An Innovative Approach and a Cost-Effective Methodological

An Innovative Approach and An Innovative Approach and a Costa Cost--Effective Methodological Application Effective Methodological Application

to WFD Implementationto WFD Implementation

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE HYDROLOGICAL ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF THE HYDROLOGICAL MANAGEMENT IN CATALONIA (SPAIN)MANAGEMENT IN CATALONIA (SPAIN)

EURO INBO 2008Sibiu, 1-4 October

Introduction

Water Framework Directive (WFD) (2000/60/EC): its main objective is to achieve a “good status” of water by 2015 in all water bodies.

EU Member States should deliver a draft version of the River Basin Management Plan (RBMP) by the end of 2009. This document should include a Program of Measures (PoM) designed to meet the 2015 objectives.

! No specific methodology has been validated to evaluate the technical efficiency of the hypothetical program of measures that would lead to the target results.

! Nor it has been established how these measures or combination of measures should be evaluated to attain the most cost-effective solution.

BUT

Objectives

Art. 5: IMPRESS Identification of the GAP to fill for each Water Body

PoM

Economic AnalysisEstimation of the costs of the PoM, assignation of these costs to water uses

River Basin Management Plan for

Catalonia

P/I tool – decision making process

PoM optimization and application of the cost-effective criteria

• Which tools to assess the effects of measures on ecological status of water bodies?

• What are the effects of combinations of measures?

Optimization of the PoM: looking at the catalogue of measure and considering its

estimated cost, it is important to develop tools able to asses the efficiency of the

measures and their interactions…

Methodology

GIS Representation

Multi-objective optimization

tool

Water quality Model

QUAL2K

THE PRESSURE AND IMPACT TOOLAllows to evaluate the effect and the efficiency of the different measures in reaching the WFD’s goals AND permits to assess combinations of measures.

Methodology

QUAL2K Model

• Simulates water quality and quantity in streams and rivers.

• One dimensional model, based on steady state hydraulics, with non-uniform, simulated steady flow.

• Allows water system to consist of a mainstream river and branched tributaries, segmented as unequally-spaced reaches.

• Multiple loadings and abstractions can be input to any reach

• Conventional Pollutants (Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Dissolved Oxygen,BOD, Sediment Oxygen Demand, Algae), pH, Periphyton, Pathogens

• Simulates the physical-chemical and biological processes of constituents in the water system.

• Qual2k is a well know - well referenced model and is used by the EPA since the end of the ‘70s.

• Integrates a solutions-finding engine based on genetic algorithm.

• It is able to tradeoff among several solutions according to N criteria.

• Based on K. Deb, A. Pratap, S. Agarwal, and T. Meyarivan. NSGA-II. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 6(2):182–197, 2002.

• Developed by A. Udías, F.J. Elorza (2005), “Optimización de perímetros de protección de acuíferos mediante un algoritmo genético” pp :155-166. Boletín Geológico y Minero. Ed: J.J. Duran; ISSN:0366-0176

Multi-objectivecriteria tool

The application of the P/I tool to the Muga Watershed

Spain

Catalonia

Muga Watershed

• area: 760 km2

• population: 65.756 inhabitants

• 807 mm of annual rain


Existing Pressures on the Muga System

X Superficial withdrawals (urban, irrigation)X Urban waste water treatment plants effluentsX Untreated urban dischargesX Industrial effluents discharges X Agriculture return flows

PoM Main actions

Upgrading technology at the 3 existing treatment plantsConstruction of 37 new treatment plantsRemoval of untreated urban effluentsWater ru-use

Equivalent anual cost of investment

0,0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

0 2.500 5.000 7.500 10.000 12.500 15.000 17.500 20.000 22.500

Treated volume (m3/day)

Unit

cost

(€/m

3)

PRIM ARYy=-0,0002x+0,0933; y=0,052

SECONDARYy=2,7579x^(-0,357)

NITRIFICATION 60%y=3,1716x^(-0,357)

NIT I DESNIT 70%y=3,4474x^(-0,357)

NIT I DESNIT 85%y=4,1369x^(-0,357)

ADVANCED TREATM ENTy=4,4127x^(-0,357)


Starting information

Type of treatment

TSS

(mg/

l)

Dis

s O

xyge

n (m

g/l)

BO

D (m

g/l)

Org

anic

N (m

g/l)

N-N

H+ 4

(mg/

l)

NO

- 3 (m

g/l)

Org

anic

P (m

g/l)

PO42-

(mg/

l)

Alk

alin

ity

(mgC

aCO

3/l)

pH (s

.u.)

Primary 50% 1 20% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 5%Secondary 90% 1 90% 30% 30% 0% 0% 0% 20% 5%Nitrification 60% 95% 2 95% 60% 60% 0% 0% 0% 20% 5%Nitrification and desnitrification 70% 95% 2 95% 70% 70% 100% 0% 0% 30% 5%

Nitrification and desnitrification 70% and dephosphating

95% 2 95% 70% 70% 100% 50% 100% 30% 5%

Nitrification and desnitrification 70% and dephosphating

95% 2 95% 85% 85% 100% 50% 100% 40% 5%

Advanced treatment 100% 7 100% 95% 95% 100% 50% 100% 40% 5%

Type of treatmentCost of investment

Dimensional characteristics

Art. 5: IMPRESS

Projection of 2015 men-induced pressures

on the system


In the Muga system 40 treatment plants are planned with 7 types of possible treatments

740 alternatives = 6x1033 possible strategies

Which is the optimum strategy

that allows reaching WFD goals

in a efficient way?


Environmental quality

Inve

stm

ent

(€)

A B

C

B

Environmental quality

Inve

stm

ent

(€)

C

ED

A

A’

1. Points A and B: same investment but point B allows better Env. Quality B is the best choice

2. Points C and B: same Env. quality but C implies higher investment B is the best choice

1. Point A is better choice than points B-C-D-E

2. A has a lower cost, but A’ allows better environmental quality…both options are valid choices.


1. Create the conceptual model of the system and calibrate QUAL2K according to data gathered at monitoring stations in the watershed

2. Run the actual scenario to evaluate the gap between existing conditions and WFD targets

3. Run a scenario with 2015 pressures (according to Art. 5 of IMPRESS) to evaluate non-compliance river reaches and the magnitude of non-compliance

X Non-Compliance

Compliance

Actual scenarioNon-compliance for N-NH4

2015 ProjectionNon-compliance for N-NH4

+

4. Define possible combinations of PoM to optimize

Optimization

of the new 40 treatment

plants

Optimization

of the new 40 treatment

plants

+

existing plants

Optimizationof the new

40 treatment plants

+existing plants

+100%

reutilization

5. Apply the multi-objective optimization tool to identify the optimal PoM that leads to the achievement of the WFD’s objectives at the best cost/effectiveness ratio

Nitrate

Minimum Investment

100%00%- 1

Ammonia Phosfats

( € ) ( € ) ( € )

100% 100%- 100% - 100%

B

C

AAA

B B

C C

DDD

100%00%- 1

( € ) ( € ) ( € )

100% 100%- 100% - 100%

B

C

AAA

B B

C C

DDD

Efficient Strategies Curves

(€)

100%-100%

C

AB

D

(€)

100%-100%

C

AB

D

2015 ProjectionOptimization of new treatment plants + existing plants

Non-compliance for N-NH4+

Results Actual Situation 2015 Projection

2015 Projection

New plants + Existing Plants

Nº Months Non-

Compl

Mean Non-

Compl.Conc.

(mg/l)

0 -

-

0,52

-

-

-

0,57

-

-

-

-

-

0,55

-

0,56

-

-

0,58

-

0,54

-

-

-

1,11

0

1

0

0

0

1

0

0

0

0

0

2

0

2

0

0

2

0

2

Reach River

WFD

Target

(mg/l)

Nº Months

Non-Compl.

Mean Non-

Compl.Conc.

(mg/l) 1/

Nº Months

Non-Compl

Mean Non-

Compl.Conc.

(mg/l)

7 Arnera 0,2 6 0,40 9 0,37

0

0

0

13 Muga 0,5 1 0,64 2 0,55

18 Llobregat de la Muga 0,5 12 2,88 12 3,08








26 Ricardell 0,5 4 1,09 4 1,23

28 Merdàs 0,5 7 0,57 11 0,60

31 Anyet 0,5 12 1,07 12 1,18

33 Anyet 0,5 5 0,63 6 0,68

43 Manol 0,5 11 1,26 12 1,34

44 Manol 0,5 7 0,83 9 0,83

45 Manol 0,5 4 0,88 6 0,83

46 Riera de Alguema 0,5 4 0,92 6 0,87

47 Riera de Alguema 0,5 1 0,53 2 0,56

50 Riera de Figueres 0,5 12 9,25 12 10,19

51 Muga 0,5 10 1,03 12 1,10

52 Muga 0,5 10 0,82 12 0,89

53 Muga 0,5 9 0,73 11 0,79

254 Muga 0,5 8 0,77 11 0,86

1,7 0

1

23

0

723 6,8 1,3 1,48,0

Actual Situation

Nº of reaches

2015 Projection

Nº of reaches

2015 Projectionwith measures

9 0,37 01 6 0,4

Mean nº of Non-Compl

Months

Mean Non-Compl. Conc. (mg/l)


Months

MeNon-Compl. Conc. (mg/l)

Nº of reaches


Months

Mean Non-Compl. Conc. (mg/l)

,60,5

-0,2

an WFD Target (mg/l)

Conclusions

It allows finding the most cost-effective combination of PoMs, being helpful, as in the

Catalan basin, in managing significant items of the total investment for the WFD

implementation.

Results of modeling and analysis can be represented by a GIS tool to better support the decision making process.

Further developments of this methodology include coupling a new module related to

agriculture aimed at managing and decreasing DIFFUSE SOURCES of pollution and optimizing all those PoMs which are dealing with the whole watershed management.

Advanced characterization/estimation of the DIFFUSE SOURCES opens up the

possibility to groundwater systems management and to the interaction between surface water and aquifers.

The application of the P/I tool can be useful during WFD implementation.

Mail to: Mrs Giuliana Coscera

[email protected]

Mail to: Mr Lorenzo Galbiati

[email protected]

Documents

An Innovative Approach and a Cost-Effective Methodological