPA EnergyStar Program (see http://www.energystar.gov/) 

Reports, facts, data on reducing energy consumption via more efficient home appliances. 

Separate categories for washers, dishwashers, etc. 

Department of Energy-National Energy Technology Laboratory 

(http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/coalpower/ewr/water/power-gen.html) 

Overviews and reports on power plant consumption of water. 

Energy-Water Nexus- Identifies emerging energy-water issues and potential impacts in the US. 

Report to Congress available at: http://www.sandia.gov/energy-water 

Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) Reports/research mainly focusing on water supply for 

energy production. www.epri.com 


USEPA-Office of Research and Development-National Risk Management Research Laboratory 

Conversion of Wastewater Treatment Facilities into Biorefineries 

Optimization of microbial communities and testing of microbial products (e.g. lipids) in the 

production of biofuels (biodiesel) from wastewater and wastewater treatment residuals. Project 

to commence in 2008. 

Water/wastewater Treatment and Water Re-use in ligno-cellulosic based ethanol plants. 

Characterization of wastewater from a variety of ligno-cellulosic-based ethanol plants. 

Development, testing and evaluation of technologies for WW treatment and water re-use. 


62

Organisation: WERF 

Contact person: Lauren Fillmore 

Email address: lfillmore@werf.org 


Cost-effective Energy Recover from Anaerobically Digested Wastewater Solids 

(01-CTS-18-UR) Hydromantis 

This project resulted in Life Cycle Assessment Manager for Energy Recovery 

(LCAMER), a unique spreadsheet-based tool, available from WERF, which enables 

wastewater treatment plant owners and engineers to make informed decisions on the 

feasibility of recovering energy from anaerobic digestion of wastewater solids. 

LCAMER is available in either U.S. or metric units of measurement. Using a life 

cycle assessment approach, which incorporates factors such as equipment lifetime 

and the cost of borrowed money, model users can compare the payback periods or 

internal rates of return for a variety of: 

• anaerobic digestion processes (mesophilic, thermophilic, temperature-phased); 

• gas pretreatment processes (hydrogen sulfide, siloxanes and carbon dioxide); 

• energy recovery processes such as boilers, generators, turbines, fuel cells and direct drive 

engines. 

State of the Science Report on Energy and Resource Recovery from Sludge for the Global 

Water Research Coalition (of which WERF is a member) (OWSO3R07) Hydromantis 

The report is a review of current knowledge, based on a literature survey of the current and 

emerging technologies for the recovery of energy and resources from wastewater solids and solid 

streams. A triple bottom line assessment of the current and emerging technologies was 

conducted to the extent possible, given limited data. The objectives of the workshop are to (1) 

identify research needs and knowledge gaps in energy and resource recovery from sludge; (2) 

prioritize research needs to address knowledge gaps; and (3) develop research concepts and 

proposals. 


Evaluation of Processes to Reduce Activated Sludge Solids Generation and Disposal (05- 

CTS-3) CH2M-Hill 

The project team has conducted a literature search of known technologies and processes used to 

reduce WAS sludge mass. Technologies with full scale installations will be analyzed for nonfinancial 

issues (such as scalability, overall performance, etc.) in a desktop evaluation for both 

industrial and municipal applications. The project will result in a framework to evaluate 

different technologies taking into account site-specific conditions, based on both economic and 

non-economic factors. 

Development of a Nitrifying Fuel Cell for Sustainable Wastewater Treatment 

(06-UN-1-18) Dr. Nancy Love University of Michigan 


63

Emerging technology has been developed to capture energy present in wastewater for electricity 

generation through the development of microbial fuel cells. Most of the microbial fuel cell 

efforts have focused on energy from the carbon metabolism. Researcher will evaluate ammonia 

oxidation in lieu of carbon oxidation as a promising new renewable energy technology, using 

recent advances in nanotechnology, biotechnology, materials science. 

Co-digestion of Organic Waste Products with Wastewater Solids (OWSO5R07) CDM 

Co-digestion of organic wastes with wastewater solids is used to treat industrial, agricultural and 

commercial organic wastes. As a result of co-digestion, there has been an observed increase in 

biogas production, reduced electrical and natural gas demand, extended landfill life, reduced 

greenhouse gas production and a new revenue source from waste tipping fees. Currently 

anaerobic digester performance and operations is based on indirect measurements that include 

volatile solids reduction and loading rates. These indirect measurements work for wastewater 

solids because of the extent of empirical data on the treatment of wastewater solids. This 

changes when the digester feedstock is altered with other organic wastes. The development of 

data is essential to make co-digestion an efficient process to be implemented by municipalities. 

Current a Waste Characterization Protocol under development. Laboratory analysis will be 

underway this summer. 

Energy Management (OWSO6R07) SAIC 

A substantial amount of information exists regarding energy efficiency opportunities at 

wastewater treatment plants, including benchmarking studies in US and Europe. Facility level 

energy benchmarks are largely voluntary and implementation of these measures has progressed 

unevenly. While some states have energy programs that are well synchronized with their 

planning and design guidelines, many do not. In addition, many design guidelines suggest that 

facilities be planned and designed over a 20-year period which may result in over capacity and 

inherent energy inefficiency in the early years of operation. 

Value analysis is an established and often required step during planning and design phases. 

Value analysis practitioners are certified through SAVE International and include experts in a 

variety of disciplines. VA practice, as it relates to energy reduction for wastewater treatment, 

can be improved by incorporating energy efficiency, renewable energy production, CHP and 

other concepts in the model standard. This project will: 

• improve VE practice as it relates to energy reduction for wastewater treatment facilities; 

• focus on pathways to promote the VE practice with the SAVE Foundation and improve 

VE in regards to liquid treatment and solids handling process energy efficiency 

• evaluate the feasibility of establishing a national standard for VE of wastewater treatment 

facilities modeled after the existing ASTM Standard E-1699 or alternative (e.g., VALUE 

international). 

Characterization of Greenhouse Nitrogen Emission from Wastewater 

Treatment Operations Columbia University 

A new project just started to develop, calibrate and validate biochemical models for N2O 

production by autotrophic nitrification and denitrification processes to characterize nitrogen 

GHG emissions from wastewater treatment. 

Case Study of Best Practices for Sustainability CH2M-Hill 


64

A new project to develop parameters to define sustainability in a carbon constrained 

environment. Once the parameters for measurement have been developed, they will be applied 

at the Strass WWTP in Austria which is self-sustaining with regards to energy. This project will 

result in the collection of data to evaluate the process optimization decisions made at the Strass 

plant. Process changes made and the results that yielded the current energy sustainability will be 

documented in a case study. Emphasis will be made on assessing the impact to the carbon 

footprint of these changes for an assessment of net environmental benefit. 


65

Organisation: Water Research Commission 

Contact person: Jay Bhagwan 

Email address: jayb@wrc.org.za 


Reservoir system operational optimisation. WRC Report 757/1/98 

The project developed an operational model for reservoir control to minimise pumping costs. 

Software was developed which allows the user compare the effects of different operation policies 

and costs on the total running cost of the system. 

Review of factors that influence the energy loss in pipelines and procedures to evaluate the 

hydraulic performance for different conditions. WRC Report 1269/1/06 and accompanying 

software, TT 278/06 

The project quantified the economic influence of increasing friction losses in pipe systems. The 

influence of water quality, operating conditions and the hydraulic performance of different liner 

systems and pipe materials, as well as life cycle costs, were incorporated. 

Quantifying the influence of air on the capacity of large diameter water pipelines and 

developing provisional guidelines for effective de-aeration. WRC Report No 1177/04 

The study has confirmed that flow velocity; air bubble size and the down-slope of the pipeline 

are the main contributing factors which determine whether the air can be removed hydraulically. 

It showed that air in pipes do contribute significantly to energy loss through friction increase. 

Based on the study and results, provisional guidelines were prepared, describing the influence of 

air on the capacity of large diameter pipes and providing details to ensure effective de-aeration. 

Furthermore an air valve sizing and positioning (ASAP) procedure has been developed and 

incorporated into utility software for the determination of air valve sizes and locations. 

Development of a solar-powered reverse osmosis plant for the treatment of borehole water. 

WRC Report No 1042/1/01 

The project aimed to design and construct a RO unit, powered by solar energy, capable of 

producing potable water from brackish borehole feed for rural households or small communities. 

The project team provided basic and practical guidelines for the sizing and choice of reverse 

osmosis unit and solar cell combination for the planning and implementation of water supply 

from such groundwater sources. 


Development of a wave-energy reverse osmosis system. WRC Project 1000198 

The project aims to further develop a reverse osmosis prototype system which utilizes ocean 

wave power in order to produce the elevated pressures required in the desalination of sea water 

to potable standards. A few prototypes will be constructed to evaluate the effect of various wave 

parameters on the system performance and improve the system into a practical, working 

technology. Term: 2008 - 2010 

Energy from waste. WRC Project 1000230 

This project aims to provide guidelines for the national approach to be taken in generation of 

energy from wastewater and wastewater residues. Term: 2007 – 2008. 


66

Organisation: WSAA & CRC WQT 

Contact person: Tony Priestly (CSIRO) 

Email address: Tony.Priestley@csiro.au 

Energy Consumption in the Provision of Urban Water Services 

Why Local Conditions Matter 

Introduction 

The provision of urban water services in Australia is a major undertaking involving businesses 

with an annual turnover in excess of $6 billion. Pressure is mounting on the volumes of water 

available for use in urban areas and questions are being asked as to the long term sustainability 

of water supply to Australia’s growing urban communities. A key aspect of any consideration of 

sustainability issues involves energy consumption. In theory, if abundant energy is available at a 

relatively cheap price and with no long term environmental limitations, then Australian cities 

have no water crisis. Seawater desalination is an essentially inexhaustible supply, so long as the 

energy required can be sourced. Of course, the reality is that energy supplies are not 

inexhaustible and climate change is imposing a shadow over the cheaper sources of power such 

as coal. 

This study looks at the use of energy to provide urban water services in some of the major urban 

centres in Australia and seeks to understand the drivers behind the variations in observed energy 

consumptions. In doing so, it will contribute to the debate on the sustainability of urban water 

systems and allow comparisons to be made with alternative design approaches. 

Energy Use in Urban Water Systems 

Water is an essential underpinning of any civilization and has long history of use in urban areas 

dating back to Roman times. Urban water services entail the provision of a safe water supply for 

a range of uses including drinking, washing, food preparation, garden watering, waste disposal 

and a range of commercial and industrial needs. The services also include the disposal of 

wastewater and the management of stormwater, encompassing what has become known as the 

urban water cycle. In general, there is very little public understanding of the enormous resources 

required to provide these services and certainly no knowledge of the energy consumption 

implications. 

Tables 1 and 1A below provide a detailed breakdown of energy consumption for four of 

Australia’s major urban areas, Sydney, Perth, Melbourne and Brisbane. Analysis of this data 

provides some understanding of what drives energy consumption in the provision of urban water 

services. Energy consumption in the form of both electricity and natural gas for water supply and 

waste disposal is outlined and, in some cases, broken down into energy consumed in pumping 

and treatment. 

The data paint an interesting picture across the different cities and highlight the fact that local 

geography, topography and environmental regulations play a major role in determining energy 

consumption. An important point to note is that, despite water authorities being major energy 


67

consumers, the actual energy consumed per head of population served is quite low at between 

250 to 420 MJ/annum, compared with the total energy consumption of the average Australian of 

around 257,000 MJ per annum (ABS, 2004). In most cases the dominant form of energy used is 

electricity, although Melbourne is an exception here with 37.5% of its energy requirements 

coming from natural gas about two thirds of which is internally generated (biogas from 

wastewater treatment). 

There are a lot of data contained in Tables 1 and 1A and the key messages only emerge when 

detailed comparisons are carried out between the different cities. The following analysis is an 

attempt to draw out these messages by looking at each city individually and in comparison to the 

others. The raw energy data were supplied by each water authority and supplemented by data 

drawn largely from WSAA Facts 2005. 

Sydney 

Sydney is Australia’s largest urban complex and Sydney Water in 2004-05 provided water to 

4.228 million people. Its total energy use per person per year is 320 MJ, about 40% of which is 

used in water supply and the remainder for wastewater disposal. However, these figures are 

somewhat skewed by the fact that the energy requirements of 4 privately owned and operated 

water filtration plants supplying Sydney are not included in these figures. This situation is 

reflected in the relatively low energy requirement provided for water treatment (2.5%), with a 

significantly greater demand coming from pumping requirements (35%). 

Wastewater management requires the majority of Sydney’s energy consumption (60%), with 

energy for treatment (51%) dominating that for pumping (9%). This situation is explained by the 

fact that Sydney disposes of most of its sewage through the deep ocean outfalls and does not 

have to pump sewage long distances. It contrasts markedly with the situation in Melbourne 

where considerable energy is used to pump sewage long distances to either the Western 

Treatment Plant or the Boags Rocks Outfall. It also highlights the fact that any move away from 

the deep ocean outfalls is likely to add considerably to Sydney Water’s energy requirements. 

A comparison of power consumption rates in KWh/m 3 is also given in Table 1A. Again the 

power requirement for sewage treatment (0.40 KWh/m 3 ) dominates, although it is important to 

note that this figure is closely matched by Perth and Melbourne. However, Perth and Melbourne 

treat most of their sewage to secondary or tertiary levels, while the majority of Sydney’s 

treatment is primary only. 

Perth 

In contrast to Sydney, the majority of Perth’s energy consumption goes into water supply (62%). 

The major reason for this situation is that a large fraction of Perth’ water supply comes from 

groundwater and requires significant pumping energy to drive it to a treatment plant and then 

through the distribution system. Because of its relatively low quality, this groundwater also 

requires significantly more treatment than Sydney’s. For example, Perth has adopted a number of 

innovative water treatment technologies, such as MIEX, in order to prevent taste and odour 

problems arising in their networks. Consequently, Perth’s total energy use per person per year 

(412 MJ) is about 30% higher than Sydney’s, but not as high as Brisbane (522MJ). 

On the sewage side, Perth is fairly representative of a conventional system and its energy 

consumption reflects this fact. 


68

The most significant future energy demand for Perth will arise from its decision to build a sea 

water desalination plant to augment its water supply. This plant is projected to supply 45,000 ML 

per annum of water with a power consumption of around 185,000 MWh. This represents a power 

consumption rate of around 4.1 KWh/m 3 compared with 0.46 KWh/m 3 for its present supply. 

This additional demand will approximately double Perth’s present power consumption to around 

800 MJ/person/year. However as pointed out earlier, this is still a tiny figure in comparison to the 

total average energy consumption per head in Australia of 257,000 MJ/person/year. 

Melbourne 

Melbourne’s power consumption figures are dominated by two factors. Firstly, greater than 90% 

of Melbourne’s water supply comes from fully protected catchments located in the mountains to 

the east of the city. These catchments are at a significant elevation and, as a consequence, most 

of Melbourne’s supply is fed by gravity with little to no need for pumping. Also, because of the 

high water quality obtained from the protected catchments, these supplies require minimal 

treatment. Both of these factors result in Melbourne having a very low power requirement for 

water supply (0.13 KWh/m 3 ). 

On the other hand, Melbourne is required to pump its sewage significant distances before final 

disposal and needs to treat most of it to tertiary levels to achieve significant nitrogen removal. 

Both of these activities are energy demanding, with the consequence that Melbourne has the 

highest energy consumption rate (0.94 KWh/m 3 ) of all the major capitals. This figure is more 

than double that of Sydney at 0.47 KWh/m 3 . However, Melbourne also generates significant 

energy of its own, through biogas generation at the wastewater treatment plants, an action which 

reduces its imported energy consumption rate on sewage to 0.6 KWh/m 3 . 

Because of the above factors, Melbourne’s energy split between water supply and wastewater 

disposal of 16/84 is in stark contrast to other cities, especially Perth and Brisbane where water 

supply dominates the energy situation. 

Brisbane 

Like Perth and in stark contrast to Melbourne, Brisbane expends most of its energy on water 

supply (66%). Part of this result can be ascribed to the fact that Brisbane also provides water to 

six other councils around Brisbane, but does not look after their wastewaters. However, the key 

reason is that most of Brisbane’s water supply has to be pumped to the Mt. Crosby reservoir, a 

significant lift, so that it can be gravity fed to the city. Brisbane’s water supply also requires 

significant treatment at Mt. Crosby, which also adds to the power demand, although the figures 

provided for Brisbane do not break down this demand between pumping and treatment. 

On the sewage side, Brisbane has a fairly conventional sewage system, with an energy demand 

that is at the high end of the norm (0.42 KWh/m 3 ). The most interesting figures coming from the 

Brisbane data involve specific power consumption rates at a variety of wastewater treatment 

plants, both large and small, and a reuse scheme involving reverse osmosis of a tertiary effluent. 

Power consumption rates in conventional sewage treatment are shown to vary from a low as 0.17 

to as high as 1.14 KWh/m 3 . This variation can be explained in part by the degree of treatment 

required, but is also clearly related to plant size. The big plant at Gibson Island (0.4 KWh/m 3 ) is 

clearly more efficient in energy terms than some of the smaller plants, such as Karana Downs 

(0.838 KWh/m 3 ). An industrial water reuse scheme also operates at the Gibson Island plant and 

involves reverse osmosis, the same technology as used in sea water desalination (see Perth). In 

this case, primarily because of the lower total dissolved solids of the source water, power 

consumption rates of 1.18 KWh/m 3 have been obtained compared to 4.1 KWh/m 3 forecast for the 

Perth plant. 


69

Table 1. Summary Energy Consumption across Major Urban Water Authorities (04-05) 

GJ of energy Sydney Perth Melbourne Brisbane 

Total population 

served 

4.228 million 1.484 million 3.583 million 0.975 million 

Total energy all 1,351,413 611,386 1,285,554 

demands (GJ) 

Total electrical 1,329,213 610,219 802,954 (62.5%) 509,340 

energy 

(98.4%) 

Total gas or diesel 

energy 

22,200 (1.6%) 1,167 482,600 (37.5%) 

Total energy water 506,651* 378,861 202,862** 337,918 

supply 

(37.5%) 

(15.8%) 

Volume of water 526,367 228,638 440,982^ 255,009^^ 

supplied (ML) 

Total energy water 

supply - pumping 

473,672 257,094 166,109 

Total energy water 

supply – treatment* 

32,978 121,766 36,753 

Electrical energy - 502,575 378,861 202,862 (15.8%) 337,918 

water supply 

(37.2%) 

Gas energy - water 

supply 

4,076 (0.3%) 0 0 

Total energy 772,435 231,531 1,074,975 171,422 

sewerage 

(57.2%) 

(83.6%) 

Volume of 454,262 110,965 318,327 113,382 

wastewater collected 

(ML) 

Total energy 115,812 79,506 633,369 

sewerage - pumping 

Total energy 656,622 152,024 441,606 

sewerage - treatment 

Electrical energy 764,489 230,364 592,376**** 171,422 

sewerage 

(56.6%) 

(46.1%) 

Gas energy sewage 7,946 (0.6%) 1,167 482,600# 

(37.5%) 

Other (gas & 72,328 (5.3%) 995 7,717 (0.6%) 

electricity)*** 

*excludes energy consumption of 4 privately owned and operated water filtration plants 

supplying Sydney 

** excludes energy consumption in 1 privately owned and operated treatment plant 

*** excludes use of vehicle fuels 

**** includes 77,902 GJ of electricity internally generated from biogas 

# includes 309,570 GJ of energy from internally generated biogas 

^ excludes 128,889 ML of water supplied directly for environmental flows only 


70

^^ includes 78,191 ML of water supplied to surrounding councils 

Table 1A – Energy consumption analysis 

Sydney Perth Melbourne Brisbane 

Total energy use 

/person/year (MJ) 

320 412 360 (250*) 522 

Water sewerage 40/60 62/38 16/84 66/34 

energy split as a % 

Power 

consumption 

rates KWh/m 3 ↓ 

Total water 0.27 0.46 0.13 0.37 

Total sewerage 0.47 0.58 0.94 (0.6*) 0.42 

Water pumping 0.25 0.31 0.11 

Water treatment 0.02** 0.15 0.02 

Sewage pumping 0.07 0.2 0.55 (0.21*) 

Sewage treatment 0.40 0.38 0.39 

* Imported energy only 

** Does not include power consumption from 3 privately operated plants 


71

Water and Energy - Draft Report of the GWRC Research ... - IWA

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?