Version of 09/04/2008 PG - Hymemb · This report was prepared and issued by the LNEC members above...

Project location Portugal (Lisboa e Vale do Tejo and Algarve)

Project start date: 01/01/2014

Project end date: 31/12/2016

Total Project duration (in months) 36 months

Total budget € 631,046

Total eligible budget € 620,546

EU contribution: € 282,678

(%) of total costs 44.80%

(%) of eligible costs 45.55%

Name Beneficiary LNEC – Laboratório Nacional de Engenharia Civil

Contact person Dr. Maria João Rosa

Postal address Av. Brasil 101, 1700-066, Portugal

Visit address Av. Brasil 101, 1700-066, Portugal

Telephone +351 21 844 38 41

Fax: +351 21 844 30 32

E-mail [email protected]

Project Website www.life-hymemb.eu

Technical Summary LIFE12 ENV/PT/001154

LIFE Hymemb. Tailoring hybrid membrane processes for sustainable drinking water production

Title

LIFE Hymemb. Tailoring hybrid membrane processes for sustainable drinking water production.

Report identification

Technical summary

Authors

Maria João Rosa, Margarida Campinas, Catarina Silva, Rui Viegas (LNEC)

Contributors

Helena Lucas, Lizete Costa, Rui Sancho (AdA) – action A1

Helena Lucas, Rui Sancho, Lizete Costa, Rosário Coelho (AdA) – action B3

João Craveiro, Maria João Freitas (LNEC) – actions B5, C2, C3

Acknowledgments

This report was prepared and issued by the LNEC members above listed, but the contribution of many

colleagues is deeply acknowledged: from AdA, Helena Lucas, Maria do Rosário Coelho and Maria da Luz

Berjano, members of the project Executive Board; Rui Sancho, Lizete Costa and other colleagues from Water

Operations Dept. and Bráulio Almeida from the Maintenance Dept., Isabel Sousa and other colleagues from

AdA Laboratory, Physico-Chemical, Microbiology, Sampling and Quality units; from LNEC, Maria João

Freitas, João Craveiro, Nuno Alves, Vítor Napier, Elsa Mesquita, Conceição Santos and Paula Couto.

Due date

June 30th

2017

Delivery date

June 5th

2017

The research leading to these results has received funding from European Union LIFE programme under grant agreement

LIFE12 ENV/PT/001154.

The publication reflects only the authors’ views and European Union is not liable for any use that may be made of the

information contained therein.

Technical summary LIFE12/ENV/PT/001154 3

List of Contents

1 Acronyms and abbreviations .............................................................................................. 5

2 Executive summary ............................................................................................................ 6

3 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 11

4 Administrative part ........................................................................................................... 13

4.1 Description of the management system ..................................................................... 13

4.2 Evaluation of the management system ...................................................................... 16

5 Technical part ................................................................................................................... 18

5.1 Technical execution per action .................................................................................. 18

5.1.1 Action A1 - Site adaptation for the prototype ..................................................... 18 5.1.2 Action B1 - PAC/MF prototype engineering and commissioning ...................... 20 5.1.3 Action B2 - Selection of PACs for conventional addition and for PAC/MF ...... 22 5.1.4 Action B3 - Optimization of PAC conventional addition ................................... 24

5.1.5 Action B4 - Long-term demonstration and optimization of PAC/MF ................ 28 5.1.6 Action B5 - Characterization of stakeholders’ attitudes towards membrane

processes ............................................................................................................. 32 5.1.7 Action C1 - Technical, environmental and economic assessment of the tested

technologies ........................................................................................................ 35

5.1.8 Action C2 - “Cross” cost benefit analysis ........................................................... 38 5.1.9 Action C3 - Socio-economic impact of the project actions on the local economy

and population ..................................................................................................... 40 5.2 Dissemination actions ................................................................................................ 43

5.2.1 Objectives............................................................................................................ 43 5.2.2 Dissemination: overview per activity ................................................................. 43

5.3 Evaluation of Project Implementation ....................................................................... 57

5.4 Analysis of long-term benefits .................................................................................. 62

5.4.1 Environmental benefits ....................................................................................... 62 5.4.2 Long-term benefits and sustainability ................................................................. 64 5.4.3 Replicability, demonstration, transferability, cooperation .................................. 65 5.4.4 Best Practice lessons ........................................................................................... 66 5.4.5 Innovation and demonstration value ................................................................... 66

5.4.6 Long term indicators of the project success ........................................................ 67


List of Figures

Figure 1 Organigramme of LIFE Hymemb Project ................................................................. 14

Figure 2 Overall progress of the project (proposed schedule as informed in Amendment to

GA). .......................................................................................................................................... 17

Figure 3 Site adaptation; before (left) and after (right) LIFE Hymemb. .................................. 18

Figure 4 PAC/CFS site adaptations: valves, pipes, fittings, flowmeter, level regulation. ....... 19

Figure 5 PAC/MF prototype assembling and installation at Alcantarilha WTP ...................... 20

Figure 6 PAC selection methodology ...................................................................................... 22

Figure 7 PAC/CFS optimization in jar tests (top) and PAC/CFS prototype tests (bottom) ..... 26

Figure 8 PAC/MF demo in Alcantarilha WTP: operation optimization and spiking tests ...... 29

Figure 9 The change of stakeholders’ attitudes regarding the adoption of PAC/MF .............. 34

Figure 10 Decision maker toolkit for benchmarking the performance of PAC/MF and

PAC/CFS technologies ............................................................................................................. 35

Figure 11 The general consensus about costs and benefits of PAC/MF technology ............... 38

Figure 12 Notice boards exhibited in Alcantarilha WTP: administrative building entrance

(left) and prototype’s room (right) ........................................................................................... 45

Figure 13 Leaflets produced for LIFE Hymemb dissemination............................................... 46

Figure 14 LIFE Hymemb stand at 17th

ENaSB conference in Guimarães ............................... 47

Figure 15 LIFE Hymemb second seminar at Alcantarilha WTP ............................................. 48

Figure 16 Project explanation during technical visits of water industry professionals,

regulators, consultants and regional public administration. ..................................................... 49

Figure 17 Stakeholders’ workshops held on December 2nd

2014 in LNEC, Lisbon (left) and on

September 27th

2016 in Vilamoura, Algarve (right). ............................................................... 50

Figure 18 Ciência Viva no Verão - open-day event in Alcantarilha WTP during July 2015. . 50

Figure 19 Participation in ENEG conference (Porto, December 2015) with 3 oral

presentations and 2 posters (LIFE Hymemb notice board on the right). ................................. 53

Figure 20 Advisory Council Meeting in Lisbon, on April 2016 .............................................. 55

List of Tables

Table 1 LIFE Hymemb meetings held during the project timeline .......................................... 15

Table 2 Impact matrix (assessment of socioeconomic impacts) .............................................. 41

Table 3 LIFE Hymemb results evaluation ............................................................................... 58


1 Acronyms and abbreviations

AdA Águas do Algarve, S.A.

AdP Águas de Portugal group

AHP Analytical Hierarchical Process

ALM Action Leaders’ Meeting

APA Agência Portuguesa do Ambiente

CBA Cost Benefit Analysis

CFS Coagulation/Flocculation/Sedimentation

DOC Dissolved Organic Carbon

DWD Drinking Water Directive

EB

EBM

Executive Board

Executive Board Meeting

ECs Emerging Contaminants

EQSD Environmental Quality Standards Directive

ERSAR Entidade Reguladora dos Serviços de Águas e Resíduos

EU European Union

GA Grant Agreement

IWA International Water Association

LNEC National Civil Engineering Laboratory

MF Microfiltration

MSP Monitoring Scheme Protocol

NES Urban Water Unit

NF Nanofiltration

NOM Natural Organic Matter

NUT Urban and Territories Studies Unit

PAC Powdered Activated Carbon

PAC/CFS PAC conventional addition (in coagulation/flocculation/sedimentation)

PAC/MF Hybrid membrane process of PAC and microfiltration

PAStool Performance Assessment System tool

PhC Pharmaceutical Compound

R&D Research & Development

SROI Social Return On Investment

SSM Soft System Methodology

SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats

TG Technical Groups

THMFP Trihalomethane Formation Potential

TOC Total organic carbon

TR Technical Report

UQTA Water Quality and Treatment Unit

VAT Value Added Tax Identification Number

WFD Water Framework Directive

WS Workshop of the stakeholders’ panel

WTP Water Treatment Plant

WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant


2 Executive summary

LIFE Hymemb project’s general objective was to demonstrate the feasibility and

sustainability of the innovative advanced process of adsorption onto powdered activated

carbon/ceramic microfiltration (PAC/MF) for the treatment of drinking water, in order to

provide a safer and more resilient barrier against emerging contaminants (ECs), with lower

environmental impacts.

The project demonstration strategy relied on long-term pilot prototype testing of the

PAC/MF process in Alcantarilha WTP real conditions (Algarve, Portugal), for demonstrating

its effectiveness and efficiency for controlling ECs in drinking water and for benchmarking

(i.e. for assessing and improving the performance of) this advanced technology versus the

PAC conventional addition in the coagulation/flocculation/sedimentation step (PAC/CFS).

The target ECs were pharmaceutical compounds (PhCs), pesticides, cyanotoxins, viruses and

protozoan (oo)cysts, contaminants that challenge the conventional treatment. NOM was also

addressed for its behaviour as oxidation/disinfection by-products formation precursor and its

influence on water treatment performance towards ECs (coagulant and oxidant demand,

membrane fouling, etc.).

In short, the project incorporated 4 key pillars of innovation: i) use of ceramic MF

membranes; ii) long-term pilot scale demonstration of PAC/ceramic MF prototype; iii)

tailoring of PAC/MF technology to a wide spectrum of water qualities and contaminants; iv)

cost-benefit analysis incorporating social indicators.

The key outcomes were technological and social innovation: i) the former by optimising

PAC/MF operating conditions for effectively removing the target ECs while increasing the

membrane productivity and lifetime and minimizing the environmental impacts; by

developing and applying sound tools for benchmarking PAC/MF advanced process and

PAC/CFS conventional process and ultimately by developing PAC/MF technical guidelines

on “when, where and how” sustainably using PAC/MF; ii) social innovation, by

characterizing the stakeholder’s attitudes towards membrane technology and developing a

cost-benefit analysis with a strong social dimension and by a strong and comprehensive

dissemination of the project outcomes through specialized audience and to society in general

(Layman’s Report).

This document is the technical summary of the project, foreseen in its After-LIFE

communication plan, and is structured in 5 chapters: the list of acronyms and abbreviations

(chap. 1), the executive summary (chap. 2), the introduction (chap. 3), and two main chapters

addressing the project administrative part (chap. 4) and the technical execution (chap. 5),

which are summarized below.

In chapter 4, the project management system is described and evaluated. LIFE Hymemb

project management was structured in four organizational levels: Project Manager, Team

Leaders, Executive Board (EB) and Action Leaders, with the support of the Financial

Departments. Who’s who is available on the project website (www.life-hymemb.eu).

Technical and scientific expertise had three pillars: engineering, water quality and social

sciences, and the 13 project actions involved 21 staff, 9 from LNEC and 12 from AdA.

A 6-member Advisory Council provided technical-scientific advice and direct inputs to the

stakeholders’ actions and helped disseminating the project results at national and international

levels through their representative roles in the water sector.

LIFE Hymemb management was driven by project goals, and a sound monitoring of each

action progress was conducted through progress indicators, using a tool developed during the

http://www.life-hymemb.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/LIFE-Hymemb_Technical-Guidelines.pdf

http://www.life-hymemb.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/LIFE-Hymemb_Laymans-Report_EN.pdf

http://www.life-hymemb.eu/


project’s first quarter the Monitoring Scheme Protocol, which was updated in every EB

meeting. During the project timeline, 11 meetings were held: 7 EB meetings, 2 with the

participation of the LIFE national contact point, Dr. Isabel Lico (from APA) and 4 with Dr.

Filipa Ferrão (the Commission’s External Monitor from Neemo).

In terms of project management evaluation, all LIFE Hymemb’s main objectives were

fulfilled and all deliverables were accomplished, with 2 exceptions: 16 analytical monitoring

reports were elaborated instead of 21 (action B4) and 3 publications in relevant peer-reviewed

journal are still under preparation (as detailed in the After-LIFE plan) due to the late start-up

of the PAC/MF prototype and to some temporary interruptions, time and labour consuming. A

contingency plan was successfully implemented for catching-up the initial 4-month delay

related with prototype construction, assembling and testing, since no supplier was found for

the foreseen renting. 24 foreseen deliverables and 3 not foreseen (technical reports of action

C1) were produced: 3 project reports (inception, progress and final) and the monitoring

scheme protocol, 9 technical reports of implementation actions, 6 reports of monitoring

actions, 7 deliverables of communication and dissemination and the after-LIFE

communication plan.

An adequate level of total expenditure was reached, 2% above the total budget foreseen. The

costs per category of expenditure and costs per action were incurred within the allowed

flexibility of 10% and 30,000€ (cf. Article 15.2 of the Common Provisions).To achieve the

objectives targeted, LNEC and AdA developed a 3-year working plan with 13 actions

thoroughly described in chapter 5. The demonstration focus made the implementation actions

to be dominated by an extensive testing of the innovative technology (action B4) against the

optimized conventional technology (B3 - WTP and PAC/CFS prototype) as well as on social

innovation issues (B5). Auxiliary actions included the site adaptation (A1) and the

engineering and commissioning of the prototype (B1), the selection of PACs for both

treatment options (B2). The demonstration character called also for a strong and effective: (i)

monitoring of the results produced, which relied on standardized metrics for performance

assessment and benchmarking (C1), whereas the cost-benefit analysis included engineering

and social dimensions (C2), both actions feeding the socio-economic impact assessment (C3);

(ii) communication and dissemination (D1) and networking (D2).

PAC/MF demonstration followed a 6-step methodology: i) selection of a representative list

of target contaminants; ii) selection of activated carbons and prototype conditions – lab tests;

iii) design and assembly of PAC/MF prototype; iv) long-term pilot testing (1.5 years) of

PAC/MF prototype in Alcantarilha WTP, using water from 4 points of the WTP sequence.

Each testing period included MF, PAC/MF and EC spiking tests, and an intensive analytical

monitoring plan to optimize the operating conditions and demonstrate the water quality; v)

benchmarking PAC/MF vs. WTP technology (PAC/CFS in current WTP conditions and

optimized for EC removal); vi) cost-benefit analysis including social indicators produced by

collaborative methodologies with stakeholders.

PAC/MF was successful installed in Alcantarilha WTP with 5 types of water easily available.

Additional work was performed, e.g. for installing the PAC/CFS prototype for action B3

(section 5.1.1).

For the design and assembly of PAC/MF prototype, it was necessary to specify the technical

requirements of the ceramic membrane and of the PAC/MF prototype, to select the supplier

and co-develop the prototype engineering and commissioning (section 5.1.2). The prototype

design required drawing the prototype linear diagram, designing all components

(number/dimensions/capacities of membranes, tanks, pumps, and valves), defining the

necessary instrumentation and main characteristics (range, precision) and defining the


prototype’s working program (operation functions, equipment state, triggers, processes). The

PAC/MF prototype was designed by LNEC, assembled by ORM (Portuguese company) and

was fully operational at Alcantarilha WTP in July 2015, allowing a 1.5-year field test.

A methodology for PAC selection was developed and successfully used. 9 PACs were pre-

selected for testing, i.e. 4 for PAC/CFS and 5 for PAC/MF, and 1 PAC was selected for each

application at pilot scale (section 5.1.3).

LIFE Hymemb project proved (section 5.1.5) that PAC/MF technology works very well for

EC removal and the results exceeded the initial expectations. The technology demonstrated to

be, on one hand, effective and reliable, and, on the other hand, efficient and sustainable. The

treated water quality was always very high: turbidity < 0.03 NTU, low aluminium residuals,

improvement in NOM and viruses water quality, full-removal of endospores (indicators of

biological forms resistant to chemical oxidation). In the spiking tests with 10-19

pharmaceuticals (C0 = 8.8-17.5 ug/L total-PhCs) and/or 2-10 pesticides (C0 = 1.3-11 ug/L

total-pesticides) or microcystin-LR (C0 = 1.3 ug/L), PAC/MF achieved 83-98% removal of

total-PhCs, 78-98% of total-pesticides and > 85% of microcystin-LR (not quantified in the

treated water), using PAC doses between 2 mg/L and 18 mg/L. In terms of operational results,

high fluxes (154-283 L/(m2.h) @ 0.6-0.8 bar), filtration time (≥ 2 hours), water recovery

(≥ 97%) and treatment capacity (4.6-9.5 m3/(m

2.day.bar)) were obtained with the four tested

waters. For these low turbidity, low and hydrophilic organic content waters ( 5 NTU,

3 mg/L TOC, 2 L/(mg.m)), direct PAC/MF was feasible with in-line coagulation, and

0.08 to 0.12 €/m3

were the costs (CAPEX+OPEX) estimated for producing 100,000 m3/day

(ca. 500,000 p.e.).

A tool for benchmarking PAC/MF and PAC conventional addition was delivered (section

5.1.7). PAStool, the tool developed in the last 10 years by LNEC for assessing and improving

the technical, economic and environmental performance of water treatment systems, based on

indicators and indices, was upgraded to include MF and PAC/MF technologies and new

performance functions were developed for ECs, such as pesticides and pharmaceuticals. This

tool allowed establishing the status quo of the conventional PAC/CFS operation in

Alcantarilha WTP, identifying the critical aspects of PAC/CFS and filtration and

improvement measures of chemicals (50% reduction in PAC dose for EC control, using the

selected PAC), energy and economic performance (section 5.1.4). PAC/MF was

benchmarked with PAC/CFS, showing higher effectiveness and reliability for ECs (20%

higher removal), turbidity, endospores and fine PAC particles. The economic benchmarking

was limited since no data were available for the cost breakdown per conventional treatment

stages.

A stakeholder’s panel was created and their values, believes and attitudes were characterized,

before and after the project, during 2 workshops, using collaborative methodologies (section

5.1.6). Positive and consistent changes in attitudes and perceptions about the adoption of the

new technology were visible after the project. Stakeholder’s “myths” and doubts regarding

membrane technology were clarified with this project, namely in relation to high energy

consumption, frequent membrane replacement and high pre-treatment required. The necessary

data for “cross” cost-benefit analysis (CBA) and socio-economic impact assessment were

produced. The built capacity was indicated by the stakeholders as to pave the way to more

informed decisions in the future, in the Portuguese water sector.

The CBA of the PAC/MF technology integrated traditional dimensions but also social

dimensions and stakeholders’ inputs (section 5.1.8). Social indicators were developed and a

hybrid methodology (AHP) was used for approaching intangible costs and benefits. The

stakeholders prioritized, individually and collectively, the costs and benefits of PAC/MF


application. The benefits were prioritized over the costs, particularly the environmental and

social benefits, where the safety and reliability of the drinking water supply played a key role.

Funding and water tariffs were considered key issues. The important gap identified between

immediate costs for the investor and the widespread benefits for the long-term may require

legal, regulatory or economic incentives for the technology adoption.

For assessing the project socio-economic impact (section 5.1.9), a matrix of potential impacts

of PAC/MF adoption was developed with the stakeholders with 5 dimensions analysed: 1)

human well-being and health; 2) economic and social dynamics; 3) regional and local

development; 4) demography; 5) governance. Very positive, direct, sustained and relevant

impacts in public health and security of drinking water supply were identified. Some potential

for regional development, particularly as a decentralized treatment solution in remote water

stressed areas, namely tourism and other economic sectors may be promoted, particularly in

regions more prone to climatic changes and with lower water availability and quality.

Dissemination activities (section 5.2) included logotype and website development and

visualizations promotion (1121 average number of visitors/month), 2 notice boards produced

(A0 and A1 sizes) and exhibited near the prototype in Alcantarilha WTP, 699 leaflets

distributed and 785 leaflets downloaded, 10 press releases, 3 seminars organized (139

participants), 14 technical visits to prototype (245 visitors), 2 workshops with the

stakeholders’ panel (avg. 27 participants/workshop), 9 open-day events (140 participants),

Technical Guidelines for PAC/MF, 1 scientific paper (3 under preparation), 22 national and

international conference presentations, 1 Layman’s Report (EN, PT) and several networking

activities (e.g. meetings, 12 connections established with ongoing projects in related areas, 7

networking activities with consortia on other ongoing related LIFE+ projects).

All the project results were immediately visible (section 5.3), with exception of socio-

economic impact of the project actions on the local economy and population, which will

depend on future technology implementation at full-scale. PAC/MF implementation presents

great advantages in terms of water quality reliability and safety and these advantages will

become more important as the lower the water quality and availability of alternative water

sources are in a specific region, the greater is the risk related with emerging contaminants.

The project was effective in attaining most of the pre-established dissemination target

objectives, sharing the project progress and its results with a great diversity of groups, e.g.

water industry and professionals, water and environmental authorities, academia, local

community.

The major direct environmental benefit (section 5.4.1) of LIFE Hymemb was the

demonstration of the feasibility and sustainability of an innovative advanced technology

(PAC/ceramic MF) able to improve the removal of challenging emerging contaminants,

gaining in water safety and reliability in comparison with conventional drinking water

treatment. The process resource efficiency greatly depends on where and how in the water

treatment sequence the PAC/MF is to be used. The raw water quality determines the pre-

treatment required and, therefore, where PAC/MF may be used. For low turbidity, low and

hydrophilic organic content waters, direct PAC/MF is feasible with in-line coagulation and

significant savings are possible in reagents (no ozone needed, 25% lower coagulant dose, no

flocculant and lower final chlorine doses), sludge (lower reagent doses produce less sludge)

and energy (equivalent energy consumption to conventional treatment and significant energy

savings of PAC/MF versus current membrane processes available for equivalent removal of

ECs).

LIFE Hymemb was relevant for European environmentally significant issues or policy on

water and may contribute to future updates of the water framework (WFD), drinking water



http://www.life-hymemb.eu/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/LIFE-Hymemb_Laymans-Report_PT.pdf


(DWD), and environmental quality standards (EQSD) directives. The project was relevant for

priority substances issue in two ways: i) the data resulting from an intense prototype’s

monitoring and the developed EC selection methodology provided some grounding for

“indicators” ongoing research area; ii) the project focused some of the priority substances of

EQSD, such as the hormones beta-estradiol and estrone, the anti-inflammatory diclofenac and

the macrolide antibiotics erythromycin and azithromycin.

Regarding long-term benefits and sustainability (section 5.4.2), the project results are

relevant for the ultimate goal of providing guidance about safe barriers in treatment trains of

WTPs and WWTPs – “safety credits” for technologies, and simpler and cost-effective

“indicators” for EC regular monitoring. The long-term economic benefits include the business

opportunities with the new technology and potential cost savings and regional development if

the technology is adopted. An important social benefit of the project is the contribution to

better informed professionals with key-roles in water decision matters (water industry, water

professionals, water and environment authorities, public administration) and education

(academia and community), allowing better informed decisions related to EC occurrence and

control technologies, as well as on low pressure membrane technology in general and

PAC/MF in particular.

The demonstration (section 5.4.3) allowed a better knowledge of PAC/MF technology

potential and application field, namely answers to where, when and how to use PAC/MF

technology, and this knowledge and data were processed for water practitioners (designers,

consultants and operators) use in the “Technical guidelines for PAC/MF application”.

As replicability and transferability are concerned, all LIFE Hymemb project outputs may

be used in the future with high replicability and transferability potential, and were/are

being/will be used by the consortium partners or by third parties. Project outputs include the

technical guidelines, the PAC/MF and PAC/CFS prototypes and the 4 tools/methodologies

delivered.

PAC/MF technology can be easily replicated, i.e. used in different drinking water treatment

plants, or transferred, i.e. be used for different purposes, namely for other microcontaminants

and applications, e.g. for water reclamation (wastewater treatment) aiming at safe and

unrestricted water reuse. The PAC/CFS prototype is to be used (with adaptations) in LIFE

IMPETUS (LIFE14 ENV/PT/000739), starting in 2017, whereas the PAC/MF prototype is

planned for demo projects with other Portuguese water utilities facing water quality issues.

The technology demonstration methodology, the benchmarking upgraded tool (PAStool),

the collaborative methodology developed for characterizing the stakeholders’ attitudes and

resistances towards innovation and the AHP methodology developed for social indicators in

“cross” CBA are considered successes and sound project outputs already replicated in one or

more projects. Examples are LIFE IMPETUS, dealing with EC control in urban wastewaters

by adsorption/coagulation processes, and iEQTA, a project to begin in the last quarter of 2017

directly funded by several water utilities and addressing the assessment and continuous

improvement of WTP and WWTP performance.

It is believed that, with this project, we were ultimately able to better prepare the water sector

for climate change adaptations and that future collaborations will be derived in the future.



3 Introduction

In the last years, scientists, regulators and the general public have expressed an increased

concern regarding the presence of emerging contaminants in drinking water. While many ECs

are directly introduced by anthropogenic actions (e.g. pesticides, endocrine disrupting

compounds, viruses, protozoan (oo)cysts) others are natural responses to these actions (e.g.

the cyanotoxins production due to phosphorus input) and they are both aggravated by climate

change. ECs are problematic for their potential environmental and chronic health effects and

their recalcitrance towards conventional water treatment: protozoan (oo)cysts for their

resistance to chemical oxidation/disinfection; natural organic matter (NOM) for its deleterious

effect on microcontaminants’ removal, its behaviour as major disinfection by-products’

precursor, chlorine demand and promotion of biofilm growth in the distribution networks; and

microcontaminants, such as cyanotoxins produced by toxic cyanobacterial (blue-green algal)

blooms, pesticides and pharmaceuticals, since they are dissolved organics, of intermediate to

low molar mass. Many ECs are not yet legislated in EU due to unknown occurrence and

unknown or inconclusive environmental effect (in risk cancer increase, bacterial resistance to

antibiotics and reproductive abnormalities in aquatic organisms) but the advances in analytical

methods and in cause-effect studies are driving the regulators’ attention and one may expect a

more restrictive legislation in a near future.

Climate change effects are responsible for sharp variations in raw water availability and

quality and therefore call for resilient treatment processes able to deal with this variability and

uncertainty. Climate change and anthropogenic pressures, as well as upcoming water quality

regulations, are therefore important drivers for the technological upgrade of the existing water

treatment plants. It is therefore crucial to prepare the water treatment sector, by developing

and demonstrating innovative water treatment technologies able to complement or replace the

conventional treatment. Demonstration pilot studies, in real operation conditions, will enable

to provide guidance about safe barriers in treatment trains of WTPs and WWTPs – “safety

credits” for technologies. Further, they will support the prioritization process and the update

of the “List of priority substances” and the “Watch List” monitoring mechanisms established

by the Environmental Quality Standards Directive (EQSD 2013/39/EU; first revision by

Decision 2015/495).

Hybrid membrane technologies, such as the innovative PAC/ceramic MF addressed in LIFE

Hymemb, are very good candidates to overcome the challenges involved, due to their

resilience to raw water quality fluctuations and ability to control particles, such as protozoan

(oo)cysts and bacteria, when standalone MF is used, or particles, natural organic matter

(NOM) and dissolved microcontaminants when using PAC/MF. Ceramic MF membranes are

better candidates for PAC/MF than polymeric ones due to their uniformity, strong chemical

and physical resistance and low fouling potential, responsible for high fluxes at low pressures

(< 1 bar), easy cleaning, high water recovery and long lifetimes (2-5 times the polymeric

membranes) and ability to process high solids loading. The capital costs involve a higher

initial investment but lower membrane replacement cost, and the operating costs are

potentially lower due to their energy efficiency. Despite these advantages, ceramic

membranes are still emerging in many European countries and are not yet used in Portugal.

Here, the resistances towards membrane technology are mostly related with the lack of

information and the high energy consumption myth, generalized from the reverse osmosis

process for water desalination.

Furthermore, earlier PAC/MF studies were mostly short-term, lab-scale investigations, under

controlled environment, hardly mimicking real operation conditions. PAC/MF ability as safe


and resilient barrier against ECs, as well as its cost-effectiveness and sustainability were

therefore yet to be demonstrated in real conditions at full (or pilot) scale.

LIFE Hymemb’s general objective was to demonstrate the feasibility and sustainability of

advanced membrane processes for the treatment of drinking water, in order to provide a safer

and more resilient barrier against emerging contaminants, with lower environmental impacts.

Specific objectives included:

Developing an innovative hybrid process, using a low-pressure ceramic membrane and

powdered activated carbon;

Conducting a two-year field test of a PAC/MF prototype, to demonstrate its

effectiveness, reliability and efficiency and to compare the advanced and the

conventional treatment processes;

Drafting recommended guidelines (for several Portuguese and European surface

drinking water scenarios) on PAC/MF application for safe EU control with a reduced

carbon footprint, i.e. with a 15% decrease in the consumption of chemicals of and

sludge production, keeping energy consumption to a minimum;

Carrying out a cost-benefit analysis of the process using field data gathered during the

project, as well as social indicators of stakeholders’ attitudes towards membrane

processes. LIFE Hymemb therefore expected to identify potential opportunities for

using PAC/MF technology in drinking water treatment.

The expected results were:

To optimize the operating conditions of the hybrid PAC/MF for effectively removing

the emerging contaminants targeted, whilst minimising membrane fouling - thus

increasing the technology's productivity and lifetime. The aim was to obtain a

significant decrease (15% target) in chemicals consumption and sludge production,

and to keep the energy consumption to a minimum in comparison with optimized

conventional treatment systems;

The development of comprehensive technical guidelines for upgrading conventional

drinking water treatment with PAC/MF and for its application Europe-wide;

To identify the main values, beliefs and attitudes towards membrane processes and

build a SWOT analysis on the use of PAC/MF for drinking water production;

To build bridges between engineering and social dimensions for an effective

technology transfer from R&D institutions to end-users; and

To quantify the environmental, economic and social impacts of each technology

studied.

The outcomes foreseen were technological and social innovation: i) the former by developing

PAC/MF technical guidelines and optimising PAC/MF operating conditions for effectively

removing the target ECs while minimising the membrane fouling and thus increasing the

membrane productivity and lifetime, aiming to minimize environmental impacts (decrease in

chemicals consumption and sludge production and keeping to the minimum the energy

consumption compared to the optimized conventional treatment); 2) the social innovation by

identifying the main values, believes and attitudes towards membrane processes and by

assessing the environmental, economic and social impacts of PAC/MF for drinking water

production.

Expected longer term results were the contribution to future updates of the European

environmental policy and legislation on water and, specifically, on the “Watch List”

monitoring mechanism and the prioritization process of the priority substances (EQSD) and

on drinking water quality.


4 Administrative part

4.1 Description of the management system

To achieve the objectives targeted, LNEC and AdA developed a 3-year working plan with

thirteen actions. LIFE Hymemb built on LNEC’s and AdA’s knowledge and data from earlier

projects. As so, the focus was on demonstration and social innovation, although advances on

knowledge were foreseen in (i) benchmarking metrics, (ii) “cross” cost-benefit analysis and

ultimately (iii) water treatment resilience to climate change and anthropogenic pressures.

The demonstration focus made the implementation actions to be dominated by an extensive

testing of the innovative technology (action B4) against the optimized conventional

technology (B3 - WTP and PAC/CFS) as well as on social innovation issues (B5). Auxiliary

actions included the site adaptation (A1) and the engineering and commissioning of the

prototype (B1), and the selection of PACs for both treatment options (B2).

The demonstration character called also for a strong and effective: (i) monitoring of the

results produced, which relied on standardized metrics for performance assessment and

benchmarking (C1), whereas the cost-benefit analysis included engineering and social

dimensions (C2), both actions feeding the socio-economic impact assessment (C3); (ii)

communication and dissemination (D1) and networking (D2).

Physical assets used in LIFE Hymemb included existing full-scale treatment (AdA) and lab

(AdA and LNEC) facilities, a new PAC/MF prototype and the adaptation of a LNEC

PAC/CFS prototype.

Technical and scientific expertise had three pillars: engineering, water quality and social

sciences, and the project actions involved 21 staff, 9 from LNEC and 12 from AdA:

LNEC - the project coordinator, M.J. Rosa (Coordinator of UQTA, the Water Quality and

Treatment Unit, and Head of the Urban Water Unit (NES)), one full-time dedicated PhD

researcher, 3 other UQTA’s PhD researchers and 1 lab technician, 2 PhD researchers on

Social Ecology and the financial/administrative officer;

AdA - the team leader, H. Lucas (AdA’s Operations Director), 4 water treatment

engineers, 1 operator, 1 maintenance engineer, the head of the Lab and 3 lab analysts, and

the financial manager.

The rights and duties of both beneficiaries were clearly established in the partnership

agreement, signed in December 2013, prior to the project start-up, and a copy was send to the

Commission.

LIFE Hymemb project management was structured in four organizational levels: Project

Manager, Team Leaders, Executive Board and Action Leaders, with the support of the

Financial Departments (Figure 1). Who’s who is available on the project website (www.life-

hymemb.eu).

The Executive Board (EB) was the project governing body, and supervised the activities

developed and the work progress. It included 6 full members, 3 from LNEC and 3 from AdA;

whenever necessary, other LNEC and AdA staff members were invited to attend the EB

meetings. 7 EB meetings were held, 4 hosting the external monitoring visits of F. Ferrão.

The Advisory Council had initially 4 members – A. Serra, CEO of Águas de Portugal

International, S.A.; H. Alegre, Head of LNEC Hydraulics and Environment Dept, former

Senior Vice-President of the International Water Association and a worldwide reference in

performance assessment; P. Freixial, Director of ERSAR Engineering Dept., the water


services regulator, who approves the investment plants for WTP construction and

rehabilitation; R. Matos, LNEC Principal Researcher and coordinator of BINGO H2020

project. In early 2016, it was extended to Jaime Melo Baptista, former President of ERSAR

and currently LNEC Principal Officer, and Cecília Alexandre, from ERSAR Water Quality

Dept., the national authority on drinking water quality. The counsellors participated in the

stakeholders’ workshops and seminars and in a dedicated meeting (section 5.2.2.14) for the

comprehensive discussion of the project progress and results. In addition to the technical-

scientific advice, they helped (and will continue to help) disseminating the project results at

national and international levels through their representative roles in the water sector.

Figure 1 Organigramme of LIFE Hymemb Project

LIFE Hymemb management was driven by project goals, and a sound monitoring of each

action progress was conducted through progress indicators using a tool developed during the

project’s first quarter the Monitoring Scheme Protocol (MSP) (action E1 Deliverable), . The

MSP was updated with the actions’ progress in every EB meeting.

Regular meetings, either EB meetings or Action Leaders’ meetings, were held alternately in

Lisbon (hosted by LNEC) and in Algarve (hosted by AdA). The participants were the project

team members of both beneficiaries, including those responsible for the administrative and

financial issues in both institutions. During the project timeline, 11 meetings were held (Table

1), one of them an EBM/Advisory Council meeting that took place at LNEC (Lisbon) in 29th

April 2016. The LIFE national contact point, Dr. Isabel Lico (from APA), participated in two

meetings and Dr. Filipa Ferrão (Neemo External Monitor) visited the project 4 times. The

meetings held in 2015 and 2016 at Alcantarilha WTP included visits to the WTP and/or to the

prototypes.

The meetings were arranged regularly by LNEC, the coordinating beneficiary. LNEC

proposed the dates, local and topics to discuss; invited the participants; disclosed the meeting

agenda in advance and asked for beneficiaries’ contributions; prepared a presentation with the

progress of each action; encouraged topic discussion and alerted for deliverables and other


progress indicators’ deadlines. AdA provided the necessary technical/financial documents and

information to LNEC, controlled the deadlines of their deliverables and organized the meeting

room and all necessary equipment when the meeting was in the Algarve. Each action leader

was responsible for the action progress and reported to the project leader periodically and to

all other members during project meetings.

Table 1 LIFE Hymemb meetings held during the project timeline

Year Date Meeting Place

2014

23/01/2014 Action Leaders Meeting (Kick-off) LNEC, Lisbon

21/03/2014 Action Leaders Meeting Alcantarilha WTP, Algarve

22/05/2014 EB meeting (1st Monitoring Visit) LNEC, Lisbon

13/11/2014 EB meeting Web Meeting

2015

22/01/2015 Action Leaders Meeting Web Meeting

25/05/2015 EB meeting (2nd

Monitoring Visit) Alcantarilha WTP, Algarve

17/07/2015 Action Leaders Meeting Web Meeting

2016

21/01/2016 EB meeting Web & in-person meeting in Alcantarilha WTP

29/04/2016 EB meeting /Advisory Council Meeting LNEC, Lisbon

27/06/2016 EB meeting (3rd

Monitoring Visit) Alcantarilha WTP, Algarve

18/11/2016 EB meeting (4th

Monitoring Visit) LNEC, Lisbon

Decisions concerning the project technical and financial management occurred during the

Executive Board Meetings and the decisions were communicated by the project manager (or

representative) to all participants or by each leader to its team. The Action Leaders’ meetings

were particularly focused on sharing the actions’ main progresses, preparing the future work

and deciding/organising technical aspects and collaborations. To reduce the project carbon

footprint, it was decided that some meetings would be held by web conferencing.

LIFE Hymemb staff was also gathered in three Technical Groups (TGs), transversal to all

actions, namely TG Engineering, TG Water quality and TG Social studies. Countless contacts

and casual meetings were made and information/expertise was shared to operationalise the

different actions during the project timeline. Besides the facilitators (one from each party),

those non-formal meetings gathered technical staff, variable according to the meeting agenda.

Since May’15 and after the prototype start-up, there were regular visits of LNEC Hymembers

to Alcantarilha WTP (once a week or more) for a close follow-up of the prototype operation.

These visits were also used for other issues needed, such as Technical Group contacts and

future work preparation.

LIFE Hymemb involved one amendment to Grant Agreement. Given the impossibility of

renting a PAC/MF pilot plant fulfilling the technical and financial criteria set out in the

proposal, in October 2014, an amendment request was submitted to the Commission. The

Amendment No 1 to Grant Agreement for Project LIFE12 ENV/PT/001154, hereafter

Amendment to GA, featured the prototype design by LNEC and its assembly by a national

company, and became valid on January 19th

2015. Due to the reallocation of 50,000 €, from

“External assistance costs” and “Other costs” to “Prototype costs”, the amendment introduced

changes to the original financial forms (forms F3, F4c , F7 FA1 and FB). Besides the budget

reallocation, timeline adjustments were made to actions A1, B1, B3, B4 and C2 and to the due

dates of related deliverables and milestone. The changes proposed did not alter the objectives

of LIFE Hymemb, nor the technology or the expected results. All deliverables and milestones

remained, only with minor adjustments in due dates or period reported.


4.2 Evaluation of the management system

Reporting to Commission (Inception report, Progress report and Final report) was always

accomplished on time with positive feedbacks. Communication with External Monitor was

always very easy, helpful and fruitful, with promptly feedback by telephone or email. The

communication with the Commission was also always very cordial and explanatory.

All Hymemb’s objectives were fulfilled and the budget was fully executed. All deliverables

were accomplished, with 2 exceptions (16 Analytical monitoring reports instead of 21 due to

PAC/MF prototype late start-up and peer-reviewed papers under preparation) and three

additional reports. Figure 2 presents the overall progress of the project, comparing the

proposed schedule (as informed in Amendment to GA) with the actual time schedule.

The major problem for project development was connected with the delay in PAC/MF

prototype construction, assembling and testing. The solution (approved in the Amendment to

GA) of building a PAC/MF prototype designed by LNEC was successfully achieved but took

longer than anticipated, and resulted in a 4-month delay in action B4 and, to some extent, in

actions C1 and C2. Although a catch-up plan was successfully implemented and the timely

completion of the project was not compromised, it required an intensification of the field

testing until the last month of the project which affected the timely submission of 3 papers to

peer-reviewed journals (action D1).

The arrangements contained in the partnership agreement were followed without significant

deviations. LNEC and AdA members had already a long experience of working together in

different projects and their expertise areas complemented well. LNEC team was particularly

important for PAC/MF design and operation, performance assessment and social studies, and

AdA team for the strong analytical component of the project and the prototype maintenance

and technical assistance.


Tasks/Activities 2014 2015 2016

1T 2T 3T 4T 1T 2T 3T 4T 1T 2T 3T 4T

Action A.1 Proposed

Actual

Action B.1 Proposed

Actual

Action B.2 Proposed

Actual

Action B.3 Proposed

Actual

Action B.4 Proposed

Actual

Action B.5 Proposed

Actual

Action C.1 Proposed

Actual

Action C.2 Proposed

Actual

Action C.3 Proposed

Actual

Action D.1 Proposed

Actual

Action D.2 Proposed

Actual

Action E.1 Proposed

Actual

Figure 2 Overall progress of the project (proposed schedule as informed in Amendment to GA).


5 Technical part

5.1 Technical execution per action

This section covers the execution of the preparatory, implementation and monitoring actions

developed throughout the project timeline, from January 1st 2014 to December 31

st 2016. As

requested, action E1 (management) was already approached in section 4 and actions D1 and

D2 (dissemination) will be developed in section 5.4..

5.1.1 Action A1 - Site adaptation for the prototype

Foreseen dates (as informed in Amendment to GA):

Jan. 2014 - Mar. 2014 July 2014 - Feb. 2015 Objectives achievement

Achieved

Additional work performed Actual dates: Jan. 2014 - May 2015

What has been done

AdA had to provide proper settings and conditions for PAC/MF prototype installation and

operation. After considerations regarding WTP configuration and accessibility to treatment

operations, the site selected to install the PAC/MF prototype was at the ending of the WTP, in

the building above the treated water cistern and containing the water supply pumps.

Adaptations of the area had to be performed, such as: a separator structure to ensure a proper

soundproofing (Figure 3); power supply; pumps, pipes and fittings for process water

connections and wastewater discharge. After PAC/MF installation on-site, in May 2015, a

fine-tuning of the electrical and water connections was performed.

Five types of water (raw water, ozonated water, decanted water, filtered water, treated water)

were available nearby the prototype, with easier and faster transitions (only a valve switch).

The site was also adapted for installing a PAC/CFS prototype (Figure 4), not initially

foreseen. This allowed using the PAC/CFS prototype (for action B3) in parallel with the

PAC/MF prototype (for action B4), a measure used to overcome the limitation of not having

the ECs targeted in the water to be treated in Alcantarilha WTP (section 5.1.4).

Additional works:

- A separator structure to ensure a proper soundproofing was installed

- A fifth connection was installed for supplying treated water, e.g. for washing and preparing

the reagents

- Water and wastewater connections for PAC/CFS prototype

Pipes, fittings, valves, flowmeter, level floater were installed.

Figure 3 Site adaptation; before (left) and after (right) LIFE Hymemb.


Figure 4 PAC/CFS site adaptations: valves, pipes, fittings, flowmeter, level regulation.

Problems encountered and how they were managed

The additional works introduced costs not foreseen, but were essential for an adequate site

adaptation and to enable the effective implementation of the measures included in the

contingency plan (section 5.3). This over-expenditure was accommodated between actions.

Progress indicators

- Number of places prepared: 5 (target 4)

Deliverables and milestones

No milestones and deliverables were foreseen.

Perspectives for continuing the action after the end of the project

The room at Alcantarilha WTP is to be used in future demo projects.


5.1.2 Action B1 - PAC/MF prototype engineering and commissioning

Foreseen start date: Jan. 2014

Foreseen end date: Feb. 2015 (as informed in the Amendment to GA)

Objectives achievement

Achieved

Actual start date: Jan. 2014 Actual end date: June 2015

What has been done

LNEC-NES had to specify the technical requirements of the ceramic membrane and of the

PAC/MF prototype, select the supplier and co-develop the prototype engineering (action

B1.1) and to ensure the prototype’s commissioning (action B1.2)

Prototype engineering (action B1.1) – the prototype design required drawing the prototype

linear diagram, designing all components (number/dimensions/capacities of membranes,

tanks, pumps and valves), defining the necessary instrumentation and main characteristics

(range, precision) and defining the prototype’s working program (operation functions,

equipment state, triggers, processes). An international and national procurement of suppliers

for ceramic membrane pilots was performed, with 13 companies being contacted, and ORM, a

national engineering company was selected. ORM possessed a large experience in building

ceramic MF pilots (not in PAC/MF hybrid processes, for which detailed engineering

specifications from LNEC were required) and presented the lowest price. The contracting

procedure for building and assembling the prototype occurred early March’15 between

LNEC, AdA and ORM. The prototype was then built and set in-place in Alcantarilha WTP

(Figure 5) late May 2015.

Prototype commissioning (action B1.2) - after the prototype start-up, initial tests were

carried out for checking the equipment workability, the integrity of the membranes and leaks

in the connections. The prototype automation and remote control were then implemented and

checked and the operation manual was prepared and issued (deliverable of action B1). The

prototype was then commissioned late June – this process involved ORM, LNEC and AdA

staff.

Figure 5 PAC/MF prototype assembling and installation at Alcantarilha WTP



Due to the impossibility of renting a PAC/MF prototype fulfilling all the technical and

financial criteria, an Amendment to GA was submitted to the Commission and was approved

in Jan.’15, which featured the prototype design by LNEC and its assembly by a national

company.

PAC/MF prototype was fully operational in early July 2015, 4 months later than foreseen in

the amendment to GA. This delay was mostly due to the complexity of the automation and

remote control of the prototype. This delay directly affected action B4 and, to some extent,

actions C1 and C2. A catch-up plan was successfully implemented and the timely completion

of the project was not compromised, but it required an intensification of the field testing until

the last month of the project which affected the timely submission of 3 papers to peer-

reviewed journals (action D1).

Progress indicators

- The delivery of PAC/MF prototype at AdA’s WTP including its operation manual


(M) PAC/MF prototype commissioned, June 2015

(D) PAC/MF prototype in-place, commissioned and with the operation manual, May 2015

(interim version), July 2015 (definitive version)


The PAC/MF prototype is expected to be used in other demonstrations for water treatment

and wastewater reuse (replicability and transferability) as explained in the After-LIFE

communication plan; for this, other Portuguese water utilities facing water quality issues will

be approached by LNEC.


5.1.3 Action B2 - Selection of PACs for conventional addition and for PAC/MF

Foreseen start date: Jan. 2014 Foreseen end date: June 2014 Objectives achievement

Achieved

Actual start date: Jan. 2014 Actual end date: June 2014

What has been done

LNEC-NES had to identify a set of commercial carbons adequate for controlling the target

contaminants through PAC conventional addition and PAC/MF, to be tested in actions B3 and

B4.

This action was completed in June 30th

2014 and extra work was performed in April 2015

when lab studies (adsorption kinetics) were performed with Alcantarilha ozonated water and 9

PACs.

The selection of the powdered activated carbons adequate to control the target contaminants

through PAC conventional addition (PAC/CFS) and the hybrid PAC/MF process followed a

3-step methodology developed in UQTA-NES/LNEC (Figure 6).

Figure 6 PAC selection methodology

This 3-step methodology consists of: i) assortment of a short-list of ECs representative of the

target contaminants; ii) pre-selection of commercial PACs with the adequate chemical and

textural properties for each application (PAC/MF or PAC/CFS) through a classification/

elimination process based on average particle size, surface charge and pore volume


distribution (pre-selected PACs were characterized for their elemental composition,

porosimetry and point of zero charge - pHpzc); iii) to carry out tests of adsorption kinetics with

the selected PACs and a short-list of ECs in model waters and in natural waters from

Alcantarilha WTP.

Four PACs were tested for PAC/CFS and five for PAC/MF. The EC short-list included,

besides natural organic matter, 5 pharmaceuticals (17α-ethinylestradiol, atenolol,

carbamazepine, diclofenac and paracetamol), 1 pesticide (cymoxanil) and 4 cyanotoxins

(microcystin-LR, microcystin-LY, microcystin-LW and microcystin-LF). This methodology

allowed selecting one PAC for each application – Sorbopor MV121 (< 45 m average particle

diameter, 6.4 pHpzc and 43% mesoporosity) for PAC/CFS (action B3) and Norit SA Super

(15 m average particle diameter, 11.3 pHpzc and 53% mesoporosity) for PAC/MF (action

B4).

Additional works:

- Assessment of the adsorption efficiency of 9 PACs for natural organic matter of

Alcantarilha WTP. Results confirmed the earlier PAC selection for EC control, i.e. PAC

MV 121 for PAC/CFS and PAC Norit SA-Super for PAC/MF.


No relevant problems were encountered.

Progress indicators

- Short-list of 10 ECs for developing adsorption tests: 5 pharmaceuticals, 1 pesticide, 4

microcystins were selected (target = 10);

- Pre-selection of PACs: 9 PACs were pre-selected for testing (target = 6).


(D) Report on PAC selection and characterization for PAC/CFS and PAC/MF, June 2014

(M) 3 PACs selected for PAC/CFS and 3 sets of ECs/water quality scenarios, June 2014

(M) 3 PACs selected for PAC/MF and 3 sets of ECs/water quality scenarios, June 2014


The EC and PAC selection methodology is considered a success and a sound project output

already replicated in two LIFE projects dealing with EC control in urban wastewaters by

adsorption (LIFE IMPETUS) or adsorption/membrane processes (LIFE aWARE) aiming at

water reuse.


5.1.4 Action B3 - Optimization of PAC conventional addition

Foreseen start date: Oct. 2014

Foreseen end date: Nov. 2016 (informed in the Amendment to GA)


Achieved

Actual start date: Oct. 2014 Actual end date: Dec. 2016

What has been done

LNEC-NES & AdA had to optimize PAC conventional addition in Alcantarilha WTP for the

removal of the target contaminants and to provide data and knowledge for a sound

benchmarking between the conventional PAC addition and the new process, i.e. PAC/CFS vs.

PAC/MF.

Action B3 was successfully concluded within the project timeline, achieving all the proposed

objectives.

The activities developed were:

• Identification of the key operating conditions and analytical parameters to

assess/optimize the performance of PAC conventional addition.

• Design of an intensified analytical monitoring plan in Alcantarilha WTP. Compared to

the regular WTP monitoring plan, this intensified plan included extra sampling places,

increased sampling frequency and additional control parameters. The control parameters

were selected upon the importance for assessing the performance of PAC/CFS stage, their

importance/diversity as emerging contaminants targeted by LIFE Hymemb, as well as the

feasibility and affordability of their analysis by an external laboratory. The latter took

into consideration the set of PhCs analysed, the quantification limits per PhC, the time-

period to deliver the analysis results and the commercial availability and price of the

contaminant to be used in the spiking tests. This required a wide and international

procurement and a comprehensive characterization of the physical/chemical properties

determining their removal by the conventional and the advanced treatments. This key

time-consuming activity was distributed between actions B3 and B4. A final set of 22

pharmaceuticals and 10 pesticides was chosen.

• Development of the procedures for sampling, sample conservation and transport, analysis

and reporting routines.

• Development of the template for the Monthly Analytical Monitoring Reports;

• Implementation of the intensified analytical monitoring plan in Alcantarilha WTP from

May 2015 to December 2016. ;

• Optimization of PAC conventional addition in Alcantarilha WTP. To overcome the

problems encountered (detailed below), the two following sub-actions were developed.

Optimization of PAC conventional addition in Alcantarilha WTP for the removal of

regular contaminants

The data produced by the monitoring plan, as well as historical and up-to-date data on water

quality water and key operating conditions were used to assess the PAC/CFS performance in

Alcantarilha WTP through performance indices of water quality, removal efficiency and

operating conditions, in articulation with action C1.

PAStool files gathered the data needed for assessing and improving the performance, i.e. the

water quality data and the key operating conditions between Jan. 2015 and Aug. 2016, and


from 6 periods of 2013-2014, chosen for being representative of different treatment

conditions. The results were uploaded to PAStool files and the corresponding indices of water

quality were computed.

The results showed that filtration was an essential step in Alcantarilha WTP for ensuring

acceptable-good turbidity and aluminium performances after PAC/CFS. Identified situations

of PAC/CFS unsatisfactory performance were mostly related to economic aspects rather than

technical, i.e. to excessive velocity gradients and detention times and too low overflows and

hydraulic loadings, and therefore they did not impair the removal efficiencies in PAC/CFS

and in filtration.

The testing of full-scale measures for NOM removal improvement, e.g. PAC replacement

and/or dose increase, were considered for Alcantarilha WTP but it was decided not to be

implemented since the risks of PAC fines passing downstream to the treated water were not

balanced by the expected benefits on water quality – the water quality performance

assessment showed an acceptable NOM performance for decanted water and a low potential

formation of oxidation by-products.

Optimization of PAC conventional addition for EC removal at pilot scale

Given the absence of ECs in Alcantarilha WTP raw water, the testing of the PAC selected in

action B2 for EC removal was conducted through EC spiking tests in a LNEC’s owned

PAC/CFS prototype not foreseen in the proposal. After setting-up the PAC/CFS prototype in

Alcantarilha WTP and carrying out the preparatory tests (jar tests, prototype tests), four

spiking tests were performed, 2 with pesticide addition to ozonated & raw water and 2 with

PhC addition to ozonated water.

For a sound benchmarking between PAC/MF and PAC/CFS the EC spiking tests were

conducted in consecutive days. The optimized operating conditions to be used in the spiking

tests were established through jar tests, preparatory tests with the PAC/CFS prototype (Figure

7) and performance assessment (PAStool). Three different optimization strategies to

maximize EC removal were tested during the spiking tests and compared with the up-to-the-

moment WTP operating conditions (condition 1). These were: the use of a more adequate

PAC (MV121, selected in action B2) at higher doses and increased contact time condition

2; maintaining the PAC applied in Alcantarilha WTP, but maximizing the PAC dose

condition 3; using PAC MV121 at higher dosing but maintaining the PAC contact time

condition 4.

For the three optimization strategies tested, removal ranged between 65% and 79% for PhCs

and 72% and 83% for pesticides. For each contaminant, different water quality performance

indices were obtained, oscillating between unsatisfactory to good. The unsatisfactory

performance of some ECs tested was partially explained by the demanding conditions used

(high initial concentration and a minimal acceptable value of 0.1 g/L for acceptable

performance), as the amenability to removal of those compounds was confirmed by removal

efficiencies 80%, e.g. carbamazepine, fluoxetine and bezafibrate). For others, e.g. the

antibiotic sulfamethoxazole and the pesticides bentazone and dimethoate, unsatisfactory

performance and low removal were systematically verified. The spiked contaminants were

classified in three groups based on their amenability to be removed by PAC/CFS, depending

on the water quality indices performance as well as on their percentage removal.

Overall, better performance and percentage removals were observed when using conditions 2

and 4, that mostly differed in PAC contact time (higher for condition 2). Although

comparable EC removal was obtained with condition 3, this was considered as a high risk


strategy since it required a high dose of PAC MV118, which increased the turbidity residuals.

Several tests revealed opposite PAC effects on turbidity and NOM removal, NOM

beneficiating from PAC addition but turbidity being hampered by PAC increase. These results

advise the preferential use of PACMV121 in detriment of PAC MV118, keeping PAC doses

below 10 mg/L and ensuring a safe downstream barrier to fine PAC particles.


With few exceptions (4 PhCs were detected in concentrations very close to the quantification

limit), no pharmaceuticals and pesticides occurred in Alcantarilha WTP intake water (in 2013,

Funcho dam was replaced by Odelouca dam, a new reservoir, the biggest in the Algarve).

This was a risk foreseen in the contingency plan of the project. Due to these results, a

differentiated methodology was used for optimization of PAC/CFS for removing regular

contaminants (e.g. NOM and turbidity), naturally present in Alcantarilha WTP water, or ECs

(pharmaceuticals, pesticides). Performance indices with Alcantarilha full-scale WTP data

were used to assess the performance and to optimize the regular contaminants removal, while

EC spiking tests were conducted in a PAC/CFS prototype.

Figure 7 PAC/CFS optimization in jar tests (top) and PAC/CFS prototype tests (bottom)

Progress indicators

- Number of PACs tested: 2

- Number of parameters analysed: 63 (7 regular parameters, THMFP, 2 cyanotoxins, 28 PhCs, 13 pesticides, 12 microbiological parameters)

- Number of operating conditions tested: 19 conditions assessed in the WTP;

76 values of 8 operating conditions essayed in jar tests and PAC/CFS prototype


(D) 1st report on PAC conventional addition, Sept. 2015

(D) Final report on PAC conventional addition, Dec. 2016



Action B3 outputs are to be transferred to wastewater treatment in the ongoing LIFE

IMPETUS project and the PAC/CFS prototype (after adaptations) is to be installed in a

WWTP in the Lisbon area.


5.1.5 Action B4 - Long-term demonstration and optimization of PAC/MF

Foreseen start date: Oct. 2014

Foreseen end date: Nov. 2016 (informed in the Amendment to GA)


Achieved

Actual start date: Oct. 2014 Actual end date: Dec. 2016

What has been done

A representative list of target ECs to be monitored in PAC/MF prototype was selected as

detailed in action B3 (shared activity between actions B3 and B4). This list included 22

pharmaceuticals, 10 pesticides, 2 cyanotoxins, microbiological indicators (bacteriophages for

viruses; aerobic endospores for protozoan (oo)cysts) and oxidation by-products

(trihalomethanes) formation potential (THMFP).

An analytical monitoring plan for controlling the water quality before and after PAC/MF

treatment was designed. It included regular parameters and new parameters (target ECs).

Regular daily, weekly and monthly maintenance/monitoring operation procedures for

PAC/MF prototype were defined. Procedures for assuring the prototype continuous operation

and long-term demonstration were established.

PAC/MF prototype operation control methods were defined for assessing the prototype’s

performance under different conditions: i) registering each minute the prototype operating

data; ii) exporting those data to an excel file and computing the key variables for decisions on

a daily-basis; iii) applying and validating PAStool for PAC/MF performance assessment

(articulation with action C1). PAC/MF prototype had acquisition and remote transmission of

operating data and remote control of the main functions. Key-variables computed for daily-

basis control were filtration cycle-averaged values of transmembrane pressure (TMP), intake

pressure, permeate flux, permeability and fouling rate.

The demonstration plan was designed taking into consideration the expected raw water

fluctuations and the transferability of the results. The plan implementation was detailed and

scheduled and all requisites needed were gathered.

Intensive long-term testing of PAC/MF technology in Alcantarilha WTP was carried out

between July 2015 and December 2016, during which the analytical monitoring plan and the

maintenance/monitoring operation procedures were implemented.

The prototype operated continuously (for 1.5 years) with the feed water coming from 4 points

of the treatment sequence (raw, ozonated, decanted and filtered waters). The testing period of

each water included stand-alone MF operation, PAC/MF operation and EC spiking tests

(Figure 8). PAC/MF technology successfully demonstrated its resilience, efficiency for EC

control and cost-benefit efficiency..

PAC/MF operating conditions were optimized. Several operating conditions were tested and a

set of feasible operating conditions was defined for each water. This set of feasible operating

conditions balanced flux, water recovery, treatment capacity, backwash frequency and

chemically enhanced backwash (CEB) intervals. The potential membrane fouling was

assessed and membrane cleaning strategies were successfully developed. High fluxes (154 -

283 L / h.m2) @ 0.6 - 0.8 bar), filtration time ( 2 hours), water recovery ( 97%) and

treatment capacity (4.6 - 9.5 m3/m

2.day.bar) were obtained with the four tested waters. As

expected, higher treatment capacity was obtained when permeating filtered water, while not

so much different results were obtained with the three remaining waters (slightly better for

decanted water). When treating non-clarified water (raw and ozonated waters) a pre-treatment


was required with in-line alum coagulation (3 mg/L Al2O3) for minimizing the membrane

fouling.

PAC/MF performance was assessed in terms of water quality concerning regular parameters,

naturally occurring in the prototype feed. The assessment involved the upload of the water

quality data in the PAStool files and the subsequent computing of the performance indices of

water quality (in coordination with action C1). In addition, an analysis of the total percentage

removal was also conducted for parameters associated with natural organic matter (UV254nm

and THMFP) and microbiological indicators (bacteriophages and endospores).

Figure 8 PAC/MF demo in Alcantarilha WTP: operation optimization and spiking tests

Very good results were obtained in terms of water quality performance. MF was able to

maintain good-excellent turbidity performance regardless of the intake water quality,

warranting a high efficacy and reliability with turbidity values between 0.01 NTU (the

turbidimeter’s detection limit) and 0.03 NTU and aluminium residuals < 46 g/L when in-line

coagulation was used as membrane pre-treatment for raw and ozonated waters. After

PAC/MF or PAC/alum/MF treatment, improved water quality performance was always

observed in the natural organic matter water (TOC and DOC), achieving good water quality

performance with raw water, acceptable-good status with ozonated water, mostly good

performance with decanted water and acceptable-good status with filtered water. PAC/MF

ensured a full-removal of aerobic endospores indicators for protozoan (oo)cysts’ removal

by this technology and, although PAC/MF was not a full barrier against viruses

(bacteriophages), it highly improved their removal from 4 - 12 PFU/100 mL to

0 - 1 PFU/100 mL in the treated water.


A total of 12 EC spiking trials were conducted with different background waters (2 with raw

water, 3 with ozonated water, 6 with decanted water and 1 with filtered water), class of

contaminants, contaminant initial concentrations and PAC doses. Six spiking tests were

performed with 10-19 pharmaceuticals (8.8-17.5 g/L total-PhCs), seven with 2-10 pesticides

(1.3-11 g/L total-pesticides) and one test with a microcystins extract (1.3 g/L in

microcystin-LR). To assess the stability of the water quality produced by PAC/MF, an 8-day

spiking test was carried out with caffeine and permeate samples were taken during a 6-day

period with PAC addition. PAC/MF performance was assessed in terms of assessment of

water quality concerning ECs. The spiking tests results of water quality were compiled in

PAStool files and performance indices of water quality were compiled for each contaminant

(in coordination with action C1). An analysis of the percentage removal of total

pharmaceuticals, pesticides and microcystins was also carried out.

PAC/MF achieved 83-98% removal of total-PhCs, 78-98% of total-pesticides and > 85%

of microcystins (no quantification in treated water) in the spiking tests using 2-18 mg/L

PAC. Further, the 8-day trial with caffeine showed the long-term stability in the PAC/MF

permeate concentration. Overall, PAC/MF was able to improve the water quality performance

for pharmaceuticals and pesticides from unsatisfactory to good or acceptable-good

performance. Nevertheless, the contaminants presented distinct behaviour and were classified

in three groups based on their amenability to be removed by PAC/MF, depending on the

performance assessment water quality, on the percentage removal consistency observed in all

spiking tests and removals observed when low PAC doses were used (high competition

scenario). The compounds less amenable to PAC/MF removal, such as the antibiotic

sulfamethoxazole and the pesticide bentazone, were found to be good candidates for

challenging treatment tests in future demos and for monitoring the treatment effectiveness.

PAC dose was determinant for water quality, particularly for the compounds less amenable to

adsorption. For the waters tested, 2 mg/L PAC achieved 75% total-ECs removal, 5 mg/L PAC

achieved 85% total-ECs removal and 10 mg/L PAC achieved removals above 90%. In terms

of natural organic matter, low formation potential was observed for all waters and PAC doses,

and a good and reliable performance was achieved with 10 mg/L and above.

A preliminary PAC/MF economic analysis was carried out. By comparing the costs of the

PAC/MF process for treating the four different intake waters studied, similar PAC/MF costs

were obtained for the raw, ozonated and decanted waters, with the first two presenting almost

identical costs, and lower costs were obtained for the filtered water intake. The results show

that performing additional pre-treatment like ozonation or clarification does not offer any

advantage for the PAC/MF process. The cost functions developed show a total PAC/MF

cost of 0.08-0.12 €/m3, including investment and operation costs, for treating low turbidity

(0.1-5 NTU) and low DOC concentration (1-3 mgC/L) intake waters at a flow rate of

100 000 m3/day.

After testing PAC/MF with the feed water coming from four different points of the

Alcantarilha treatment sequence, and taking into account the operating and water quality

results and the economic analysis, it is concluded that PAC/MF technology should be

considered as an alternative to the whole conventional treatment train, with in-line

coagulation needed, or as post-treatment of filtered water. In all cases, as with the

conventional treatment, a final disinfection step would be needed afterwards to ensure a

disinfectant residual in the water distribution system.

LNEC team was particularly important for PAC/MF operation, tests design and execution and

performance assessment, and AdA team for the strong analytical monitoring of the action, the

prototype maintenance and technical assistance.



This action started in October 2014 (as initially planned in the proposal) to have all plans and

programmes (external lab selected for analysing the pharmaceutical compounds, analytical

monitoring plan, demonstration plan, maintenance/monitoring operation procedures for

PAC/MF prototype and prototype operation control methods) ready for starting the PAC/MF

demo in due time.

However, the effective demonstration of the PAC/MF technology started with a 4-month

delay, due to the deferral related with the acquisition and construction of PAC/MF prototype

(May’15 instead of Feb.’15) and with the successful implementation of its remote control

(June 15). After the start-up of the demo actions, unintended shut-downs/interruptions of

PAC/MF operation were verified, some requiring improvements/corrections of the prototype

(carried out by ORM, at no expenses for the project), others mostly resulted from damaged

communication modules, essential components for prototype automation and remote control.

These problems kept the PAC/MF inoperative in January and August 2016. Those two

reasons, the late start of action and the interruptions, explain why 16 Analytical Monitoring

Reports were issued instead of 21, as foreseen in the Amendment to GA.

Interruptions/delays are explained by the high specificity and flexibility of this non-

commercial product and did not compromise the objectives established for the project, which

were fully achieved. A catch-up plan was implemented, which included an intensification of

the experiments and extension of the demonstration period until the project end. Additionally,

an UPS was installed in PAC/MF prototype for protecting the electric system from the

frequent surges and brown-outs which were responsible for the prototype stopping and

component failure.

Progress indicators

- Reports on time, 1 analytical report/month: 16

- Number of contaminants tested/treatment sequence tested: 204

- Number of operating conditions tested/treatment sequence tested: 100


(D) 1st report on PAC/MF, Sept. 2015

(D) 16 analytical monitoring reports, Dec. 2016

(D) Final Report on PAC/MF, Dec. 2016


The prototype is expected to be used in other demonstrations for water treatment and

wastewater reuse (replicability and transferability) as explained in the After-LIFE

communication plan; for this, other Portuguese water utilities facing water quality issues will

be approached by LNEC. The technology demonstration methodology is considered a success

and a sound project output already replicated in two LIFE projects dealing with EC control in

urban wastewaters by adsorption (LIFE IMPETUS) or adsorption/membrane processes (LIFE

aWARE) aiming at water reuse.


5.1.6 Action B5 - Characterization of stakeholders’ attitudes towards membrane

processes

Foreseen dates:

Jan. 2014 - Dec. 2014 Jan. 2016 – Sep. 2016 Objectives achievement

Achieved

Actual dates: Jan. 2014 - Dec. 2014 Jan. 2016 – Nov. 2016

What has been done

LNEC-NUT with the support of LNEC-NES and AdA for the technology related issues had to

identify the main values, believes and attitudes towards membrane processes, to raise

awareness and to build bridges between engineering and social dimensions for an effective

technology transfer from R&D to end-users. Active and collaborative methodologies were

implemented to achieve these purposes, and two stakeholders workshops were conducted, one

before and the other after producing the LIFE Hymemb results, to verify the project impact on

the stakeholders’ believes/attitudes.

The first stakeholders’ workshop took place on December 2nd

2014, involving 31 participants

from the different areas of the stakeholders’ panel structure in a collaborative and highly

productive journey. The stakeholders’ panel was therefore consolidated. It included the

members of the Advisory Board.

One of the most relevant conclusions of the first workshop was that the costs of installation

and the adjustment and operation of the new technology (particularly in relation to initial

investments and energy operating costs) were key issues for the decision-making and the

possible adoption of the new technology. The perception of high initial investments and the

uncertainties on the energy performance counteracted with the perception of widespread

benefits in the dimensions of public health and environmental impacts. These analytical

dimensions were to be explored in subsequent actions (C2 and C3).

The second workshop took place in September 27th

2016 and involved 22 participants from

the different stakeholders’ panel structure areas: Owner Utilities (4 entities); Operators of

Water Facilities (2 entities); Builders (2 entities); Regulators (2 entities) and R&D&I (1

entity). This workshop attracted mainly entities with a direct key role on the technology

adoption, and the participants were very active and interested. This resulted in permanent,

very fruitful and lively debates around the presentations of PAC/MF demonstration results

and further topics developed within the scope of PAC/MF impacts assessment (actions C2 and

C3).

Participants were involved in an AHP (Analytical Hierarchical Process) exercise and in a

Collective Impact Panel around 5 selected dimensions: (1) well-being and public health; (2)

dynamics in local economy; (3) regional development; (4) demography; and (5) governance.

Three main challenges have been addressed as settings for PAC/MF application:

(1) the intensification of tourism and new pressures over the territory and water demand;

(2) the impact of climatic changes in water availability, quality and safety; and

(3) the integrated and collaborative water governance profiles in need.

For each of those challenges it was identified that PAC/MF presented relevant potentials in

comparison with conventional water treatment solutions, namely;

a) by providing a more responsive, flexible and prompt handling solution to cope with

the new pressures over the territory and to ensure social equity to water accessibility;


b) by removing emerging contaminants, reinforcing water quality and safety provision

and contributing to consumers well-being and general public health; and

c) by stressing new water governance solutions cutting across the existing regulatory and

regulation systems.

Also, some ideas have been disassembled in relation to more simple perceptions around

impact configurations and costs structure associated to PAC/MF, while others were boosted,

mainly underlining:

(i) a better awareness and comprehension around transition challenges from adaptation

scenarios towards anticipatory and pro-active ones;

(ii) the role that PAC/MF can play in these transitions; and

(iii) their relevance to stress and mobilize innovation solutions towards a more

collaborative water governance engaging relevant and diverse stakeholders.

Besides, a Voting exercise, which was repeated in two tasks (actions B5 and C2), allowed us

to verify to what extent the involvement of the stakeholders in project results was important to

change their pattern or judgment profiles about the adoption of the new technology.

Figure 9 illustrates the results obtained to demonstrate the change of attitudes achieved during

the project, which were measured in two key moments of stakeholder involvement, before and

after LIFE Hymemb results: the first three columns on the right side of the table concerns the

voting results of the first stakeholders’ workshop (OCT1) and the last three columns refer to

the voting results of the second stakeholders’ workshop (OCT2) (green-agreements; yellow-

doubts, red-disagreements with statements).

The workshops allowed robust interactions between stakeholders, in-depth debates, relevant

information/data exchange and solid knowledge co-production and alliances. The results

obtained are probably the most positive and consistent results of the social component of

stakeholder perceptions and attitudes. Stakeholder’s “myths” and doubts regarding

membrane technology were clarified with this project, namely in relation to high energy

consumption, frequent membrane replacement and high pre-treatment required.

The methodology followed overcame the best expectations, both in accomplishing the

identification of stakeholder’s perceptions and attitudes as to test resistances, changes,

obstacles and opportunities (when, where and how) of using PAC/MF in drinking water

production. This methodology also allowed following the maturation and clarification of the

stakeholders values, beliefs and attitudes all along the project development, allowing both

comprehensive and factual analysis regarding potential practices to be addressed in PAC/MF

technology development. This collaborative approach also seeded relevant steps forward in

stakeholders’ engagement in applied research and empowered researchers with tools and

living collaborative experiences as add-value to knowledge co-production. Both may be

consider to be developed concerning PAC/MF further implementation either to other

innovation technologies impacts approaches and appraisals.


OC T1 (2014)

A greem ent

OC T1 (2014)

D o ubt

OC T1 (2014)

D isagreem ent

OC T2 (2016)

A greem ent

OC T2 (2016)

D o ubt

OC T2 (2016)

D isagreem ent

STRONG

CONSENSUS... is an advanced and e nv iro nm e nt a l f r ie nd ly t e c hno lo gy , as it reduzes the use o f chem icals in water… 0,4444 0,0069 0,0000 0,9474 0,0029 0,0000

STRONG

CONSENSUS... is s a f e r than tradic io nal/co nventio nal water treatm ens and with advantages fo r pub lic he a lt h 0,0902 0,0307 0,0000 0,4474 0,0062 0,0000

PREVALENT

DOUBT

... do es no t receive sym pathy (c a us e s re s is t e nc e o n us e ) am o ng water ut ilit ies and technic iens

(des igners )0,0383 0,0383 0,0099 0,0307 0,0585 0,0062

CONSENSUS

ACHIEVED

… is m o re adequate to be apllied in priv a t e s e rv ic e s (i.e. in spec ial to uris t areas - reso rts with water

abs trac t io n sys tem s) than in public serv ices (i.e. general do m estic water supplies )0,0278 0,1111 0,0000 0,0062 0,0188 0,0902

CONSENSUS

ACHIEVED... co nsum es a lo t o f e ne rgy 0,0140 0,1974 0,0000 0,0026 0,0333 0,0611

PREVALENT

DOUBT... is dif f icult to apply because it dem ands s ign if ic a n t c ha nge s in t he in f ra s t ruc t ure s 0,0111 0,1444 0,0069 0,0033 0,0214 0,1111

CONSENSUS

ACHIEVED... is e xpe ns iv e a nd le s s in t e re s t ing f ro m t he f ina nc ia l po in t o f v ie w 0,0062 0,1974 0,0062 0,0062 0,0383 0,0474

CONSENSUS

ACHIEVED... requires a v e ry de m a nd ing pre - t re a m e nt 0,0243 0,0902 0,0029 0,0140 0,0099 0,0902

CONSENSUS

ACHIEVED

... is weel kno wn am o ng techinal s taff , but unk no wn ( in it s a dv a nt a ge s ) a m o ng

e ndus e rs / c o ns um e rs0,0243 0,0585 0,0099 0,0383 0,0243 0,0188

CONSENSUS

ACHIEVED... requires s pe c ia lize d s t a f f (hum an reso urces) 0,0000 0,1140 0,0243 0,0099 0,0383 0,0383

CONSENSUS

ACHIEVED... im plies a f re que nt re p la c e m e nt o f m a t e ria ls (the m em branes) and hard m aintenance 0,0000 0,4474 0,0062 0,0099 0,0243 0,0585

CONSENSUS

ACHIEVED... has no a dv a nt a ge whe n po we re d a c t iv e t e d c a rbo n is a dde d 0,0000 0,1474 0,0188 0,0029 0,0000 0,9474

The application of PAC/MF in drinking water production is a technology that…

Figure 9 The change of stakeholders’ attitudes regarding the adoption of PAC/MF


N/A

Progress indicators

- List of stakeholders’ universe

- Constitution of the broadband representative stakeholders’ panel with ca. 20 members

- Attitudes’ profiles;

- Social variables and indicators;

- SWOT analysis


(M) 1st workshop with stakeholders’ panel, 2 Dec.2014

(D) Report 1 on workshop 1 of the stakeholders’ panel, Mar. 2015

(M) 2nd

workshop with stakeholders’ panel, 27 Sept. 2016

(D) Report 2 on Workshop 2 of the stakeholders’ panel, Dec. 2016


The methodology followed overcame the best expectations and will be used in future

demonstrations of new technologies. Also, regarding membrane technologies, stakeholders’

perceptions and attitudes should be further explored, reinforcing previous consensus,

stabilizing the domain of new consensus and the production of shared and common

knowledge. The prevalence of some factors of doubt also indicates fields of future discussion.


5.1.7 Action C1 - Technical, environmental and economic assessment of the tested

technologies

Foreseen start date: Jul. 2014 Foreseen end date: Dec. 2016 Objectives achievement

Achieved

Actual start date: Jul. 2014 Actual end date: Dec. 2016

What has been done

LNEC-NES had to assess the technical, environmental and economic performance of the

conventional (PAC/CFS) and advanced (PAC/MF) technologies using standardized

methodologies and metrics.

A full strategy for assessing and improving the performance of PAC/MF advanced technology

and the alternative PAC conventional addition (PAC/CFS) was defined, which involved the

integration of actions B4 and C1 for PAC/MF or B3 and C1 for PAC/CFS. The strategy used

allowed benchmarking the conventional technology and advanced technology technologies

for EC removal.

To guide the implementation of the LIFE Hymemb overall methodology a decision maker

toolkit (Figure 10) was developed for assessing, improving and benchmarking the

performance of PAC/MF and PAC/CFS technologies (PAC/CFS either in current WTP

conditions or under optimised conditions for EC removal).

Figure 10 Decision maker toolkit for benchmarking the performance of PAC/MF and PAC/CFS

technologies


PAStool, the performance assessment tool based on indicators and indices developed by

LNEC-NES, was used for both PAC/CFS and PAC/MF. PAStool was fed by variables

relative to water quality parameters and operating conditions relevant for the process

performance; it was ready to be used in the conventional treatment sequence for regular

parameters but required the development and validation of performance functions and

reference values for PAC/MF, as well as new performance functions and reference values for

EC water quality for both technologies.

PAStool was therefore upgraded to include MF and PAC/MF technologies (deliverable of

action C1) and new performance functions were developed for ECs, such as pesticides and

pharmaceuticals. .

The performance assessment of PAC/CFS was done in articulation with action B3 and the

results were therefore summarised in section 5.1.3. PAStool files gathered the data needed for

assessing and improving the PAC/CFS performance, i.e. the water quality data and the key

operating conditions between Jan. 2015 and Aug. 2016, and from 6 periods of 2013-2014,

chosen for being representative of different treatment conditions. Alcantarilha WTP full scale

results were relative to regular parameters (e.g. NOM) while PAC/CFS pilot results were used

for EC optimization.

Similarly, the performance assessment of PAC/MF was completed in articulation with action

B4 and the main results were already presented in section 5.1.4. PAStool was used for

demonstration of PAC/MF performance, using prototype results with different waters and

conditions tested. Regarding the emerging contaminants, the results obtained during the

spiking tests were used.

The benchmarking of conventional (PAC/CFS) and advanced (PAC/MF) technologies was

carried out using the decision maker toolkit. The direct comparison of water quality

achievements of each technology was based on the percentile distribution of indices.

PAC/MF was able to achieve 20% higher removals of pharmaceuticals and pesticides using

similar PAC doses, with much lower residuals of turbidity, aluminium, TOC and endospores,

presenting therefore higher efficacy and reliability. Higher PAC doses and contact times could

improve removal by PAC/CFS, but the PAC dosing interference with turbidity (PAC fines)

demands for a downstream safe barrier(s) against very fine particles.

For all pharmaceuticals and pesticides tested the performance indices showed a better long-

term technical performance for PAC/MF than for PAC/CFS. Different individual

microcontaminant performances were observed.

When each technology was assessed (Final report on PAC conventional addition and the Final

report on PAC/MF) the 29 contaminants targeted were classified in three groups based on

their amenability to be removed by PAC/MF and PAC/CFS, depending on the performance

assessment of water quality and on the percentage removal consistency observed in all spiking

tests.

For PAC/MF, 14 contaminants presented always good performance or removal ≥ 90%, 9

presented variable performance and 70-90% removal and only 4 PhCs and 2 pesticides were

classified as less prone to be removed by PAC/MF and when the competition conditions and

the PAC dose were determinants. For PAC/CFS, 12 contaminants presented acceptable-good

performance or unsatisfactory performance but ≥ 80% removal, 10 presented unsatisfactory-

good performance and ≥ 70% removal and only 4 PhCs and 3 pesticides were classified as

less prone to be removed by PAC/CFS.


For those emerging contaminants classified as less prone to removal, competition conditions

are determinant and performance is highly dependent on the PAC dose. Those compounds are

considered, therefore, good candidates for challenging treatment tests in future demo works

and for monitoring the treatment effectiveness.


The economic benchmarking was limited since no data were available for the cost breakdown

per conventional treatment stages.

Progress indicators

- Number of new performance functions developed for water quality standards on ECs: 57

- Number of new performance functions developed for removal efficiencies: 61

- Number of new performance functions developed for operating conditions: 9 (PAC/MF) +

31 (PAC/CFS)

- Number of new performance functions of EC standards validated at pilot scale: 52

(PAC/MF) + 41 (PAC/CFS)

- Number of new performance functions of removal efficiencies validated at pilot scale: 42


- Number of performance functions of operating conditions validated at pilot scale: 9


- Number of new performance functions of EC standards validated at full scale: 61

- Number of new performance functions of removal efficiencies validated at full scale: 12

- Number of performance functions of operating conditions validated at full scale: 19


(D) PAStool upgraded for PAC/MF, Dec. 2014

(M, D) Decision maker toolkit for tested technologies, Dec. 2014

(D) PAStool validation report, Nov. 2016 (D) Benchmarking of conventional (PAC/CFS) and

advanced (PAC/MF) technologies for EC removal, Dec. 2016


The upgraded PAStool is a project output designed to support the continuous improvement of

WTP performance. The upgrade is to be transferred to wastewater treatment and the use of the

WTP and WWTP tools are to be replicated in several water utilities in a project to begin in the

last quarter of 2017.


5.1.8 Action C2 - “Cross” cost benefit analysis

Foreseen dates (as informed in Amendment to GA):

Jan. 2015 - Oct. 2015 Jul. 2016 – Dec. 2016 Objectives achievement

Achieved

Actual dates: Jan. 2015 – Dec. 2016

What has been done

LNEC-NUT led the development of a cost benefit analysis by adopting a hybrid methodology

that takes into account the hierarchy of cost and benefits factors. The methodology AHP

(Analytic Hierarchy Process), as exposed in the Grant agreement, presupposes that investment

priorities are based on previous perceptions of costs and benefits. As so, the variables to

incorporate in the CBA were identified from action B5; the Soft System Methodology (SSM)

tools to be applied in the CBA was investigated; the dimensions/statements to be used in the

Analytical Hierarchical Process (AHP) were prepared - 1st interaction with the stakeholders’

panel; the judgment profiles were analysed and the “Cross” CBA was completed.

Earlier results (action B5) pointed to an important gap between immediate costs for the

investor and the widespread benefits (health, environment and territory and other economic

sectors) for the long-term. Besides, we are in the presence of costs that also have social

dimensions (trust, acceptance of tariffs, etc.). During stakeholder’s workshops the differences

between costs and benefits perceived by participants were assessed, and the intensity of the

differences was expressed by using a numerical scale. The balance between costs and benefits

resulted from a collective and individual assessment which was supported by prior

information about some of the dimensions and indicators (action C1).

Emphasizing the value of collaborative methodologies (as AHP methodology), one of the

most interesting results was the direct confrontation between individual and group evaluations

and the consistency of the evaluations resulting from several groups (individuals randomly

grouped) with the production of a collective matrix of final results. The direct comparison

between individual and collective valuations allowed us to state that the stakeholders

expressed the consensuses achieved in group’s judgment assessments, and that those

consensuses were solid since they were internalized by individuals and led to expressions of

value expressed individually or in collective terms. The discriminations of the factors

influencing the adoption of PAC/MF technology is illustrated in Figure 11, expressing the

general consensus reached.

0,00 5,00 10,00 15,00 20,00 25,00 30,00 35,00 40,00 45,00 50,00

CAPEX

OPEX

SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL COSTS (SEC)

BENEFITS BY RETURN ON INVESTMENT AND OTHERGAINS (BRI)

SECTORAL ECONOMIC BENEFITS (SEB)

GENERIC SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS(GSEB)

%

Figure 11 The general consensus about costs and benefits of PAC/MF technology


The main conclusions extracted and discussed with stakeholders, can be summarized as

follows:

Market reactions are favourable for PAC/MF implementation as the technical

characteristics of the new technology were tested and confirmed good results;

But negative reactions remain regarding the increase of tariffs and water price for final

consumers;

So, it is necessary to ensure and develop a robust link of confidence among producers,

water suppliers and consumers;

The social and environmental general benefits are highly valued, and enhanced the social

and institutional acceptability regarding the new technology;

The new technology can be adopted to foster independent infrastructures for new tourist

destinations (not only over coastal zones) favouring territorial and social cohesion;

The international image of the region (Algarve in this case) is favoured, and the drinking

water utilities become more prestigious if they internalize technological innovation

dynamics;

Besides the tourism and catering sectors, other sectors of economic activity may benefit

from the adoption of the new technology, and national producers of ceramic membranes

may emerge;

However, an incidence of social and environmental factors accentuates critical issues

regarding financing difficulties and the price of water for final consumers.

In short, positive aspects related to generic and long-term social and environmental benefits

were addressed and considered in addition to just direct costs associated to the new PAC/MF

technology. The analysis suggested that overall financing may be a critical issue and

incentives (legal, regulatory or economic) may be needed.

For low turbidity, low and hydrophilic organic content waters ( 5 NTU, 3 mg/L TOC,

2 L/(mg.m)), direct PAC/MF was feasible with in-line coagulation, and 0.08 to 0.12 €/m3

were the costs (CAPEX+OPEX) estimated for producing 100,000 m3/day (ca. 500,000 p.e.)

(action B4 results).


N/A

Progress indicators

- List of variables and indicators for the “cross” CBA

- Judgment profiles

- “Cross” CBA completed


(D) Cost-benefit analysis, Dec. 2016


The value and consistency of the collaborative methodology AHP was emphasized during

LIFE Hymemb project and therefore it is expected to be used in future works. In fact, this

approach is planned for the ongoing LIFE IMPETUS project, which deals with

pharmaceuticals’ control in urban wastewaters by adsorption.


5.1.9 Action C3 - Socio-economic impact of the project actions on the local economy

and population

Foreseen start date: Jul. 2014

Foreseen end date: Dec. 2016


Achieved

Actual start date: Jul. 2014 Actual end date: Dec. 2016

What has been done

LNEC-NUT led the development of the impact dimensions framework to be considered in the

impact analysis; the development of an impact matrix and alternative socioeconomic

scenarios regarding PAC/MP adoption; the detailed identification of indicators for the socio-

economic impact scope; the identification of potential contributors, parties who should be

involved; and the data collection of the potential socio-economic impacts and the socio-

economic impact assessment.

This action intended to answer central questions of the project, not in technical terms of the

performance of the new technology, but in terms of the evaluation of impacts and

evolutionary scenarios taking into account the adoption of the new technology. This impact

assessment explored the concerns of stakeholders, their reactions to the characteristics of the

technology and anticipated some projections of social and territorial conditions, considering

emerging environmental threats.

The collective production of an impact matrix and the discussion of results with the

stakeholders proved to be a more adequate solution than the conventional SROI (Social

Return of Investment) methodology, taking into account the opportunities created for

collective discussion and the direct involvement of stakeholders in workshops (with no

dependence of individual or partial contacts or of the traditional inquiries methodologies).

To settle a matrix of impacts it was considered relevant to assess (i) their positive or negative

consequences; (ii) to estimate their magnitude; (iii) the direct and indirect effects; and (iv) the

estimated consistency of changes supported by the regional reality in socioeconomic terms.

The matrix of potential impacts took into account different impact dimensions, organized in 5

sets of items: 1) human well-being and health; 2) economic and social dynamics; 3) regional

and local development; 4) demography; and 5) governance.

The participants in the stakeholders’ workshops could discriminate the impacts on a wall,

pointing out the estimated consequence of PAC/MF new technology for each dimension and

sub-dimension. The aggregated results of the annotations, discriminated by criteria and

respective indicators of analysis, are summarized in Table 2.

A pattern of interdependent changes were extracted, and the interpretations of the anticipated

changes were considered to develop an evolutionary scenario taking into account the

antagonistic perspectives of socioeconomic evolution, considering societal change

contradictory aspects and assuming that new technologies give us the ability to face emerging

environmental threats and can lead us to new levels of social organization and civic

sensitivity.


Table 2 Impact matrix (assessment of socioeconomic impacts)

The main results of the collective assessment of the impacts of the new technology can be

stated as follows:

It is expected that the new technology will stimulate a set of very positive, direct, sustained

and relevant impacts in the field of public health and security of water supply for human

consumption;

Economic issues deserve greater attention, despite the identification of positive and

sustained impacts that may especially affect the tourism, food and catering industries.

Positive impacts on the level of employment and other sectors (such as agriculture) are

seen as indirect and not so relevant;

The issues of territorial cohesion and local and regional development are not assured, and

although there are no negative impacts addressed, the positive impacts are neither direct

nor relevant. The quality and safety of water for human consumption are a necessary factor

for economic progress and social well-being, but do not determine the dynamics of land

use change and, so, the issue of territorial cohesion is still covered by uncertainly and

doubts;

Demographic dynamics can be positively favoured as a potential adoption of the new

technology contributes to a higher social welfare of the region, but demographic dynamics

(such as patterns of human occupation of the territory) depends on more structural

migratory flows and natural population growth trends;


The regulator still plays an essential and its legitimation may be reinforced by the new

technology, in a first stage, because this technology allows raising the requirements on

water quality;

However, in a second phase, the new technology and the constant progress of technical and

scientific innovation may emancipate the social actors from the dependence of legal norms,

since the market and the competitive aspects oblige the water sector to anticipate and

respond proactively to new environmental threats such as emerging contaminants.

In summary, if adopted, the impacts of PAC/MF technology may affect very positively the

public health and the quality and safety of the drinking water supply, the tourism and other

economic sectors strongly dependent on water quality and environmental amenities,

particularly in regions more prone to climatic changes and with lower water quality (modular

and flexible solutions are better solutions for facing climate change).

Positive impacts should also be pointed out regarding a potential and sustained involvement

of stakeholders in the water sector, the reduction of social conflict and, finally, the promotion

of technological innovation and technical and scientific progress.


N/A

Progress indicators

- Detailed identification of indicators for the socio-economic impact scope

- Identification of potential contributors, parties who should be involved

- Data collection of the potential socio-economic impacts

- Assessment of those potential impacts


(D) Socio-economic impact assessment, Dec.2016


The socio-economic impact assessment is expected to be used in future works. In fact, this

approach is planned for the ongoing LIFE IMPETUS project, which deals with

pharmaceuticals’ control in urban wastewaters by adsorption.


5.2 Dissemination actions

5.2.1 Objectives

Led by LNEC-NES, the project team developed and executed a communication and

dissemination plan to communicate and disseminate the project progress and its results, to

raise awareness and knowledge on PAC/MF technology and to promote its adoption as a safe

and sustainable solution for the production of high-quality drinking water.

The target groups of the dissemination efforts included: water industry and water

professionals, national and regional water and environment authorities, central and regional

public administration, national and regional public health authorities, associations related with

water services and water resources, academia, representatives of local community and general

public in Portugal (including schools) and across Europe.

A summary of the dissemination activities planned and targets for progress indicators is

presented below.


(D) LIFE Hymemb logo and webpage, Jun. 2014

(D) Notice Board, May. 2015

(D) 10 Public conference presentations, Dec. 2016

(D) 4 Publications in relevant peer-reviewed journals, Dec. 2016

(D) Layman’s Report, Dec. 2016

(D) Published press releases, Dec. 2016

(D) Technical guidelines for PAC/MF, Dec. 2016

5.2.2 Dissemination: overview per activity

5.2.2.1 Logotype

This deliverable of action D1 was concluded in June 30th

2014 .

Visualization of LIFE Hymemb logotype was promoted through different dissemination

media and far surpassed the target. The number of views was computed as the sum of: i)

number of visitors of project website; ii) number of views of notice board; iii) number of

leaflets distributed, iv) number of leaflets downloaded; v) number of participants in seminars,

vi) number of participants in workshops.

Logotype

Who: LNEC

Indicators of Progress:

Number of views = 36718 (target = 3000)

Action D1 Deliverable




5.2.2.2 Website

The project website (www.life-hymemb.eu) was a project deliverable of action D1 and was

launched on 30th

June 2014 (due date 30th

June 2014).

Project web-visitors far exceeded the expectations – an average of 1121 visitors/month

(June’14 – Dec.’16) vs. 400 targeted, from around the world (e.g. Italy, Ukraine, Brasil, USA,

Germany, China, France, Spain, Mexico, The Netherlands, India, Canada) and mostly (43%)

from Portugal.

Besides this Technical Summary, other documents are publicly available for downloading

from the project website, namely the Technical Guidelines of PAC/MF and the Layman’s

Report.

5.2.2.3 Notice Board

The notice board was produced in two sizes, both to install in Alcantarilha WTP; the bigger

(A0 size) was at the entrance of the prototypes’ room (Figure 12) and the smaller (A2 size) at

the entrance of the administrative building. Further copies were printed to exhibited in

conferences (e.g. in 17 ENASB, Guimarães) and in LNEC-NES building. Digital copies were

also exhibited in several oral communications and are available for download from the project

website.

The number of Notice Board views regards only the bigger size panel at the entrance of the

prototype room (located inside the treatment installations sideways to treated water cistern,

and therefore with controlled entries for security reasons) as no effective accounting system

was possible for the other panels, at the entrance of the administrative building, in the

conference exhibitions and at LNEC-NES. The number of views was counted as the sum of: i)

number of visitors in technical visits to PAC/MF prototype, ii) number of participants in

open-day’s events including a prototype visit.

Due to this accounting limitation, the “official” number of Notice Board views was below the

ambitious target established, that was set considering these different media. Another

conditioning was the prototype location, chosen for technical reasons (action A1), which

restrained the Notice Board location to a confined space.

Website (www.life-hymemb.eu)

Who: LNEC


Average number of visitors/month = 1121 ( target = 400)


Notice Board

Who: LNEC and AdA


Number = 2 (target = 1)

Number of views=385 (target=1200)






Figure 12 Notice boards exhibited in Alcantarilha WTP: administrative building entrance (left) and

prototype’s room (right)

5.2.2.4 Leaflets/brochures

The LIFE Hymemb leaflet was produced in a double face A5 size, in Portuguese and in

English (Figure 13), one language on each side.

The leaflet was available for downloading at the project’s website and copies were printed

and distributed during the technical visits and open-day events in Alcantarilha WTP,

stakeholder’s workshops, seminars and also during technical and scientific events in LNEC.

Despite the objectives, in number, have fallen behind the expectations since only the

“physical” documents distributed were accounted for, an effective dissemination of the

project was accomplished. The leaflets reached a variety of target audiences, including across

world governmental and water industry professionals (e.g. Azerbaijan Water Public Body,

visits of foreign delegations - Serbia, Guinea and Sao Tome and Principe organized by PPA –

Portuguese Water Partnership), Portuguese water industry and water professionals (e.g. AdP,

Bewater, Hubel, Teixeira Duarte, Sisaqua, AdA-water and sanitation, Acciona, ORM, water

and sanitation congress participants – 17th

ENaSB); national (e.g. APA, ERSAR - engineering

and water quality departments) and regional (e.g. ARH-Algarve) water and environment

authorities, regional public administration (e.g. Inframoura, Tavira verde, EMAS Beja),

universities (Lisbon University-Sciences Faculty, Lisbon University-Pharmacy Faculty,

Algarve University-Superior Health School, Master's degree: urban water management,

Lisbon university – Institute of Agronomy), LET IWA 2016 participants and SAFEWATER

project participants, regional associations enterprises (e.g Praia da Rocha Rotary Club, BNI -

Local Business Association of Portimão, Zoomarine), schools (e.g Escola Poeta António

Aleixo Portimão) and general public (Jesuit priests; participants of “Ciência Viva”, “National

Water Day” and “Há Ciência em Lisboa” events).

Leaflets

Who: LNEC and AdA


Number distributed =669 (target = 750)

Number of downloads =785 (target=1200)


Figure 13 Leaflets produced for LIFE Hymemb dissemination

5.2.2.5 Press releases

Ten press releases/interviews were published (versus the 9 targeted).,

The project press releases/interviews were:

- Ambiente Online (Oct. 2013)

- Água e Ambiente (Nov. 2013)

- Indústria & Ambiente special issue - vol. 84 (Jan-Feb. 2014)

- Água & Ambiente - Special edition dedicated to IWA Congress (Nov. 2014)

- Jornal Água & Ambiente - interview with LIFE Hymemb’s coordinator (Nov. 2014)

- Marca d’Água - AdA Newsletter (April 2015)

- Marca d’Água - AdA Newsletter (May - June 2015)

- Boletim da LAT - Liga dos Amigos do Tortosendo, n.º 95 (2nd

quarter 2016)

- LIFE Magazine 1st edition – project interview (March 2017)

- LIFE Magazine 1st edition in LNEC’s Facebook (March 2017)

5.2.2.6 Seminars

Press releases

Who: LNEC and AdA


Number =10 (target = 9; 3/year)

Seminars

Who: LNEC (2 seminars) and AdA (1 seminar)


Number =3( target = 3)

Number of participants =139 (target = 120)


As planned, three seminars were organized for project dissemination and the number of

participants also reached the target planned (120 in total)

To maximize the dissemination potential, all seminars were undertaken in the last months of

the project, between September and November 2016, in different areas of Portugal (north,

centre and south) and using different seminar models adjusted to the target audience

(exhibition stand + room presentation; prototypes’ visit + room presentation; standard

seminar).

The first seminar, organized by LNEC, took place on 14-16th

September 2016 during the 17th

ENaSB in Guimarães (north of Portugal) and consisted on a technical exhibition stand fully

dedicated to LIFE Hymemb and LIFE aWARE projects. The 17th

ENaSB (a 350-participants

event) focused “The sanitary engineering in the cities of the future” and aimed to present and

discuss the most recent scientific developments, innovation and technical solutions for water

supply, sanitation and waste services. Besides the personal contact with congress participants

in the expo stand, dissemination also occurred through in-room communications, posters and

information brochures (Figure 14). An estimation of 20% of conference participants was

assumed for seminar attendance.

The second seminar, organized by AdA, was held on the 26th

September 2016 at Alcantarilha

WTP, in Algarve (Figure 15). The seminar included in-room presentations, where the project

objectives, concept and main results were shared with around 40 invited participants. The

seminar also included technical visits to Alcantarilha WTP, laboratories and to both PAC/MF

and PAC/CFS prototypes.

The last seminar was organized by LNEC and occurred on the 18th

November 2016, at LNEC

Congress Center in Lisbon, consisting on in-room presentations, where the final results of

PAC/MF demonstration were shared to an invited target audience. Thirty one participants

confirmed their presence, but, due to last-minute agenda settings, only 22 were able to attend.

Seminar participants included national and regional public administration, water industry and

water professionals, national and regional water & environmental authorities and private

companies related to water and environment management in Portugal. Overall, the

participants showed enthusiasm with the project results and the technology potential, and

satisfaction with the possibility of making better informed decisions in the future.

Figure 14 LIFE Hymemb stand at 17

th ENaSB conference in Guimarães


Figure 15 LIFE Hymemb second seminar at Alcantarilha WTP

5.2.2.7 Technical visits to prototype

Fourteen (14) technical visits to prototype took place after June 2015, when PAC/MF

prototype was fully operational in Alcantarilha WTP, and occurred until November 2016. To

keep on track the number of activities carried out with prototype visits (technical visits and

open-days) and the flyers distributed, a report template was developed to be filled in for those

activities.

The number of visitors to the prototype exceeded the target. Actually, this number of visitors

reflects the huge effort of project promotion, since, for security reasons, the prototype location

(section 5.2.2.3) demanded the visits to be pre-programmed by AdA and a small numbers of

visitors at a time. During the visits, the project main objectives were explained and a brief

description of both PAC/MF and PAC/CFS prototypes were provided. A lively discussion

was always encouraged and visitors expressed their curiosity towards the technology, putting

questions to which the necessary clarifications were rendered.

The prototype visitors consisted on national and international water industry and water

professionals (e.g. Bewater, AdA wastewater department, Azerbaijan Water Public Body,

Hubel, Teixeira Duarte, Sisaqua, AdA consultants - Figure 16), national and regional water

and environment authorities (e.g. APA, ERSAR-engineering and water quality departments,

ARH-Algarve), regional public administration (e.g. Inframoura, Tavira verde, EMAS Beja),

participants of the European FP7 projects MARSOL and SAFEWATER. Educational

activities with 82 students from the Algarve University also included technical visits to the

prototype, corresponding to 58 students from Superior Health School and 24 students from

Master’s degree in urban water management.

Technical visits

Who: LNEC and AdA


Number of visitors=245( target = 150)


Figure 16 Project explanation during technical visits of water industry professionals, regulators,

consultants and regional public administration.

5.2.2.8 Workshops with stakeholders’ panel

Two stakeholders’ workshops were foreseen and accomplished, before and after LIFE

Hymemb results, to verify the project impact on stakeholders believes/attitudes towards

membrane technology..

The 1st stakeholders’s workshop, organized by LNEC, took place on December 2

nd 2014 in

Lisbon, at LNEC Congress Centre, and the 2nd

stakeholders’ workshop, organized by AdA,

was held on September 27th

in Algarve, at Vila Sol Hotel – Vilamoura (Figure 17).

The stakeholders’ workshops brought together 22 (2nd

WS) to 31 (1st

WS) participants of

different economic activities from Algarve and national entities related with water quality,

water treatment and consumers’ protection, in collaborative and highly productive journeys.

Relevant aspects about LIFE Hymemb project and membrane technology were addressed

with presentations, debriefing moments and active methodologies.

Reactions and feedbacks were highly positive, with believes/attitudes towards membrane

technology visibly changing from the first to the second workshop, after visiting the PAC/MF

prototype and knowing the project results. These workshops were very useful and productive

due to a very positive trade-off: on one hand, the participants increased their knowledge on

emerging contaminants and innovative technologies and, on other, they assisted the

assessment of intangible costs and benefits important for developing two project deliverables,

the cost-benefit analysis and the socio-economic impact assessment.

Workshops

Who: LNEC (1st) and AdA (2

nd)


Number of workshops=2 (target = 2)

Number of participants/workshop=27 (avg.) (target = 30)


Figure 17 Stakeholders’ workshops held on December 2nd

2014 in LNEC, Lisbon (left) and on

September 27th 2016 in Vilamoura, Algarve (right).

5.2.2.9 Open-day events

Open-day events were developed between July 2015 and November 2016, most of them with

prototype visits and flyers distribution and the number of participants exceeded the

expectations (taking into account a target of 50).

Open-day events were of great interest as participants were usually highly motivated people

wanting to better understand the drinking water treatment process. Examples of participants in

open-days with prototype visits were local community in “Ciência Viva no Verão” (Figure

18), Jesuit priests and local associations (Praia da Rocha Rotary Club, BNI - Local Business

Association Portimão). Educational activities with 27 students from one secondary school

(Escola Poeta António Aleixo, Portimão) were also included in open-day events with a visit to

the prototypes.

Figure 18 Ciência Viva no Verão - open-day event in Alcantarilha WTP during July 2015.

Open-day events were also organized outside Alcantarilha WTP and therefore with no visits

to the prototype, but with LIFE Hymemb presentations and/or leaflets distribution. Examples

were “Ciência Viva no Verão” organized by AdA in Tavira WTP (Algarve, August 5th

2015);

visit to LNEC-NES of 22 environmental engineering students from the Lisbon University –

Open-day

Who: LNEC and AdA


Number of open-days=9 (target = 2)

Number of participants=140 (target = 50)


Agronomy Faculty (Lisbon, October 6th

2016); “Água: como a tratar e reutilizar“, LNEC

event organized by invitation for the workshop series “Há Ciência em Lisboa!” (Lisbon, 22th

October 2015, Noite Europeia dos Investigadores); foreign delegation visits to LNEC -

delegations from Serbia, Guinea, Sao Tome and Principe organized by the Portuguese Water

Partnership (Lisbon, 30th

June 2016 – 17th

October 2016). For instance, the Guinean

delegation, including 6 members of government ministries’ in natural resources and energy

and technical professionals from water & energy and infrastructure rehabilitation

corporations, visited LNEC on July 4th

2016 and expressed a clear interest in testing the

PAC/MF technology in Guinea. Future developments are expected.

5.2.2.10 Technical guidelines for PAC/MF

The Technical guidelines of PAC/MF, an important project output with useful

recommendations for design and application of PAC/MF technology, is a dissemination

deliverable developed after PAC/MF demonstration in Alcantarilha WTP and available for

download at the project website.

The technical guidelines were uploaded in the project website after the project ending and

after receiving the Commission’s agreement. As such, no downloads apply at this time. The

target set out was proposed for the After-Life communication plan.

5.2.2.11 Scientific papers

During the project timeline one paper was published, in 2016, in the Boletin Grupo Español

Carbón: “Using activated carbon based technologies for the removal of emerging

contaminants from water/wastewater – UQTA (LNEC) Projects”, developed by M. Campinas,

E. Mesquita, R.M.C. Viegas and M.J. Rosa. This open-access paper (also available in the

project website) resulted from an invitation of the activated carbon expert group and presented

the research and demonstration strategy and the main outcomes of the projects that are being

carried out by the Water Quality and Treatment Laboratory team of LNEC using activated

carbon based technologies for treating water or wastewater, where LIFE Hymemb played a

central role. This journal audience includes academia (professors and students), researchers,

water and environmental authorities, water industry and water professionals.

As already explained in section 4.2, as part of the catch-up plan for the late start-up of the

prototype, the PAC/MF demonstration in Alcantarilha WTP was extended until the project

end. As a full analysis of all prototype results was only possible after December 2016, the

expected number of papers was not attained within the project timeline, and the 3 missing

papers were therefore transferred to the After-LIFE communication plan.

Technical guidelines

Who: LNEC


Number of downloads=0 (target = 700)

Papers

Who: LNEC and AdA


Number =1(target = 4)


http://www.gecarbon.org/boletines/articulos/BoletinGEC_040-art3.pdf

http://www.gecarbon.org/boletines/articulos/BoletinGEC_040-art3.pdf


5.2.2.12 Presentations in national and international conferences

An ongoing endeavour, intensified during the project’s last years, was put into project

dissemination, particularly regarding the PAC/MF technology potential, within the water

industry and water professionals; associations related with water services; water and

environment and health authorities and academia. This explains the number of conference

presentations far above the target set, 22 vs. 10, in 17 events. The feedback was very positive;

the conference participants’ got aware of the technology potential, upgraded knowledge and

reinforced their intervention capability with better informed decisions.

The conference presentations during the project timeline (either oral communications or

posters) are listed below:

(1) APA’s LIFE12 Kick-off meeting, 4 Nov. 2013 - “LIFE HyMemb (LIFE12 ENV/PT/001154)

Tailoring hybrid membrane processes for sustainable drinking water production”, M.J. Rosa (oral)

(1) APA’s launching session of LIFE 2014-2020 Programme, Jul. 14th 2014 - “LIFE HyMemb

(LIFE12 ENV/PT/001154) Tailoring hybrid membrane processes for sustainable drinking water production”,

M.J. Rosa (oral)

(1) IWA World Water Congress, Lisbon, Sep. 21-26th

2014 -“Tayloring Hybrid Membrane Processes

for Sustainable Water Production: First Adsorption Studies”, M. Campinas, R.M.C. Viegas, H. Lucas, R.

Coelho, M.J. Rosa (poster)

(1) 9th EXPO ÁGUA, Lisbon, Nov. 18-19th 2014 - “LIFE HyMemb - Tailoring hybrid membrane

processes for sustainable drinking water production”, M. Campinas, R.M.C. Viegas, H. Lucas, R. Coelho,

M.J. Rosa (poster)

(5) ENEG - Encontro Nacional de Entidades Gestoras de Água e Saneamento, Porto, Dec. 1st-4

th

2015 (Figure 19)

“Seleção de carvão ativado em pó para tratamento de água para consumo humano: aplicação convencional e

processo híbrido PAC/MF”, M. campinas, E. Mesquita, R.M.C. Viegas, M.J. Rosa (oral)

“LIFE Hymemb – trabalho preparatório das ações de demonstração do processo híbrido PAC/MF e de

otimização da adição convencional de carvão ativado”, C. Silva, R. Sancho, H. Lucas, M.J. Rosa (oral)

“As metodologias colaborativas no envolvimento de stakeholders face à adoção de novas membranas para

produção de água para consumo humano – 1º workshop LIFE Hymemb”, J. Craveiro, M.J. Freitas (oral)

“O projecto LIFE Hymemb”, M.J. Rosa, M. campinas, R.M.C. Viegas, C. Silva, V. Napier, M.J. Freitas, J.

Craveiro, I. Sousa, R. Coelho, M-L. Berjano, L. Costa, R. Sancho, H. Lucas (poster)

“LIFE Hymemb - Projeto de um protótipo de tecnologia híbrida Adsorção/Microfiltração (PAC/MF) para

tratamento de água para consumo humano”, R.M.C. Viegas, M. Campinas, M. J. Rosa (poster)

(1) II Simpósio Internacional em Ecologia Humana, Feb. 4-5th 2016 - “Atitudes e crenças em face de

novas tecnologias em sistemas de produção de água para consumo humano: as metodologias colaborativas no

envolvimento de stakeholders”, J. craveiro, M.J. Freitas (oral)

(2) 13th Congresso da Água, Lisbon, Mar. 7-9

th 2016

“Soluções de tratamento avançado para controlo de cianobactérias e cianotoxinas em água para consumo

humano”, E. Mesquita, M. Campinas, M.J. Rosa (oral)

“Remoção de contaminantes emergentes em água para consumo humano por adsorção/microfiltração.

Demonstração piloto no âmbito do Projeto LIFE Hymemb”, M. Campinas, R.M.C. Viegas, C. Silva, M.J.

Rosa (oral)

(1) AquaLiveEXPO, Lisbon, Mar. 2nd

2016 - “Soluções inovadoras para contaminantes emergentes”, M.

J. Rosa, R. Viegas, M. Campinas, E. Mesquita, V. Napier, C. Silva (oral)

(1) WEX 2016 - Water and Energy Exchange, Feb. 29th

(oral)

Conference presentations

Who: LNEC and AdA


Number =22 (target = 10)


(1) PERMEA & MELPRO 2016 - Membrane Science and Technology Conference of Visegrád

Countries, Prague (Czech Republic), May 15-19th 2016 - “Removal of emerging contaminants from

drinking water with adsorption/low pressure ceramic membranes – the LIFE Hymemb project”, M.

Campinas, R.M.C. Viegas, R. Coelho, H. Lucas, M.J. Rosa (poster)

(1) LIFE Water Platform Meeting, Manchester (UK), May 24-25th 2016 - “Advances in membrane

technology to improve drinking water against emergent contaminants”, R.M.C. Viegas, M. Campinas, M.J.

Rosa (oral)

(1) LIFE aWARE Lisbon Workshop, Lisbon, Jun. 3rd

2016 - “LIFE Hymemb project Tailoring hybrid

membrane processes for sustainable drinking water production”, M.J. Rosa, M. Campinas, R.M.C. Viegas

(oral)

(1) Encontro APDA, Amadora (APA), Jun. 8th 2016 - “Potenciais problemas e soluções de tratamento

de micropoluentes orgânicos em sistemas de tratamento”, Maria João Rosa, Elsa Mesquita, Rui Viegas,

Margarida Campinas, Catarina Silva, Vítor Napier (oral)

(1) ICSWaP - 1st International Conference on Sustainable Water Processing, Sitges (Spain), Sept

11-14th 2016 - “Pilot-scale demonstration of a hybrid adsorption/low pressure ceramic membrane process

for removing emerging contaminants from drinking water”, M. Campinas, R. M. C. Viegas, M. R. Coelho, H.

Lucas, M. J. Rosa (oral)

(1) 17th ENASB – Encontro de Engenharia Sanitária e Ambiental, Guimarães, Sept. 14-16th 2016 -

“A utilização de carvão ativado no controlo de contaminantes emergentes – projetos UQTA (LNEC)”, E.

Mesquita, M. Campinas, R.M.C. Viegas, M. J. Rosa (oral)

(1) 10.º CNME- Congresso Nacional de Mecânica Experimental, Lisbon, Oct. 12-14th

2016 - “Qualidade e tratamento de água no LNEC: de estudos laboratoriais à inovação à escala real”, R.M.C.

Viegas, M. Campinas, E. Mesquita, C. Silva, V. Napier, M. J. Rosa (oral)

(1) Inter LIFE PT 2016, Luso, Nov. 4th

2016 - “Projeto LIFE Hymemb”, M. J. Rosa, M. Campinas,

R.M.C. Viegas et al. (oral)

Figure 19 Participation in ENEG conference (Porto, December 2015)

with 3 oral presentations and 2 posters (LIFE Hymemb notice board on the right).

5.2.2.13 Layman’s report

The Layman’s Report was produced after PAC/MF demonstration and is available at the

project website during the next 5 years.. It is not possible to analyse the indicator of progress

– number of downloads as the deliverable was uploaded in the project website after the

project ending and the Commission’s agreement. The target for this progress indicator was

therefore transferred to After-LIFE communication plan.

Layman’s report

Who: LNEC


Number of downloads =0 (target = 350)



5.2.2.14 Networking activities

The networking objectives were considerably exceeded as, during the project timeline,

multiple connections were established with other projects in related areas, other LIFE projects

and international specialist groups, technical committees and individual experts.

The fruitful connection with LIFE aWARE (www.life-aware.eu) was maintained until

November 2016 when that project ended. The facilitators were R. Viegas and Maria João

Rosa (LNEC) and the networking mainly envisioned exchanging knowledge and experience

in membrane-based prototype’s engineering and operation troubleshooting, as well as in PhC

occurrence. In June 3rd

2016 LIFE Hymemb participated, with one presentation and in the

debate, in LIFE aWARE Lisbon Workshop held in LNEC Congress Center, Lisbon. The

workshop promoted the dissemination of adsorption/membrane hybrid technology and the

debate around the “Expectations from Portuguese stakeholders towards the role of advanced

water treatments in water reuse”, which was informal and highly participated as intended.

Very fruitful networking activities were developed with TRUST FP7 project (www.trust-

i.net/, 29 partners), particularly during its Final workshop “The Cities of the Future –

Transitions to the Urban Water Services of Tomorrow”, held in Muelheim, Germany, April

27-29th

2015, and co-organized by IWA – The International water Association. The

connection with this project ended in April’15, with its conclusion (major facilitator M.J.

Rosa and H. Alegre (Advisory Board), LNEC).

A very fruitful connection was established in Sept.’14 and intense networking activities were

developed with the IWA project WaCCliM (http://www.iwa-network.org/WaCCliM/)

particularly for energy performance issues (major facilitator C. Silva and H. Alegre (Advisory

Board), LNEC).

A productive networking particularly in water governance and social issues was established in

Jul.’15 with BINGO, a H2020 project coordinated by LNEC - R. Matos (Advisory Board).

Networking was also established with SAFEWATER project, a collaborative research project

funded by the European Commission under the FP7 SECURITY programme and involving 9

partners from Europe and Israel. The project was coordinated by ARTTIC (France) and

Fraunhofer (Germany) and included the involvement of three water utilities, one of them

AdA. The project meeting held in Algarve, on 25th

May 2016, included a visit to PAC/MF

prototype in Alcantarilha WTP.

A connection was initiated with LIFE IMPETUS (http://life-impetus.eu/), particularly by

exchanging knowledge in areas such as PAC selection tests and target contaminants. In fact,

all LIFE IMPETUS partners were invited to be present in the last Hymemb seminar (18th

November 2016, Lisbon), where the final results of PAC/MF demonstration were shared.

LIFE Hymemb was invited to participate in LIFE Water Platform Meeting in the UK (May

24-25th

2016), with a presentation framed in the chemical status of surface and groundwater

bodies - emergent pollutants thematic. An invitation from APA – Agência Portuguesa do

Ambiente was also accepted to participate in Inter LIFE PT 2016 in Luso, Portugal

(November 3rd

- 4th

2016), to share the project methods and outcomes with other meeting

Networking

Who: LNEC and AdA


Connections established with ongoing projects in related areas=12 (target = 2)

Networking activities with consortia on other ongoing related LIFE+ projects=7 (target = 3)

http://www.life-aware.eu/

http://www.trust-i.net/

http://www.trust-i.net/

http://www.iwa-network.org/WaCCliM/

http://life-impetus.eu/


participants. Besides an oral presentation, important dissemination and networking activities

resulted from personal contacts and exchange of views.

Besides other informal contacts (in person, by email, by phone) the project dissemination and

productive networking was also promoted through the Advisory Council Meeting that took

place at LNEC (Lisbon) in 29th

April 2016 (Figure 20).

The project networking was also possible through the new consortia established for preparing

and submitting 4 proposals to H2020 calls, all in related issues (the technology and/or the

target contaminants)

Figure 20 Advisory Council Meeting in Lisbon, on April 2016

A potentially fruitful networking was also developed in 2016 during the visits organized by

PPA – the Portuguese Water Partnership (Parceria Portuguesa para a Água). PPA includes a

network of entities aiming to develop synergies and maximize the potentialities for the

sustainable growth of water sector and valorisation of water resources in the world.

Delegations from Serbia, Guinea and Sao Tome and Principe included members of

government offices in natural resources and energy, technical professionals from water &

energy and infrastructure rehabilitation corporations. Maria João Rosa, the LIFE Hymemb

coordinator, integrated the hosting Commission (APA-LNEC) and had the opportunity to

present LIFE Hymemb project and discuss alternatives for expanding the bilateral cooperation

in the water field, namely in water and wastewater treatment. Other similar visits had already

been conducted in the previous years from Chinese and Kosovo delegations and UNECE -

United Nations Economic Commission for Europe delegation.

Multiple networking activities with international specialist groups, committees and individual

experts were also developed during 2014/2016. Major fora were:

- Advisory board – multiple informal contacts (in person, by email, by phone) and during

seminars, Advisory Council Meeting and the two stakeholders workshops

- Stakeholders’ panel – before, during and after the workshops

- AdP holding – networking with the other water utilities (major facilitators H. Lucas and

R. Coelho, AdA)

- CT90, SC3 – Portuguese committee on water reuse (M.J. Rosa member, President until

2015), with representatives of the national health, environmental, agricultural and water

authorities, the regulator of water services, water utilities and experts

- ISO/TC 282 SC1, SC2, SC3, SC4 – Water reuse, membrane technology and water

treatment in general, performance assessment, risk assessment (M.J. Rosa is the PT

expert)


- Lisbon 2014 IWA Water Congress & Exhibition, where LIFE Hymemb was presented

(section 5.1.7) and during several parallel events and workshops

- ENEG - Encontro Nacional de Entidades Gestoras de Água e Saneamento (Porto,

Dec.’15), the National Meeting for Water and Wastewater Management Entities – LIFE

Hymemb presentation in conference room (LNEC), contacts during poster presentation in

technical exhibition and parallel events (LNEC and AdA);

- WEX 2016 - Water and Energy Exchange (Lisbon, Feb. 29th

-March 2nd

), an international

summit discussing latest issues on the impact of water reuse on the Water-Energy Nexus –

contacts with F. Machado of Lusagua and President of AEPSA – the Portuguese

Associations of the private water companies, who presented a communication in a

conference including a slide dedicated to LIFE Hymemb.

- AquaLiveEXPO (Lisbon, Mar. 2nd

2016) – LNEC-UQTA stand, posters and LIFE projects

presentation;

- PERMEA & MELPRO 2016 - Membrane Science and Technology Conference of

Visegrád Countries (Prague, May 15-19th

2016) – poster presentation, contacts and

discussions;

- APDA Seminar, about challenges of integrated emerging contaminants management in

urban water cycle (Amadora, June 8th

2016) – presentation and debate with the

participants, mostly water utilities managers and technicians;

- 13th

Leading Edge Conference on water and wastewater technologies (Jerez de la

Frontera-Spain; June 13-16th

2016), devoted to innovation in the field of water technology

– contacts and venues exchange between AdA members and other conference

participants;

- 17th

ENaSB – Encontro de Engenharia Sanitária e Ambiental (September 14-16th

2016),

dedicated to “Sanitary engineering in the cities of the future” – LIFE Hymemb

presentation in a conference room, a stand in the technical exhibition and parallel events

(LNEC and AdA);

5.2.2.15 Technical summary and After-LIFE short courses

During an early external monitoring visit (May 22nd

2014) corrections were identified and it

was then decided that both the technical summary and short-courses would integrate the

After-LIFE communication plan. As encouraged by the Commission (in a letter dated of

December 2016, the short-term dissemination was strengthened in order to be more effective.

As so, several actions were scheduled for the first semester After-LIFE, including the

preparation and publishing in the project website of this technical summary.

Technical summary


Number of downloads = 0 (target = 500)

Courses


Number of courses = 0 (target = 2)

Number of participants/course = 0 (target = 20)


5.3 Evaluation of Project Implementation

LIFE Hymemb project relied on the long-term demonstration of the PAC/MF technology in

Alcantarilha Water Treatment Plant (WTP) for demonstrating its efficacy and efficiency for

controlling ECs in drinking water and for benchmarking this advanced technology with the

conventional technology used in the WTP.

During the project timeline there were some difficulties that delayed its implementation and

had to be overcome with a contingency plan, such as the prototype long-term renting

unfeasibility and the absence of ECs in Alcantarilha WTP intake water. The contingency plan

solution for the first difficulty was building a PAC/MF prototype designed by LNEC, which

required a budget reallocation only possible with an Amendment to GA (Amendment No 1 to

Grant Agreement approved in January 2015). The second difficulty, the absence of ECs in

Alcantarilha WTP intake water, arose from the fact that in 2013, in the proposal phase,

Funcho dam was replaced by Odelouca dam, a new reservoir and the biggest in the Algarve.

This limitation was overcome with methodology adjustments, using EC spiking tests in

PAC/MF prototype and also in a LNEC owned PAC/CFS prototype, not initially foreseen,

allowing the benchmarking with PAC/MF as intended.

PAC/MF construction and assembling was successfully achieved but took longer than

anticipated, partially due to the complexity of the automation and remote control. For

catching-up the 4-month delay in action B4, the contingency plan further included an

intensification of the: (i) spiking trials, (ii) periodic visits to prototype, (iii) prototype

monitoring control, besides (iv) extending the demonstration period until the project end. In

addition, some site adaptation extra works and equipment (5 pumps) allowed putting in place

two measures of the contingency plan, i.e. using PAC/CFS prototype in parallel with

PAC/MF prototype and speeding up the demonstration actions by making easier and faster

changes between the waters to be treated by PAC/CFS (action B3) and PAC/MF (action B4).

PAC/MF demonstration followed a 6-steps methodology: i) selection of a representative list

of target contaminants; ii) selection of activated carbons and prototype conditions – lab tests;

iii) design and assembly of PAC/MF prototype; iv) long-term pilot testing of PAC/MF

prototype in Alcantarilha WTP, using water from 4 points of the WTP sequence to identify

where to use the technology - each testing period included MF, PAC/MF and EC spiking tests

and an intensive analytical monitoring plan to optimize the operating conditions and

demonstrate the water quality; v) benchmarking PAC/MF vs. WTP technology (PAC/CFS in

current conditions and optimized for EC removal); vi) cost-benefit analysis including social

indicators.

The project methodology originally proposed was therefore refined in some aspects, and the

contingency plan was absolutely crucial for the successful project implementation, which

allowed attaining all objectives. The economic benchmarking was limited since no data were

available for the cost breakdown per conventional treatment stage.

Altogether, and as foreseen, PAC/MF was demonstrated as a resilient and sustainable solution

for controlling ECs in drinking water. It was proven that PAC/MF technology works very

well, even exceeding the initial expectations for EC removal. The technology demonstration

methodology is considered a success and a project output with high transfer and replication

potential, already used/in use in other projects and fields of application.

Table 3 summarizes, for each action, the results foreseen in the revised proposal (actions A, B

and C) versus the results achieved. Dissemination actions were already fully detailed in

section 5.2, and the effectiveness of the overall dissemination is commented in a paragraph

after the table.


Table 3 LIFE Hymemb results evaluation

Task Results foreseen

in the revised

proposal*

Results achieved Evaluation

A1 - Site

adaptation for

the prototype

Site adaptation in

Alcantarilha WTP

for the installation

of PAC/MF

prototype and

demonstration with

4 types of water

PAC/MF was successfully

installed in Alcantarilha WTP

with 5 types of water easily

available. Additional work was

performed, e.g. for installing

PAC/CFS prototype for action

B3

All objectives were met and

surpassed.

B1 - PAC/MF

prototype

engineering and

commissioning

Provide the

adequate PAC/MF

prototype ready for

a 2-year field test

PAC/MF prototype was

designed by LNEC, assembled

by ORM (Portuguese company)

and was fully operational at

Alcantarilha WTP in July 2015,

allowing a 1.5-year field test.

The objective was met.

Action suffered a delay which

reduced the field test period

(action B4). The lesson to be

learned is that a long-term renting

of a prototype is very difficult

unless consortia include

technology providers.

B2 - Selection

of PACs for

conventional

addition and

for PAC/MF

Select adequate

PACs for EC

control by

PAC/CFS and by

PAC/MF

A methodology for PAC

selection was developed and

successfully used.

9 PACs were pre-selected for

testing (4 for PAC/CFS and 5

for PAC/MF) and 1 PAC was

selected for each application at

pilot scale

All objectives were achieved.

The EC and PAC selection

methodology is considered a

sound project output, already

replicated in two LIFE projects

dealing with EC control in urban

wastewaters by adsorption (LIFE

IMPETUS) or

adsorption/membrane processes

(LIFE aWARE) aiming at water

reuse.

B3 -

Optimization of

PAC

conventional

addition

Improve by 15%

the current overall

performance of

PAC conventional

addition in

Alcantarilha WTP

– particularly the

effectiveness and

cost-efficiency of

EC removal

EC removal was improved by

65-83% after testing 3

optimization strategies in

PAC/CFS prototype

Cost-efficiency measures

identified:

- a 50% reduction in PAC dose

with the selected PAC (action

B2) vs. current PAC for similar

EC removal

- excessive coagulation

detention time and flocculation

velocity gradient could be

adjusted at Alcantarilha WTP,

improving the energy

performance


Due to the EC absence in

Alcantarilha WTP raw water,

adjustments had to be made in the

methodology for PAC/CFS

optimization, which were

successfully applied.

Strategies for optimizing the EC

removal by PAC conventional

addition and cost-efficiency

improvement measures were

identified.

The outputs are to be transferred

to wastewater treatment in the

ongoing LIFE IMPETUS project

and the PAC/CFS prototype (after

adaptations) is to be installed in a

WWTP in the Lisbon area.


Table 2 (cont.) LIFE Hymemb results evaluation

B4 - Long-term

demonstration

and optimization

of PAC/MF

Tailor PAC/MF

for safe and

sustainable

production of

drinking water.

Optimize

PAC/MF

operating

conditions for

effective EC

removal

PAC/MF was tested in real

conditions, with different waters,

operational conditions and

targeting different ECs: 22

pharmaceuticals, 10 pesticides,

microcystin-LR, NOM, viruses

(bacteriophages) and endospores

(indicators of biological forms

resistant to chemical oxidation

e.g. crypto).

PAC/MF demonstrated

flexibility, good operational

results (high flux and treatment

capacity @ 0.6-0.8 bar) and good

and reliable water quality:

turbidity < 0.03 NTU, low

aluminium residuals,

improvement in NOM and

viruses water quality, full-

removal of endospores and up to

98% removal of pharmaceuticals,

pesticides and cyanotoxins.

For low turbidity, low organic

content waters ( 5 NTU, 3

mg/L TOC, 2 L/(mg.m)) direct

PAC/MF is feasible with in-line

coagulation; 0.08 to 0.12 €/m3

(CAPEX+OPEX) were estimated

for 100,000 m3/day (ca. 500,000

p.e.)


Results exceeded the

expectations

PAC/MF successfully

demonstrated its resilience,

efficiency for EC control and

sustainability.

The demonstration allowed a

better knowledge of PAC/MF

potential and its application field

(Technical Guidelines for

PAC/MF application).

B5 -

Characterization

of stakeholders’

attitudes towards

membrane

processes

Attitudes’ profile

and SWOT

analysis on the

use of PAC/MF

Comprehensive

awareness

towards

innovative

membrane

processes

Two stakeholder’s workshops

were organized, one in the

beginning and the other in the

end of the project. Participants

visited the prototype and the

technology results were

presented and debated.

Positive and consistent changes

in attitudes and perceptions about

the adoption of the new

technology were visible after the

project.

Stakeholders’ capacity building

on emerging contaminants issues

and on adsorption membrane

processes was a very positive

externality of the technical

presentations and debates.

All objectives were achieved as

expected.

The workshops allowed robust

interactions between stakeholders,

in-depth debates, relevant

information/data exchange and

solid knowledge co-production

and alliances.

The methodology overcame the

best expectations and is to be used

in ongoing projects.

The built capacity was indicated

by the stakeholders as to pave the

way to more informed decisions

in the future, in the Portuguese

water sector.


Table 2 (cont.) LIFE Hymemb results evaluation

C1 - Technical,

environmental

and economic

assessment of

tested

technologies

Upgraded

version of

PAStool for

performance

assessment of

WTPs including

PAC/MF

technology

LNEC’s tool for benchmarking

drinking WTP (PAStool) was

upgraded to include MF and

PAC/MF technologies and new

performance functions were

developed for ECs, such as

pesticides and pharmaceuticals.

PAStool supported the

optimization of the two

technologies (actions B3 and B4)

PAC/MF was benchmarked with

PAC/CFS, showing higher

effectiveness and reliability for

ECs (20% higher removal),

turbidity, endospores and fine

PAC particles.

The objectives of PAC/MF

assessment were attained as

expected.

The upgraded PAStool is a project

output designed to support the

continuous improvement of WTP

performance. The upgrade

PAStool is to be transferred to

wastewater treatment and the use

of the WTP and WWTP tools are

to be replicated in several water

utilities in a project to begin in the

last quarter of 2017.

C2 - “Cross”

cost-benefit

analysis

Cross CBA of

PAC/MF

technology,

including social

indicators

Social indicators were developed

and a hybrid methodology (AHP)

was used for approaching

intangible costs and benefits.

Stakeholders prioritized,

individually and collectively, the

costs and benefits of PAC/MF

application.

For low turbidity, low organic

hydrophilic waters (action B4)

CAPEX+OPEX estimated for

100,000 m3/day (ca. 500,000 p.e)

were 0.08 to 0.12 €/m3.

Benefits were prioritized over

costs, particularly the

environmental and social

benefits for health, environment,

territory and other economic

sectors. Funding and water tariffs

were considered key issues.

Main objectives were attained.

The CBA of the PAC/MF

technology integrated traditional

dimensions but also social

dimensions and stakeholders

inputs.

The methodology developed is to

be used in an ongoing LIFE

project.

The important gap identified

between immediate costs for the

investor and the widespread

benefits for the long-term may

require legal, regulatory or

economic incentives for the

technology adoption.

C3 - Socio-

economic impact

of the project

actions on the

local economy

and population

Socio-economic

impact

assessment

A matrix of potential impacts of

PAC/MF adoption was

developed with stakeholders with

5 dimensions analysed:1) human

well-being and health; 2)

economic and social dynamics;

3) regional and local

development; 4) demography;

and 5) governance.

Very positive, direct, sustained

and relevant impacts in public

health and safety of drinking

water supply were identified.

Tourism and other economic

sectors may also be promoted,

particularly in regions more

prone to climatic changes and

with lower water availability and

quality.

All objectives were achieved as

expected.

PAC/MF technology

demonstrated real ability for safer

and more reliable drinking water

supply and some potential for

regional development, particularly

as a decentralized treatment

solution in remote water-stressed

areas.

* No changes in the results foreseen were introduced with Amendment No 1 to GA


All the project results were immediately visible, with exception of socio-economic impact of

the project actions on the local economy and population, which will depend on future

technology implementation at full-scale. PAC/MF implementation presents great advantages

in terms of water quality reliability and safety towards the emerging contaminants targeted

and will become as more important as the lower the water quality and the availability of

alternative water sources are in a specific region and, therefore, the greater is the risk related

with emerging contaminants.

As to dissemination, the project team is confident that PAC/MF awareness as a reliable and

safe solution against emerging contaminants was raised, as well as knowledge regarding its

field of application, namely answers to where, when and how to use PAC/MF technology. It

is believed that, with this project, we were able to better prepare the water sector for the

emerging contaminants issue and the climate change adaptations, and that future

collaborations will be derived.

The project was effective in attaining the objectives pre-established, as confirmed by the final

outcome indicators’ tables, namely:

in raising the awareness of the Portuguese general public; the Layman’s report and its

promotion as foreseen in the After-LIFE communication plan is expected to amplify

this impact, broadening it to a European scale;

in the capacity building of the project stakeholders, through the stakeholders’

workshops, and of the Portuguese water sector in general through the project seminars

and presentations in key national conferences for water quality and treatment

innovation, e.g. ENEG2015, ENASB2016;

in raising the awareness of the European and international water sector through the

technical visits to the prototype, international conference presentations (e.g.

IWA2014, PERMEA2016, LIFEWaterPlatform2016), foreign delegation visits and

the networking activities;

in the strengthening of the capacity building at national level and its enlargement to a

European level through an effective promotion of the Technical Guidelines, and

particularly of its synergetic combination with the short-courses foreseen in the After-

LIFE communication plan; if approved (the 2nd

phase of EU Teaming), the LIS-

WATER centre of excellence will boost this impact;

in reaching researchers and academia through the conference presentations and

prototype visits; the dissemination of LIFE Hymemb new knowledge and technology

developments is to be accomplished through the scientific papers under preparation to

be submitted to reference peer-reviewed journals.




5.4 Analysis of long-term benefits

5.4.1 Environmental benefits

Direct / quantitative environmental benefits

The direct benefits of LIFE Hymemb fully accomplished the project objectives and expected

results detailed in chapter 3.

The major benefit was the long-term (1.5 years) field test demonstration of the effectiveness,

reliability and efficiency of an innovative advanced technology, based on PAC adsorption and

low-pressure ceramic MF, to improve the removal of challenging emerging contaminants.

Compared with conventional drinking water treatment, PAC/MF improved 20% the removal

of total pesticides and pharmaceuticals, gaining both in effectiveness and reliability.

Another direct benefit was the development of comprehensive technical guidelines for

upgrading conventional drinking water treatment with PAC/MF and for its application

Europe-wide.

As to process resource efficiency, the direct benefits greatly depend on where and how in the

water treatment sequence the PAC/MF is to be used. The raw water quality determines the

pre-treatment required and, therefore, where PAC/MF may be used. The operating conditions

of the hybrid PAC/MF were optimized for effective EC removal whilst minimising membrane

fouling, thus increasing the technology's productivity and lifetime.

For low turbidity, low and hydrophilic organic content waters ( 5 NTU, 3 mg/L TOC,

2 L/(mg.m)) direct PAC/MF is feasible with in-line coagulation (C), i.e. the WTP sequence

would be simplified to PAC/C/MF with a downstream chlorination (to provide the residual

disinfectant in the distribution system needed to ensure the water stability in warm-weather

countries). In this case, significant savings in reagents, sludge and energy are possible.

In reagents:

No ozone needed for pre-oxidation of these waters (manganese-rich waters might be

oxidized by potassium permanganate; ozone is a good candidate option for PAC/MF pre-

treatment of NOM-rich waters);

25% lower dose of a less expensive commercial coagulant is possible (traditional alum

vs. pre-polymerised aluminium coagulants);

No flocculant (polyacrylamide) is needed for floc setteability;

Lower final chlorine doses are needed (more stable water).

In sludge, lower reagent doses produce less sludge.

In energy:

Equivalent energy consumption to the status-quo (conventional treatment with ozone pre-

oxidation);

Significant energy savings of PAC/MF versus current nanofiltration (NF) membrane

processes available for equivalent removal of emerging contaminants; PAC/ceramic MF

fluxes (150-280 L/(m2.h)@0.6-0.8 bar) are up to tenfold the polymeric NF flux with 1/10

the transmembrane pressure and no energy for recirculation.

For these low turbidity, low and hydrophilic organic content waters 0.08 to 0.12 €/m3

were the

costs (CAPEX+OPEX) estimated for producing 100,000 m3/day (ca. 500,000 p.e.) by direct

PAC/MF with in-line coagulation.



Relevance for environmentally significant issues or policy areas

A great effort has been put by EU in the latest years to assess the potential impact of ECs and

to determine protective levels for human and aquatic organisms. Many ECs are not yet

legislated in EU mostly due to a great number of compounds with unknown occurrence,

toxicity studies not performed or not conclusive and analytical limitations. LIFE Hymemb

assisted on knowing the problem dimension, by obtaining data on pharmaceuticals’

occurrence in Odelouca dam, the biggest water source for drinking water supply in western

Algarve, filling in the gap of knowledge and providing an additional input to the Water

Framework Directive (WFD, 2000/60/EC) implementation process in this region.

To support and update the “List of priority substances” and the “Watch List” monitoring

mechanisms established by the Directive on Environmental Quality Standards (EQSD

2013/39/EU; first revision by Decision 2015/495) it is relevant to collect EU-wide data. Also,

a correlation between the contaminants’ removal and their properties may assist the

prioritization process in future reviews of the priority substances list and the definition of

“indicators” for legislation. LIFE Hymemb was relevant for priority substances issue in two

ways: i) the data resulting from an intense prototype’s monitoring and the developed EC

selection methodology provided some grounding for “indicators” ongoing research area; ii)

the project focused some of the priority substances of EQSD, such as the hormones beta-

estradiol and estrone, the anti-inflammatory diclofenac and the macrolide antibiotics

erythromycin and azithromycin.

The EU is working on the impacts of climate change on drinking water resources across the

EU, as well as on the adaptation measures (ADWICE-project, 2012; Blueprint to Safeguard

European Water resources). The adaptation of water treatment processes (e.g. improving

microbiological safety) is pointed out as one of the adaptive measures to reduce the impact of

climate change on drinking water quality. Climate change is therefore an important driver for

the technological upgrade of the existing water treatment plants and the membrane-based

processes are very good candidates to overcome the challenges involved, due to their

resilience to raw water quality fluctuations and ability to control particles, such as protozoan

(oo)cysts and bacteria, when MF is used, or particles, NOM and dissolved

microcontaminants, when using PAC/MF. With PAC/MF demonstration results, LIFE

Hymemb provided relevant data for adapting the conventional WTPs for climate change

scenarios where poor raw water quality or fast and severe variations of raw water quality

might be a reality.

Initiatives will be carried out to inform the policy makers about the LIFE Hymemb results.

The Advisory Council and the stakeholders’ panel counted with the active participation of the

three national authorities – the drinking water quality authority (ERSAR – Water quality

Dept), the water services regulator (ERSAR) and the environmental authority (APA) – who

are fully aware of the project results. Further, the close collaboration between them and the

project coordinator and team members will ensure an updated “information channel”. These

and the other counsellors and project team members have privileged positions in several

international organizations, e.g. IWA – International Water Association, ISO technical

committees of water.

At European level, the LIFE Hymemb knowledge on emerging contaminants and safe control

barriers influenced the Portuguese position with respect to the EU document under

preparation “Development of minimum quality requirements for water reuse in agriculture

irrigation and aquifer recharge”.

At international level, if approved, LIS-WATER (the Lisbon International Centre for Water,

which was recently awarded funding by the H2020 teaming programme for the 1st stage – 1 year


for developing the project and the business plan) will be an excellent platform for informing the

decision and policy makers, since this will be particularly focused on the water services

regulation.

5.4.2 Long-term benefits and sustainability

Long-term / qualitative environmental benefits

Two long-term environmental benefits of this project are, on one hand, the high visibility of

the health-environmental problem associated with the emerging contaminants and, on the

other hand, the long-term safer and sustainable technology for EC control. The project results

are relevant for the ultimate goal of providing guidance about safe barriers in treatment trains

of WTPs and WWTPs – “safety credits” for technologies, and simpler and cost-effective

“indicators” for EC regular monitoring.

Long-term / qualitative economic benefits

The long-term economic benefits include the business opportunities with the new technology

and potential cost savings and regional development if the technology is adopted.

Taking into account the know-how and raw materials, we believe there is an opportunity for

European companies to invest in the development of ceramic membranes and “green”

activated carbons, which will, of course, may be boosted with the right legal, regulatory and

economic incentives.

PAC/MF technology, if used as a decentralized water treatment solution, i.e. with water

production closer to water consumption, allows having a high-quality water with a smaller

supply distribution network and, therefore, cost savings in network construction and

maintenance and in energy.

This technology may also allow, for instance, the tourism development in inland regions with

climate change-driven challenges in water supply.

Long-term / qualitative social benefits

An important social benefit of the project is the contribution to better informed professionals

with key-roles in water decision matters (water industry, water professionals, water and

environment authorities, public administration) and education (academia and community),

allowing better informed decisions related to EC occurrence and control technologies.

Other social benefits depend on technology adoption and are connected to a safer and reliable

water quality; as referred in section 5.1.9, this will be all the more important as the lower the

water quality in a specific region and the lesser the alternative water sources are, and therefore

the higher is the risk connected with emerging contaminants. Water consumers will benefit

from a safe barrier against emerging contaminants where a growing concern with the presence

of these contaminants in water bodies is acknowledged.

Continuation of the project actions by the beneficiary or by other stakeholders

The EC thematic is being continued by LNEC and AdA in an ongoing LIFE project LIFE

IMPETUS (2016-2019), although focusing wastewater treatment and optimized conventional

technology. This project is already benefiting and will continue to benefit from LIFE

Hymemb results, particularly in areas such as PAC selection, PAC treatment and target

contaminants. The grounding established in LIFE Hymemb for “emerging contaminants

indicators”, that may assist future reviews of the priority substances list, will be continued

during this project. Both projects share the ultimate goal of providing guidance about safe


barriers in treatment trains of WTPs and WWTPs – “safety credits” for technologies. In LIFE

IMPETUS, activated carbons produced from local industry by-products will be preferentially

used, a green externality that may also promote PAC/MF technology.

The PAC/MF prototype will be used in the next innovation projects to be developed by

LNEC, namely in other demo projects in Portuguese WTPs with water quality issues. The

PAStool upgraded will be used by LNEC in ongoing and future projects (LIFE Impetus,

iEQTA). AdA and Águas de Portugal holding is already testing the use of PAStool for

benchmarking the performance of their WTPs and WWTPs.

For AdA, the LIFE Hymemb legacy with direct and immediate impact includes: the analytical

knowledge and experience on the not legislated ECs targeted – pharmaceuticals, THMFP and

aerobic endospores; the prototype room now available at Alcantarilha WTP for other demo

purposes; the capacity built on PAC adsorption for controlling regular and emerging

contaminants and the measures identified for improving the cost-efficiency of PAC/CFS step

at Alcantarilha WTP.

The built capacity was indicated by the stakeholders as to pave the way to more informed

decisions in the future, in the Portuguese water sector.

5.4.3 Replicability, demonstration, transferability, cooperation

PAC/MF technology can be easily replicated, i.e. used in different drinking water treatment

plants, or transferred, i.e. be used for different purposes.

The LIFE Hymemb results are being replicated/transferred in ongoing projects led by LNEC

on technology innovation.

Depending on the quality of the water to be treated and on the treatment purpose, the

PAC/MF technology may be added to a conventional treatment sequence or replace one or

several steps of that sequence (e.g. filtration, or filtration and clarification by CFS). With

waters presenting low membrane fouling potential, it may even replace all conventional

sequence line, only requiring a final disinfection for ensuring a disinfectant residual during

distribution. PAC/MF is a modular technology, allowing a staged investment, with an easy

scale-up according with water demand/consumption profiles.

PAC/MF is a compact and flexible technology and activated carbon can be adjusted to a broad

range of target-contaminants, such as disinfection by-products, cyanotoxins, pesticides,

pharmaceuticals and odour/colour compounds. The technology allows an easy adjustment to

seasonal contaminants (e.g. cyanotoxins), by selecting and adequate PAC and adding it only

when the contaminants are detected/expected.

The technology establishment still present some resistance, mainly justified by: many ECs are

not yet legislated, which would otherwise promote the use of advanced technologies; the

inexistence of local production of activated carbon; the high initial investment cost of ceramic

membranes; and the lack of updated information on membrane technology, for instance in

Portugal. Ceramic membranes are emerging in Europe but not yet used in Portugal and,

although with a higher initial cost than the traditional polymeric membranes, they allow

higher fluxes and water recovery, lower energy consumption, a longer service life (2 to 5

times higher) and easier cleaning. The polarization of ceramic membrane production outside

Europe also does not contribute to their dissemination. The lack of updated information,

particularly in countries with insipient implementation of membrane technology, feeds old

“myths” reducing membrane technology to desalination and high energy costs. Demonstration


pilot projects are effective means to overcome these barriers and should therefore be

supported.

The Technical Guidelines will play a key-role in the project replicability and transferability by

water practitioners, and the same applies to the Advisory Board members and the

stakeholders, due to their representative roles in the water sector (regulators, policy makers,

project designers, builders, water utilities and consumers).

5.4.4 Best Practice lessons

In terms of project implementation, three lessons were learnt and replicated in subsequent

projects:

a thorough contingency plan and a safe buffer period are key elements for successful

projects involving prototype development;

an adequate methodology is the key for a successful and cost-effective demonstration

of a new technology;

an early engagement of a broadband of stakeholders promotes an internal validation of

the project methodology and outputs, the effective dissemination of the results and the

stakeholders capacity building.

As already explained in section 5.3, the 6-steps methodology successfully developed for

PAC/MF demonstration included: i) selection of representative target contaminants; ii)

selection of prototype conditions – lab tests; iii) design and assembly of prototype at pilot

scale; iv) long-term testing of prototype in a WTP, v) benchmarking the new technology vs.

WTP technology and vi) cost-benefit analysis including social indicators.

To raise the awareness for membrane technology, a diversity of stakeholders of different

economic activities and entities related with water quality, water treatment and consumers’

protection policy were involved in several dissemination activities, such as advisory councils,

seminars, workshops and technical visits to prototype. For instance, ERSAR and AdP, two

key stakeholders for drinking water treatment in Portugal, were formally engaged with LIFE

Hymemb through its advisory council. During the stakeholders’ workshops, the discussion

was centred on the implication of using the new technology on focal subjects such as

economic and territorial development, population and environmental and human health. This

discussion was particularly important to build the bridges between engineering and social

dimensions needed for an effective innovation and technology transfer from R&D to end-

users, particularly in Portugal, where membrane technology is quite insipient in water

treatment. With the stakeholders’ engagement in these activities, a positive change was

observed in their perceptions and attitudes towards the PAC/MF technology (section 5.1.7).

5.4.5 Innovation and demonstration value

LIFE Hymemb demonstrated, through a PAC/MF prototype operating in real conditions at

Alcantarilha WTP, during a long period (1.5 years), the sustainability of this technology for

controlling emerging contaminants. Good results were obtained in terms of operational and

water quality performance, such as removals up to 98% of pharmaceuticals and pesticides;

full removal of protozoan (oo)cysts and long-term stability in permeate concentration. With

the low turbidity, low organic hydrophilic waters tested, direct PAC/MF is feasible with in-

line coagulation, and 0.08 to 0.12 €/m3 (CAPEX+OPEX) were estimated for 100,000 m3/day

(ca. 500,000 p.e.).

The project incorporated 4 key pillars of innovation, including technological and social

components:



- Use of ceramic MF membranes, still emerging in many European countries and not yet

used in Portugal;

- Pilot scale demonstration of PAC/MF technology. Usual PAC/MF studies were short-

term, mostly at lab-scale and its ability as safe and resilient barrier against emerging

contaminants (ECs) was yet to be demonstrated in real conditions at full (or pilot) scale.

PAC/MF long-term demonstration in Alcantarilha WTP not only demonstrated the

process effectiveness, reliability and efficiency in EC control, as also ensured a

meaningful benchmarking between the advanced and the WTP’s conventional water

treatment process by using performance assessment tools (performance indices).

- Tailoring of PAC/MF technology to a wide spectrum of water qualities and contaminants;

PAC was tailored in type and dose. The selection of the adequate PAC to control the

contaminants targeted followed a methodology developed in UQTA/LNEC, and PAC/MF

was tested with different water quality scenarios using water from different points of

Alcantarilha WTP sequence and seasonal variations connected with a long-term

demonstration period (1.5 years) and operational conditions. The stand-alone MF and the

hybrid PAC/MF process with several PAC doses were compared.

- Cost-benefit analysis crossing traditional dimensions (such as technical, environmental

and economic) with an innovative social dimension, based on social indicators. A

stakeholder’s panel was created and the project characterised their values, believes and

attitudes, before and after the project, during 2 workshops (on in the beginning and the

other in the end of the project) using collaborative methodologies. Results showed that

market reactions are favourable for PAC/MF implementation as good operational and

water quality results were demonstrated and social and environmental general benefits

were highly valued. The important gap identified between immediate costs for the investor

and the widespread benefits for the long-term may require legal, regulatory or economic

incentives for the technology adoption.

5.4.6 Long term indicators of the project success

Since this was a demonstration, and not a full-scale implementation project, long-term

indicators of the project success should address the impact of the project outcomes on Europe.

Regarding the market uptake of the new technology, two indicators are proposed:

Recognition of PAC/MF technology as a safe technology for EC control, based on the

percentage of tendering specifications considering EC control by PAC/MF for WTP

green field and rehab works;

Implementation status of membrane technology in Portugal and of PAC/ceramic MF

in Portugal and in Europe, based on the number of installations and membrane area

installed.

Version of 09/04/2008 PG - Hymemb · This report was prepared and issued by the LNEC members above...

Documents

Transcript of Version of 09/04/2008 PG - Hymemb · This report was prepared and issued by the LNEC members above...