59
Non-Revenue Water Reduction - an International Update Roland Liemberger

Non-Revenue Water Reduction - an International Updatesiteresources.worldbank.org/EXTWAT/Resources/4602122-1213366294492/... · 10 IWA Standard Water Balance System Input Volume Authorised

  • Upload
    buidien

  • View
    222

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Non-Revenue Water Reduction -an International Update

Roland Liemberger

2

Topics of the Presentation:

S choosing the right performance indicatorS outsourcing of NRW reduction – the Selangor

(Malaysia) exampleS brief notes on the IWA leakage conference in

Cyprus

3

Around the globe one and the same problem ...

4

too much precious water

is lostis lost

5

great engineers since ever wanted great engineers since ever wanted to build huge schemes .....to build huge schemes .....

6

... and politicians always enjoy opening ceremonies!

7

8

9

that's why we have a major problem:

NRWNRW(Non(Non--Revenue Water)Revenue Water)

10

IWA Standard Water Balance

System

Input

Volume

Authorised

Consumption

RevenueWater

Non

Revenue

Water

BilledAuthorised

Consumption

UnbilledAuthorised

Consumption

ApparentLosses

RealLosses

Water

Losses

Billed Metered Consumption

Unbilled Unmetered Consumption

Unauthorised Consumption

Customer Meter Inaccuracies

Leakage on Transmission andDistribution Mains

Billed Unmetered Consumption

Unbilled Metered Consumption

Leakage on Service Connectionsup to point of Customer Meter

Leakage and Overflows at Storage Tanks

11

Traditional PIs for Real Losses

S per property per day

12

Traditional PIs for Real Losses

S per property per dayS per km of mains per

day

13

Traditional PIs for Real Losses

S per property per dayS per km of mains per

dayS per service connection

per day

14

Traditional PIs for Real Losses

S per property per dayS per km of mains per

dayS per service connection

per dayS percentage of system

input volume

80%

20%

Consumption Losses

15

Real Losses as % of System Input

VIENNA(Austria)

8.5 %

16

Real Losses as % of System Input

LEMESOS(Cyprus)

12.5 %

17

Real Losses as % of System Input

DUSHANBE(Tajikistan)

16.2 %

18

Real Losses as % of System Input

BRISTOL(UK)

16.8 %

19

Real Losses as % of System Input

PHILADELPHIA(USA)

25.8 %

20

Real Losses as % of System Input

MAKKAH(Saudi Arabia)

31.6 %

21

The Infrastructure Leakage Index

S a better IndicatorS describes the quality of infrastructure

managementS is the ratio of Current Annual Real Losses to

Unavoidable Annual Real LosesILI = CARL / UARLS being a ratio, it has no units

22

The 4 Components of a Successful Leakage Management Policy

Current Annual

Volume ofReal Losses

Pressure Management

Speed and Quality of Repairs

Pipeline and Assets

Management

SelectionInstallation

MaintenanceRehabilitationReplacement

Active Leakage Control

Potentially RecoverableReal Losses

Unavoidable Annual Real

Losses

23

The 4 Components of a Successful Leakage Management Policy

Speed and Quality of Repairs

Active Leakage Control

Pipeline and Assets

Management

SelectionInstallation

MaintenanceRehabilitationReplacement

Pressure Management

Current Annual

Volume ofReal Losses

Potentially RecoverableReal Losses

24

Unavoidable Annual Real

Losses

Current Annual Volume of Real Losses

Economic Level of Leakage

ILI and the Economic Level of Leakage (ELL)

Economically RecoverableReal Losses

25

ILI from 1 to . . . . . . .?

26

ILI from 1 to . . . . . . .?

27

Comparing ILI to Percentages

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

1 10 100 1000ILI

Rea

l Los

ses

[% o

f Sys

tem

Inpu

t]

ViennaLemesos

Dushanbe

Philadelphia

Holy City of Makkah

Bristol

28

What's the problem?

SNRW Reduction is 'not a nice job'SDifficult to do for a public company (limited

funds, limited manpower, limited options to motivate staff)SCould be outsourced very efficientlySUtility would supervise/monitor the contractor

29

The Solution:

Performance BasedNRW Reduction Contracts

30

Performance BasedNRW Reduction Contracts

An all-inclusive contract with contract payments directly related to target

achievement, where the contractor has to reduce NRW in an

agreed area by an agreed unit rate per volume NRW reduced

(e.g. m3/d).

31

From Theory to Practice

NRW Reduction Project in Selangor, Malaysia

32

SELANGOR

33

Selangor Water Supply- basic facts

SWater is produced by privatised bulk water suppliersSWater is distributed by Selangor State

Waterworks Department SArea covered includes Kuala LumpurØ~ 800,000 hectaresØ~ 13,000 km of water mainsØ~ 5 million population

34

Overall Water Situation

2000 2010 20200

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Dem

and

(Mm

3 /da

y) ExtractionLimit

35

NRW Situation in Selangor

S NRW ~ 40% of Total SupplyS ~ 280 million cubic metres per yearS ~ 821 litres per connection per dayS if reduced by 50%: enough to supply an extra

1.8 million people

36

Water Balance Selangor

Real Losses (195 Mm3/yr)

Consumption (520 Mm3/yr)

NRW(290 Mm3/yr)

Apparent Losses (95 Mm3/yr)

37

Physical Losses Selangor

Excess Losses

Physiacal Losses195 Mm3/yr

Background Leakage

Reported Bursts

38

Selangor NRW Reduction Contract

SA Performance Target Based NRW Reduction Contract in 2 PhasesSPhase 1 09/98 – 03/00 “Pilot Project”SPhase 2 commenced April 2000 “State-

wide Project” (9 years)

39

Phase 1 Contract Characteristics

Duration 18 monthsStart 15 September 1998Completion 14 March 2000Contract value RM 17.1 M (US$ 4.5 M)Performance TargetsØ physical losses reduction 10,450 m3/dayØ meter accuracy improvement 6,400 m3/dayØ Overall NRW Reduction 18,540 m3/day

40

The contract price includes

SPlanning, engineering, leak detection, construction supervisionSRepair materials, meters, equipmentSAll required civil, repair and installation works

41

Physical LossReduction Programme

S establishment of NRW zonesS installation of bulk meters and Pressure

Reducing ValvesSComponent based leakage modellingS replacement of all leaking service

connectionsS leak repairS pressure management

42

Example from Selangor:

0

10

20

30

40

50

6000

:00

02:0

0

04:0

0

06:0

0

08:0

0

10:0

0

12:0

0

14:0

0

16:0

0

18:0

0

20:0

0

22:0

0

Flo

w R

ate

(l/s

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Pre

ssu

re (m

)

43

Inflow, pressure and leakage

0

10

20

30

40

50

6000

:00

02:0

0

04:0

0

06:0

0

08:0

0

10:0

0

12:0

0

14:0

0

16:0

0

18:0

0

20:0

0

22:0

0

Flo

w R

ate

(l/s

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Pre

ssu

re (m

)

44

Leakage components

0

10

20

30

40

50

6000

:00

02:0

0

04:0

0

06:0

0

08:0

0

10:0

0

12:0

0

14:0

0

16:0

0

18:0

0

20:0

0

22:0

0

Flo

w R

ate

(l/s

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Pre

ssu

re (m

)

45

After leak repair

0

10

20

30

40

50

6000

:00

02:0

0

04:0

0

06:0

0

08:0

0

10:0

0

12:0

0

14:0

0

16:0

0

18:0

0

20:0

0

22:0

0

Flo

w R

ate

(l/s

)

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Pre

ssu

re (m

)

46

Consumption - before and after

0

5

10

15

20

25

3000

:00

02:0

0

04:0

0

06:0

0

08:0

0

10:0

0

12:0

0

14:0

0

16:0

0

18:0

0

20:0

0

22:0

0

Flo

w R

ate

(l/s

)

47

Meter AccuracyImprovement Programme

S selection of meters to be replacedS Installation of new metersS detection of illegal connections and report

to JBAS

48

Monitoring

S Flow and pressure measurements PRIOR to any activitiesSMeasurements to be repeated AFTER

completionSMeter records of replaced meters compared

with a three month reading of new meters

49

Phase 1 Achievements

Performance TargetsØ physical losses reduction 10,450 m3/dayØ meter accuracy improvement 6,400 m3/dayØ Overall NRW Reduction 18,540 m3/day

Achieved:

11,429 m3/day9,212 m3/day

20,898 m3/day

50

Phase 2 Contract Characteristics

Duration 9 yearsStart April 2000Completion April 2009Contract value RM 398 M (US$ 105 M)Performance TargetsØ reduce physical losses by minimum 97,500 m3/dayØ improve meter accuracy by minimum 81,450 m3/dayØ Overall NRW Reduction 198,900 m3/day

51

Annualised Savings

52

IWA Leakage ConferenceCyprus, Nov. 2002

S 3-day specialised conferenceS attracted participants from 27 countriesS has facilitated new advances and concepts to

stretch the current thinking on Øreal and apparent losses evaluation and Østrategic solutions

53

Most interesting topics (I):

SComponent based apparent loss modelling (Julian Thornton, WSO)S Latest findings from North America (AwwaRF

study) (Paul Fanner, WSO)S Introducing DMAs in North America (Ken

Brothers, Halifax Regional Water Commission)SNew Water Balance Software, 'Aqualibre'

www.aqualibre.info

54

Most interesting topics (II):

S Tactical planning of leakage reduction (Alex Rizzo, Malta Water Services Corporation)SPractical experience in applying the ILI (Allan

Lambert)SWater loss reduction in Italy and GreeceSPressure Reduction in South Africa (Ronnie

McKenzie, WRP)

55

IWA Water Loss TaskforceS ~ 40 Members from around the worldSChair: Ken Brothers, Halifax Regional Water

Commission (Canada)S Teams were formed to do further research:Ø Real Water Losses (including ILI/ ELL ) (Leader: Paul Fanner, USA)Ø Apparent Losses (Leader: Alex Rizzo, Malta)Ø PI and International benchmarking (Leader: Ronnie McKenzie, SA)Ø Leak Detection Practices (Leader: Richard Pilcher, UK)Ø District Metered Areas (Leader: John Morrison, UK)Ø Pressure Management Team (Leader: Julian Thornton, USA)

SNext important IWA Leakage Event: World Water Congress 2004, Marrakech (Morocco)

56

The Way Forward ??

S is it likely that politicians and media (and the Bank?) will stop using percentages???S a new indicator is needed whichØis simple, ideally using percentagesØtakes ECONOMICS into account

SENE – the Economic Network Efficiency

57

Calculate the ENE

S step 1: determine CARLS step 2: calculate the economic level of

leakage, express as EARL (Economic Annual Real Losses)S step 3: calculate the Economic Leakage

Index ELI = CARL / EARLS step 4: calculate the ENE:

ENE [%] = 1 / ELI

58

Economic Network Efficiency

59

Thank you.

www.waterlosses.com