Creating opportunities to adapt to climate change through innovative ...

Creating opportunities to adapt to climate change throughinnovative water managementInternship project, RijkswaterstaatSupervised by:WINN (waterinnovatie) department; Marco HofmanDienst Noord-Holland; Hans OverbeekWritten by:Kamila AntkowiczRicardo SilvaSimone van de SteegGergana VankovaFriday January 29, 2010

Table of contents1. Introduction ................................................................................................. 22. The concept ................................................................................................. 32.1 Blue Energy ................................................................................................... 32.1.1 Technical information ........................................................................... 32.1.2 Size ........................................................................................................ 32.2 The two main chains ..................................................................................... 42.2.1 BE Industrial agglomerate AquaCluster ...................................... 42.2.2 BE Westzaan polder Research center .......................................... 52.3 Saving energy ................................................................................................ 62.3.1 Regional cooperation ............................................................................ 62.3.2 Shipping information ............................................................................ 82.3.3 Refinements .......................................................................................... 83. The results ................................................................................................... 93.1 Blue Energy ................................................................................................... 93.1.1 Membranes ........................................................................................... 93.1.2 Pre-treatment ..................................................................................... 103.1.3 Pilots .................................................................................................... 103.2 The two main chains ................................................................................... 113.2.1 BE Industrial agglomerate AquaCluster .................................... 113.2.2 BE Westzaan polder Research center ........................................ 133.3 Saving energy – results ............................................................................... 143.3.1 Regional cooperation .......................................................................... 143.3.2 Shipping information .......................................................................... 163.3.3 Refinements ........................................................................................ 174. The next steps ............................................................................................ 184.1 Blue Energy ‘cluster’ ................................................................................... 184.1.1 Location ............................................................................................... 184.1.2 Pilot possibilities .................................................................................. 194.1.3 Thoughts on cooperation .................................................................... 194.2 DSS Recommendations ............................................................................... 214.2.1 Operational water management ........................................................ 214.2.2 Policy makers ...................................................................................... 224.2.3 Research .............................................................................................. 225. References ................................................................................................. 236. Contacts ..................................................................................................... 291

1. IntroductionThis project started during Xperiment, September 2009. Xperiment is a seven week programfrom the LEF Future center, an innovation platform in Rijkswaterstaat. Teams of studentsfrom different nationalities and educational backgrounds are asked to look at some ofRijkswaterstaat’s challenges for the future.Our team of four people focused on sustainable water level management at theNoordzeekanaal. At the end of that waterway, in IJmuiden, there is a large pumping station.In 2007, its energy costs were approximately €800,000. Rijkswaterstaat’s ambition is tomake it a truly energy neutral pumping station, and asked us for ideas on how to do this. Wefocused on two sides of the ‘energy neutral’ coin: generating energy from water, andconsuming less energy.There are many technologies for generating energy from water. One of them, Blue Energy,uses the potential difference between salt (sea) water and fresh water to generate energy.This technology was presented to us as problematic, because of its waste product. Duringthe process, the salt and fresh water mix, and the Blue Energy plant has an output ofbrackish water. Large amounts of brackish water can both cause recirculation issues (makingyour salt input water less salt, or your fresh input water less fresh) and ecological issues.In those first seven weeks, we developed a concept that aims to look at that brackish waternot as problematic waste, but as a resource. We then presented an overview of all the thingsthat you can do with brackish water, and this is only the beginning. Once we allow ourselvesto redefine ‘waste’, many things become possible.When it comes to consuming less energy, a lot of work had already been done. IJmuidennow operates with a decision support system (DSS, or BOS in Dutch) that advises operatorson when to pump. Its most innovative and essential feature now is that it takes the sea levelinto account, which results in a lot more discharging (free) and pumping during low tide (upto three times as cheap as pumping during high tide).We felt that there was room for more improvement, though, so we talked to a lot of expertsand compiled a list of possibilities, ranging from very simple technical changes to more outof-the-boxideas about feeding shipping information to the system to anticipate on.When the program ended, we felt that there was much more we could do with our ideas.Fortunately our supervisors, Marco Hofman from WINN (the water innovation department)and Hans Overbeek from Rijkswaterstaat Noord-Holland, agreed with that and asked us tostay on a little longer.“I was very interested in that next step, from vision to implementation design, and Ichallenged the students to work on that after Xperiment.” – Marco HofmanDuring the next three months, we elaborated on our ideas by testing them for feasibility andfinding partners for their implementation one day. We wanted to take this project one stepfurther, and enable the parties involved to actually start working on (parts of) it. In the nextchapters, you can read all about our ideas, results, and recommendations.2

2. The concept2.1 Blue Energy2.1.1 Technical informationBlue energy technology generates electricity from the difference in salt concentrationsbetween fresh and salt water: the more extreme those differences are, the higher poweroutput. A study conducted by REDstack (Ref. 5.1) and master theses of some of the studentsfrom TU Delft show that the salinity conditions of Noordzeekanaal (water surface 1,5 g/lchlorine and the North Sea 30 g/l chlorine) are adequate to produce sufficient and feasibleamounts of energy.However, slight increase in salt concentration of fresh water would decrease the powergenerating potential: 1 g/l to 2 g/l, would decrease the available energy by 0,2 MJ. Theselosses may be compensated by increase in available membrane surface or by pumping morewater (both increase the costs considerably).In order to produce 1 MW of energy, 1 m³/s of fresh water and 1 m³/s of sea water arerequired. Both fresh and salt water should be pre-treated to avoid clogging of themembranes. REDstack focuses its study on developing feasible pre-treatment techniques.Both fresh and salt water must be pumped into the systems. Energy consumption of thepumps, in case of a 200 kW power plant, would take up to 10%.2.1.2 SizeREDstack has built a module capable of producing 200 kW. Its size is the same as a 40 ft seacontainer. The size of a membrane in this module is 100,000 m². The gross power output isequal to 220 kW, but the 10% of it is used for pumping. Pipes, fittings and filters are placedoutside of the frame. The approximate size of filters is about 31 m².For a power plant with the potential of producing 200 MW, about 200,000 m² of groundwould be needed (for 1,000 40 ft sea containers), assuming modules are placed next to eachother, as opposed to on top of each other.3

2.2 The two main chains2.2.1 BE Industrial agglomerate AquaClusterWe started by looking at ways of getting "rid" of the brackish water produced by the energyplant, as the main issue presented to us about Blue Energy was how to deal with theenvironmental impact of the plant's effluent. Halfway through the project, the latestscientific opinion disagrees [Ref. 5.2]. The interesting part was that it didn't matter anymore,as we had already identified connections that had value of their own. And even if the BlueEnergy plant did not gain directly by being part of a larger chain, if it is part of project whereothers have something to gain, they will invest resources and time into it!On one side, we looked at the structures in the area that already had an effluent, presentingtwo main reasons for the connection: the water going through the plant already wentthrough a cleaning process, and the water is brackish, not sea water, which has an effect oncorrosion and thus costs.Also, by integrating all those entities' effluents, it could be easier to manage those flows inthe most sustainable way possible, for example, by piping them as far as the sea, wherecurrents help disperse the impact.We searched by looking at documents on water effluents [REF 5.3] and a MGMC stakeholderanalysis report. Companies like NUON-Velsen, that apparently were going out of business,and CVG, that declared from the beginning that they had their own systems and would liketo remain that way, were immediately put out of the question, while the giant Corus and thelocal RWZI's seemed to have some potential for collaboration.As the concept developed to include these, new factors came into play: we now hadcooling/waste brackish water as an effluent, parties who want to make sure these aredisposed properly and a very long, complex and shared pipeline with only greater ambitions.Admitting the complexity of our project, we continued by finding out how we couldintroduce an extra place in the chain still. Research here became more difficult, but as timeprogressed, we found more and more examples from which to strengthen our vision.Drawing from mediagenic examples such as the Happy Shrimp farm [5.4], recentdevelopments with algae growing [5.5] we started getting an idea of what was possible.Continuing on the topic of food production, Willem Brandenburg from WageningenUniversity shared with us the vision of agriculture turning to the sea and the possibilitiesinvolved [5.6]. Talking with professionals from different waterboards and agriculturalresearchers, we learned about how waste helped the natural flora and fauna flourish andhow saline agricultural initiatives had developed, particularly in Zeeland [5.7]. A meetingwith the Milieufederatie also presented to us how housing organizations were trying toincorporate warm water flows into their new projects, scoring points with environmentalists.It was at this point that the concept was at its richest state, with so many different partiesand interests combined into an imaginary pipeline that looked more like a web the fartheryou got from the Blue Energy plant. This, however, made the implementation of the design amuch more ambitious step.4

2.2.2 BE Westzaan polder Research centerWhile we were looking at possibilities for the use of brackish water we accidentally ran intothe Verbrakking Polder Westzaan Project. The project involved recreating a brackishecosystem in some of the polders near Westzaan, using (slightly) brackish water fromNoordzeekanaal. While we were approaching the Westzaan Polder Project, we were alsoacquiring more information on the effects of climate change and global warming. Thanks tospecialists from Knowledge for Climate (Kennis voor Klimaat), InnovatieNetwerk andWageningen University we found out that there are possibilities to adapt to the changescaused by global warming.There are two main issues regarding the climate change and its consequences: it affects thequalitative water management and increases its costs. Traditionally, the river Rhine wasmeant as a waterway transporting water from melting snow in the Alps to the North Sea,supplying fresh water to the western parts of the Netherlands. Because of the globalwarming, “increased precipitation and evaporation, higher river discharges in winter andmore frequent or extreme droughts in summer” (Knowledge for Climate brochure) the watersupply from Rhine must be managed more efficiently and effectively. On one hand excessrain water in the winter must be pumped out to the sea, in order to prevent floods. On theother hand, some of the water must be ‘stored’ when in summer the water supply decreasesbut it is still needed, mainly for agriculture.Due to the rising sea levels and subsidence, the more andmore salt water penetrate the inland waters, increasing itssalinity gradient. The challenge emerging from this situationis that waterways must be flushed with the fresh water(from Rhine, for example), which costs lot of energy, thusmoney. Besides, the salinization process seems to scare thegeneral public, putting pressure on Rijkswaterstaat and localgovernments to employ often radical solutions. If we add upthe two effects of climate change on the watermanagement, we can conclude that at some point we aregoing to run out of money, or water!Since the agriculture in the Netherlands uses huge amounts of fresh water, we decided tohave a look at the possibilities of changing the agriculture to aquaculture, tomato growing toshellfish / fish / shrimp growing, and at the same time find out how ‘traditional’ plants andanimals respond to water with slightly higher salt concentration.For these plans we needed to create a platform for experimenting with different species ofplants and animals, we needed to create a Research & Information Center on SalineCultures. The main function of this center, next to experiments and research, would also bethe focus on feasibility of such a ‘production switch’ for farmers and providing general publicwith results and information. Planned location of the Research & Information Center wouldbe in a short distance to the Westzaan Polder, connected to it by natural waterways.5

We have got the commitment of Wageningen University to help supply knowledge andexpertise. Next step was to find parties willing to supply facilities and financial support.2.3 DSS IdeasAs has been noted before, being energy neutral is not just about generating more energy. Itis also about saving energy on existing processes. After we had learned about all that hadalready been done, we saw a number of opportunities that all came down to the same basicidea in the end: having bigger margins, even temporarily, increases the flexibility of thesystem, which in turn increases the possibilities of more accurate water management andmakes it easier to save energy. In even more basic terms: having more centimeters to workwith equals using less energy.We narrowed down a few areas in which we could see some opportunities at first sight.These were regional cooperation, shipping information, and a collection of smaller systemimprovements.“Met meer kennis kan dus op sommige momenten energie bespaard worden enop andere de veiligheid vergroot worden” - Albert Goedbloed, researcherNoordzeekanaal water management (REF 5.8)2.3.1 Regional cooperationThe NZK is part of a much larger water catchment area. This means that every drop of rain,every trickle of water in one of rivers of that area will eventually end up in the canal.Currently, the DSS uses weather information as an approximation of how much water theywill receive from the surrounding water boards: Rijnland, Hoogheemraadschap HollandsNoorderkwartier (HHNK), and Amstel, Gooi, en Vecht (AGV; also managed by StichtingWereld Waternet, so also referred as Waternet). There have been attempts to get data onhow much they were pumping towards the North Sea Canal (NSC) from the waterboardsdirectly, but the project failed because the information provided was often inaccurate. Also,looking at the map of the water catchment area (see image), Hoogheemraadschap DeStichtse Rijnlanden (HDSR) can also be considered part of the system, as it borders theAmsterdam-Rijnkanaal (ARK)."At the time the Water Agreement was written (2005/2006) much was still uncertainabout the availability of online information. The DSS for the North Sea Canal was in adevelopment stage and it was still not exactly certain which information was neededfrom the waterboards.For myself I was planning to contact the regional waterboards next year and makefurther agreements about exchanging data. The work you guys do now can be anexcellent starting point for us to pick up the improvement of the data exchange."– Peter Beuse, Dienst Noord-Holland6

Some regions are working on revitalizing these plans, but it seems that they are ratherscattered initiatives. The main topics of discussion we had with the waterboards were:- Current status of development of water management systems- Organizational, financial or other types of obstacles?- Degree of collaboration between Rijkswaterstaat and Waterboards on these developmentefforts- What effort has been put in standardizing communication between water managementsystems?- Extent of integration of water management systems- Is information shared in real-time? How far do predictions go? Is it information sharing ormutually influenceable systems? Rijkswaterstaat or beyond?- Benefits predicted from the full system developmentWe also tried to discover what the latest developments in water management were from anacademic point of view. Peter-Jules van Overloop from TU-Delft presented us with a coupleof relevant projects, mainly the work of Rudy Negenborn (Ref. 5.9) who proposes anoverarching intelligent system as a multi-level, multi-objective decision system to support allthe local systems.“Local water management bodies usually only control water levels in a relativelysmall region. However, the evolution of the water levels is influenced by whathappens over a much larger region, often extending far beyond the neighborhood ofthe given region. The currently uncoordinated and localized control results insuboptimal overall system performance.”Dr. Rudy Negenborn, Delft Center for Systems and Control, TU DelftIn the end, we tried to present to each of the local players with the simple argument:Managing the water catchment area as one big area means more knowledge and morestorage capacity is available as a whole. More knowledge means more accurate predictions,7

which in turn leads to more efficient energy use and better awareness of potential threats.More storage capacity means neighbors can help one another more systematically, splittingthe strain throughout the system, which also implies that energy usage can be spread out insmall sections, leading to savings as well.2.3.2 Shipping informationWhen managing the water level in the Noordzeekanaal, there are many things one needs totake into account other than extreme floods or draughts. One of these things is traffic: theNoordzeekanaal does not just function as a way to discharge water to the sea, it is also animportant part of the regional infrastructure, connecting the Noordzee with the port ofAmsterdam.This means that there are a lot of ships passing the Noordzeekanaal every day, some of themvery large. In order to grant them safe passage, we need to maintain a minimum water levelthat enables them to pass safely over the tunnels in the area. However, this water level ismaintained at all times – even when there are no such large ships passing.Our suggestion was to set up a connection with the port of Amsterdam, who operates thelocks in IJmuiden and oversees all ships coming in and going out of the harbor. This way, thepumping station operators can go below that minimum level for a short period of time tomake optimal use of low tides, if they know that there is no ship with a large draftapproaching.We received positive responses to this theory, and set out to gather information on technicaland ‘political’ feasibility. (Ref. 5.10)2.3.3 RefinementsThis section focuses on using the information you have. The DSS does not currently use allavailable water level information. It measures the local water levels, takes an average, anduses that for its calculations, with no regard for the actual local situations. That means thatit is always working with a greater margin of error than is strictly necessary, because judgingby just the average water level there could be local risks.We wanted to find out what would be the advantages (or disadvantages) of taking localwater levels into account, instead of working with an average of the entire Noordzeekanaal.8

3. The resultsDuring the first two months we came up with a conceptual idea and we were given thechange to develop it little bit further. One of our main goals was to contact the parties thathad shown interest during the first months and to make the connection between them,make them talk and discuss the possibilities, feasibility and the conditions under which theywill cooperate and work with each other.Finding the right people which will be interested and responsible for the futuredevelopment and cooperation was one of the main challenges that we faced. We found outthat once we reached these people, talked with them and introduced them to our visionthey were quite open to it. It was normal to see that there were differences between thepeople (and the organizations behind them) but at the end they had more or less the samegoal – saving energy, cost reductions, being environmentally friendly and at the same timeto adapt to upcoming climate change – but in different ways. By showing them that theirdifferences could be put aside and there were opportunities to work together to furtherthese goals, we already made one big step forward.It is one thing when people talk with us and through us, and another when they actually talkto each other. Therefore, we decided to put everybody in one room in an informal situationand just talk and discuss. We achieved this with two round table meetings: on the 20thJanuary at Rijkswaterstaat Haarlem and on the 21st in the LEF Future center in. At thesemeetings, people were able to talk openly and freely about their opinions, ideas andachievements without being pressured to commit to anything formal.3.1 Blue Energy – status of developmentThe last three months of our work enriched our knowledge on blue energy considerably. Notonly we were invited to see the pilot of the blue energy in Harlingen but also, REDstackprovided us with loads of information and studies that have been done in the blue energytechnology. Our main focus in the last three months was to examine what the status of thedevelopment is, how feasible and environmentally friendly the technology is and what thepossibilities of implementing it at the Noordzeekanaal are. The summary below should give aclearer picture of the current developments.In general the challenges that the producer focuses on are costs and pre-treatmentimprovements.3.1.1. MembranesThe life expectancy of the membrane is eight years. From the technological point of view,the developed membranes respond to the requirements for generating energy sufficiently;however, their costs are very high and in market terms - not affordable. Experts say that theprice per m² is likely to fall if:1. Market share of membranes increase.2. The economies of scale are achieved.3. The production capabilities of the membranes increase.9

These issues close the cycle: even if the market share for membranes increase, theproduction capabilities might not be satisfying the demands that the market has risen andthe economies of scale will not be achieved. Therefore, production improvements andcommercialization are required.3.1.2. Pre-treatmentThere is a new technology for pre-treatment is still under development. The problem thatthe REDstack is facing is the lack of information on the water quality required for the stacks.The new developments regarding this issue are based on assumptions; therefore every newtechnology must be tested on existing plants. The newest development for the pretreatmentis the drum filter. The basic idea behind this technology is that the filters, placedvertically, rotates. Through gravitation, the water entering the drum flows through the filtercausing the dirt to be tripped out. For more specific technical information regarding this typeof pre-treatment, see (Ref. 5.1).3.1.3 PilotsHarlingen, Frisia Zout. This pilot is managed by REDstack and financially supported bySenterNovem. The pilot has started in 2008 and due to technical problems it was kept onhold till the beginning of 2010. The main reason for this hold back was the trial-errorinstallation. The pilot was the first ‘out of laboratory’ example, therefore they did not alwayshave the right equipment, there were construction problems, et cetera. The advantage ofthe pilot at the salt factory is the fact that the fresh water that is being used is relativelyclean, which saves the costs of pre-treatment. Additionally, the availability of salt makes itpossible to experiment with the salt concentration of the salt water, increasing the powerproduction output. The price of the Harlingen pilot came to about €1,000,000.In February 2010 the team managing the pilot in Harlingen is going to test the drum filteringtechnology.Pilot in Norway by Statkraft, however, using different technique (Pressure RetardedOsmosis); Capacity of generating 10 kW.Afsluitdijk. A letter of intent has been signed by REDstack, Rijkswaterstaat, Noord-HollandProvince, Wetsus and others, to construct a pilot at Afsluitdijk capable of producing 20 to50 kW. The project has been planned in years 2010-2012. Since October 2009, RoyalHaskoning has been busy obtaining permits. The actual building should start around January2011. It is expected that by 2018 the power plant at Afsluitdijk would be capable ofproducing 200MW. Because of its size, the pilot on Afsluitdijk is going to come up to theprice of €4,000,000.Quite an issue at Afsluitdijk at this moment is the environmental considerations concerningfish: every time the locks open up tons of fish dies of the shock caused by differences in saltconcentration between salt and fresh water. The brackish water from blue energy wouldcreate a bridge for the fish, to adjust to the new environment.10

3.2 The two main chains3.2.1 BE Industrial agglomerate AquaClusterThe meeting of the 21 st of January was mostly dedicated to this part, as most of theparticipants were private players interested in short/mid-term results.The format of the meeting and the variety of the presentations led to several types ofdiscussions on the topic.Attendance List– Corus– Milieufederatie– The Firm– Provincie Noord-Holland– Acacia Water / Eco-polder project (Ref. 5.11)– DeltaresContributions from– REDstack (Ref. 5.12)– Eneco – ACRRES (Ref. 5.13)Firstly, most were somewhat cautious about Blue Energy technology, as it is still too much inthe future to be considered. However, at this stage, the chain is strong enough to stand onits own without a Blue Energy plant, so we could focus on the later parts.Secondly, the possibilities of sustainable technologies to be linked with co-siting initiativesare both broad and unproven. Corus expressed from the beginning that they are interestedin what these opportunities bring, from the perspective of linking with their wastemanagement, not with the products it may bring.Thirdly, one big criticism against potential pioneers is that so many of them still go bankruptevery year, even with government support, which has not been helping their popularity withthe usual public investors.We can conclude that even on co-siting through waste management there is still muchground to cover: Convincing business cases must be built, defining the ownership of thewaste and each party’s responsibilities and still must be able to stand on their own, mostlywithout subsidies. Most of the opportunities we could find (such as shrimp growing) had noserious representative to make an investment in the area. If this waste is linked further withfood production, it involves a whole series of regulation barriers and public image issues. Tomanage such complicated linkages can be a job by itself.The linkages that became most clear with the discussion were the connection betweenCorus and Eneco’s similar ACRRES project, and The Firm with “Cluster” Management.Corus needs a reliable partner with which to trust their carbon credits, and Eneco is a strongenough partner to suggest it will not let the project fail out of liquidity issues.If more linkages are created, it might be an idea to let a private company specialized inprocess management to maintain the connections between all the parties, as theserelationships can be consuming, and Corus, for example, presented it as one of the majorbarriers to trying out with several small projects from different parties.11

This leads us to the topic of discussing what position Rijkswaterstaat should aim to fill in thissituation. RWS is related to the project as water quality is one of the main objectives. This isdone in practice by managing the permits that allow firms to dump water in the waterways,but can’t be said to be a perfect solution.The most extreme position would be for RWS to actively invest in companies that take wastewater management into their own hands. This can be considered far from RWS’s corebusinesses, but seeing as it is the expert organization on water management, it could be apossibility to recommend certain initiatives with the Province of Noord-Holland, whotraditionally sponsor such projects.Alternatively, firms could refer to RWS in terms of policy advice. As a connection betweengovernment and private companies, RWS could define and enforce the terms about tradingwaste water, either as a recommendation or as a rule. This is especially necessary when the“market” for waste water is rising up and unregulated, smaller firms needing some sort ofguarantee against exploitation by established players.The idea of mariculture, another way to say agriculture in the sea, did not get muchattention in the meeting due to lack of representatives, mainly Willem Brandenburg (Ref.5.6). It must be stated though, that the different initiatives and future expected for salineagriculture seem to be a worthy path to study before it actually becomes necessary.Experimental fields could be set up as part of the chain, as just another product, but withglobal relevance.EnecoAfter the first two months on our project, as we mentioned early, we had the chance andthe opportunity to present our vision at the innovation market at Katwijk, The Netherlands.During one of the preparation meetings we were introduced to Mr. Arjan Mast, from Eneco.Our initial contact was about blue energy and the model of the technology. Later on wefound out that he is also a project manager of ACRRES project that is running at the momentin Lelystad.The main goal of the ACRRES’ project, together with gaining knowledge, learning andtesting possibilities, is sustainable energy generation. They are exploring the opportunity ofenergy generation by using gas components which are released after the fermentation ofcrops and fertilizer. Not all of the components are suitable for that process; gases such asCO 2 will be released into the atmosphere. To prevent that from happening, there will be acontinuation of the chain where the CO 2 and warmth will be taken to a nearby artificial pondwhere there it will be used for algae growing. The produced algae will be used for eitherfood or oil production (Ref. 5.13). Here is where we saw an opportunity for integration withour vision. We spoke with the project manager and we discussed the possibilities forcombining that idea with the Verbrakking Polder Westzaan project. After he heard about ourproject and the ideas about cooperation with Corus, he was open to be included in thecooperation. The ACRRES project works closely with Wageningen University and they havethe knowledge and the recourses for research and study. Therefore they are willing to usebrackish water on a later stage in their project if they have a sample of the water that Coruswill give so they could research what type of algae one could grow in it.12

3.2.2 BE Westzaan polder Research centerOur ideas regarding this part of the chain have changed slightly when we discovered that theVerbrakking Polder Westzaan Project was kept on hold. This was due to the problems theprovince of Noord-Holland encountered: unsolved issues with the water circulation after itflows through the polders, and farmers questioning the water quality of the surroundings.Those were the two main causes of the project to stop. This has made us believe evenstronger in the necessity of the Research & Information Center! However, having no actuallocation and no people who had been involved in this subject, we had to start all over again.The Innovatie-Estafette in Katwijk was our first step to raise interest and find partners whowere willing to take over the idea and implement it. Indeed, most of the visitors stronglysupported our vision and expressed the need for such a Research Center, especially todiminish the fear of salinity and invite governments and general public to work on it. We metresearchers from Zeeland, who deal with the same problems in their province and they allrecommended to us to contact Wageningen University and Plant Research International,because of its knowledge, skills and expertise in the field. We knew there are studies onsaline agri- and aquacultures conducted by different organizations in different part of theNetherlands. However, it seemed that there were no actual results ready to beimplemented. It was clear to us that the demand for setting up a separate, single entity,focusing on only researching, experimenting, informing and collecting results, was very high,but there was no one who could gather all possible stakeholders to one room. For thatreason we decided to skip the part of Westzaan Polder and focus on carrying out the idea ofResearch Center.At the Innovatie-Estaffete we also met a representative from the Province of Noord-Holland,who presented to us the plans for the project “Toekomst Afsluitdijk – dijk en meer”. It soonturned out that the serious and very broad plans for Afsluitdijk provided opportunities torealize the idea of Research Center, especially when the Province recognized the demand forit.Our second major opportunity was the “Leven met water” conference in Rotterdam, wherewe could talk to representatives of ‘Leven met zout water’ and ‘Ecopolder’ programs, bothfrom Acacia Water. Their concepts were more or less concerned with the topics we weretrying to tackle: the salinization processes, its consequences and opportunities for its usage.We decided to bring together the three projects and present them to the Province of Noord-Holland on our final round table discussion. The main goal of that meeting was to gathereveryone who in may be in any way concerned with the subject and discuss what can bedone. To some extent the meeting was successful: we accomplished the planned ‘businesscards exchange’ between Acacia Water and the Province of Noord-Holland and as we knowfrom experience, this is already half of the success.However, we sensed quite a negative attitude among other participants, which havebasically spoken out our concerns: there are too many research centers! Some of them areprivate, some private-public, some governmental and they all focus on study the samesubjects. Why is this knowledge spread all over the country? Why there is so littlecooperation between those organizations? Why there are no concrete results published to13

the public? Maybe this is the future of our research center: one central place, focusing onexperiments in real conditions, where the knowledge, resources, skills and facilities cometogether and join strengths to work towards the common good. This is something to keep inmind if one wants to pursue this any further.3.3 Saving energy – resultsAfter the research phase was done, we decided that the best way to finalize the efforts intoimproving the DSS was to gather as many relevant parties as possible in one room, presentour results and encourage discussion between them and RWS. This took place on the 20th ofJanuary and the attendance list can be found in the appendix (Ref. 5.14) and the results arepresented in the next sections.3.3.1 Regional cooperationAfter our initial research into the current status of DSSs in each of the waterboards, we had alot of data in our hands. Most of it can be found in the appendix (Ref. 5.15), but we alsofound it useful to present it in a friendly way.Real-time input(pumping stationsof third parties)Real-time statuspumping stations(their own)Precipitationinformation realtimePrecipitationpredictionsOverall inputpredictionsOverall outputpredictionsInfluence on otherparties' watermanagementProgress/statusNSC / RWS AGV HHNK HDSR RijnlandIncompleteYes: Rijnland & HDSRNo: RWS14No? Yes, RWS Yes, AGV, HDSRYes Yes Yes Yes YesYes Yes, inaccurate Yes Yes YesYes No, planned in 1-2yearsIncomplete*No: Rijnland, HDSR,RWSYes, 24-48h Yes, 48h Yes, 24hNo: RWS RWS-Utrecht? YesN/A No No No Yes, RWSYes: in high watercalamitiesComplete andworking,available forimprovementsNo** No No** No**Version 1 of the‘second generationsystem’, basictesting***Implementationand testing inJanuaryFirst generation(working on asecond)***Secondgeneration****Predictions from RWS's own systems (from the Markermeer for instance), not from any of the waterboards.** There is cooperation or influence on a voluntary (and informal) basis between HDSR, Rijnland, and AGV.Practically, this means that if they have a problem, they get on the phone and ask their neighbours for help.Generally they will receive it, beyond the formal obligations they have to each other.*** HDSR, Rijnland, and AGV all have pretty much the same system, except that HDSR had it first and is nowworking with an older generation. They are working on an upgrade, though, and then those three systems willbe even more compatible.

The meeting of the 20th of January was mostly beneficial for this topic, as creating a settingfor collaboration was our main objective.HHNK will be implementing and testing a DSS of their own within the next months. It willpredict the incoming and outgoing water amounts, and provide this information to IJmuiden.There will be information exchange, but no actual influence on each other's watermanagement – for example, to hold the water a bit longer or let it out another way if thatwould be more energy efficient. Such a 'system' is in place for calamities (flood risks), but itis not automated. The system entails phone calls and executive decisions.Their argument was that for sufficient gains to be obtained from integrating watermanagement, pumping capacity would need to be increased.Out of the four, Rijnland seems to have the most complex and developed DSS (Ref. 5.15).They were reticent about collaboration: "Can we wait until Rijkswaterstaat discharges?"However, they provide example of how they install pumps to be used mostly in criticalsituations, which means there is a lot of pumping power left over, which can then be used bythe DSS to make the system more flexible and efficient.Have made their position clear that energy efficiency is not their first priority, so will need tobe convinced that the integration of water management brings added safety as well.AGV is also working on a system (CAW) that will monitor the status of their pumpingstations. They are not very far with development, but they have secured the budget andpeople are actually working on it. They will be able to give real-time information on theirpumping to IJmuiden and, on the other side, they will get a better global picture of howmuch water the polders will need from RWS.We were cautious on the subject of dealing with much higher water levels in Amsterdam asit sometimes takes 3 hours to close all the locks.In HDSR, all stations function on an automated basis, sending warnings to water managers incase of flood possibilities. They also claim that this is not very usual in Rijkswaterstaatsystems. Their predictive model is not good enough to make long term predictions yet, sothey just use the model to react on current conditions. The intention is to start applyingpredictions sometime in the near future.This waterboard, out of the four, seems to be the one that lacks the most incentive to investin improving their systems, as their gains would be much less significant and right now thesystem does its job.They point out that for building a proper predictive model they would like to have morehistorical data like weather predictions that is not available publically, so they have beeninvesting in building up a five year hydrological database that is available at any time.They enjoy a good relationship with Rijkswaterstaat Utrecht, as communication by phone(cell phone to cell phone) is allowed and welcome, for all kinds of situations.They would like to have better margins on dry summers with cooperation from RWS-NH, butrealize Rijkswaterstaat has to worry about a lot more factors, so understand cooperation isslow.15

The problem in this case stems from the fact that the DSS aims for a medium level, whichvaries due to predicted variations (which only go so far). The idea would be to vary this "setpoint" also according to the seasons. Another issue in the summer is the "wave" created bypumping. It is already the objective of Rijkswaterstaat to make the wave last longer, in orderfor it to be less tall. Both situations would be less of an issue if proper exchange ofpredictions between RWS and the waterboards was in place.The first explanation by Geert-Jan Ebbinge on the main reason why the informationexchange from Rijkswaterstaat is not live yet is because of money issues.Peter-Jules van Overloop was very enthusiastic on providing simulations on all the situationsdiscussed and also reinforced his point that the DSS in the NZK is not yet using the fullmargins available even with proven results. He warns however, that for the NZK DSS youwould need accurate predictions from most of the waterboards before external predictionscan fit in the system.The research project into multi-agent, multi-objective overarching DSS system that providesadvice to each of the advisory systems was presented with mixed reactions (Ref. 5.9).Objectives should take into account the different effects of varying water levels: floods,salinity, houseboats and city foundations, shipping efficiency, et cetera.Waterboards had already provided information, but they were unaware of their potentialbenefit and how they could use the research to test out certain factors relevant only forthem. An example provided would be a simulation of an increase of pumping capacity inspecific locations.The main conclusion was that the research from Dr. Negenborn should be closely supportedby all the different water managers and adjusted to their needs, as this meeting served toprove that the operational and research worlds of water management can benefit from eachother.3.3.2 Shipping informationTo find out more about everything related to the Noordzeekanaal as a trade route, we askedthe port of Amsterdam for help. They showed us around and were very willing to share alltheir information on incoming ships. Apparently, this had been a habit for a long time duringthe ‘old ways’ of faxing information to the pumping station: they wrote the specifics of anylarge incoming ship on the water level graphs before sending them over. However, with thenew (digital) system, this simply went out of use.They also told us that there are about 300 ships with a significantly large draft are coming inevery year; less than one per day. However, only half of those are sufficiently predictable(over 24 hours in advance). The other half can announce their arrival a much shorter timeahead, sometimes only three or four hours. According to a researcher from TU Delft, thiswas not enough time and the chances of the idea actually having an impact were very low.Until either the shipping becomes more predictable, or someone can think of a way to usethis information in some other way, this concept seems pretty much a dead end.16

3.3.3 RefinementsWe contacted a number of people who had done research on the Noordzeekanaal in thepast, to get supporting evidence for our ‘using local water levels’ theory. We found suchsupport from Albert Goedbloed, who had studied the DSS and wrote a number of futurerecommendations. One of them was using a more detailed water level model (’10-bakkenmodel’, see (Ref. 5.8). Not being anything close to engineers ourselves, there was not muchmore we could do on this topic, except for referring to and emphasizing his work.However, in our search we had run into several other interesting issues that we would like toaddress here.The first is related to using local measurements for a more accurate picture. The water levelmeasurements in the Noordzeekanaal are not always very accurate themselves, which canmuddle the results of any research or model. However good your models and predictionsare, if you start with incorrect input information, results are going to be suboptimal. Thisshould be a relatively easy ‘fix’, and it might really improve system performance.Another thing that could be considered to be taken into account in the DSS is the wind. Ifthere is a strong wind in the direction of the Noordzeekanaal (or along any other long andstraight body of water), the water level on one side can be much higher than on the otherside, because it is being pushed up by the wind. If one wants to look at water levels morelocally, then being able to predict them can be useful. Weather forecasts generally havereliable wind predictions (for 24 hours ahead, at least), so this is something else that couldbe included in the DSS.In the meeting we had on January 20 th , it was also brought up that looking at wind effectscould be an interesting part of looking at the area as one big system. Hopefully, moreresearch will show if there is much to gain by incorporating wind predictions in the DSS.Lastly, we learned that Rijnland uses another way of saving on electricity costs. They try tofocus their energy use on night times, in order to stay away from peak demand and relievethe electricity grid. In theory, we very much like the idea to be implemented in otherwaterboards and Rijkswaterstaat as well, but there are some practical concerns.Rijkswaterstaat has an energy contract for the organization as a whole, soon to be joinedwith the Ministery of Defense’s energy arrangements. Considering the vital importance ofwater management for safety, this seems a logical development.It would be very complicated to somehow create a ‘separate’ energy contract for just thepumping station in IJmuiden, or even for all pumping stations together. It might even bemore expensive, canceling out possible gains.17

4. The next stepsIn this report, we have elaborated on the work we have done. This section is devoted to ourideas of what other people should do with our results. It is primarily aimed atRijkswaterstaat, but also contains some recommendations about how other organizationscould or should act, especially in the chapter about the blue energy plant and everythingthat follows from it.4.1 Blue Energy ‘cluster’4.1.1 LocationWhen choosing a feasible location for the blue energy plant, the balance between extendedinfrastructure, accessibility to water, feasibility and potential of the power generation shouldbe considered.We have explored which location could be most feasible. However, it seems that due to highprices for piping infrastructure and required pumping of the input water it is worth toexplore possibilities of using the differences in salt concentration of the canal water.The blue energy plant capable of producing 200 MW requires about 200,000 m² ground,assuming the modules to be placed next to each other. Those large amounts of empty spacearound the Noordzeekanaal are only available to the south-west of Assendelft. An obstacleof this location is that it is not owned by Rijkswaterstaat, and obtaining it might increase thecosts significantly, assuming that the price of 1 m² of ground in the Netherlands isapproximately €500. A second challenge regarding this possible location is that the effluentfrom the blue energy plant will have to be pumped to the canal or transported to the sea.The latest option requires piping (infrastructure), and taking into account the distancebetween the sea and Assendelft, might be very costly.According to the information we received from Henk Looijen, water manager in theNoordzeekanaal area, the salt concentration of the surface water is about 1500 mg/l,starting from 4 km away from Ijmuiden. The salt concentration of the bottom water is (atdepth of 12 meter) 7500 mg/l.18

Theoretically, using those differences the power availability is reduced by 4.5 MJ, accordingto assumption that decrease in salt concentration difference from 1 g/l to 2 g/l will result ina 0,2 MJ decrease in available energy. This loses in available energy may be compensated byincreased membranes surface, but it remains an important issue.The combination between sufficient salt concentration of the water and viable positioning ofthe blue energy plant can be achieved if the modules will be placed in the northern side ofthe canal, right next to Corus. The salinity of the water surface remains 1,5 g/l and thesalinity of the bottom 7,5 g/l. Assuming the idea of chain BE → Corus → AquaCluster beingsuccessful, the distance from the plant to Corus would then be shorter, thus requiring lesspiping infrastructure. Taking into account that in the future blue energy modules might beinstalled in the basements of organizations, Corus and the Pumping Station might utilize thespace and the infrastructure they have. In addition, the distance for pumping the excess ofthe brackish water that would have to be pumped to the sea will be shorter, and have farless influence on the surroundings.4.1.2 Pilot possibilitiesBecause of high costs, still quite high error margins and continuous developments regardingthe technology it might be unfeasible to start up a pilot at Noordzeekanaal at this time.Project leader of the blue energy pilot in Harlingen, Mr. Simon Grasman, told us thatbecause the technology has just gone out of laboratory and because there were so fewpossibilities to ‘try’ it in real conditions, mistakes still happened a lot during start-up. Evenusage of a wrong tool to install the module or maintain it causes huge delays.Now that the system works in perfect conditions (clean water, extremely fresh andextremely salty), it is time to work out the issues that will show up when using ‘natural’water. This is what the pilot at the Afsluitdijk will do. They will start small, but if thedevelopment of membranes, pre-treatment processes and other technological issues willcontinue at the same speed, it will be relatively easy to increase the scale and lower thecosts.The Afsluitdijk offers a rather rare situation, which makes it so suitable for this pilot: you canfind fresh water and sea water right next to each other, with an artificial barrier in betweento keep them from mixing. Because of these extremes in salt concentration, it will berelatively easy to make things work there.However, this rare situation also means that the results are not immediately applicableeverywhere else. Most places that have rivers flowing into the sea are much more like theNoordzeekanaal: there is a salinity gradient between the salt and fresh water, and no clear‘border’ between the two.The next step will be to improve the blue energy technology to make it suitable for thesekinds of places, and that is when the Noordzeekanaal returns to mind as a good pilotlocation. If we can make it work (and cost-effective) not only at the Afsluitdijk, but at a placelike the Noordzeekanaal, we will open up a wide range of locations for renewable energygeneration.19

4.1.3 Thoughts on cooperationClearly there is a potential in the cooperation between Eneco, The Firm, Corus andRijkswaterstaat and it should be considered if the plans of implementing the idea areserious. All of those parties have the chance to obtain profits, if the collaboration betweenthem will be based on realistic and clear agreements. This cooperation can be illustrated asfollowing:The reason for choosing these organizations as main actors of the chain derives fromrecognising the existing relationships between those organizations and opportunities forfuture cooperation. Since Corus has signed up a contract with Eneco to install solar energyon Corus’ roofs, the long term relationship resulting from that might, and maybe should, besupported by joining another project and bring together the strengths both organizationshave. Corus operations are strongly dependent on Rijkswaterstaat: this is the entity thatregulates the policies on water quality and grants required permits. Joining the projecttogether would solve some of the challenges those two parties encounter and createsolutions to the critical operational issues. The Firm performs services already for Corus, so itwouldn’t be strange to further their collaboration. Eneco seeks ways to generate greenenergy and Corus may be a powerful partner to connect with.Besides, the four organizations are powerful players, and for an ambitious project,sometimes the more complex the parties and their connections are, the easier it is toguarantee it will come to reality.While Corus seeks to get rid of its waste in the cheapest manner, Eneco actively seekssustainable energy generation, therefore it sets up projects like ACRRES (REF 5.13) todevelop ideas, knowledge and experience. Both parties are powerful and have the resourcesto set up a strong and long term relationship. Eneco can provide tools and support the blueenergy development at the Noordzeekanaal and after it is developed, come to an agreementwith Rijkswaterstaat for the energy storage. Eneco has already shown interest in taking asample from Corus’s water to research what can be done with it.The role of The Firm, as organization specializing in project management, would be todevelop business cases, different scenarios and risk assessments for Corus and Eneco. Due tothe knowledge and experience Mr. Gilbert Curtessi gained during his experiments with theHappy Shrimp farm, he is more likely to foresee possible problems that could occur. And20

there are some problems that should be considered. First of all there is the issue of theownership of the waste; assuming Corus does not need to pump their waste water to thesea, because the water quality after it leaves the AquaCluster is clean and does not need tobe neither cooled, nor cleaned. In this case there should be an entity to monitor theprocesses and cooperation between the two main partners (Corus and AquaCluster), andthese processes should not be disturbed by unnecessary problems.The other issue that could effectively be tackled by The Firm is the risk assessment. Next tothe financial risks, there are also risks in terms of ‘technical failures’. It should be consideredwhat would happen in case the possible AquaCluster will not be able to handle all the outputwater from Corus. Assuming the idea of Marinecultures comes to life, the pollution in thiscase could be an issue. Developing business cases and risks assessments in the field, which isnot a core business for any of the players, might be more effective, if performed by anexternal party: the objectivity gained guarantees better results.This leads us to the topic of discussing what position Rijkswaterstaat should aim to fill in thissituation. Rijkswaterstaat is related to the project as water quality is one of the mainobjectives. This is done in practice by managing the permits that allow firms to dump waterin the waterways, but can’t be said to be a perfect solution.The most extreme position would be for RWS to actively invest in companies that take wastewater management into their own hands. This can be considered far from Rijkswaterstaat’score businesses, but seeing as it is the expert organization on water management, it couldbe a possibility to recommend certain initiatives with the Province of Noord-Holland, whotraditionally sponsor such projects.Alternatively, firms could refer to Rijkswaterstaat in terms of policy advice. As a connectionbetween government and private companies, Rijkswaterstaat could define and enforce theterms about trading waste water, either as a recommendation or as a rule. This is especiallynecessary when the “market” for waste water is rising up and unregulated, smaller firmsneeding some sort of guarantee against exploitation by established players.4.2 DSS recommendationsWe aim this section mostly at Rijkswaterstaat, because it is the organization we have used asa 'starting point' for all this, and because the initiative will have to come largely from them,as they are (rightfully) perceived as the higher authority by the other actors. We focus onthree areas: operational water management, policy makers, and research.4.2.1 Operational water managementTo turn those good intentions from all parties involved into real cooperation, it is importantthat Rijkswaterstaat Noord-Holland devotes some time and effort (in other words: people)to it. When we first talked to some of the waterboards, they had doubts aboutRijkswaterstaat's intentions and sincerity. We have to show them some commitment. Themore elaborate data exchange that we talked about during the last meeting would be a verygood starting point. Setting up a server to do this would be a very small investment in termsof money and time, but an important first step in confirming the willingness to also provideothers with information when they need it.21

4.2.2 Policy makersThe 'lower level' cooperation is a good start to improve relations. However, if we want tomake a real (and bigger) change in the long term, we will have to gain support from thepolicy makers. In the end, they decide what issues deserve their resources, and cooperationand improving their systems (for both safety and efficiency) should be among those issues.We strongly suggest that there is an organized initiative to achieve their support. Apossibility would be to write a letter or declaration of support (in general terms), and havesomeone from the operational water management 'level' from each organization sign it.Alternatively, such a call for support could come from Rijkswaterstaat Noord-Holland alone,but its effect might be less strong. However one should go about it, it is important that thepeople at the policy level of the organizations involved are aware of the issue and startthinking and talking about these things.In turn, the policy makers will need technical and practical information and advice from theoperational experts. We believe that if this is to succeed, parallel processes are essential.Practical improvements and policy developments are both ways of making progress andneither should be neglected.4.2.3 ResearchThere is some research about both the IJmuiden DSS and the area at large already planned.These would be great occasions to also look at some of the suggestions and concerns fromthe waterboards and our team. For the system integration research:How far would such an approach go? What kind of things would it 'ask' from us thatwe do not take into account or do now? (waterboards)How would it respond in emergency situations?What would be the estimated 'profits', due to less energy costs?For the IJmuiden DSS:Test/implement a more refined model that regards the local water levels rather thanjust the average ('10-bakken model')Improve measurement accuracyExplore the possibilities for taking wind effects into account - possibly in relation tothe integrated water management studyWe know that some of these things are already on the 'to do list'. We are merelyemphasizing their importance, and the importance of communicating the results properlyand convincingly to those involved.22

5. References5.1See attached filed “REDstack paper.pdf”5.2“Last thursday we talked about whether the brackish effluent of a Blue Energy plantwas thought to create a problem, but that a recent study from Arnout Bijlsma andothers showed that this was less of a problem than expected. I asked them why andthis is what they said:They looked primarily at the problem of recirculation, which means that you let yourbrackish effluent out in a location near the location from where you pump in eitherthe salt water or the freshwater. They showed that if you let the brackish effluent outon sea, it will not be a big problem, because of the sea water flow along the coastfrom the south to the north. This means that the brackish water transported away tothe north and that there is a constant new supply of salt water.The same principle is true when you let the effluent out on the Noodzeekanaal (atleast when the sluices are open) since there is continuous supply of new freshwater.So recirculation seems to be not the problem.Secondly, they haven't studied the possible adverse affects of brackish water on theenvironment. Normally the fresh water and the saltwater are mixing as well, so on ahigher scale level, it shouldn't make much difference if you put an BE-installation inbetween.However, on a smaller scale you might create different salt concentrationslocally, which might have effect on local ecosystems. They have not studied this indetail and should be in the future.As they see it, the biggest problem is to find high salt concentrations and purefreshwater problem for the intake. The BE-installation works best if the difference insalt concentrations is high. However the sea water near IJmuiden has a lowerconcentration than average due to the mixing of the freshwater from theNoordzeekanaal, and vice versa, the Noordzeekanaal is not pure fresh due to mixingof salt water.So where does this leave you? Well, this study tells us a brackish water might be not aproblem in terms of recirculation, however we are not sure how it effectslocal ecosystems, or whether it will be accepted by society. Secondly, we shoold looktowards other points of intake for instance, cooling water from factories...I suggest you think about these insights and take them into account while writing theproposal and discuss it with Marco en Hans.The bright sight is: since the problemseems to be less that expected, the chances for you to actually get commitment fromthe decision makers are bigger!”Rutger van der Brugge, Deltares5.3See attached file “lozers afvalwater koelwater NZK.pdf”5.4http://www.treehugger.com/files/2006/08/happy_shrimp_fr.php“Happy Shrimp Goes Local in Rotterdamby Petz Scholtus, Barcelona, Spain on 08.10.06Soon we Europeans can enjoy local and happy shrimp from the Netherlands. No moreclocking up on Food Miles when you fancy fresh shrimp, no more deep-freezing & overpackagingand no more polluting of mangrove forests by existing shrimp farms in Asia. Bass23

& Gill BV have came up with e new business idea: the Happy Shrimp Farm; the first tropicalshrimp farm in Europe. They call it a new eco-industrial company that benefits the economyand the environment. Here is how:The Happy Shrimp greenhouse-enclosed Farm in Rotterdam uses the waste heat (otherwisereleased into the air) of the neighbouring power plant to warm the farm. A biological filterbed makes sure the waste streams of the farm don’t pollute in order for future generationsto enjoy shrimp happily in an untouched environment. Another advantage of a shrimp farmin Europe is that the shrimp available is at its most freshest as well as safe to eat (see FoodSafety page). Happy Shrimp made it their responsibility not just to farm shrimp eco-friendlybut also to tell people about industrial ecology, sustainability, energy use, healthy food andjoyful lives. Their web site is a great and clear source of information full of happy shrimps.To feast on Happy Shrimp you have to wait until March 2007 when they will hit the market.The construction of the farm started in April this year and the official opening is inSeptember followed by the Night of the Prawns Party. In the meantime you can Shrimp UpYour Life with the Happy Shrimp Merchandise: 100% organic t-shirts, stickers, or a HappyShrimp Eco-Sphere; a NASA developed self-sustaining living environment for 3-4 small brightred shrimps! Great how far you can take a sustainable shrimp locally! ::Happy Shrimp via::Springwise”5.5See example at http://www.aquaphyto.com/5.6See attached file “WageningenPresentation saline agriculture.pdf”5.7“Nice project, and regarding to your question if brackish water is in our focusof interest: no, not really, but besides we’ve done some work withaquaculture in this kind of environment.I think that the production of brackish water can be used to create a naturereservation area. Here in Zeeland we have about 900-1000 hectares of saltwetland on former agricultural land, which was already difficult (brackish)for the traditional crops. We tried some aquaculture with the algae in thiskind of area as food for shellfish, but not very successful. The main issue wasthat the salinity was too low, for shellfish aquaculture you need at least 20promille salt, and also the algae in these areas where not of any food value.You will need higher salinity.There might be possibilities for silt vegetables or ragworms, but these arenot our very core business.” - Marco Dubbeldam, Stichting Zeeschelp5.8See attached file “AlbertGoedbloedThesis.pdf”5.9See attached file “negenborn-multi-agent-water.pdf”5.10See attached files “Schutgegevens 2009_01-06.xls” and “tunnel depth.doc”5.11See attached file “Roundtable 21st January.ppt”5.12See attached video “BLUE ENERGY”24

5.13www.acrres.nl/5.14Attendance List DSSMarcel Boomgaard, HHNKBen Staring, AGVRené van der Zwan, RijnlandEdwin Jongman, HDSRJulian Sallows, Port of AmsterdamPeter-Jules van Overloop, TU DelftHans Overbeek, RWS NHGeert-Jan Ebbinge, RWS NHPeter Beuse, RWS NHMarga Rommel, RWS NHErik Stapper, RWS NH5.15The summary the team wrote during research, longer version.:HHNK will be implementing and testing a DSS of their own within the next months. It willpredict the incoming and outgoing water amounts, and provide this information to IJmuiden.There will be information exchange, but no actual influence on each other's watermanagement – for example to hold the water a bit longer or let it out another way if thatwould be more energy efficient. Such a 'system' is in place for calamities (flood risks), but itis not automated. The system entails phonecalls and executive decisions.Peter Schuit (HHNK):"Ja wij zijn bezig met een B.O.S. en de verwachting is dat wij deze de komendemaanden gaan testen.Het B.O.S. gaat werken volgens het Neerslag afvoer model en krijgt input vanuitMFPS waterstanden Eb en Vloed Noordzee Den Helder, Meteo Consult voor watbetreft weerinformatie en neerslag vanuit de radarbeelden en informatie vanuit hetwerkgebied van het HHNK.Er wordt een prognose gemaakt voor de komende 24 of 48 uren en die wordt peruur bijgesteld.In deze prognose wordt de verwachting weergegeven wat b.v. het Zaangemaal dekomende periode gaat doen, deze info wordt dan ook doorgegeven aan de B.O.S. vanhet Gemaal IJmuiden.""Yes, we are working on a DSS and the expectation is to test it in the comingmonths. The DSS will work according to the precipitation discharge model and will getinput from MFPS water levels low and high tide North Sea Den Helder, MeteoConsult concerning weather information and precipitation from the radar images andinformation from HHNK's working area. “ – Peter Schuit, HHNK, translation:There will be a prognosis for the next 24 or 48 hours and it will be updated everyhour. In this prognosis we indicate the expectations of what for instance theZaangemaal will do, and this information will be sent to the IJmuiden DSS."25

AGV is also working on a system (CAW) that will monitor the status of their pumping stations(water levels, how much do they pump when). They are not as far with development asHHNK, but they have secured the budget and people are actually working on it. They will beable to give real-time information on their pumping to IJmuiden5 and, on the other side,they will get a better global picture of how much water the polders will need from RWS. Thenew system is being tested soon:"We zijn nu begonnen met versie 1, dat moet een draaiend basissysteem opleveren.Met de volgende versies worden de mogelijkheden telkens verder uitgebreid."- Martine Lodewijk, AGV, translation:We are now implementing a first version, which should provide a working basicsystem. In the next versions, we will elaborate on it with more options."Binnen het volg- en stuursysteem wordt een 'grof naar fijn' aanpak geadviseerdwaarin op ten duur zoveel mogelijk componenten zijn gebaseerd op real-timeinformatie". – Report Kaderrichtlijn Water system (prestudy), paragraph 3.5,translation:Within the system, we advise a 'big to small' approach, which should be based onas much real-time information as possible in the end."Verbetering neerslaggegevens. Dit is belangrijke input voor de waterbalansen,maar is momenteel nog van onvoldoende kwaliteit." – Report Kaderrichtlijn Watersystem (prestudy), paragraph 4.3.3, translation:Improvement precipitation data. This is important input for the water level balance,but is currently of insufficient quality."Volgens mij is de real-time informatie de meeste en belangrijkste posten al welbeschikbaar, zoals pompstatus van de gemalen en neerslag. Wel kunnen de gegevensnog verbeterd worden (neerslag). Niet beschikbaar zijn bijv. metingen van deinlaatdebieten, maar dat zal - vooral voor alle kleinere inlaten - niet snel gebeuren (teveel inlaten en te duur).” – Martine Lodewijk, AGV, translation:I think that the real-time information from the most and most importantinstallations, such as pumping status of the pumping stations and precipitation, isalready available. However, we could still improve some data (precipitation).Measurements of water input from other locations is not available, and it probablywill not be anytime soon (too many small input places, too expensive)"Radarbeelden van de neerslag komen al online binnen. In 2009 is het dit rekengridverfijnt tot 1 km, maar we hebben nog niet gecontroleerd of die informatienauwkeurig genoeg is." – Martine Lodewijk, AGV, translation:We are already receiving radar images of the precipitation online. In 2009, wenarrowed down the grid to 1km, but we have not checked if that information isaccurate enough yet."De maalstaten van Rijnland en HDSR krijgen we nu al realtime binnen. MetRijkswaterstaat zijn daar wel gesprekken over geweest, maar nog geen uitkomst." –Martine Lodewijk, AGV, translation:We already receive Rijnland's and HDSR's pumping information real-time. WithRijkswaterstaat there have been conversations about it, but so far without results.26

Rijnland: allegedly hesitant, especially about integration beyond communication (don't see“what's in it for them”).Meeting with René van der Zwan:Currently, they are using their second version of a DSS.One pumping station completely automated, others in progress - 2015 date for fullautomationDSS is controlled either:remote control (manual)preprogramming (in advance) - 10 actions, useful for more than 24h in advanceautomatic: DSS advice is automatically acceptedWatermanager can work from everywhere (intranet,internet,mobile) - VPN securityCollection points on polders currently around 100 - predicting to increase to around 1000 inthe future (collection every 15 mins)Water levels (22 stations), Rainfall data (6), Salinity (17), Discharge (10) Water levels fromRWS (12 stations)Weather data collected from Meteo Consult and KNMI (2 stations) - reliable only up to 24hWind information is integrated into their DSS programming.All data goes into an hydrological database to be used in future models.*They take into account tidal movement near Gouda, but not in the NZK. The argumentpresented is that the margins are not sufficient to take relevant benefits from it, which mighthave been disproved by discussion with Peter-Jules.*All this information can be acquired at any point by asking Mr van der Zwan as he preparedan excellent presentation for us and would not doubt be able to share the latest status atany point.Current and desired collaboration:Information exchange with neighbouring waterboards AGV and HDSR as they use the samesystem, so real-time numbers on current flow, waterlevels, ... are shared into a commonserver and refreshed several times per hour. There are plans to also include predictionssoon.Their predictions of discharge information in the NZK are sent to RWS (but not used) andthey expressed interest in being able to receive RWS's predictions back as well.While attempting more complex types of collaboration, they have to go around thewaterakkords and european regulations to be able to coordinate with other waterboards.The benefits they expect to have when enhancing their systems are: increase of peakcapacity storage basin (1/100 year failure) and improvement of water quality control(salinity).Their interest in saving energy is limited but have some initiatives on that front as well:- watertreatment (RWZIs) by exploring alternative energy sources- pumping energy at night (off-peak)v- Wind energy- more flexible water levels27

Hoogheemraadschap De Stichtse Rijnlanden (HDSR), which does not border the NSC butdoes border the Amsterdam-Rijnkanaal (ARK). That way, there is an indirect connectionbetween them and the pumping station in IJmuiden, as the ARK and the NSC are an opensystem.Meeting with Edwin JongmanAll stations function on an automated basis, sending warnings to watermanagers in case offlood possibilities. Claims also that this is not very usual in RWS systems.Their predictive model is not good enough to make long term predictions yet, so they justuse the model to react on current conditions. The intention is to start applying predictionssometime in the near future.Points out that for building a proper predictive model they would like to have more historicaldata like weather predictions that is not available publically, so have been investing inbuilding up a 5 year Hydrological database that is available at any time.Enjoy a good relationship with RWS-Utrecht, as communication by phone (cellphone tocellphone) is allowed and welcome, for all kinds of situations.Would like to have better margins on dry summers with cooperation from RWS-NH, butrealize RWS has to worry about a lot more factors, so understand cooperation is slow.The problem in this case stems from the fact that the DSS aims for a medium level, whichvaries due to predicted variations (which only go so far). The idea would be to vary this "setpoint" also according to the seasons.This waterboard, out of the 4, seems to be the one that lacks the most incentive to invest inimproving their systems, as their gains would be much less significant and right now thesystem does its job.”28

6. ContactsRWSMarco Hofman, programme manager WINNmarco.hofman@rws.nl0651998073Rick Hoeksema, WINNrick.hoeksema@rws.nl0610769498Geert Jan Ebbinge, voorzitter operationeel boezemoverleg0653748088geert-jan.ebbinge@rws.nlEric Regeling, Directorare IJsselmeergebied, Senior Project Manageeric.regeling@rws.nl0320297633Johan Roelandschap, Project Leader of the National Energy Policy for Rijkswaterstaatjohan.roelandschap@rws.nlRWS WestravenRob Peters, PPP expertrob.peters@rws.nlAndré Noordegraafanoordegraaf@planet.nlandre.noordegraaf@rws.nlRWS-NHHans Overbeek, Adviseur Waterbeheer Afdeling Advies, DWS-Directie Water enScheepvaart, RWS Noord-Hollandhans.overbeek@rws.nl0235301875Peter Beuse, DSS-man @ Rijkswaterstaat Noord-Hollandpeter.beuse@rws.nl0235301556, 06-53978385Marcel de Vries, Pumping Station IJmuidenmarcel.de.vries@rws.nl0652077503Paul Schouten, finance RWS Noord-Holland025556631929

Erik Stapper, RWS Noord-Holland, 'Planmatig Beheer'erik.stapper@rws.nl0255566365Marco van Wieringenmarco.van.wieringen@rws.nl0235301465Ellen van Mulligen, Watermanager RWS Ijsselmeergebiedellen.van.mulligen@rws.nl0652717354Paul Overtoompaul.overtoom@rws.nl0235301565Henk Looijen, RWS Noord-Hollandhenk.looijen@rws.nl0627883932Peter-Jules van Overloop DSSP.J.A.T.M.vanOverloop@tudelft.nl0620368817Frank van Elst023 5301883frank.van.elst@rws.nlSjahrina Alladin, RWS NH, Sustainability Project0235301730sjahrina.alladin@rws.nlDeltaresMarcel Bruggers, Deltaresmarcel.bruggers@deltares.nl0643752813Rutger van der Brugge, Deltaresrutger.vanderbrugge@deltares.nl+31(0)88 335 77 25Arnout Bijlsma, Deltares,arnout.bijlsma@deltares.nl015285842430

Port of AmsterdamEvert Koster, Port of Amsterdamevert.koster@portofamsterdam.nl0651260027Janine van Oosten, Havendienst regiomanager West (port authority, regional manager West)janine.van.oosten@portofamsterdam.nl0205234725Julian Sallowsjulian.sallows@portofamsterdam.nlWURWillem Brandenburg, WURwillem.brandenburg@wur.nl0620496396Jan Ketelaars, WUR (De Zeeuwse Tong)jan.ketelaars@wur.nl0317480519IndustryGilbert Curtessigilbert.curtessi@gmail.com0614405444Gerard Jägers, Corus, sustainability departmentgerard.jagers@corusgroup.com0251492991Donna Tognarelli, Corus, chemist, algae research, environmental consultant YmGreenDonna.Tognarelli@corusgroup.com06129 91735TUDelftLuciano RasoEmail: l.raso@tudelft.nlTelephone: +31 15 2782345Theo Olsthoorn - Prof TUDelft + Waternett.n.olsthoorn@tudelft.nl31

Frans van de Ven - Prof TUdelftEmail: F.H.M.vandeVen@tudelft.nlTelephone: +31 15 2784673Albert Goedbloeda.goedbloed@gmail.comWaterboardsAmstel Gooi en VechtPaulien Hartogstrategisch adviseur Water en ROmobiel 06 52534594 Paulien.Hartog@waternet.nlKees Hogeneskees.hogenes@waternet.nl (supposedly)Maarten Ouboter, AGVmaarten.ouboter@waternet.nl06-52480077Hilga Sikma, AGVhilga.sikma@waternet.nl0206083615Ben Staring, AGVben.staring@waternet.nl (?)0206082618RijnlandGeneral phone number Rijnland: 071 - 306 3063Dolf Kern, policy advisor071-3063312/06 - 50213994dolf.kern@rijnland.netErik van der Lindenerik.linden@rijnland.net0618300409René van der ZwanRene.Zwan@rijnland.net071306335132

Hoogheemraadschap NoorderkwartierNoor Ney, Hoogheemraadschap NoorderkwartierN.Ney@hhnk.nlPeter Schuit, Hoogheemraadschap Noorderkwartierp.schuit@hhnk.nl0725193670George Zoutberg, HHNK Research Department0299391361Joost Veerj.veer@hhnk.nlMichiel Schreijerm.schreijer@hhnk.nlHoogheemraadschap De Stichtse RijnlandenErik Boegborn030-6345782boegborn.jf@hdsr.nlEdwin Jongmanjongman.em@hdsr.nl030 634 57680627090519Wim van Burenburen.wd@hdsr.nl06-15 06 84 51Province of Noord-HollandPeter Gravengravenp@noord-holland.nl(0235143143, general phone number, department ELT)Ragna Walraven-Kroes+316 54 228 145Hans Eikelenboom, province of NH, 'Sector Water'023-514397806-51143860eikelenboomj@noord-holland.nlJoost Damentel. (023) 514 4604, email damenj@noord-holland.nl33

Peter Hoogervorste-mail: hoogervorstp@noord-holland.nlPim van Herk023-514 3691herkp@noord-holland.nlOtherAndré Smit - Staatsbosbeheera.smit@staatsbosbeheer.nlsuggested that actually is responsible for westzaan projectPeter Sloot06 537 037 43psloot@aequator.nldeveloped concept with innovatienetwork of mini waterboard - similar project, opportunityto compare technologies/conceptsHenk Kolkman, Dienst Landelijk Gebied, hydroloogH.G.Kolkman@minlnv.nl0302344255Henk Ekkelboom, Dienst Landelijk Gebied regio Westh.ekkelboom@minlnv.nl0652401562Wim Verhoog, stakeholder interviews voor RWS Noord-Holland, bij MGMC wv@mgmc.nl0235424656Florrie de Pater, Knowledge for Climate (VU)florrie.de.pater@ivm.vu.nl0625093551Rolf van Arendonk / J. Jansen, Milieufederatier.van.arendonk@mnh.nl , j.jansen@mnh.nl0756351598Nico Landsman, Province of Zeelandnr.landsman@zeeland.nlCharles van Schaik, InnovatieNetwerk (MinLnv)c.m.van.schaik@innonet.agro.nl0648131218Arjan Mast, Eneco34

a.mast@eneco.nl0655120733Simon Grasman, Redstack, Blue Energys.grasman@redstack.nl0613934968Rickert Pos (directeur) Foundation Wensenwerk06 41 28 73 09rickert@wensenwerk.nlMarlous Roubos Foundation WensenwerkStichting Wensenwerk06 19 56 13 39sjwp@wensenwerk.nlAnnemarie H. Kruijt, Project officer NWP0703043743 / 0618820080a.kruijt@nwp.nl35