Archive for category: Enviromental Policy

Assessment of alternative water supply options

The project assessed four alternative water supply options in Europe, with the specific objectives being to a) assess the risks and impacts of four alternative water supply options (desalination, wastewater re-use, ground water recharge, and rainwater harvesting) b) assess the extent to which the possible negative effects from these water supply options in terms of environment and human health can be mitigated and c) identify conditions for the sustainable development of alternative supply options. (Ref. No. 070307/2008/496501/SER/D2).

Client: DG Environment
European Commission

Region: European Union

Type: Environmental Policy, Water & Flood Management

Duration: 05/2008 – 03/2009

Other Partners: Flemish Institute for Technological Research NV (VITO) in cooperation with: Ecologic (Austria) – ACTeon (France) – I.A.CO (Cyprus) – TAU Consultora Ambiental (Spain)

The main objectives of the project were:

• Assess the risks and impacts of four alternative water supply options (desalination, wastewater re-use, ground water recharge, and rainwater harvesting); Provide an overview of social, economic and environmental risks and impacts of the four alternative water supply options.
• Assess the extent to which the possible negative effects from these water supply options in terms of environment and human health can be mitigated; On the basis of 14 cases studies, the most appropriate mitigation measures that resolve the adverse impacts associated with the four alternative water supply options were identified and their technical and financial feasibility was assessed.
• Identify conditions for the sustainable development of alternative supply options on the basis of five case studies across Europe: the role of desalination and wastewater re-use to resolve chronic water shortages in Cyprus; a mix of solutions to resolve chronic water shortages in Malta; the role of the AGUA Desalination Project as an alternative to the inter basin water transfer over long distances in Southern Spain; waste water re-use for the industry and drinking water supply as an alternative to groundwater and the water transfer over short distances in Belgium, and rainwater harvesting with regards to improving the management of urban storm runoff and at the same time enhancing the quality of groundwater aquifers that supply water to the city in Berlin Germany.

Main findings and conclusions of the study were:

• Desalination is growing in importance, but its supply regime is rigid and inflexible as per its design specifications. There are particular environmental and economic concerns, such as high energy use, and disposal of brine.
• Wastewater re-use is a proven alternative water supply technology, with relatively low capital costs and energy use, reducing the demands for freshwater for non-potable uses. Concerns for strict quality controls.
• There is not much information on the technology uptake of rainwater harvesting. It replaces mainly potable water supply within the house or industrial plant for non-potable purposes. Investment cost and retrofitting, and rainfall distribution affect uptake of Rainwater Harvesting.
• Groundwater recharge includes tertiary treated waste water or primary treated surface or rain water. Strict controls to ensure that the wastewater is sufficiently purified, thus reliable mitigation measures and procedures have to be more or less guaranteed.
• The main conclusion from the five case studies is that alternative water supply options can be successfully used to solve water management problems, both related to droughts, storm water management and water quality issues.
• The requirements of the WFD to implement integrated water management and cost recovery programmes will contribute to a better appreciation of the benefits of alternative supply options. However, ready to use tools and data are missing to facilitate the analysis of local problems and account for the full costs and benefits of all options.

Water Scarcity & Droughts Policy in the EU – Gap Analysis (Ref. No. ENV.D.1/SER/2010/0049)

The overall objective of the project was to identify new policy options that would help address Water Scarcity and Droughts (WS&D) in the EU. The study contributes to the on-going European Commission effort to move WS&D through the policy agenda, feeding in particular into the Blueprint to Safeguard Europe’s Water (EU Water Blue Print).

Client: Directorate D-Water Chemicals & Biotechnology
DG Environment
European Commission

Region: European Union

Type: Environmental Policy, Water & Flood Management,

Duration: 02/2011 – 08/2012

Other Partners: ACTeon (France) in cooperation with: Artesia (UK) – FEEM (Italy) – Fresh Thoughts (Austria) – I.A.CO (Cyprus) – TYPSA (Spain)

The main objectives of the project were to:

• Provide a sound overview of the magnitude of the WS&D problem in Europe, today and by 2030, accounting for global changes such as socio-economic developments and climate change;
• Assess the adequacy of measures (at national, river basin district or local levels) already envisaged by individual Member States (MS) to prevent, manage or mitigate WS&D;
• Identify remaining gaps (i.e. WS&D problems that remain unsolved even with all planned measures already implemented) and suggest possible new measures (or mix of measures) to fully address WS&D in the EU;
• Assess qualitatively the environmental, economic and social impacts of these new measures, along with their feasibility.

The project was developed in two consecutive tasks:

1. Task 1 was the gap analysis itself. Building on the review of current knowledge on a) the magnitude of WS&D in Europe, and b) the policy responses already developed to tackle WS&D, it proposed a dual ex-post assessment of:
   The existing (being implemented and recently approved) measures that address WS&D and that are proposed in the River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs) of individual Member States (MS).
   The implementation of the recommendations of the 2007 EC Communication on WS&D and of policy instruments developed in Europe, as answers to the key issues identified in this Communication.
2. Task 2 focused on the identification of new policy responses resulting from the gap analysis and on the qualitative assessment of these policy responses. Though initially foreseen, no specific stakeholder consultation process on WS&D was organised by the Commission, WS&D issues being embedded in the wider stakeholder consultation organised in support of the development of the EU Water Blueprint.

The main conclusions of the study, which were fed into the Blueprint to Safeguard Europe’s Water, were:

• There is a diversity of gaps for addressing fully WS&D in Europe: Conceptual gaps, Information and assessment gaps, and Policy, governance and implementation gaps.
• Policy areas representing alternative policy approaches to WS&D that could be promoted in Europe were identified: establishment of ecological flows, establishment of efficiency targets, promotion of adequate economic incentives for efficient water use, guiding land use to respond to water scarcity, trading water use rights for the environment, strengthening the European Drought Emergency Response Capacity, and development of Drought Management Plans.