2018 Abstract Volume

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Investments in innovative, urban sanitation infrastructure: Decision-making in Sweden Presenting Author: Co-Authors: Ms. Maria Lennartsson, City of Stockholm, Sweden Dr. Marinette Hagman, Nordvästra Skånes VA-bolag, NSVA, Sweden Dr. Elisabeth Kvarnstöm. RISE, Sweden Keywords source-separation, wastewater, decision-making, nutrient recovery, energy recovery Highlights Highly ambitious sustainability profiles and systems investigations have guided decision-making process in Helsingborg and Stockholm, leading to construction (currently on-going) of a sanitation system with three separate pipes for the blackwater, greywater and ground kitchen waste flowstreams in H+ and a similar approach under investigation in Stockholm Royal Seaport. Introduction and objectives Two urban development areas in Sweden with very high sustainability profiles are H+ in Helsingborg and SRS in Stockholm. Systems investigations, including e.g. systems’ analyses, legal studies, cost-benefit analyses have guided decision-making process in respective areas, leading to construction (currently on-going) of a sanitation system with three separate pipes for the blackwater, greywater and ground kitchen waste flowstreams in H+ with concurrent separate treatment of each flowstream, whereas a similar approach is under investigation in SRS. Separate collection and treatment of different flowstream increases the possibility for heat recovery from the greywater, increased biogas production and reuse of nutrients. Methodology approach In the seminar we will describe the two urban areas from a (i) sustainable infrastructure perspective focusing on sanitation, (ii) the decision-making processes in each example, exemplified by results obtained throughout the investigation periods, including e.g. cost-benefit analyses, heat recovery, (iii) financing of the investments. Analysis and results Both cities have a political decision to test sources separating wastewater systems in their environmentally profiled areas SRS and H+. Policies and goals have been formulated, for SRS, the goals were formulated already in 2010, whereas for H+, an investigation process was allowed to formulate more specific goals that were set in 2013. The investigation results show e.g. higher benefits, such as increased potential to recover energy, nutrients and water, and decreased climate emissions. The technical investigations show that the complexity of the infrastructure is comparable to conventional systems and the additional cost is marginal. The initial preparatory and investigation phases were managed in a similar way, in the case of Helsingborg, by the H+ Project office with human resources from different city administrations, and in Stockholm by the City’s Development Administration. Stockholm has not yet taken a full implementation decision. In Helsingborg the decision was taken in 2013. The success of the H+ project is due to having established common vision through a cross-sectoral collaboration. The involvement of key-stakeholders and the support from top-management as well as a team driven by curiosity and ability to think out-of-the-box has been instrumental in the process. Seminar: Sustainable infrastructure for inclusive green growth 130
Conclusions and recommendation • Separate collection and treatment of blackwater and greywater have higher benefit-to-cost ratio than BAT for conventional treatment (Swedish setting), hence representing urban, green infrastructure. • Planning and implementation of this urban green infrastructure demand a stronger relationship and cooperation between the city planners and the water utility than necessarily exists today. • This shift towards urban, green infrastructure will shift costs and benefits between actors (e.g. heat recovery possibilities). This acts as a conserving force of the conventional approach, demanding an eagle view of the implementation with an actor with the mandate to steer the development towards implementation of urban, green infrastructure. Seminar: Sustainable infrastructure for inclusive green growth 131
Page 1 and 2:
ABSTRACT VOLUME Photo: iStock World
Page 3 and 4:
Seminar: Tapping into collective wi
Page 5 and 6:
An alternative gender analytical ap
Page 7 and 8:
Circular economy practices for exot
Page 9 and 10:
Gendered approach in capitalising o
Page 11 and 12:
‘Green Lady of Bihar’ and susta
Page 13 and 14:
Human rights to water and sanitatio
Page 15 and 16:
Integrating indigenous and scientif
Page 17 and 18:
Monitoring SDGs 6, 5 and 14 through
Page 19 and 20:
What gets measured (by women), gets
Page 21 and 22:
Women, SDGs and climate related ada
Page 23 and 24:
Seminar: IWRM and ecosystem based a
Page 25 and 26:
Assessing the effectiveness of wate
Page 27 and 28:
Assessing the interconnectedness of
Page 29 and 30:
Can you sue a river? Legal rights a
Page 31 and 32:
Effective stakeholder participation
Page 33 and 34:
Environmental paradigm and water ma
Page 35 and 36:
IWRM and ecosystem, the gap between
Page 37 and 38:
Participatory ecosystem management
Page 39 and 40:
Reducing uncertainty in ecosystem b
Page 41 and 42:
SDG targets and implementation of I
Page 43 and 44:
Seminar: Political drivers for sust
Page 45 and 46:
A multinational commitment to save
Page 47 and 48:
Cooperation and conflict: A subnati
Page 49 and 50:
Linking water ecosystem services an
Page 51 and 52:
Protracted conflict and the targeti
Page 53 and 54:
Conclusions and recommendation EcoP
Page 55 and 56:
the annual water saving in the six
Page 57 and 58:
RBO-established institutional and g
Page 59 and 60:
Seminar: Ecosystem based water mana
Page 61 and 62:
measures to address such issues as
Page 63 and 64:
Development of a curated global com
Page 65 and 66:
Drivers for ecosystem-based flood m
Page 67 and 68:
Enabling smart collaboration for th
Page 69 and 70:
Environmental report-cards support
Page 71 and 72:
Floods for food: Water spreading we
Page 73 and 74:
How much groundwater can we pump an
Page 75 and 76:
Conclusions and recommendation Alth
Page 77 and 78:
modeling to consider future pressur
Page 79 and 80: critical to secure support for refo
Page 81 and 82: Conclusions and recommendation The
Page 83 and 84: • Fewer IKP were identified in ar
Page 85 and 86: Seminar: Industry’s role in ecosy
Page 87 and 88: their operating plants. Local commu
Page 89 and 90: Conclusions and recommendation WCL
Page 91 and 92: The fact that 88% of SMEs suppliers
Page 93 and 94: Conclusions and recommendation Prov
Page 95 and 96: Leveraging artificial intelligence
Page 97 and 98: Mining sector collective action on
Page 99 and 100: Public and private roles beyond 'fe
Page 101 and 102: Sinopec: Grey-green infrastructure
Page 103 and 104: Trends in water-related innovation
Page 105 and 106: Water stewardship and business valu
Page 107 and 108: Seminar: Sustainable infrastructure
Page 109 and 110: Building inclusive basin resilience
Page 111 and 112: Can Africa take the lead on sustain
Page 113 and 114: Controlling water disasters and bui
Page 115 and 116: Developing a robust water strategy
Page 121 and 122: Conclusions and recommendation Know
Page 123 and 124: Conclusions and recommendation This
Page 125 and 126: Conclusions and recommendation Over
Page 129: Conclusions and recommendation The
Page 133 and 134: Natural and built infrastructure ca
Page 135 and 136: Promoting pathways to guide investm
Page 137 and 138: Smart web-based IT solution for pla
Page 139 and 140: Tracking sustainable infrastructure
Page 141 and 142: Water for the city: ‘Greening’
Page 143 and 144: Seminar: Is there such thing as inn
Page 145 and 146: Adaptive PES: Financing sustainable
Page 147 and 148: Economic and financial instruments
Page 149 and 150: Establishing a trans-provincial eco
Page 151 and 152: Financial sustainability of watersh
Page 153 and 154: How to upscale financing for ecosys
Page 155 and 156: miParamo, environmental financing m
Page 157 and 158: Strengthening enabling conditions f
Page 159 and 160: Seminar: Investing in freshwater ec
Page 161 and 162: Balancing built and natural infrast
Page 163 and 164: Conserving the Lake Tana ecosystem
Page 165 and 166: Integrating water and energy bills
Page 167 and 168: Investing in aquatic ecosystems and
Page 169 and 170: Investing in free-flowing rivers: A
Page 171 and 172: Making freshwater biodiversity in t
Page 173 and 174: Private sector engagement with supp
Page 175 and 176: Understanding freshwater biodiversi
Page 177 and 178: Water community providers, ecosyste
Page 179 and 180: Wetworking: A participatory network
Page 181 and 182:
Willingness to accept: Enticing lan
Page 183 and 184:
Seminar: Ecosystems in an urbanisin
Page 185 and 186:
Conclusions and recommendation For
Page 187 and 188:
Conclusions and recommendation Wate
Page 189 and 190:
Integrated approach for blue/green
Page 191 and 192:
Integrating green infrastructure in
Page 193 and 194:
Integrating land use and water mana
Page 195 and 196:
Is really ecosystem development han
Page 197 and 198:
Let nature do the work in the Stock
Page 199 and 200:
Conclusions and recommendation The
Page 201 and 202:
Conclusions and recommendation Our
Page 203:
The ecosystem in Gaza Strip between
show all

2018 Abstract Volume

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?