Freeze/ thaw as a resilience issue linked to customer participation and water efficiency

Originally posted on WATEF Network 1/08/2018
https://www.watefnetwork.co.uk/blog-894


"We effectively faced a major drought occurring within the space of several days – we need to have much greater engagement with customers in order to deal with all resilience issues and water efficiency is a key aspect of this."

Background and impacts

More than 20,000 homes in London were without water in March 2018 due to an extreme weather event. Southern Water reported loss of supply to around 1,000 homes. Around 3,500 homes in Wales lost water supply and many parts of Birmingham, the West Midlands and Staffordshire (BBC News).

This network related event effectively led to the need for drought level responses. Londoners were told to “use as little water as possible” and to “take shorter showers”. Southern Water urged customers to “only use the water you absolutely must” (BBC News).

Ofwat recently released their report on the incident covering assessment, planning and preparation, handling of incidents, communications and support, and ongoing support. We’ve suggested it should also look at the role of water retailers in working with customers and wholesale companies during this period. Research by the Consumer Council for Water (CCWater) in seven of the worst affected areas indicates that 40% of customers impacted received no communication from their water company during the incident. They identified better performance by those companies who actively communicated with local resilience forums in advance.

Although water companies are moving beyond just being in contact with customers when there is a bill or a problem, this incident further illustrated the need for greater effort in this area if we want customer “participation” before and during resilience incidents.

This blog post sets out out thoughts on communications and support and proposes that the problems in this area reflect wider industry issues, which this intense resilience incident could have benefitted from: 

• A much closer relationship with customers could enable a better understanding of vulnerable users but also how to help/encourage them to prepare, and then to provide support to them.
• Greater communication up-front and behaviour change could protect pipes/ reduce water use
• Increased and sustained baseline communication on water resources, networks and how to save water could enable more effective customer participation during future resilience issues. Water efficiency was a key message to reduce demand from the system in order to maintain supplies.

Moving towards customer participation

The Waterwise Water Efficiency Strategy for the UK highlighted that consistent and co-ordinated messages are important for effective communication and vital to developing a water-saving culture. But there is a lack of consistent messaging and little coordinated or collaborative action between water companies. The 2012 drought highlighted the importance and benefits of having joined-up messaging across the sector (as did the recent freeze-thaw incident).

How does this link to the 2012 drought?

There are many lessons that can be learnt from the 2012 drought that apply to future drought (which has been looming recently in the South East of England) or other resilience issues.

Some of the key findings from a Waterwise and WWF report relevant to this event are: 

• Joint working and messaging was really important during the 2012 drought – how could this have been better coordinated by water companies in the freeze/thaw event, particularly in London?

• Having agreed messages and a single point of contact helped in the 2012 drought – can we have these prepared in advance for a range of future resilience issues?

• There was a lot of stakeholder engagement by the industry, however this was starting from a fairly low base with many sectors and there is a need for much earlier and better stakeholder engagement by the water industry – this finding reflects the low level of ongoing engagement around water resources in general and addressing this would help in the freeze-thaw also. Engaging with resilience forums is a key action suggested by Ofwat.

• There is a need for quasi-Governmental bodies to play a larger role in engaging with the public on wider water issues, these include bodies such as the Met Office, British Geological Survey (BGS) and the Research Councils – how could these bodies have helped with forecasting and communications during the incident?

• Despite the company activity the customer research shows that people perceived the reason for the drought to be water company leakage. This highlights that there is a need to increase general knowledge around water, as there is a lack of understanding of water processes amongst the public – a survey following this incident may also find a lack of understanding of water networks and that there is some baseline risk that can’t be prevented. How can this better be communicated?

• There clearly needs to be a national ongoing campaign to promote water issues and water efficiency, so that there is a background of understanding in advance of the next drought – this ongoing communication would help as customers would already be engaged during resilience issues.

• Water companies should look at the option of using mass media such as television or direct mail during future droughts which would enable them to provide more in depth information about the hydrology of the drought. There is a lot of academic research that shows the potential for instilling pro environmental activity through normalised behaviour. However this requires a baseline of understanding and more information than is currently provided, the current information on water resources and water efficiency is passive and there is a need for proactive provision of information – it will be really important to understand the most effective modes of communication on an ongoing basis but also during resilience events. It shouldn’t just be social media.

 A review undertaken for UKWIR on understanding the impacts of temporary use benefits identified:

•  There was a missed opportunity in terms of wider collaboration. For instance Thames shared its copy and images with other water companies but the use of other logos on the images (other water companies, Met Office, EA, and NGOs) would probably have added credibility and showed that this was a wider issue - how can water companies engage with other trusted bodies during resilience events? Should there have been communications at the city level in London, for example?

• There urgently needs to be a well-resourced and constantly updated industry source of information on water resources (this could be web-based) – this communication would help ongoing customer engagement and participation.

• Television was the primary source of information on the drought for customers, however clear and concise geographical splits should be communicated through the media to explain where TUB restrictions are imposed – this finding supports the need for mass communication, which is something water companies held back from during this incident.

• Water companies should notify those non-domestic sectors that might be affected by potential drought restrictions as early as possible – customers would prefer to know if they are going to be affected, however some water companies didn’t communicate early or the extent of the problems as they didn’t want to cause panic. Water companies need to better understand the desires of their customers for communication during these incidents.

• Water company websites, although not identified as a key source of information, saw a huge upturn in visitor numbers during the TUBs. Messages and access to further information should be easily accessible from the landing page of the website, and data should be updated on a regular basis (even outside of drought periods) – we know that some water company websites couldn’t handle the number of visits during this incident and this needs to be reviewed.

What can we learn for water efficiency and what research may be useful?

Although this was an extreme incident that happened in a short amount of time it does raise questions about the industry’s overall engagement with customers and the ability to deal with a more prolonged incident such as drought effectively. Many of the recommendations from the 2012 drought haven’t been taken forward, however Waterwise and our Leadership Group on Water Efficiency and Customer Participation is looking to take forward a national communications platform that could help with longer term customer engagement.

Some key areas for research to support future resilience incidents linked to water resources are: 

• Customer survey on communications methods and channels before, during and after the freeze/thaw incident. This should use a similar approach to the CCWater and following UKWIR surveys used to understand impacts in the 2012 drought 

• Segmentation and customer research in order to target messaging about water efficiency, preparing for freeze/thaw by lagging pipes and opening valves etc

• Research on developing communications and utilising national platforms to enable customers to participate in reducing demand over the long term, responding during an emergency and to help them work with water companies to get water when supplies are cut off

• What are the roles and responsibilities of retailers for supporting water customer resilience?

Waterwise are working with stakeholders across the sector to answer these question in delivering our Water Efficiency Strategy for the UK.

Water use in Tokyo

Tokyo is currently the largest city in the World with a population of over 38 million people (greater Tokyo area - 13 million in the city itself). As a megacity, Tokyo experiences a range of sustainability pressures and water management is no exception. I was recently in Tokyo for a meeting to develop the International Water Association World Water Congress programme, which is being held in September 2018. Water use and water efficiency will be a key element of the programme linked to resilience issues. I visited the Tokyo Sewerage Museum "Rainbow" to learn more about water management in the city.

Where is water used in households in Tokyo?

Based on a survey by the Bureau of Waterworks in the Tokyo Metropolitan Government, average water use per person is about 230 litres per day. The highest use is flushing toilets (64l), followed by taking a bath or shower (55l) and cooking and washing dishes (53l).

Average water use in Tokyo is 230 litres per person per day

The museum has an interactive household where you can actively use water and see how it drains away in the system. You can see how much water is used when you flush a toilet for example.

     

Water demand in Tokyo has fluctuated with economic growth and population increase. It is expected to peak between 2018 and 2027 at a maximum of 6 million m3 per day (Outline of the Tokyo Waterworks Bureau).

How does this compare internationally?

The International Water Association collects statistics on a range of issues, including household water use. The latest figures from 2014 are in the figure below, where Tokyo is within the top third of consumption.

Average water consumption in England, UK, is around 140 litres per person per day. The EST At Home with Water report outlines water use for the UK based on a water and energy calculator. This results from this report showed showering to be the largest water user (25%) followed by toilet flushing and then other (cold tap) use.




London is the one of two cities in Europe in the top 50 worldwide by population. Current consumption in London is on average 146 l/p/d. Thames Water is forecasting a deficit in supply compared with demand of 864 million litres per day by 2100.



From the draft Water Resources Management Plan for Thames Water we can also compare where water is used in the home. The figures for unmeasured and measured (metered) households in London are below. For metered homes (the most comparable), the largest water use is personal washing followed by toilet flushing.

How water efficient is Tokyo?

Comparing water efficiency based on per capita consumption alone is too simplistic as there are many different approaches to calculation and it doesn't account for wider factors that explain water use within cities.

The International Water Association Efficient Urban Water Management Specialist Group has been undertaking research on comparing water efficiency in cities over the past few years. I wrote a blog post about it here. When using a wider range of metrics as in the Sustainable Cities Water Index 2016, Tokyo is actually rated number 6, whilst London is rated 34. This can be attributed to greater metering and water recycling in Tokyo, even though the city has a higher PCC.

There is potential to reduce consumption linked to toilet flushing and showering/ bathing in Tokyo. This could come from improved efficiency of new devices, retrofit programmes and behaviour change. The Bureau of Waterworks states that they carry out a range of PR activities on concrete actions households can take to reduce consumption. They have also required manufacturers to develop and promote water efficient devices (Stable Supply of Potable Delicious Water).

Join the conversation on water efficiency through the IWA

The World Water Congress will take place on 16-21 September 2018. Come and learn more about water use in Tokyo, water efficiency, resilience and drought management. Super earlybird registration is open until 30 March!

We are also accepting abstracts for IWA Efficient 2018 until 30th April 2018. This is the major international conference on efficient urban water management and will be held in Manila.

http://worldwatercongress.org/register/

https://efficient2019.org/

Walking the WSUD way in Melbourne

I wrote this blog post a while ago after a trip to Australia in 2016 but found it recently and thought it might be inspirational for those looking at solutions that can solve drought and flood risk issues.

Why take a WSUD Walking tour?

Every holiday needs a good walking tour, especially in a city such as Melbourne. Even better is a water themed walking tour and the City of Melbourne have several self guided tours on their website related to Water Sensitive Urban Design (WSUD).

WSUD gained in prominence as a term in Australia from the 1990s and can broadly be defined as “an approach to the planning and design of urban environments that supports healthy ecosystems, lifestyles and livelihoods through smart management of all our waters”. The WSUD scoping study for the UK presents this as the pieces of the puzzle coming together and in-practice getting first conversations started around integration is key. Linked to this is the need for evidence to support WSUD approaches and demonstrators 

Figure 1: WSUD as a holistic approach (CIRIA, 2013)

Staying in the inner suburb of Richmond provided the perfect starting point for 2.2km long East Melbourne Walking Tour. In this blog I provide thoughts on the WSUD examples in Melbourne and implications for the UK. In the UK WSUD is often talked about primarily in the context of reducing surface flooding risk, however the stops on this walking tour mainly focussed on reducing potable water use/ resilience, water quality improvement and groundwater issues.

Stops on the way

Figure 2: East Melbourne WSUD Walking Tour

Stop 1: Stormwater harvesting at Darling Street

The stormwater harvesting system beneath Darling Street provides treated stormwater to irrigate neighbouring parks and median strips. This was the first stormwater harvesting system constructed in the City of Melbourne and is well integrated into the streetscape. The bioretention systems at street level provide biological treatment in addition to the pollutant traps, sedimentation chambers, and UV treatment belowground. The project made use of the opportunity of an existing local streetscape upgrade to trial a new approach. 

In context, watering restrictions during the Millennium Drought resulted in many tree deaths and impacts on usefulness of parks and recreation spaces. It is estimated that 23% of the city's tree population will be lost by 2020. This example demonstrates use of WSUD for reducing water use and protecting the wider benefits of parks and recreational spaces as well as managing stormwater.

Figure 3: Recycled Water and biofilter bed at Darling Street

Stop 2: Gipps Street median

This project was focussed on reducing issues from a high watertable and waterlogged soils. To address these issues a median strip was developed with train that are passively watered by excess water from the root system of footpath trees.

With a focus on groundwater management this stop demonstrates that WSUD is not just about surface water management and flooding issues.

Figure 4: Excess water from the street trees by the curb drains into the central median strip to reduce waterlogging

Although the system isn’t very visible in some ways it was interesting to see a local home that has also embraced use of rainwater and reclaimed water for their garden.

Figure 5: Local gardeners also using recycled water

Stop 3: Fitzroy Gardens Visitor Centre

Fitzroy Gardens is home to Captain Cook’s house (imported from the UK) and to a much larger stormwater harvesting system. The surrounding 67-hectare catchment drains to this natural low point and stormwater has now been diverted here for treatment. This system follows a similar treatment train to Stop 2: pollutant traps and sedimentation; primary holding tank; biofiltration beds; reuse tank; then finally, UV treatment before use in irrigation.

Approaching the site on the walking tour the scheme isn’t particularly visible, however you can distinguish the area where the underground tanks are sited. The signage for the scheme is quite visible by the visitors centre and there are park benches by the bioretention beds that integrate an amenity element. The scheme saves approximately 70 million litres of drinking water per year from being used for irrigation, provides reliable irrigation water for the heritage gardens and reduces pollutant loads from entering the Yarra River and Port Phillip Bay.

Water recycling and decentralised water solutions can cause concerns around carbon emissions. For this scheme the initial intention was to install renewable energy systems to cover consumption energy use from pumping, however a change in council policy lead to an energy audit and offsetting approach as part of a wider Carbon Neutrality approach for the city.

Figure 6: Biofiltration beds at Fitzroy gardens

Figure 7: Educational signage at Fitzroy Garden

Figure 8: Biofiltration bed with City of Melbourne CBD in background

Stop 4: Green facade at the Fitzroy Gardens Visitor Centre

A green facade was installed to help the new visitors centre blend into the surroundings. This was combined with sprays by the windows to both shade the building and reduce the temperature of air drawn in through windows and doors.

On the date of our visit it looked like the facade had grown compared with installation photos, however it hasn’t covered the full area yet and it is questionable how much cooling is being provided.

Figure 9: Green facade at Fitzroy garden visitors centre

Stop 5 & 6: Burston Reserve infiltration pits and raingarden tree pits

For the last two stops it was harder to distinguish the tree infiltration pits and there was no signage. The raingarden on Macarthur street is visible and along with the tree pits functions to improve water quality by filtering nitrogen, phosphorus and oils.

Figure 10: Tree infiltration pits

Figure 11: Raingarden

WSUD walks and opportunities for other cities

The walking tour was a great way to see Melbourne and to learn more about the WSUD case studies. Being able to access this via a PDF and the website provided flexibility for overseas visitors to be able to access the information on a smartphone (i.e. you don't need access to mobile data).

Other cities can definitely learn from this. Having recently travelled to Malmo, Sweden (something for another blog post) - it is much harder to find information from reports and presentation whilst exploring an area. In Portland there were good maps but we ran out of time to follow in detail any of the walking tours (link to GI tours).

Demonstrator projects are now being seen as an important step in policy transitions towards more integrated water management in the UK. In addition to site visits with professional bodies it would definitely help to have similar self-guided walking tours made available. For example, a recent walking tour of green infrastructure in London could have been written up for other to follow and share the learning. There is a map of SuDS in London available from GLA, however these sites could be linked together to create an informative walking tour. Perhaps this is something that Susdrain can pick up with partners in the UK from a SuDS perspective.

Government and Ofwat pushing ahead with water efficiency

It has been just over six months since the Waterwise Water Efficiency Strategy for the UK was launched. The strategy was developed in consultation with the water sector - including Waterwise supporters and the Water UK-supported steering group. It sets out a blueprint to deliver a vision of a UK in which all people, homes and businesses are water-efficient, and where water is used wisely, every day, everywhere.

The Waterwise Leadership Group on Water Efficiency and Customer Participation has also been working to bring together senior UK water industry leaders in a more ambitious approach to wasting less water - using this to drive a more customer-led culture.

This blog post outlines some recent areas where Government and regulators are pushing ahead on water efficiency and how we plan to work with them and industry going forward.

25 Year Environment Plan

The Government's 25 year environment plan was launched on 11 January 2018 and outlines how the government wishes to see water use fall through water companies taking "bold action to reduce water demands, both now and in the future".

The key actions outlined (for England) are:

• Working with the industry and the group led by the NGO Waterwise to improve water efficiency and customer involvement to explore the impact of introducing new water efficiency measures.
• Taking forward measures that will make significant water savings where practical and cost effective to do so.
• We will work with industry to determine appropriate targets for personal water consumption and the measures needed to achieve them.

Ofwat 2019 price review: Final methodology

The final price review methodology was published by Ofwat on 13 December 2017. Waterwise responded to the consultation on the draft methodology and it was great to see that the final methodology better reflected Defra’s expectation that Ofwat “promote ambitious action to reduce leakage and per capita consumption” - and indeed Ofwat’s own stated ambition in this area.

There are several key areas of the price review methodology that can help further water efficiency for sustainable water supplies in PR19. Per capita consumption remains a common performance commitment. Although there are some issues with the consistency of reporting and definitions around PCC this indicator should help drive investment and support within water companies for water efficiency.

The PR19 methodology outlines that Ofwat:

• expect to see companies propose more ambitious reductions relative to previous years and to support their proposals using the approaches to setting performance commitments; and,
• companies should challenge themselves against the levels and reductions achieved by other water companies, including in other countries.

The methodology also sets out “Companies should consider whether, and how, resilience risks could be best managed across company boundaries, at a regional level, or even national level. For example, through public campaigns to promote water conservation and lower per capita consumption”. 

What's next in 2018 for Waterwise

Waterwise held a joint workshop with the Water Efficiency Strategy Steering Group and the Water Efficiency and Customer Participation Leadership Group on 17 Jan. This supported key areas of work in 2018 including:

• Reviewing and responding to draft Water Resources Management Plans - we encourage all stakeholders to comment on water efficiency options in their water company’s plan
• An independent review and cost benefit analysis of water labelling - this should be a key measure to help the industry and customers choose to save water
• Water efficiency and customer participation leadership group - continue the discussion and knowledge sharing as well as top-down support for water efficiency within water companies
• Working with water companies on training and internal cultural change to enable water efficiency options, which involve behaviour changes and some uncertainties that are different from the traditional approaches most companies are used to
• Sharing knowledge and best practice to support PR19 business plans on ambitious water efficiency measures and challenging water use by water companies by comparing this within the UK and in other countries
• Working with government and the industry to develop government measures and actions to underpin water efficiency ambition, as well as industry ones

To find out more register to attend the Waterwise Annual Conference on 6 March 2018 in London.