Month: October 2012

Business needs to get wise about water, and fast. You can’t talk about climate change and ignore water – the two are umbilically linked. That’s the message from Anders Berntell of the Stockholm International Water Institute (SIWI). “Water is the bloodstream of our planet. What we mean by that it’s something that affects all activities of our planet and societies, including the business community.”

The business community is vital in the critical water debate since they are key decision makers. What Berntell urges is much greater debate and action about the issue. “Water is the one resource which cannot be substituted; no growth – economic, human, or ecological – comes without it. When you affect climate change you also affect water. We will experience climate change through too little water in some places and too much in others. Water at the wrong time or in the wrong place. It’s not about the increase in global temperatures necessarily, it’s the effects on changing water conditions.” Of course, plenty of companies now know a lot about climate change – but how much do companies know about their own water foot print?

• To feed the nine billion people expected on Earth in 2050, there might be a need for an additional 50 percent of water to produce the food, with current levels of water efficiency in agriculture.

• Already today, 1.4 billion people live in river basins where water resources are over-exploited. By 2025, three billion people might live in countries with water stress.

• An additional two billion people will live in urban areas by 2030, many in developing countries.
• Climate change is water change too – with very dramatic consequences
• Governments and key decision-makers need to act urgently so that access to water and sanitation can be secured for future growing populations.
• Failure to deal with the issue will have serious effects on water availability and pollution, possibly leading to food insecurity, bad health, environmental degradation and detrimental effects on the economic development of countries.

Is water the forgotten story?
You could be forgiven for thinking so. There’s plenty of talk and debate about a low carbon economy and CO2 emissions in today’s business climate. But when did you last hear business leaders talk about access to water? “The issue affects just about everyone,” says Anders Berntell. “We’re seeing developed areas like Europe and North America now start to experience problems, in addition to the existing ones in, for example, Africa. California has big water problems, as does Nevada. Parts of Europe increasingly are experiencing water shortages, though the situation is not as bad in the Middle East. The issue for the business community is huge.”

This will be a massive issue for food producers in particular, where a company’s water foot print can be very high indeed. “People are realising that behind every cup of coffee there is a water foot print of 140 litres of water needed to grow, produce, package and ship the beans. One kilogram of grain∞fed beef requires 15,000 litres of water. So it’s becoming more obvious to food production and also to those involved in fibre production, textiles, all which have a water foot print.”

The issue is also one for many electrical products too we typically take for advantage, like microchips in mobile phones. All have a water foot print. Certainly some companies are beginning to recognise the importance of their water foot print in annual reports, for example, but the numbers remain low. Too low.

Know your corporate water footprint
There is plainly a need to increase the energy-efficiency in water management. Too much energy is used to transport water. But this of course can be turned in to a business opportunity for some companies. “We do not use the potential of energy in the waste water from cities and other human activities,” says Anders Berntell. “This can be converted into biogas that can be used, which is a double win situation, cutting emissions of the greenhouse gas methane as well as reducing the use of other sources of energy.”

Just as people talk about a ‘low carbon’ economy, what is needed is thinking on “water wise” economy says Berntell. “And just as people have been unaware of the serious impacts of their emissions, they are still largely unaware of the impact of water use.”

In future many businesses and individuals will want to become “water neutral” by reducing their own water foot print. Business can do this by adapting and adopting technologies that use less water per unit of product production. Other strategies could be shifting water-intense production lines away from places where water is scarce to areas of higher water availability (at least for water intensive production), thereby promoting greater global water efficiency.

Individually, consumers will need to cut their own water foot print with familiar existing off∞set arrangements that have worked for lower carbon consumption.

Consider this:
• More people on our planet – from 1.6 billion in 1900 to six billion now to nine billion 2050; less water available per capita with rising demand. There is room for improvements in water use efficiency across the board.

• Investment in drinking water and sanitation provision needs to be prioritised. Still. This is the most important issue, life or death, for more than two billion people. It requires billions more dollars of investment, but it is a cost-effective investment that stimulate growth in developing nations.

Your company check list:

• Do you understand your own water foot print?
• Have you considered the productivity of employees dependent on the water and sanitation situation in the area they operate?
• Companies must also factor in production issues – that their production might be at risk due to the water availability in the area they operate.
• Can you determine your operation-wide water foot print and the embedded water in key products?
• Identify the ways to reduce water use (direct and indirect).
• Consider local water ‘offset projects’ in collaboration with local/global NGOs.
• Consider the physical, regulatory and perception risks with direct and indirect water use – these risks will increase in future.

Running dry – in detail
Many rivers around the world are running dry and are not any longer reaching the ocean because of overuse. It’s particularly the case with agriculture. The end result is that cities and industry are suffering. “Cities downstream in a river basin suffer from the lack of water due to upstream use in agriculture,” says Berntell. “There’s tension between the various conflicting demands for water. Cities are starting to pump for longer distances to support their citizens. Adding to this are increasing populations that have increasing demand for domestic supply of water.

On top of this – a big dilemma – is the potential use of water for bioenergy production. This is already happening in Africa where big companies are starting to buy land for future production of bioenergy for the growing of corn, wheat or sugar cane for the production of ethanol. “Companies are starting to calculate about the impact of future energy crisis,” says Berntell, “which will increase the price of ethanol and make it a prominent commodity. We will have a competition for food or bioenergy production.” So the big question is whether water will be used for food production or for ethanol to feed cars? “That’s an issue where governments need to take political decisions, otherwise the market will make the decisions for them.”

Further information: Anders Berntell, Executive Director, Stockholm International Water Institute, anders.berntell@siwi.org; www.siwi.org

Climate crisis. Energy crisis. Global economic crisis. After a year like this one, it can seem like crises are overwhelming us. And these three are all interconnected. When we try to tackle one, we impact the others. So are we facing a triple threat? A combined global challenge of unprecedented proportions?  Assessments like the Stern Review remind us of the stark economic consequences of inaction. We must move forward. And there are many politicians, scientists, thinkers and industrialists with inspiring visions of how we can.

At Philips, we share these positive perspectives. Yes, the crises exist. But we can “reframe” these crises as opportunities. We not only think it’s possible; it’s essential. And we’re acting on it.

In a similar way to replacing energy inefficient incandescent lamps in our homes, the ‘green switch’ to energy efficient lighting in our cities and non-residential buildings offers a huge opportunity to cut emissions and energy usage that we have barely begun to tap.

In fact, making the green switch in our urban environments is an opportunity for a triple win:
• You and I, as end-users of lighting, get lower costs and better quality light.
• The environment benefits from lower energy usage and lower emissions.
• And the economy wins from lower costs and greater competitiveness.

So what’s so exciting about lighting? Lighting accounts for 19 percent of the world’s electricity consumption. That’s a huge amount and a huge opportunity to cut emissions and our electricity bills! What’s more, the beauty of switching to energy efficient lighting is that we can make cuts today. In terms of climate change mitigation, that is the biggest win of all.

On the 7th December 2006 Philips made a call to phase out energy-inefficient incandescent light bulbs. This call particularly targets the 25 percent of lighting electricity consumption that happens in our homes. It’s a call that has been subsequently taken up around the world, and the phase-out of incandescent lamps seems to have passed ‘the tipping point’ having gained global momentum towards phase∞out within less then a decade.

All this represents a remarkable transition that we hope will provide an example and inspiration for other such energy transitions.
 
In addressing the non-residential part of the equation, it is clear that the size of the opportunity is even larger, given that cities are responsible for 70 percent of total global energy consumption, and buildings accounting for 40 percent of that global total. More specifically, in terms of electricity used for lighting, public and commercial buildings represent 60 percent of the global total, and street lighting 15 percent.

Globally, if we put energy efficient lighting in our non∞residential buildings we could achieve savings of ¤62bn. We’d also make emissions savings of 330 million tons of CO2. That’s a non-negligible proportion of the savings we need to reach the IPCC’s 450 stabilisation case and it’s something we can do today.

In your city, your office block, your factory, your school – through a simple switch to energy efficient lighting – adding also daylight and presence detection controls – one can make a big difference. And when each of us acts, the combined effect is huge. This change has to be in all buildings. It’s great to create highly energy∞efficient new buildings. But the real target should be the existing building stock. If we don’t focus on renovation, we are missing out on 99 percent of the opportunities to make savings!

The situation is critical. Our research shows that 80 percent of existing lighting technology in non-residential buildings is out of date and inefficient. And only one percent of buildings are equipped with controls to detect daylight or the presence of people. So the opportunities are big. The rate of change isn’t. In renovating existing buildings we have found that for individual buildings energy efficient lighting can provide energy savings from 40 percent up to 70 percent, thus reducing operational cost and carbon emissions, while creating a more productive working environment.

So how can we move from talk to action? How can we turn challenges into opportunities, and opportunities into wins? Philips has just announced one immediate action. In July 2009, we will phase out electromagnetic operating gear in our luminaires, as well as older, less efficient versions, of our TL fluorescent technologies. This is ahead of the EU legislation’s legislation on energy-efficiency  which will come into force in 2010.

For us, this kind of voluntary move is a concrete way in which we can help drive energy efficiency and gain time in the race to stabilise atmospheric greenhouse gas concentrations.

On top of this, in January of this year, we have launched an initiative to accelerate renovation of existing city and non-residential lighting installations. It will help make energy efficient lighting accessible to public buildings, offices, factories, schools, shops – anywhere it’s needed.

Our initiative consists of three elements:
• Firstly, assessment tools to calculate the energy performance of your current installation and the costs of a new one.
• Secondly, a complete portfolio of energy efficient products and system solutions.
• Thirdly, we are putting in place financial support, because we recognise that both initial and renovation cost can be a genuine barrier to change.

We put assessment tools first, because you need to begin by quantifying the potential. Energy benchmarking lets you generate a breakdown of your specific energy saving potential in terms of  kilowatt hours, costs and CO2 savings. This kind of analysis is also a great way to raise awareness among the people who will be directly affected by the change – the people who live in your city or use your buildings. Imagine motivating your staff or students in school by involving them in your plans. And don’t forget, energy efficient lighting is not about making sacrifices. The quality of light will not go down. In fact, the latest energy efficient lighting will provide a significant quality boost. Your city or buildings will become appealing, better places to be.

The final element in the programme is finance.

Over its lifetime, energy efficient lighting delivers financial savings. At times of rising energy prices, the Total Cost of Ownership is attractive as this street lighting example shows, but the initial costs and costs of renovation are higher than simple replacement. That is why Philips is currently working with leading banks and finance companies to create financial solutions to complement our lighting solutions.

We also believe that governments have a role to play here. Business can deliver technologies and financial solutions, but if governments also provide public funding, in part through economic stimuli packages, the effect will be multiplied. The global economic crisis should not divert us from this. In fact, it should spur us on. With a triple win available – social, environmental and economic – we urge governments to act.

Energy∞efficient lighting is a catalyst for innovation; a driver for new sustainable, people-focused businesses. It will help us build knowledge for the next generation. In renovating our cities and buildings, we’ll develop the skills we need for the new sustainable economy. It will generate employment, and boost economic prosperity and growth. That’s why we urge city authorities, building owners and governments to join us in acting on this opportunity – to go after the triple win – for people, the environment and the economy.

We have the tools and the technologies. And when you add the finance, we have all we need to make the switch. The only thing we do not have is time. So if you are wondering whether we can make it happen. Our answer is clear and simple. Yes, we can!

In simplest terms, energy is required to produce usable water, and water is required in the production of energy. Globally, the demand for both of these crucial resources is projected to grow at an alarming pace, with energy demand doublingi and water demand tripling in the next 20 years.

Many people take clean water for granted and don’t think about how much we depend on it for drinking, agriculture, sanitation, and hygiene. According to the United Nations Development Programme, more than one billion people, or about one in six worldwide, have no access to safe drinking water, and more than two billion lack access to adequate sanitation. The effects of unclean water often lead to cycles of poverty, conflict, disease and death.

Indeed, almost half the population in developing countries is suffering from water-related diseases. 

If we continue along the current trend, by the year 2025 two thirds of the world’s people won’t have sufficient access to clean water. Unfortunately, water supply/demand imbalances will only continue to grow as the world’s population mushrooms. Even in a developed country such as the US, most states expect water shortages during the next decade.

Lifeblood of industry
Water is the lifeblood of industry as well. It’s often said that an economy runs on oil, but it also could be said that it runs on water. It’s estimated that 15 percent of freshwater worldwide is used for industrial purposes, and in the United States the number is even higher – some 45 percent of freshwater withdrawal in the US is used for industrial purposes such as cooling, as a solvent or in chemical processing.

In particular, water demands related to electricity production have almost tripled since 1995. An average 1,000-megawatt power plant requires more than five million gallons of water per day, and water is required for virtually every aspect of producing electricity. Moreover, the deployment of technologies to meet expected carbon-emission requirements will further increase water consumption by one-to-two billion gallons per day (GPD). GE works with customers every day to reduce water consumption per MW produced.

Conversely, the water sector consumes three percent of the electricity generated in the US annually, with from six to 18 percent of a given US city’s energy demand going to produce, treat and transport water.  Looking ahead, energy consumption at water and wastewater utilities is projected to grow by more than 20 percent in the next 15 years.

This link between water consumption and energy production has been widely recognised at GE. As a result, last year we brought our Water & Process Technologies business under the GE Energy Infrastructure umbrella, so that we could focus on our customers’ total needs and better address joint water/energy challenges.

The combined organisation is a world leader in providing water and process technologies such as water/wastewater treatment, process systems solutions and desalination, as well as a full suite of traditional and renewable power generation technologies and energy-related solutions. Examples of comprehensive solutions that GE can bring to bear on joint water and energy challenges include on-site reuse technologies; wastewater-to-energy systems; distributed power; information management/remote monitoring; and diagnostics and control.

GE also is at the forefront of hybrid desalination development. We recently were named as the reverse osmosis provider for the largest hybrid desalination plant in the world, Ras Al Zour in Saudi Arabia. It’s a combined power and water project that will produce 250,000m3 of water per day from reverse osmosis treatment, and 750,000m3 per day from thermal processes.

Water reuse is a key strategy
According to the WateReuse Association, the US reclaims and reuses about six percent of its wastewater. But the level is much higher in some other countries. Israel today is reusing 70 percent of its wastewater. Singapore is reusing 15 percent and plans on doubling it by 2010. Australia currently reuses about eight percent and has set a national target of 30 percent by 2015.

GE encourages and enables water reuse and an increasing number of our customers are turning to it to save water, energy and money, with technologies that enable water to be reused economically, sometimes many times over. For example, some 11.4 trillion gallons per year of municipal wastewater is treated in the US Rather than simply treat it and discharge it to a receiving stream, the addition of an incremental treatment process, either at the wastewater plant or at the industrial plant, allows this water to meet the needs of many industrial processes including power plant cooling. Thus, co-location of water-treatment facilities and power plants is a key strategy.

A US Department of Energy-sponsored study looked at 110 new power plants proposed for construction in 2007. It found that municipal wastewater treatment plants located within a 25-mile radius of the proposed power plants could satisfy 97 percent of the power plants’ cooling-water needs. Incentives to co-locate municipal wastewater treatment plants and power generation plants in the future would go a long way toward reducing freshwater withdrawal.

Moreover, reusing water often reduces energy consumption in and of itself. A 1,000 MW power plant which installs a water-reuse system for cooling-tower water recovery will reduce the energy otherwise needed to produce, distribute and treat fresh water by a net 15 percent, or enough to power some 350 homes for a year.

Energy exploration & production activities also generate large quantities of wastewater, with an estimated seven∞to∞10 barrels of water consumed for every barrel of crude oil, from the well to the gas pump. Some oil-recovery processes are particularly water-intensive, including Steam Assisted Gravity Drainage (SAGD), which uses 30-40 barrels of water to produce one barrel of oil. GE advanced wastewater solutions can dramatically reduce water use and enable water reuse in these activities.

Policy initiatives set forth
But while the technologies exist, the motivation to employ them often doesn’t. Today, it is often less expensive to pull water from a river or a well, or even to draw potable water from a municipal system, than to treat and reuse it.  Thus, policymakers in the US and around the world are looking for ways to expand water recycling and reuse initiatives.

In response, last year GE developed a comprehensive white paper that gives governments, communities and businesses examples of the policies and tools they need to make informed decisions as they work to increase water recycling and reuse in their areas. Addressing Water Scarcity Through Recycling and Reuse: A Menu for Policymakers provides a representative sampling of the four major types of policies and programs in use globally: education/outreach; removal of regulatory barriers; financial incentives; and mandates/regulation.

We at GE ourselves see the importance achieving water and energy efficiencies across our portfolio of businesses. In 2005, GE launched a global environmental initiative called ecomagination, which is our commitment to imagine and build innovative solutions that solve today’s environmental challenges and benefit customers and society at large.

We have committed to reducing our water consumption by an absolute 20 percent during the same time frame. In addition, GE is doubling its level of investment in clean R&D from $700 million in 2005 to more than $1.5 billion by 2010, focused on helping our customers meet pressing energy and water challenges.

Energy and water truly are co-dependent resources, critical to the functioning of modern economies and to life itself. We must understand and respect this inter-relationship, so that we can better manage the ways we acquire and use these resources.  In so doing, we shall build a foundation for sustainable progress going forward.

Twenty to forty percent of the water consumption in sewered cities is used for flushing toilets. This is often potable water brought to the cities at high cost. While the daily water use in industrialised countries ranges from 150 to 250 liters per capita, the volume of our excreta (urine and faeces) amounts to a mere 1.5 litres per capita per day, constituting less than one percent of the wastewater volume. But note what this one percent excreta contributes: the majority of the pathogens in wastewater, 90 percent of the nitrogen, 80 percent of the phosphorus and about 50 percent of the organic matter. These are in fact the major substances of concern regarding health problems and water pollution from sewage. Do we really need to dilute them in large quantities of water and spread pathogens to both waterways and groundwater?

Wastewater as a resource
Nitrogen and phosphorus are valuable plant nutrients, and phosphorus is a limited resource that the world will be running out of in some decades. A century ago these resources were recycled. In cities, the night soil was collected, sometimes mixed with peat and/or lime, and used as fertiliser. With the invention of the water toilet about 150 years ago, and development and installation of subterranean gravity sewer systems, these resources began being discharged to water, causing pollution. When Paris introduced flush toilets and sewers in the late nineteenth century the question arose, “What would happen with the vegetable production in the city outskirts?”

Do we need a 150-year-old technology?
We are still building and improving our sewer systems often at very high cost. But is it necessary to continue using a system developed 150 years ago? Would we have chosen the same water consuming system today if we had no sewers and were planning a new system? The paradox is that we are doing so, despite the interesting alternatives which exist and are emerging.  

Large parts of the world face water scarcity
and over 40 percent of the world population are in the situation where they have no sewers or no sanitary systems at all. Should they all be provided with standard flush toilets and large collecting sewers? Particularly in dry climates the water need alone will make conventional sewer systems very expensive and often not feasible.

Volvo engineers show the way
When Volvo was designing its new conference and recreation centre on a beautiful fjord north of Gothenburg they had to design a near zero-emission wastewater treatment system in order to obtain a building permit. Conventional systems were simply not good enough. The Volvo engineers then designed one of the first multi-apartment source separating systems in the world in the early 1990s. They used low flush toilets for collection of excreta, and combined this with a biogas reactor that received the excreta and grinded organic household waste. From the nutrient rich output from the biogas reactor they produced struvite – a mineral that contains both phosphorus and nitrogen, and returned this as fertiliser to neighbouring farms.

The Volvo engineers had understood that the majority of the pollutants were in our excreta. But they also realised that waste was a potential resource for agriculture. By collecting waste using a minimum of water they could both meet their discharge requirements and turn the pollutants into valuable resources – fertiliser and biogas!

To achieve this, the Volvo engineers were using a source separating system. Over the last two decades source separating technology has been developed mainly in smaller systems. This technology, however, is now ready for upscaling.

Will source separation work in a large city such as New York? Imagine a skyscraper where the water for toilet flushing has to be lifted hundreds of meters. If you could lift one litre instead of 10, large amounts of energy will be saved. By using modern vacuum toilets the flush volume can be reduced to about one litre. Vacuum toilets are already standard on all modern cruise liners, some having more than 1500 toilets. The collecting vacuum systems are becoming very energy efficient, making substantial water and energy savings possible. The development of vacuum systems in cruise ships have therefore paved the way for using such systems in any terrestrial building complex.

More than 90 percent water saving
More water could be saved if greywater is treated and recycled. Greywater is water from showers, sinks, kitchen and washing. Greywater is very low in nutrients and often meets drinking water requirements for nitrogen without further treatment. Commercial systems suitable for installation in the basement of large building complexes have been developed by German companies and are used, for example, in some new buildings in Arabian countries. In Oslo, the capital of Norway, greywater from 33 apartments at Klosterenga is treated to bathing water quality in a beautifully landscaped compact natural system in the courtyard of the building. The treatment area is partly utilised as a playground for children. The high quality effluent in the Norwegian system is made possible using a light∞weight aggregate especially developed for treatment wetlands. The excellent effluent quality allows direct reuse of the water for irrigation, groundwater recharge or for some in∞house applications. Water from such systems often is of better quality than many raw water sources currently used for drinking water production. In order to upgrade to drinking water, compact membrane systems designed for this purpose are already on the market. If treated greywater is reused for in-house applications more than 90 percent reduction in water consumption is possible. In arid areas this option is particularly interesting.

In addition, international research shows that source separating systems give an equal or higher reduction of pathogens than a traditional sewer systems, and a significant reduction in risk of exposure to pathogens. A major reason for this is that the resources are collected using a minimum of water and not mixed into the water cycle in the first place. This could therefore make an important contribution to the improvement of health particularly in the developing world, where conventional treatment systems are expensive, difficult to maintain, and simply not viable.

Leapfrog conventional systems
Source separating systems provide a decentralised treatment option. The systems can be implemented house by house or block by block in urban or peri-urban areas. The locally treated greywater, if not reused, can be discharged to the nearest storm drain, stream or river, thus reducing the need for secondary sewers that are the largest expense of a sewer system. In cities where secondary sewers are not yet established, such as Kuching in Sarawak Malaysia with a population of 0.5 million, substantial cost savings would be possible using a decentralised source separating system as compared to building new sewers in an existing city. Additionally, a source separating system would provide potential for large water savings as well as production of bioenergy and fertiliser for local agriculture. This is in fact a much more efficient and sustainable option, particularly as compared to centralised conventional options based on secondary treatment, where the nutrients would be lost to the sea. There are many cities like Kuching with no established sewer system. For such cities a decentralised approach would be worth considering. They have the option to leapfrog 150-year-old water consuming conventional technology and move right into a decentralised water saving system with potential for water and nutrient recycling and bioenergy production, provided they get access to this technology and are able to adapt it to their specific economic, environmental and cultural contexts. The challenge is now to find the most effective mechanisms to make such a shift in approach possible, and thus contribute to sustainable development both locally and globally.

Further information: www.umb.no

It’s corn planting time in the US Plains, and that means Kansas corn farmer Merl “Buck” Rexford is worrying about the weather – and hoping there is enough water.

Like corn farmers throughout the United States, Rexford hopes to grow a healthy crop yielding more than 150 bushels an acre this year. Much of his crop will wind up at a nearby ethanol plant. And that puts the 65-year-old Rexford at the centre of a bitter divide over biofuels, particularly corn ethanol.

Critics argue that precious water resources are being bled dry by ethanol when water shortages are growing ever more dire. Federal mandates encouraging more ethanol production don’t help. Proponents say corn ethanol for transportation
fuel is far better for the environment, national security and the economy than oil and the first
step toward cleaner fuel sources.

“We really have to ask ourselves, do we want to be driving with renewable fuels or with gasoline made from petroleum resources,” said Brent Erickson, executive vice president at the Biotechnology Industry Organisation, which backs ethanol. Corn ethanol’s future is already muddied by concerns that it requires a substantial amount of energy to produce and that heightened demand makes corn more costly in human food and livestock feed.

“Biofuels are off the charts in water consumption. We’re definitely looking at something where the cure may be worse than the disease,” said Brooke Barton, a manager of corporate accountability for Ceres, a group backed by institutional investors focused on the financial risks of climate change. Corn is a particularly thirsty plant, requiring about 20 inches of soil moisture per acre to grow a decent crop, but most corn is grown with rain, not irrigation. Manufacturing plants that convert corn’s starch into fuel are a far bigger draw on water sources.

Water consumption by ethanol plants largely comes from evaporation during cooling and wastewater discharge. A typical plant uses about 4.2 gallons of water to make one gallon of ethanol, according to the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. The ethanol industry pegs that at about three gallons of water to one gallon of fuel.

Washington lawmakers and the White House have been encouraging the use of ethanol as an alternative fuel to help lighten the nation’s costly dependence on foreign oil. But the moves are meeting opposition from many groups who fear that population growth and climate change are combining in ways that will leave not only the United States, but the world, with too little water. Many ethanol plants are located in agricultural areas – close to the corn, but also close to other users who need a lot of water to operate, such as hog farmers and cattle ranchers.

“We’re headed in the wrong direction and this problem is not going away,” said Mark Muller, programme director at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. “This water issue is like the financial crisis… and I’m afraid something awful is going to happen.” The group says much of the Corn Belt stretching through Iowa, Illinois, Nebraska, Minnesota and Indiana has enough water for all, but water availability could challenge the ethanol industry in areas including greater Chicago, western Iowa and Nebraska, and generally west of the Missouri River.

“Water use could be a limiting factor (for ethanol) if we don’t introduce and support more water-saving technologies,” added the Institute’s Jim Kleinschmit. “Water is a worry,” agreed Heritage Foundation senior policy analyst for energy and and environment Ben Lieberman. “When we expand corn ethanol as we have with these federal mandates,” he said, “we are starting to see corn in more marginal areas that may need more irrigation. We are seeing increased water use not just for the processing plants but also the water in growing the corn.”

AAORA’s idea is to combine traditional fuel such as biomass or diesel with low-carbon solar power, during daylight, to generate uninterrupted electricity. The approach is a novel answer for handling the variability of solar power, a major challenge which otherwise requires expensive batteries or other forms of storage to provide round-the-clock power.

AORA is constructing its first hybrid solar power station on a half-acre plot in Israel’s Negev desert, where companies are competing to create more efficient technologies and tap into the multi-billion dollar clean energy market. The Negev plant, unveiled to the public this week at an energy conference in Israel’s Red Sea resort of Eilat, uses diesel for now. It will be online next month, producing 100 kilowatts, enough energy to power about 40 houses, said Pinchas Doron, AORA’s chief technology officer. The module looks like a smaller version of solar “power towers” being developed in the United States and Europe, with 30 large mirrors reflecting sunlight onto a generator on top of a 30 metre high tower. What is unique in AORA’s design is a gas turbine that can handle super-high temperatures and then work off external fuel when sunlight is unable to produce the necessary heat, Doron said. “It can shift seamlessly between using the sun as fuel and a conventional or another renewable fuel.”

That is important in off-grid locations where there is no alternative power source. And even where there is a grid, the lack of predictability of solar power is a problem, creating a headache for network operators.

Clean energy experts welcome the new design, though some say the technology has its limitations. “This was a logical step. In certain contexts, like remote places, this could be the way to go,” said Ken Zweibel of the Institute for the Analyses of Solar Energy in Washington, DC. “It’s dispatchable. You can’t have that from photovoltaic alone,” he said, referring to traditional solar panels. Israel Kroizer, president of California-based BrightSource Energy Inc, said his company’s steam turbine solar tower, which uses hundreds of mirrors, is more efficient than AORA’s hybrid gas engine for larger scale production of electricity.

BrightSource last week signed contracts to supply Southern California Edison with 1,300 megawatts of solar thermal power. One of the main hurdles was creating a generator that could handle concentrated sunlight that reaches nearly 1,000ºC, much hotter than any other power tower model, said AORA’s operations manager, Yuval Susskind. “Most materials melt in that heat,” Susskind said.

Air in a special receiver at the top of the tower capable of handling the high temperature is heated by the concentrated sunlight and shot into a combustion chamber, where it expands and powers a turbine, producing electricity. A separate route can bypass the solar receiver and use a secondary fuel to power the turbine when necessary, allowing the solar power plant to produce continuous electricity.

The process also creates a by-product of some 170 kw of heat, which can be used to heat water for homes or factories, Susskind said. “Because each of these units sits on just a half-acre, it can provide electricity in the most remote areas,” he said. “You can build one outside a village in Africa or have many together in a desert in California.” A 100 kw plant using traditional photovoltaic panels, which can have up to 15 percent efficiency, would need twice the land, AORA said, than its hybrid-solar plant running at 28 percent solar efficiency.

Susskind said no other plant has hybrid technology at the same scale and efficiency. AORA said the cost of their electricity is competitive with other solar technologies: between $3,500-$5,000 per installed kilowatt, meaning each 100 kw hybrid plant may cost up to $500,000. Total production costs depend on the price of the external fuel.

Over its first one hundred years in business, Acea has inevitably been influenced by the march of Italian history, starting from the first public lighting services for the streets of Prati – a district close to the Vatican City – to the assignment of responsibility, under the fascist regime, for the city’s water supplies.

Sustained growth
Acea makes no secret of its pride in the fact that its most important activities include management of Rome’s famous monumental fountains (the Trevi Fountain is just one that comes to mind). Over the years, and during the economic boom of the 1960s, Acea’s growth continued at a sustained pace.

This is despite the fact that it began to encounter its first significant challenges during this period, following the creation of what would become the nation’s energy giant, Enel. This was accompanied by nationalisation of electricity generation and distribution.

Acea, however, remained in step with the city’s urban and socio-economic development. With its 10,000km of aqueducts, abstraction equipment and pipelines, the Rome-based Company is Italy’s leading water company, meeting the needs of over 8,000,000 people, equal to approximately 14 percent of the Italian market. It manages the entire water cycle in Rome and other areas in Lazio, whilst also providing water services in the regions of Tuscany, Umbria and Campania, where it serves the province of Naples.

Since the 1990s Acea has also expanded overseas, where it is now present in Latin American countries such as Honduras, the Dominican Republic, Colombia and Peru.

Acea is able to guarantee the quality of the water it supplies thanks to the expertise developed by a Group company, LaboratoRi, which was created in partnership with a leading British research centre: the WRC (Water Research Centre). LaboratoRi carries out periodic tests – almost one million a year – to be able to guarantee the excellence of the water supplied.

With regard to the sewerage network and the water treatment system, Acea Ato2 (which serves Central Lazio and Roma) manages approximately 5,650 km of network, with around 3,850 km serving municipalities outside Rome. This network collects and transports waste water from approximately 3.6 million people to treatment plants.

In the energy sector, on the other hand, Acea is Italy’s number two electricity distributor. In 2008 the energy injected into the network was 12,012.6GWh. Its main market is once again the capital city, where it manages an electricity distribution network of 28,200km and operates over 180,000 street lamps, lighting the city’s squares and roads. Over the decades Acea has developed expertise in the design, implementation and installation of artistic lighting systems. The many world-famous historical and artistic sites and monuments “lit up” by the Company include the Basilica of Saint Peter’s, the Coliseum, the Roman Forum and Villa Adriana.

AceaElectrabel
Finally, 2002 saw the birth of the joint venture, AceaElectrabel, resulting from an agreement between Acea and the Belgian company, Electrabel, one of Europe’s leading electricity companies. The joint venture led to the establishment of three new companies for electricity generation, the market sale of electricity and gas and trading in other fuels. AceaElectrabel immediately concluded national agreements, responding successfully to the challenges presented by liberalisation of the energy market, thanks to significant market shares in Tuscany, Umbria, Lombardy, Piedmont and Puglia.

In recent years the Rome-based utility has begun developing and building renewable energy plants. Acea currently produces more than 4.5 million kWh of solar energy a year from plants located in the Rome area. By 2012, the Company expects solar production to reach 30MW. Finally, Acea also produces 200MW of electricity from wind farms situated in southern Italy, in an area straddling the Molise and Campania regions. Acea operates in the Waste to Energy sector with two plants producing energy from refuse-derived fuel (RDF). During 2007 and 2008 the plants produced a total of approximately 320,000MW of energy.

“The sheer scale of dirty water means more people now die from contaminated and polluted water than from all forms of violence including wars,” the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) said.

In a report entitled “Sick Water” for World Water Day, UNEP said the two million tonnes of waste, which contaminates over two billion tonnes of water daily, had left huge “dead zones” that choke coral reefs and fish.    

It consists mostly of sewage, industrial pollution, pesticides from agriculture and animal waste.

The report said a lack of clean water was killing 1.8 million children under five every year. Much of the waste came from developing countries, which dump 90 percent of their wastewater untreated.

Diarrhoea, mostly from dirty water, kills around 2.2 million people a year, it said, and “over half the world’s hospital beds are occupied with people suffering from illnesses linked with contaminated water.”

The report recommends water recycling systems and multi-million or multi-billion dollar water sewage treatment works”.

It also suggests protecting wetlands, which act as natural waste processors, and saving animal waste to use as fertiliser.

“If the world is to … survive on a planet of six billion people heading to over nine billion by 2050, we need to get smarter about how we manage wastewaters,” said UNEP director Achim Steiner. “Wastewater is quite literally killing people.”

Stuart Andrews says APP’s environmental commitment is increasingly about partnership, long-term planning – and tigers.

One of the world’s biggest paper producers claims it’s putting environmental issues at the heart of its corporate strategy. That’s quite a claim for a company regularly at the forefront of unflattering lobs from environmentalists. APP declares it has zero tolerance for illegal logging and has toughened its stance on a range of environmental fronts that travels some distance beyond ordinary compliance. “It is very hard to sum up everything that APP does in a few words,” says Stuart Andrews, “but when I look at the people involved in the business, the passion that exists within my colleagues, meet with the customers and look at the great projects with which we are involved in, personally I would take two strap lines: “caring for lives” and “a sustainable practice beyond compliance.”

APP is well aware, of course, of those environmentalists who doubt its commitment to environmental issues. “All our pulp fibre comes from verified legal origin, certified or recycled sources,” says Andrews. “Illegal logging is however one of the symptoms of poverty, and as the Indonesian Government works towards meeting the UN Millennium Development Goals, APP recognises that it also has its own part to play in this process, and by creating direct employment in forest areas we are also creating downstream jobs.”

Investing in the Environment
APP claims it continues to invest significantly in Indonesia, supporting education, skills, medical care, plus the establishment of community enterprises, environmental protection and disaster relief. “All of these efforts also help reduce the emotional burden that illegal logging imposes on legitimate commerce,” says Andrews.

That’s all very well and good. But how are all these ethical-sounding commitments actually enforced? “We have a very strict chain of custody implemented between our mills and the plantation forests,” claims Andrews. “Locally harvested fibre comes to our pulp mills only from our exclusive fibre suppliers and every truck we unload has to be registered and has verified legal origin documentation. In addition we use weighing stations to verify the quantity delivered with quantity received; we are even using digital photography and satellite image transmission so that the picture of stacked logs on a truck can be verified ‘like a fingerprint’ when it arrives at the pulp mill gates.”  

But huge hurdles and worries remain, not least of which is smoke and fire burning from land clearance. Forest fires are a naturally occurring phenomenon – as seen last year in California, Spain and Greece. Fires in, and near, heavily forested areas can be absolutely devastating – as well as a problem for global warming. “It is in no-one’s interest to have a fire,” continues Andrews, “so APP has had a strict no∞burn policy in place with its fibre suppliers for several years. Contracts with our suppliers forbid the clearance of land using fire, as well as other high-risk activities such as smoking and cooking with unsafe stoves.” Additionally there are fire prevention and fire management plans which include early detection and rapid response teams deploying watch towers, fire fighters and helicopters. APP also works with local communities with fire prevention and fire controlling training programmes, “including educational programmes on alternative ways to prepare land for community farming use,” says Andrews. “It is our goal to detect any new fire within two hours of it starting, and then to limit any damage to a burnt area of a maximum of one quarter of a hectare.”

A Delicate Biosphere
Meanwhile there are targets and initiatives to support. One such APP∞sponsored initiative focuses on the Giam Siak Kecil–Bukit Batu biosphere Reserve in Riau. This area holds one of the greatest treasures of biodiversity anywhere on the planet. “The reserve itself is home to about 80 villages of diverse culture, indigenous knowledge and traditions,” says Andrews. “These communities depend on the continued functioning of the ecosystem and the biodiversity in the landscape for their existence. The protected core area is over 178,000 hectares, and this is protected by a further 222,426 hectares of pulpwood plantation buffer zone, and an outer transition zone of over 300,000 hectares.” So how big is that? “I’d say roughly four and a half times the area of Greater London – so yes I would say ‘significant’.”

APP’s pulpwood suppliers contributed 72,000 hectares of land to the core area; this was land that connected two smaller conservation areas. Also the plantation buffer zone around the core area is actively managed and therefore able to better protect the delicate and bio diverse forest from illegal activities.

The core area of this biosphere reserve also contains a very important peat swamp area – and it was important to protect this unique ecosystem not only as a habitat rescue but also to ensure the sustainability of ecosystem functions in supporting lives surrounding it. “This peat landscape controls the water supply for the surrounding regions,” points out Andrews.

“The peat dome acts like a giant sponge that helps regulate fresh water flows and prevents seawater intrusion.” But what makes the area special or unique? “The diversity of habitats is vital. There are various elevation gradients, different soil types which include wetlands, peat swamp forests and alluvial bench forests. Data collected so far indicates that there are 189 species of flora here, of which 29 are listed by IUCN as endangered, vulnerable, near threatened, protected or less concerned species.” The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CTIES) also lists three rare orchid species found here. And this is before you consider the animals such as the Sun Bear, Tapir, Sumatran elephant, Sumatran tiger, Senyulong, Hornbill, and up to 26 types of fauna listed by CITES.

Tiger, Tiger
The Sumatran Tiger is a particular issue. Tigers need trees. So APP has helped establish a tiger sanctuary in an effort to encourage better co∞existence between humans and these magnificent beasts. “This is a land area of 106,000 hectares dedicated to this project,” says Andrews, “and The Tigers Conservation Working Group has become a multi∞stakeholder organisation.” Security of this sanctuary is enhanced by buffer pulpwood plantation areas to the south. Within and outside the sanctuary there are programmes to combat illegal logging and land encroachment, extensive tiger monitoring through radio collar and camera traps, and studies of food resources and methods to prevent human∞tiger conflict. This project is an ongoing commitment for APP, as are several other large projects, and many smaller schemes. In recent years in Indonesia, APP has been spending in excess of $40m a year on social and environmental programmes, though it is too early to state how much will spend in 2010. So there is a growing partnership of business, national and regional government, community groups and NGO’s involved in this UNESCO man and biosphere project.

APP certainly doesn’t pretend that such initiatives will change matters overnight. But such projects build on substantial existing environmental commitment to the area and biosphere. It’s time, energy and money very well spent.

Further information: www.asiapulppaper.com

Think for a moment about human waste. Most of us think of excreta as something we need to get rid of. What if we think about it as a resource – a way to fertilise a vegetable garden, an orchard or provide part of the energy needs for heating and cooking?

This is not a far-fetched scenario, but highly realistic according to scientists at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (UMB) in Norway, pioneers of environmentally safe solutions to organic waste and wastewater treatment.

Fertiliser for the world?
In developing countries, reuse of excreta can substitute 30-100 percent of current mineral fertiliser use. In developed countries the number is 15-20 percent, but can be increased through advances in agricultural practices. Our excreta is the source of about 90 percent of the nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium in wastewater.

These are the three major nutrients needed for plant growth. While they can be a resource in agriculture, they are currently pollutants in our waters. Thus recycling our waste provides a win-win situation of fertilising our agricultural soils and keeping rivers, lakes and seas clean.
 
At present China and Morocco have most of the remaining mineral phosphorus reserves. China, having evaluated their national situation, are ceasing their export. The European Fertiliser Manufacturers Association predicts demand to exceed production in the year 2040. Arno Rosemarin of the Stockholm Environment Institute envisions serious phosphorus shortages and escalating food prices within one to two decades.

As a consequence the Swedish government is the first country so far to decide to recycle 60 percent of the phosphorus from sewage by the year 2015.

Urine makes the difference
It takes 38MJ of electric energy to produce 1kg of nitrogen fertiliser. Every kilogram of nitrogen fertiliser we spread is equivalent to the energy in one litre of diesel oil. Trials show that yields comparable to mineral fertiliser can be obtained using urine.  Urine contains high amounts of nitrogen that naturally converts from the excreted urea to plant-available ammonia during the six months storage required by the WHO guidelines for “Reuse of Excreta and Greywater in Agriculture” to sanitise it. Urine also contains phosphorus and potassium and thus constitutes a nutrient source that is available wherever people live. In Bangalore, India, urine collected from 700-800 slum-dwellers fertilises banana fields producing 50 tons of fruit per year.

How can we collect the urine? A modern urine-diverting toilet is needed to separate and funnel the urine to a storage tank. Urine diverting toilets can easily be retrofitted in any building. Together with waterless urinals, such as those that are currently used with excellent results at the UMB, large∞scale urine collection is possible.  The urine can be collected by local farmers or used in your own garden after appropriate storage. Collection of urine in urban areas challenges the downstream handling system. For extensive use of large volumes dewatering or solidification is necessary.

Further challenges arise because medicinal residues are mainly excreted in the urine. Modern wastewater treatment plants do not remove pharmaceuticals efficiently, thus collection of urine would protect waters from these chemicals that are shown to have negative effects on aquatic biota. Soil has more potential to degrade pharmaceuticals than aquatic environments and provides a better option for final disposal. But the breakdown and potential assimilation of such chemicals in agro-ecosystems needs further study.

Another idea arises from the recognition that urine can be an important nutrient source for second-generation biodiesel production. At UMB, algae fed with urine have been shown to produce as much fatty acid and subsequent biodiesel as algae fed with mineral fertiliser.

Black water recycling 
In 1997 a first-generation recycling system, based on separate treatment of black water (urine and faeces) and water from kitchen, shower and washing (grey water), was built to serve 48 students at the UMB student dormitories. The system uses a modern and comfortable vacuum toilet system.
 
This system reduces water consumption by 30 percent, it nearly eliminates pollution and produces a valuable plant fertiliser and soil amendment product from the waste material. A liquid-composting reactor is used to sanitise the black water and runs with a net energy surplus in terms of heat. Today the scientists at UMB are pursuing anaerobic treatment for production of biogas from black water and other organic waste. Biogas has a higher energy quality than heat and can be used for cogeneration of heat and power or to power vehicles. Acknowledging the scientists’ activities, the university board decided to convert the entire UMB into a zero emission university and in 2008 the first building was retrofitted with vacuum toilets.

Eliminate secondary sewers?
In Oslo, the capital of Norway, a grey water treatment system serves 100 habitants of a low energy apartment building. The treatment system utilises technology developed at UMB and has produced an effluent that meets the European bathing water standards since its opening day in the year 2000. The effluent is suited for local discharge, irrigation or groundwater recharge. With such decentralised grey water treatment units and separate collection of the excreta, secondary sewers that constitute the most expensive part of a sewer system can to a large extent, be eliminated. As a consequence, more funds can be invested in treatment and recycling without increasing the total cost.

Appropriate sanitation for all
Our excreta is the main source of pathogens in wastewater. Open defecation and discharge of untreated wastewater into gutters, storm-drains or nearby streams introduce substantial amounts of pathogens into watercourses and wells. This is responsible for waterborne diseases killing more than three million people every year and reducing the quality of life for many more millions.

Nearly half the world population lack access to appropriate sanitation (i.e. an improved pit latrine is regarded as appropriate). The internationally agreed Millennium Development Goal for sanitation intends to halve the number of people without access to appropriate sanitation by the year 2015. With the current rate of progress, it is estimated that we will miss the goal by 700 million people. This will leave 2.4 billion people without proper sanitation in 2015.  Moreover 1.2 billion people, primarily in rural areas, will still have to practice open defecation.

Can we meet the need for sanitation by providing traditional flush toilets and sewers to the world? The answer is no. In many areas there is not enough water to sustain traditional toilets, not enough money to build sewers and treatment works, and not enough competence and interest to maintain such systems.

There are close links between unclean water, inadequate sewage treatment, malnutrition, poverty and premature death as well as low productivity in farming. If we are to deal with these vital issues touching at the heart of humanity and human rights there is a clear need for innovation as well as information and capacity building to implement sanitary systems to meet local needs.

Engineering programmes in water and sanitation focus on the design of sustainable systems to suit local conditions. A new international MSc programme; “Sustainable Water and Sanitation” developed in cooperation with universities in Nepal and Pakistan, target health and development in addition to decentralised, natural and source separating sanitary systems. Thus the students learn about a wide range of technical options in addition to traditional centralised sanitation. They learn about health challenges and risks. And, they are trained to engage all relevant stakeholders, consider local cultural and political contexts and overcome obstacles of inadequate institutional structures.