Engineering

the Future

Engineering the future of water

Review of 2011 discussion series

This report is a summary of proceedings of three meetings

organised by Engineering the Future in the Autumn of 2011.
The meeting was attended by members of the professional
engineering institutions, Fellows of The Royal Academy of
Engineering, representatives of industry, government and
other relevant organisations. The report reflects the
discussions that took place at those meetings, but it should
be noted that while the conclusions and recommendations
reflect the majority opinion, they do not necessarily
represent the policies of the organisations involved.
www.raeng.org.uk/etfwater

Engineering the future of water

Review of 2011 discussion series
The Royal Academy of Engineering
ISBN 1-903496-88-8
April 2012
The Royal Academy of Engineering
3 Carlton House Terrace
London SW1Y 5DG
Tel: 020 7766 0600 Fax: 020 7930 1549
www.raeng.org.uk
Registered Charity Number: 293074
A copy of this report is available online at
www.raeng.org.uk/etfwater

Engineering the future of water

Contents
1. Foreword ........................................................................................................3
2. Demand management and behaviour change:
water for domestic use .................................................................................4
3. Demand management and behaviour change:
water for industry and agriculture ................................................................7
4. Challenges and solutions:
local water recycling and water transfer ......................................................9
5. Conclusion ...................................................................................................12
6. Acknowledgements .....................................................................................13

Engineering the future of water

1. Foreword
Combined with climate change and food security, water security is one of
the biggest challenges of the 21st century. The World Economic Forum, in
its Global Risks Report 2012 identified water and food security as two of
the top five risks to social, economic and environmental health.
With the South East of England and other areas now declared in drought
and with climate change impacts and population pressures set to increase
in the future, water security has become an immediate problem for the UK,
not something happening in faraway places. Future droughts in the UK are
predicted to be longer and more severe.
Following on from the April 2010 report by the professional engineering
alliance Engineering the Future, Global Water Security an engineering
perspective, a series of three events were held in late 2011, addressing
challenges and identifying potential solutions for securing the UKs fresh
water supply. The events focused on local water recycling, water transfer,
and demand management and behaviour change.
The first event, Local water recycling, considered technology options and
public attitudes to water recycling; and presented real life examples of
recycled water use in the UK and globally from the perspectives of, industry
and agriculture and the Academic research community.
The next, entitled Water security: challenges and solutions addressed the
engineering, environmental and economic impact of moving water
around the country from areas of plenty to places where supply is under
great stress.

One thing is clear, the

problem of future water
security including
flooding and droughts
is not going to go away
and we must look across
the whole water cycle,
from abstraction and
treatment to use and
sewerage, to help address
the infrastructure and
attitude changes which
are needed.

The final event in the series, Behaviour change and demand management,
addressed societys attitudes and behaviour towards water and demand
management from the perspectives of a behaviour change expert, town
planner and providers of smart water technologies. This event covered
issues such as the value of water, virtual water and how smart technology
can benefit consumers and the environment through better sharing of
information.
This report outlines the issues that emerged in the course of this series
of meetings.

Dr Jean Venables CBE

FREng
3

Engineering the future of water

The United Nations has

enshrined the concept
that drinking water is a
human right.

2. Demand management and

behaviour change: water for
domestic use

Michael Norton MBE

FICE

Water for domestic use and water for industry

Water use in the UK can be considered from the perspective of water for
domestic use and water for industry.
UK society is generally unaware of how much water is taken from the
environment for activities other than to the water utility industry. In the UK,
an average of 40% of blue water abstraction is used for domestic water
supply; 40% for power generation and 20% for industry and commerce,
including 1% for agriculture (globally agriculture uses an average 70% of
blue water abstractions).
Domestic use how society values water
In the UK today, water is both everywhere and nowhere. An invisible
infrastructure makes drinking water available round the clock. The largescale and constantly flowing water supply is made possible by a hidden
network of pipes, part of the indispensable infrastructure of modern life.

Water is everywhere in
our homes but never in
our minds. Water
consumption is
everywhere but we dont
see it so it seems like it
is nowhere.
Dr Jan Selby, University
of Sussex

Because it appears to frequently rain in the UK, there is a popular

perception in that there is a surplus of available water. However, in
February 2012, after two dry winters in a row, the South East of England
was officially declared in drought and future droughts are expected to be a
regular occurrence. Yet, when we turn on the tap, the water is there and we
dont appear to have any problem.
Supply makes demand. Supply has a huge influence in constructing demand.
The invention of mobile phones created the demand for them which did not
previously exist and now there are more of them than people on the planet.
Present day practices and levels of water demand are in a large part a product
of supply systems. If there were no underground infrastructure of water
supply and waste water pipes serving peoples houses, and if people had to
deal with their water and waste water by tanker for example, patterns of
household demand would be entirely different.
Adjusting societys attitude towards water use
Throughout the series of events, experts from industry and academia
reiterated the point that there is a need for a burning platform such as a
severe drought before UK public attitudes towards household water use
will change.
It has been said that the key to promoting change is to focus on peoples
attitudes, behaviours and choices. There are four ways that we can try to
get people to change their behaviour:
exclusivity/novelty people want to be the first
benefits people can see the benefits of saving water, for example: lower
water bills
fewer barriers
social proof - our innate human need to conform.

Engineering the future of water

Price of water
It is assumed that the most appropriate tools for changing behaviours are
pricing tools and public awareness campaigns that seek to inform and
make people think more rationally about their actual water use
Average water bills may need to rise significantly in order to represent the
true cost of what is actually used. If household budgets for water are to
change in the same way as they did for the cost of fuel, then there would be
a much quicker take-up of demand reduction techniques and incentives to
alter behaviours such as remembering to turn off the tap and taking
shorter showers.
The user
Users can be supply and demand managers. The modern Western
consumer does not have to be an expert in managing their water supplies
or water demand: they turn on the tap. They dont need to know about
plumbing, engineering or water demand regulation because that is for
the experts.
In places where water supply is low and intermittent, and often where state
regulatory authorities are quite weak, it is normal for users of water to play
a highly active role in demand management.

Case study
In some parts of the world, there are often long water supply shortages and
cuts. Every summer, in varying degrees, the pipes run dry in most communities
throughout this particular area.
The result is that, unless people are very wealthy, they tend not to spend 10
minutes in the shower. Another result is that practices related to water
management are a part of everyday life.
Almost all houses in this area have their own rooftop water storage systems.
Most households have their own personal collection of pumps and motors with
which they manage their water supply.
People often go looking for water if it becomes particularly hard to find, but
there are other ways in which people manage their water supply and demand.
If the water has run dry in their own homes, people go and wash with friends and
family. The laundry is not done until the water supply comes back on. When
supplies are really low, parents might stop their children from playing outside
and getting dirty because that would increase the amount of laundry they would
need to do. The essential point is that in some parts of the world, unlike in the
UK, water supply is not invisible or taken for granted and, as a result, water users
are not just consumers but are active supply and demand managers of their own
household water supply.

Engineering the future of water

Smart infrastructure empowering consumers

Case study: Debuque, Iowa, USA

In Debuque, 300 households were given information about their water usage in
real time, with the aim of encouraging them to make informed decisions.
They were provided with proactive notifications using clear data. For example,
when a potential leak was detected, an email or text would be sent to users.
When information about their water usage was shared on an online portal,
people, feeling part of a community, adopted a community behaviour of trying
to save water and helping others to do the same.
The outcome was that participants in the Debuque scheme were 10 times more
likely to report a leak than people who did not take part in the scheme. The
Debuque scheme was successful because it was about empowering people
through informing them about their choices and impact of choice.
Smart technology and smart meters are clever, instrumented and intelligent.
However, people equipped with the right skills, information and motivation, will
ultimately change their behaviour towards water usage because they want to.

Engineering the future of water

3. Demand management and

behaviour change: water for
industry and agriculture
The role of smart water infrastructure
If society is able to manage the integration of the digital world and physical
surroundings properly, there is significant potential to support
communities, industry and agriculture towards positive behavioural change
that will conserve water resources for the future.
As sensors become more embedded across ecosystems, people gain the
opportunity to sense, monitor and measure domestic and industrial water
use. That information can be shared in order to make more informed
choices about how industry and communities use water.

Case study Sonoma County, California, USA

In Sonoma County, smart infrastructure has been applied to a complex system
to improve understanding and to promote a much more joined-up approach to
the management of water resource. This is similar to how smart grids and
smart meters have been applied in the fuel sector.
The Sonoma County Water Agency provides water to around 600,000 people.
Like most of California, the area is experiencing increasing population and
economic growth along with demand from a wine industry dependent on the
expanding vineyards; all factors increasing demand on local water resources.
Combined with these factors, four of the last five summers have brought
droughts.
Water retailers sell water to six different townships in the county and there is a
strong concern about maintaining enough water in the Russian river to allow
the Chinook salmon to migrate upstream to spawn.
With the aim of promoting greater collaboration and the drawing off of water in
a sustainable, orchestrated fashion and building a better understanding of how
to balance supply and demand without over-abstraction of the Russian river,
Sonoma County has invested in a smart infrastructure platform. The system
attempts to better integrate the physical and digital worlds, and creates a
platform which brings together multiple stakeholders to communicate and
collaborate for the common good.
They have implemented the system in three ways:
installation of more sensors, meters and actuators at strategic locations to
build a better understanding of their whole system
creation of a collaboration portal, a web-based platform, which helps to bring
the retailers, vineyards and industrial users together, to allow them to
orchestrate the way they draw water from the Russian river and avoid it
falling to unnecessarily low levels
using information better by using this network of sensors to optimise
pumping regimes to improve efficiency and build resilience.
The greatest benefit of the smart infrastructure platform in Sonoma County has
been bringing people and organisations together to collaborate for the common
good, thereby protecting an important resource needed by multiple stakeholders.

Engineering the future of water

Water footprint
The UK citizens water footprint is around 1,300 m3 a year, which is
equivalent to around 3.5 m3 a day for each person. Almost three-quarters of
this derives from outside the UK as embedded or virtual water, with
much of this from countries with worse water stress. In comparison, the
average American citizen has double the UKs average water footprint but
nearly all derives from the USA itself.
Water footprint analysis of industries
The concepts of virtual footprint and virtual water have been taken up
with alacrity by business and industry. Industries have become interested
in water footprint, in some cases, well ahead of governments, because they
can see that understanding their water footprint, where it is and what risks
they face as a result of it, is an immediate business issue.
Large multinational companies such as SAB Miller, Marks & Spencer,
Coca-Cola, Rio Tinto and BG Group are now making water footprint
analysis of their businesses to assess risks and taking mitigating action.

Water footprint is the

total volume of fresh
water that is used to
make a product, or suite
of products, expressed in
terms of green, blue and
grey water, and in terms
of location. This can be
expressed by nation,
state, river basin,
business, community,
product or suite of
products.
Michael Norton MBE
FICE

Engineering the future of water

4. Challenges and solutions:

local water recycling and
water transfer
Two of the sessions in the series were dedicated to local water recycling
technologies and water transfers. Like many engineering solutions, these
technologies should not be viewed as a silver bullet answer for water
shortages, but as part of a system that includes other technology,
alongside with societal and political dimensions.
With the South East of England undergoing regular droughts, alternatives
considered for supplying the region with sufficient supplies of water have
included local storage, water transfer, more reservoirs, ground water
storage and desalination, or a combination of several of these.
Before and after publication of the water White Paper Water for Life
(DEFRA, December 2011), a consultation setting out a vision for future
water management, there has been political, public and industry debate on
options such as desalination, water transfer and local water trading
between adjacent water companies.

Our nation needs to

take a radical and
refreshed view of its
total water needs across
drinking, agriculture
and industry against its
current total renewable
water resources. Water
recycling is going to be
one of the ways in which
we resolve that.
Michael Norton MBE
FICE

Local water recycling

Water recycling is not a new technology. In some parts of the world,
including Singapore, Israel and Australia, it is a technology widely in use.
There is an instinctive resistance to consuming recycled water among the
UK general public. This resistance, combined with widespread public belief
that the UK has access to a limitless supply of clean fresh water, is a strong
barrier to better use of water supply in UK homes and businesses.
Water reuse can make a more significant contribution to improving water
security. Some recycled water, while not suitable for drinking, is suitable for
other domestic uses such as flushing toilets and watering plants (grey water).

Case study - The role of water companies

In its strategic direction statement, Cambridge Water states that it will
encourage developers to incorporate grey water recycling in new
housing developments.
Before the recession, it was expected that the housing market boom would
result in 40% more customers in Cambridge Waters catchment area. With this
in mind, the company found that water stress would become a reoccurring
problem. This resulted in the Cambridge Proposition which required
infrastructure for water recycling to be installed in new developments;
financed in the same way as the water infrastructure is currently paid for:
through capital contributions from developers and future charges for grey
water by customers.

Use of recycled water for agriculture and industry

Some 70% of abstracted blue water is used by agriculture globally. In
England only 1% of abstracted water is used for this purpose but this
average figure hides spatial and temporal variations which can mean that
use increases to over 25% at times.
9

Engineering the future of water

The National Farmers Union has said that in order to feed the growing
population, the UK will need to increase productivity by at least 50% by
2030. The demand for water for agriculture in the UK is expected to greatly
outstrip supply over the next 20 years.
Water is vital for food production. There is political pressure to produce
more from less. There is a view that agricultures use of abstracted water
could be reduced by 40% but to do this will require substantial investment.
The UK is currently spending 82 million per year on irrigation because
farmers are reliant on water companies for their water.
Water recycling equipment can enable companies to reduce their use of
expensive tap water by up to 50% but some manufacturers of foodstuffs
including pet feed believe their brand image would be compromised if they
were seen to be using less than top quality water.
One well known potato brand recently began using a 1 million water
recycling plant to wash their potatoes after a study of their environmental
credentials.
The normal method is to pipe in abstracted water through the water mains,
wash the potatoes then send out the water as effluent. However, since
introducing a water recycling plant, the company has since reduced their
average water mains usage by 52%.

Water transfer

Large scale transfers are

an inherent part of our
water resource
management systems
today and there is every
possibility that they might
provide an opportunity
for the future.
Professor Roger Falconer
FREng

Water transfer is about moving large volumes of water from areas of plenty
to places where supply is under greater stress. Water transfer schemes in
England and Wales have long been debated and the subject often raises
political issues.
The Environment Agency believes that water transfer needs to be thought of
as part of an integrated approach to water resources planning.
Transferring water from Wales to the South-east of England has been under
serious consideration on several occasions in the past 50 years. The concept
was first put forward by the Water Resources Board in the 1960s and studied
in substantial detail in the 1970s through investigations into an enlarged
reservoir at Craig Goch in the Elan valley. The concept was looked at again as
part of the National Rivers Authoritys water resource strategy for England &
Wales in 1994, concluding that schemes involving transfers from the Severn
to the Thames looked feasible in engineering and cost terms, but more work
was needed on the associated environmental issues. Thames Water is now
undertaking more studies as part of their statutory water resource
management plan for 2014.
Consideration of water transfer needs to include storage, because the timing
of when that water is available and the ability to distribute that water is
equally as important as the reliability of the source of supply. In the case of
transferring water from the Severn to the Thames, a modest increase in
supply can be obtained without supporting storage, but for a more
substantial scheme a supporting reservoir would be needed either in the
lower Severn valley or in mid-Wales, for example, the enlarged
Craig Goch reservoir.

10

Engineering the future of water

Concerns associated with water transfer

The natural environment
Mixing of waters has always been a concern when assessing potential water
transfer schemes. For example, the Severn and Thames rivers have different
ecologies, meaning that there can be a risk of the transfer and movement of
species and possible detriment to local species. Studies of the impact of the
Severn to Thames transfer on the Severn estuary and the ecology of the
Thames are currently being undertaken by Thames Water. Migration of
species, such as sea trout and eels, also needs to be considered. The
potential transfer of invasive or non-native species are a significant concern.
The European Union Water Framework Directive and the European Union
Habitats Directive are key considerations in this regard.
Carbon footprint
Climate change and carbon reduction are now built into water plans and
analyses. However, there remains a question over how to continue to reduce
carbon usage in the future.
The Environment Agency has reviewed the carbon footprint of the entire
lifecycle of water with regard to desalination, reservoirs, effluent reuse,
transfers, metering and water efficiency among others. Water transfers fit in
the middle range of these options, neither being the worst in terms of
carbon use nor the best.

Case study Abberton water transfer

between Ely Ouse and Essex
One of the UKs most successful water transfer schemes has been running
since 1972. The Abberton water transfer scheme between the Ely Ouse and
Essex rivers is owned and operated by the Environment Agency. This particular
scheme has been found to have had no significant effects on water quality,
biodiversity, recreation or socio-economics of the region. It supplies the Essex
and Suffolk Water Company which has a total of 1.82 million customers,
1.5 million of whom are in the more densely populated Essex area.

11

Engineering the future of water

5. Conclusion
With the release of the Water for Life White Paper, the government
reiterated its commitment to protecting the environment and water as a
resource along with reducing burdens on consumers and industry.
The Engineering the Future alliance encourages government to continue its
regular dialogue with engineers when consulting on and implementing
proposed changes to water regulation.
With their ability to view infrastructure not in silos but as an entire system,
engineers with their systems thinking approach, are at the forefront of
making possible large changes to the way we plan, build and manage our
water infrastructure. Engineers can envision pathways to change practices
in water demand in a more sustainable way, through being innovative and
imaginative in proposing and implementing solutions.
Concerns surrounding water security are unlikely to disappear in the near
future, as the world tackles the challenges of climate change impacts, food
security, and population growth. Engineers, working with society and
governments, can make a difference across the whole of the water chain,
from abstraction and treatment to household use, water for food and
re-use of waste water to help address the infrastructure and attitude
changes that are needed.

One persons flood

water is somebody elses
water resource.
Dr Jean Venables CBE
FREng

12

Engineering the future of water

6. Acknowledgements
Engineering the Future would like to thank the speakers from each
Engineering the future of water event:
Local Water Recycling
Tuesday 13 September 2011
Held at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers
Chair
Michael Norton MBE FICE, Global Water Director, AMEC Environment and
Infrastructure
Speakers
Professor Paul Jeffrey, Professor of Water Management, Cranfield University
Professor Tom Stephenson FREng, Head of Applied Sciences, Cranfield
University
Stephen Kay, Managing Director, Cambridge Water
Jenny Bashford, Water Policy Adviser National Farmers Union
Dr Ben Courtis, UK Commercial Developer Engineering Systems, GE
Power and Water
Water Security: challenges and solutions for the UK;
is water transfer the answer?
Tuesday 25 October 2011
Held at the Institution of Mechanical Engineers
Chair
Professor Roger Falconer FREng, Halcrow Professor of Water Management,
Cardiff University
Speakers
Trevor Bishop, Head of Water Resources, Environment Agency
Yvette de Garis, Head of Environment and Quality Strategy and Regulation,
Thames Water
John Lawson FREng
William Robinson, Water Resources Manager, Essex and Suffolk Water
Professor Christopher Binnie FREng
Behaviour change and demand management
Tuesday 22 November 2011
Held at the Institution of Civil Engineers
Chair
Dr Jean Venables CBE FREng
Speakers
Dr Jan Selby, Senior Lecturer in International Relations, School of Global
Studies, University of Sussex
Melvyn Kay, Executive Secretary, Irrigation UK
Steve Magenis, Senior Engineer, Royal Haskoning
Michael Norton MBE FICE, Global Water Director, AMEC Environment and
Infrastructure
Robert Musgrove, Capital Programmes Lead, IBM
Daniel Webb, IBM Global Business Services

13

Engineering the Future:

Engineering the Future is a broad alliance of the engineering institutions and bodies which
represent the UKs 450,000 professional engineers.
We provide independent expert advice and promote understanding of the contribution that
engineering makes to the economy, society and to the development and delivery of national policy.
The leadership of Engineering the Future is drawn from the following institutions:
The Engineering Council; EngineeringUK; The Institution of Chemical Engineers; The Institution of
Civil Engineers; The Institution of Engineering and Technology; The Institution of Mechanical
Engineers; The Institute of Physics; The Royal Academy of Engineering.