1 / 21

George Kunkel P.E. Philadelphia Water Department

Improving Water Efficiency by Implementing the IWA/AWWA Water Audit Methodology National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners Summer Meeting New York City July 16, 2007. George Kunkel P.E. Philadelphia Water Department. Purpose of the Presentation: Provide an update around the theme .

baba
Download Presentation

George Kunkel P.E. Philadelphia Water Department

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Improving Water Efficiency by Implementing the IWA/AWWA Water Audit MethodologyNational Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners Summer MeetingNew York CityJuly 16, 2007 George Kunkel P.E. Philadelphia Water Department

  2. Purpose of the Presentation:Provide an update around the theme • Promoting water supply efficiency as a standard business practice • Strong water supply efficiency is evidenced by: • Low water leakage losses • Minimal unbilled water consumption • Minimal unauthorized consumption • Auditable operations

  3. US Drinking Water Supply Historical Shortcomings • Technical; Not all water supplied by a water utility reaches the customer • Financial; Not all of the water that reaches the customer is properly measured or paid for • Terminology; Historically a Lack of standardized definitions of water and revenue losses New Methods offered in AWWA Free Water Audit Software and revised (2008) AWWA M36 Publication: “Water Audits & Loss Control Programs”

  4. States Survey Findings & Conclusion 20% 10% 15% 15% 15% 15% 20% 15% 20% 15% 15% 15% 10% 10% 15% 15% 15% 7.5% 10% 20% 15% 10% “A better system of accounting is needed to instill better accountability in drinking water utilities”

  5. Philadelphia’s Loss Control Success is not reflected by old percentage indicators

  6. Total System Input ( allow for known errors ) Water Exported Authorized Consumption Own Sources Total System Input (allow for known errors) Water Exported Water Supplied Water Supplied Water Imported Water Losses Standardizing the Water Audit Method: IWA/AWWA Water Balance Authorized Consumption Billed Authorized Consumption Revenue Water Billed Water Exported Billed Metered Consumption Billed Unmetered Consumption Unbilled Authorized Consumption Non- Revenue Water Unbilled Metered Consumption Unbilled Unmetered Consumption Water Losses Apparent Losses Unauthorized Consumption Customer Metering Inaccuracies Systematic Data Handling Error Real Losses Leakage on Mains Leakage on Service Lines Leakage & Overflows at Storage

  7. Aggregate customer consumption volume is understated Water supply planning suffers from inaccurate consumption data for customer populations Analysis of conservation savings is hindered A portion of billings are understated or omitted, causing revenue loss (Apparent losses valued at retail rate) Paying customers effectively subsidize those who under-pay or don’t pay at all for water service High apparent losses exacerbate the need to increase water rates Impacts of Apparent Losses

  8. Excessive Source Water Withdrawals More water is withdrawn from sources than customer population needs Water supply infrastructure is effectively oversized Excessive Operational Costs Real losses are valued at the variable production cost or In areas of stressed water resources, real losses might be valued at the retail cost Much leakage is often treated again at wastewater plants – two rounds of treatment without providing any benefit! Many other adverse impacts Impacts of Real Losses

  9. Philadelphia’s Water Audit July 1, 2005 - June 30, 2006 in Million Gallons Per Day (Mgd) • Water into Supply - 253.8 • Customer Billed Cons. - 177.0 • 76.8 Non-Revenue Water • Unbilled Auth. Cons. 2.5 $ 191,000 • Apparent Losses 15.1 $ 20,276,000 ($4,500 / MG) • Real Losses 59.2 $ 4,229,000 ($160 / MG) • Non-Revenue Water Cost: $ 24,696,000

  10. Philadelphia’s Water Audit Performance Indicators • NRW by volume = 76.8 mgd /253.8 mgd = 30.2% • NRW by cost = $24.7 million/ $190 million = 13.0% • Apparent Loss indicator = 15.1 mgd / 552,000 connections = 27.4 gallons/connection/day • Real Loss indicator = 59.2 mgd / 552,000 connections = 107.3 gallons/connection/day • Unavoidable Annual Real Losses (UARL) = 6.0 mgd • Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI) = 59.2 / 6.0 = 9.9

  11. Tools & Developments • AWWA Water Loss Control Committee’s Free Water Audit Software – launched 2006 • AWWA Research Foundation Project 2811 – Evaluating Water Loss and Planning Loss Reduction Strategies Report March 2007 • AWWA Research Foundation Project 2928 – Leakage Management Technologies – late 2007 • M36 Publication – late 2008 • Concern for sustainable water supply is prompting increasing interest from regulatory agencies

  12. AWWA Water Loss Control Committee’s Free Water Audit Software • Launched April 2006 • Available for FREE download at: http://www.awwa.org/WaterWiser/waterloss/Docs/WaterAuditSoftware.cfm • Simple, user friendly: good for top-down audit • “Beta tested” by 21 water utilities during 2005 • WLC Committee provides user support for the software; updated version is forthcoming

  13. AWWARF Project 2811 – Evaluating Water Loss and Planning Loss Reduction Strategies • Identified IWA/AWWA Water Audit Methodology has current best practice • Provides strategies for using water audit information to guide development of loss control strategy www.awwa.org/bookstore/product.cfm?id=91163

  14. AWWARF Project 2928: Constructing District Metered Area 5 in Philadelphia - September 2006 Chamber with Pressure Reducing Valve, controller & flowmeter Final Research Report – Late 2007

  15. State of Texas • House Bill 3338 (2003) required water audits from water utilities for 2005 operations • Texas Water Development Board selected IWA/AWWA Water Audit Method • Over 2,000 water audits collected in early 2006 • Findings confirmed that many water utilities have never tracked water efficiency data • New operational data collection protocols should be established in these systems Report on evaluation of data can be found at: http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/RWPG/rpfgm_rpts.asp

  16. Metropolitan North Georgia Water Planning District (MNGWPD) • Part of Atlanta Regional Commission; oversees +60 water utilities in multi-county Atlanta area • Adopted IWA/AWWA Water Audit Method in following with AWWA • Requires utilities to submit water audits via AWWA Free Water Audit Software • Developed training program around the software; moving to leakage management training www.northgeorgiawater.com/files/WSWC_SECTION8.PDF

  17. Delaware River Basin Commission • Intra-state agency encompassing Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, Delaware and US Army Corps of Engineers • DRBC’s Water Management Advisory Committee has recommended revisions of the DRBC Water Code to incorporate the IWA/AWWA Water Audit Method. Approval by DRBC commissioners expected late 2007 • Once implemented, looking to collect water audits – initially on a volunteer basis; mandatory by 2012

  18. California • California Urban Water Conservation Council • Consortium of large water utilities that agree to implement best management practices for water conservation • Currently revising BMP3 for “System Water Audits, Leak Detection and Repair” • California Public Utilities Commission anticipates following CUWCC’s new BMP3 CUWCC also spearheaded creation of national Alliance for Water Efficiency

  19. New Mexico – Office of the State Engineer • Adopted IWA/AWWA Water Audit Method and advocates use of software • Sponsored pilot water audit and study in small water utility (Gallup, NM) See website references at: www.ose.state.nm.us/water-info/conservation/h2o-tech-assist.html

  20. Summary • The US drinking water industry will face challenges of resource shortages, aging infrastructure and funding needs • To address these, water supply efficiency should become a standard business practice • AWWA is actively promoting the IWA/AWWA Water Audit Method and providing tools for its use • A number of state/regional agencies are already embracing these methods and applying them to promote water supply efficiency

More Related