Direct Potable Reuse: Sustainable Water for the...
35
Direct Potable Reuse: Sustainable Water for the Future SFPUC Annual Workshop November 12, 2015
Transcript of Direct Potable Reuse: Sustainable Water for the...
Direct Potable Reuse: Sustainable Water for the Future
SFPUC Annual Workshop November 12, 2015
Presenter
Presentation Notes
----- Meeting Notes (11/9/15 12:46) ----- What is Direct potable reuse? This is an interesting time to be discussing this because what this actually means in terms of DDW regulatis very much in flux. How does this fit with SWA regs? Will we have a narrow or broad defitnion of DPR projects for CA? Will also cover: Potable reuse around CA and the world WRRF activites to support DPR THe recent release of the DPR framework document Public perception of DPR in CA.
Promotes responsible
stewardship of California's
water resources by maximizing
the safe, practical and
beneficial use of recycled water
and by supporting the efforts of
the of WateReuse Association.
Presenter
Presentation Notes
But first a bit about WRCA. Here is our mission statement. We are all about maximizing the beneficial use RW in California. This means RW for agriculture, commercial uses, landscape, habitat uses and much more and also for potable reuse, which I will talk about today.
2016 DPR Report to the Legislature
• Water Code 13563. (a) (1) The department shall investigate and report to the Legislature on the feasibility of developing uniform water recycling criteria for direct potable reuse.
• DDW has permitting authority now for DPR projects.
What’s in a Name
SB 918 (Pavley 2010) Defined Key Potable Reuse Terms • But DPR definition for regulatory purposes
may depend on outcome SWA regulations.
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Having worked for almost 15 years as a legislative advocate, I can tell you first hand it really is like sausage. And it is funny to be on the other side of it trying to figure out what was meant by these definitions.
§13561. For purposes of this chapter, the following terms have the following meanings: a. "Department" means the State Department of Public Health. b. "Direct potable reuse" means the planned introduction of recycled water
either directly into a public water system, as defined in Section 116275 of the Health and Safety Code, or into a raw water supply immediately upstream of a water treatment plant.
c. "Indirect potable reuse for groundwater recharge" means the planned use of recycled water for replenishment of a groundwater basin or an aquifer that has been designated as a source of water supply for a public water system, as defined in Section 116275 of the Health and Safety Code.
d. "Surface water augmentation" means the planned placement of recycled water into a surface water reservoir used as a source of domestic drinking water supply.
e. "Uniform water recycling criteria" has the same meaning as in Section 13521.
5
Section 13561 of the Water Code
Presenter
Presentation Notes
DPR – read – this means flange to flange and also, “into a raw water supply immediately upstream of a water treatment plant.” IPR –specifically states it is for the planned use of RW for replenishment of groundwater for water supply. Interesting that we talk about IPR as a project that has an environmental buffer, but actually the code only defines this as groundwater not SWA. §13561(d) defines “Surface Water Augmentation”, but it does not provide specifications for the Reservoir, itself. My point, the code is somewhat convoluted.
Myth: There is only one DPR
Full Advanced Treatment
Potable Water Treatment
Plant
DPR Lite
Small Reservoir
Water Consumers
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Many think of DPR as only just flange to flange but there are many types of DPR. Shades of gray….
Myth: There is only one DPR
Full Advanced Treatment
Potable Water Treatment
Plant
Full Advanced Treatment
Potable Water Treatment
Plant
Reservoir Augmentation
DPR Lite
Water Consumers
Large Reservoir
Small Reservoir
Water Consumers
Presenter
Presentation Notes
DPR lite looks a LOT like reservoir augmentation The dilemma, which DDW must address is: as the reservoir gets smaller, clearly there is a point where SWA and DPR become one
Myth: There is only one DPR
Full Advanced Treatment
Potable Water Treatment
Plant
DPR Lite
Small Reservoir
Water Consumers
Full Advanced Treatment
Potable Water Treatment
Plant
DPR with Drinking Water Treatment
Water Consumers
Full Advanced Treatment
DPR Flange-to-Flange
Water Consumers
Presenter
Presentation Notes
And then the most direct form of flange-to-flange. Emphasize that there are major differences between these, and that we are actually quite close to understanding how to do the first one based on its similarity to reservoir augmentation. Bigger challenges lie ahead with the most direct forms.
Full Advanced Treatment
Potable Water Treatment
Plant
Reservoir Augmentation
Water Consumers
Large Reservoir
• Retention time: – At least 6 months
• Dilution & mixing options: – 99-to-1 dilution, or – 9-to-1 dilution with +1-log treatment
Presenter
Presentation Notes
In looking at draft regulations, there are two criteria that stick out that are provided by the reservoir: retention time and dilution. The regulations will be in two sections of Title 22. They are bifracated. The Advanced treatment criteria will be Chapter 3 and the SWA dilution and retention criteria will be Chapter 17. Unlike the groundwater Regs. The SWA reservoir retention time criteria will not include an alternative permitting process, at least in the first draft.
Alternatives Section for SWA Regs?
• Used in CA’s groundwater replenishment regulations: spreading and injection.
• Allows adaptation of the regulations
over time. • Allows broader applicability of SWA
regs.
Presenter
Presentation Notes
The Alternatives Section, historically used in CA’s groundwater replenishment regulations, allows the DDW to adapt its regulatory decisions to project-specific circumstances and changes in science and technology. As such, the Alternatives Section is a powerful tool, which allows DDW to implement timely regulations in a rapidly changing environment, without the risk that it will be unable to accommodate these changes or unexpected conditions in future decisions. The Alternatives Section is most effective when it applies to all important criteria in a regulation.
DDW’s Alternatives Sections
• §60320.130 (spreading) §60320.230 (injection), & §60320.330 (SWA Proposed*) – Common elements:
• Project Sponsor must – Demonstrate alternative provides equal protection; – Include review by Independent scientific advisory panel
• DDW must approve the alternative • DDW may require public hearings
*Note: Applies to Article 5.3, not Article 9
11
Narrow SWA Regulations Mean More Projects Fall in DPR Category
• DDW has permitting authority over DPR now even before the release of the DPR report to the Legislature.
• But does it make sense to have medium sized reservoirs called “DPR”?
• What will this mean for CA potable reuse future?
Presenter
Presentation Notes
While we have made huge progress in our research to perfect DPR and DPR is in our future, it would be inappropriate to put the DPR label on today’s more conservative reservoir projects. �Why Regulations at all if Alternative Process is used. Without regulations many of the water districts that might otherwise consider reservoir augmentation projects will not do so. The absence of such regulations introduces significant uncertainties.
Potable Reuse Around the World
Water Supply Potential of Potable Reuse*
• Advanced purification could
yield 1.1 MAF/y of potable supplies.
• All municipal needs for 8 million Californians: 1/5 of the state’s population.
*(WRRF 14-08, Raucher, Tchobanoglous)
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Potable reuse is so exiting because of its potential to greatly increase our water supplies and which is important in the face of climate change. When we look at how much wastewater water is discharge to the ocean each year we can see this potential. We have estimated that if you purify about half of this water it could meet all municipal needs for 8 million or 1/5 of the state’s population. That is huge.
Potable Use Projects
PERMITTED GROUNDWATER (8) Existing ≈ 200,000 AFY ∼ 1.6 M People
Presenter
Presentation Notes
That was OCWD which leads the nation and the world in potable reuse. Developing 130 thousand AFY as newly expanded But that is not the only potable reuse happening in the state. California has 8 permitted indirect potable reuse projects today which serve 1.6 million people drinking water.
Potable Use Projects
PERMITTED GROUNDWATER (8) Existing ≈ 200,000 AFY ∼ 1.6 M People
PLANNED GROUNDWATER (17) Planned ≈ 221,000 AFY ∼ 1.6 M People
Presenter
Presentation Notes
But interest in potable reuse is exploding! We now we have 17 planned groundwater indirect potable reuse projects planned statewide -- that when permitted will provide another 1.6 million people with drinking water.
Potable Use Projects
PERMITTED GROUNDWATER (8) Existing ≈ 200,000 AFY ∼ 1.6 M People
PLANNED GROUNDWATER (17) Planned ≈ 221,000 AFY ∼ 1.6 M People
PLANNED SURFACE WATER AUGMENTATION (6) Planned ≈ 100,000 AFY ∼ 800,000 People
Presenter
Presentation Notes
We also have 6 planned indirect potable reuse projects for surface water reservoirs. This will create drinking water for 800,000 people. All told within the next five years or so, we will see at least 5 million Californians getting their drinking water from potable reuse.
PERMITTED GROUNDWATER (8) Existing ≈ 200,000 AFY ∼ 1.6 M People
PLANNED GROUNDWATER (17) Planned ≈ 225,000 AFY ∼ 1.6 M People
PLANNED SURFACE WATER AUGMENTATION (4) Planned ≈ 100,000 AFY ∼ 800,000 People
California Potable and Non-Potable Water Reuse Projects
NON-POTABLE WATER RECYCLING PROJECTS (141) Planned ≈ 300,000 AFY ∼ 2.4 M People
State of Reuse in the US
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Indirect potable reuse – CA, AZ, WA, UT, FL, Virginia, PA, Mass Direct Potable reuse – TX, OK, North Carolina
Namibia DPR Experience
• Windhoek, Capitol of Namibia • Longest-running direct potable reuse facility in
the world; in operation since 1968. • Providing 35% of the overall drinking water
supply for the City. • Source of pride for community.
Presenter
Presentation Notes
Windhoek is the Capitol and largest city of Namibia. Its population is 325,000 people and growing. They don’t use R/O. At least three barriers are used for microbial pollutants and at least two barriers are used for aesthetic conditions. They blend reclaimed water with potable water and this takes place directly in the pipeline that feeds the potable water distribution network. They have done extensive-long lasting outreach to the citizens.
Singapore NEWater
• NEWater can meet 30% of Singapore's total water demand currently, and is set to meet up to 55% of its demand by 2060.
• NEWater used for industrial and reservoir augmentation.
Presenter
Presentation Notes
NEWater is high-grade reclaimed water produced from treated used water that is further purified using advanced membrane technologies and ultra-violet disinfection, making it ultra-clean and safe to drink.
DPR Framework
Potable Research Initiative WRRF and WRCA
Goal: Advance DPR as a water supply option in California. Status: Research Plan, 34 projects valued at over $20 million. For more information Go to: Watereuse.org
Presenter
Presentation Notes
WateReuse Research Foundation initiated 26 independent DPR-related research projects in 2014 (or before), totaling over $11.5 million to evaluate and demonstrate the feasibility of DPR opportunities. The research revolves around developing a robust monitoring and redundant water purification system.
How do we achieve treatment and process reliability through redundancy, robustness,
and resilience?
Regulatory Concerns
Community Concerns
Utility Concerns
How do we address the economic and technical feasibility
of DPR? How do we train operators to run these advanced
systems?
How to we increase public awareness of the water cycle and
illustrate the safety of DPR to lead to
acceptance?
Barriers to DPR
6 projects 19 projects
23 projects
Framework for DPR (Released September 2015)
• Funded by: • WateReuse Association • American Water Works Association • Water Environment Federation • National Water Research Institute
administered an Independent Advisory Panel
Topics Addressed
• Regulatory Considerations – Potential Public Health Risks – Elements of the Regulatory Permitting Process – Operator training and certification
• Technology – Treatment technology for production of AWT – Treatment performance through source control,
operation and maintenance, monitoring etc – Appropriate multi treatment barriers – Blending with other waters
• Public Outreach – Purpose of Engaging stakeholders and community – Communication challenges with DPR – Planning tools and materials for a DPR outreach
effort.
34%
28%
13%
18%
7% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Strongly support
Somewhat support
Somewhat oppose
Strongly oppose
Don't know/NA
Total Support62%
Total Oppose 31%
Would you support or oppose indirect reuse of recycled water in your community?
A majority of voters support indirect reuse of recycled water for drinking.
Q11.
Presenter
Presentation Notes
As part of a statewide potable reuse outreach effort last spring the WateReuse Research Foundation conducted a phone survey in San Diego and Santa Clara. 600 people each I thought I would share these polling results for you
16%
24%
17%
36%
7% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Strongly support
Somewhat support
Somewhat oppose
Strongly oppose
Don't know/NA
Total Support40%
Total Oppose 54%
Would you support or oppose the direct reuse of recycled water in your community?
Initially, most voters oppose direct potable reuse.
Q13.
40% 26%
19% 10%
7% 3% 3% 3% 2% 2% 1% 1%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Why would you OPPOSE direct reuse of recycled water for drinking in your community?
Disbelief in the efficacy of the purification system is the biggest obstacle.
Q14b. Open end; Responses grouped; Asked of direct potable reuse opponents only
Don’t trust filtering process/system
It would be unhealthy/unsafe to drink
Just don’t want to/feel comfortable drinking it
Don’t want to drink “sewer water”
Don’t know enough about it
Concerned of more chemicals in water (used to clean it) “Human factor”; potential for human error/negligence in
water treatment No process is 100% effective/Some pathogens/toxins can
never be removed (includes medications) Lack of available test/study/research results
Will taste bad
Too expensive
Don’t trust city officials to ensure water quality
Presenter
Presentation Notes
The biggest obstacle to support was that they did not trust the filtration process or system and thought it would be unsafe to drink.
Though they are initially opposed, voters quickly become more comfortable with direct potable reuse
after information about safety.
Q13 Total/Q18/Q20.
40%
56% 59% 54%
39% 36%
7% 5% 5% 0%
15%
30%
45%
60%
75%
Initial SupportAfter SafetyInformation After Messages
Total Support
Total Oppose
Don’t Know/NA
Do you support or oppose direct reuse of recycled water in your community for all household purposes, including drinking?
Presenter
Presentation Notes
But here is the good news slide. Support rose from 40 to 60 percent for DPR and opposition dropped to 36% after people learned about the treatment process.
Conclusions
• DPR will be a safe, new water supply for CA. • Multiple solutions must be pursued
– Non-potable reuse – Indirect potable reuse – Direct potable reuse
• Need to ensure public health protection • Public acceptance is critical
Contact Information: Jennifer West WateReuse California [email protected] (916) 669-8401
