CWA 17031:2016

SLOVENSKI STANDARD
SIST CWA 17031:2016
01-september-2016
7UDMQRVWQDLQWHJULUDQDXSRUDEDLQREGHODYDYRGHYLQGXVWULMVNLKSURFHVLK
3UDNWLþQLQDSRWNLXSRUDEQD92'$
Sustainable integrated water use & treatment in process industries - a practical guidance
(Sustain WATER)
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: CWA 17031:2016
ICS:
13.020.20 Okoljska ekonomija. Environmental economics.
Trajnostnost Sustainability
13.060.25 Voda za industrijsko uporabo Water for industrial use
SIST CWA 17031:2016 en,fr,de
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.

SIST CWA 17031:2016
SIST CWA 17031:2016
CEN
CWA 17031
WORKSHOP
May 2016
AGREEMENT
ICS 13.060.25; 13.060.30; 71.020
English version
Sustainable integrated water use & treatment in process
industries - a practical guidance (SustainWATER)
This CEN Workshop Agreement has been drafted and approved by a Workshop of representatives of interested parties, the
constitution of which is indicated in the foreword of this Workshop Agreement.

The formal process followed by the Workshop in the development of this Workshop Agreement has been endorsed by the
National Members of CEN but neither the National Members of CEN nor the CEN-CENELEC Management Centre can be held
accountable for the technical content of this CEN Workshop Agreement or possible conflicts with standards or legislation.

This CEN Workshop Agreement can in no way be held as being an official standard developed by CEN and its Members.

This CEN Workshop Agreement is publicly available as a reference document from the CEN Members National Standard Bodies.

CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland,
Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta,
Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and United Kingdom.

EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION
COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATION

EUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNG

CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Avenue Marnix 17, B-1000 Brussels
© 2016 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved worldwide for CEN national Members.

Ref. No.:CWA 17031:2016 E
SIST CWA 17031:2016
Content Page
European foreword . 3
Introduction . 5
1 Scope . 7
2 Normative references . 7
3 Terms and definitions . 7
4 Drivers for sustainable integrated water use and treatment . 10
4.1 Incentives/leverages of companies as driver (process industry) . 10
4.2 Other stakeholder as drivers (municipalities, technology providers etc.) . 12
5 Non-technical aspects . 12
5.1 Framework . 12
5.1.1 Global strategies and local water challenges. 13
5.1.2 Broad acceptance and support of the chosen solutions . 13
5.2 Integrated water use and treatment: Set up of new systems and integration in
existing concepts . 13
5.2.1 General approach and local solutions . 13
5.2.2 Acceptance of solutions by different stakeholders . 15
6 Technical aspects at industrial scale . 16
6.1 Definition phase . 16
6.2 Technology selection . 17
6.3 Validation of the technology . 17
6.4 Lessons learned from E4Water case studies . 18
7 Assessment and decision aspects . 19
7.1 Risk assessment and opportunities . 20
7.1.1 Drivers . 20
7.1.2 Definition of the time frame. 20
7.1.3 Assessment of risks . 21
7.1.4 Opportunities . 22
7.1.5 Common hurdles to overcome . 22
7.2 Costs . 24
7.3 Life cycle assessment (LCA) . 26
7.4 Strategies . 27
7.5 Process - Modelling . 27
8 On site implementation . 28
Bibliography . 30

SIST CWA 17031:2016
European foreword
The present Workshop has been proposed by the E4Water consortium, which is conducting a
Collaborative Project on Economically and Ecologically Efficient Water Management in the
European Chemical Industry (E4Water; www.e4water.eu) [1]. E4Water is supported under the
7th Framework Programme of the EU, Theme NMP.2011.3.4-1, Eco-efficient management of
industrial water.
CWA SustainWATER was developed in accordance with CEN-CENELEC Guide 29 “CEN/CENELEC
Workshop Agreements – The way to rapid agreement” [2] and with the relevant provisions of
CEN/CENELEC Internal Regulations - Part 2. It was agreed on 2016-03-23 in an online meeting
by representatives of interested parties, approved and supported by CEN following a public call
for participation made on 2016-01-22. It does not necessarily reflect the views of all
stakeholders that might have an interest in its subject matter.
CWA 79 SustainWATER is a technical agreement, developed and approved by an open,
independent Workshop structure within the framework of the CEN-CENELEC system.
CWA SustainWATER reflects the agreement only of the registered participants responsible for
its content, and was developed in accordance with the CEN-CENELEC rules and practices for the
development and approval of CEN/CENELEC Workshop Agreements.
CWA SustainWATER does not have the status of a European Standard (EN) developed by CEN
and its national Members. It does not represent the wider level of consensus and transparency
required for a European Standard (EN) and is not intended to support legislative requirements
or to address issues with significant health and safety implications. For these reasons, CEN are
not accountable for the technical content of CWA SustainWATER or for any possible conflicts
with national standards or legislation.
The final text of CWA SustainWATER was submitted to CEN for publication on 2016-04-05. It
was developed and approved by:
• CEFIC, Brussels/Belgium
Steven van de Broeck; Antonia Morales Perez
• DECHEMA e. V., Frankfurt am Main/Germany
Thomas Track, Christina Jungfer, Katja Wendler
• Dow Benelux BV, Terneuzen/Netherlands
Niels Groot
• DTU - Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby/Denmark
Davide De Francisci
• EVIDES, Rotterdam/Netherlands
Wilbert van den Broek
• INOVYN Manufacturing Belgium, Lillo Site, Antwerp/Belgium
Sabine Thabert
• IVL - Swedish Environmental Research Institute, Stockholm/Sweden
Uwe Fortkamp
• Kalundborg Kommune/Denmark
Per Møller
SIST CWA 17031:2016
• Procter and Gamble, Strombeek-Bever/Belgium
Eddy Linclau
• SOLVAY; Brussels, Belgium
Nathalie Swinnen
• TNO, The Hague/Netherlands
Raymond Creusen
• TOTAL, Harfleure/France
Alexandre Muller
• TUB - Technical University of Berlin, Berlin/Germany
Sven Geißen
• UCM - Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid/Spain
Angeles Blanco
• VITO, Mol/Belgium
Peter Cauwenberg
It is possible that some elements of CWA SustainWATER may be subject to patent rights. The
CEN-CENELEC policy on patent rights is set out in CEN-CENELEC Guide 8 “Guidelines for
Implementation of the Common IPR Policy on Patents (and other statutory intellectual property
rights based on inventions)”. CEN shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such
patent rights.
The Workshop participants have made every effort to ensure the reliability and accuracy of the
technical and non-technical content of CWA SustainWATER, but this does not guarantee, either
explicitly or implicitly, its correctness. Users of CWA SustainWATER should be aware that
neither the Workshop participants, nor CEN can be held liable for damages or losses of any kind
whatsoever which may arise from its application. Users of CWA SustainWATER do so on their
own responsibility and at their own risk.
SIST CWA 17031:2016
Introduction
This CWA aims to provide guidance primarily for company stakeholders to support
implementation of sustainable integrated water use and treatment. While the whole procedure
might be relevant for some stakeholders, only parts might be for others. Such sustainable
integrated water system is essential for an efficient water use and treatment in any plant,
including chemical and process industries. In its most advanced form it can also be described as
an integrated industrial water management or even as an integrated water management when
urban and industrial waters are managed together. This industrial approach has various
dimensions starting from measures directly linked to single production processes up to
measures and cooperation that go far beyond one industrial unit or even site. With an increasing
range of scale to be considered in the industrial water management, the number of actors to be
involved is growing (e.g. neighbourhood industrial sites, municipal wastewater treatment units,
water resources management institutions up to catchment scale) and technology options are
getting manifold. So there is a clear need to consider them in an integrated way.
To improve the management of water resources, water uses and final effluent disposal, for the
companies in the chemical sector, multiple drivers exist. In many cases more than a single driver
applies for each company, and frequently inter correlation between different drivers exists.
Companies located in water stressed areas (as assessed by various neat tools developed over the
past years) will definitely identify the risk from various sides to reduce their water footprint by
reducing the fresh water intake. Minimizing discharge to sensitive water bodies, not already
regulated by local legislation implementation of the Water Framework Directive is also an
important driver since it will require measures to ensure “good ecological quality” in each river
water basin throughout Europe by 2027 latest.
Where competition with other users exists, typical governance foresees prioritization in water
distribution where the industrial activities will come after, respectively, citizens and agriculture.
The industry can look for alternative, although usually more expensive, water sources or it can
reduce its dependency on fresh water. The latter can reduce in a sustainable way the risk of
disruption in production. Moreover, the likelihood to see a pricing increase in such areas is a
high risk, enhancing the pay back of water reuse.
Anticipating these developments many companies, ranging from SME’s to multinationals, have
included sound water management in their corporate and business strategies. Many have
already defined clear objectives in setting targets for managing their water resources and some
have applied tools to assess their sustainable water use in the expectation that taking voluntary
action at an early stage provides the operating flexibility to achieve these goals when new and
strict legislation is issued.
The overall process to move towards a sustainable integrated industrial water use and
treatment can be described in the following way:
1. Clear definition of the conditions for implementation:
a. Intention, drivers, issues to be addressed.
b. Identification and description of the detailed non-technical framework to be considered,
like financing, regulations, etc.
c. 1st screening for the solution framework, to determine the scale that needs to be
considered as boundary conditions and to analyse the surrounding environment
2. Developing a 1st set of technical options/solutions in combination with non-technical
measures (where appropriate)
SIST CWA 17031:2016
3. Assessment of applicability, efficiency and prove of compliance with technical and non-
technical requirements (e.g. societal, administrative, regulative). Internal pre-assessment of
sustainable water use.
4. Refinement and optimization of the selected? solution(s)
Note: there might be several iteration steps between point 2 to 4
5. Final decision for a solution and implementation
SIST CWA 17031:2016
1 Scope
The objective of the CEN workshop is to describe a framework for a practical approach on
measures to achieve “a sustainable water use and treatment in chemical industry (and related
process industry sectors)” considering technological and non-technological issues.
In the CEN Workshop Agreement “SustainWATER” the results and experiences on how to come
to an efficient and sustainable water use and treatment are brought together out of the E4Water
case studies to provide a guidance document on this approach The main objective of the
E4Water project is to develop, test and validate new integrated approaches, methodologies and
process technologies for a more efficient and sustainable use and treatment of water in chemical
industry with transfer potential to other sectors.
2 Normative references
The following referenced documents are indispensable for the application of this document. For
dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the
referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
DIN EN 1085:2007: Wastewater treatment – Vocabulary; Trilingual version
ISO/TS 21929-2:2015(en): Sustainability in building construction - Sustainability indicators -
Part 2: Framework for the development of indicators for civil engineering works
ISO 14044:2006: Environmental management – Life cycle assessment – Requirements and
guidelines
ISO 14040:2006(en): Environmental management - Life cycle assessment - Principles and
framework
ISO 14046:2014(en): Environmental management, Water footprint, Principles, requirements
and guidelines
ISO 15663-3:2001(en): Petroleum and natural gas industries - Life-cycle costing - Part 3:
Implementation guidelines
ISO 16075-1:2015(en): Guidelines for treated wastewater use for irrigation projects, Part 1: The
basis of a reuse project for irrigation
ISO 18311:2016(en): Soil quality - Method for testing effects of soil contaminants on the feeding
activity of soil dwelling organisms - Bait-lamina test
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document the terms and definitions apply.
3.1
BREF documents
Best Available Techniques (BAT) reference documents
[SOURCE: http://eippcb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/reference/]
3.2
capital expenditures (CAPEX)
money used to purchase, install and commission a capital asset
[SOURCE: ISO 15663-3:2001(en), 2.1.3]
SIST CWA 17031:2016
3.3
economies of scope
efficiencies wrought by variety, not volume
[SOURCE: Joel D. Goldhar; Mariann Jelinek (Nov 1983). “Plan for Economies of Scope”. Harvard
Business Review, https://hbr.org/1983/11/plan-for-economies-of-scope]
3.4
ecosystem services
benefits that humans recognise as obtained from ecosystems that support, directly or indirectly,
their survival and quality of life
Note 1 to entry: These include provisioning, regulating, and cultural services that directly benefit people
and the supporting services needed to maintain the direct services.
[SOURCE: ISO 18311:2016(en), 3.9]
3.5
integrated water use and treatment
considering interactions, interdependencies and synergy potentials between different measures
of water use and water/wastewater treatment in and across various scales: process – plant – site
– local - regional
3.6
life cycle
consecutive and interlinked stages of a product system, from raw material acquisition or
generation from natural resources to final disposal
[SOURCE: ISO 14044:2006, 3.1]
3.7
life cycle assessment
LCA
compilation and evaluation of the inputs, outputs and the potential environmental impacts of a
product system throughout its life cycle
[SOURCE: ISO 14040:2006(en). 3.3.4]
3.8
life cycle cost
LCC
cost of an asset or its parts throughout its life cycle, while fulfilling its performance (3.28)
requirements
[SOURCE: ISO/TS 21929-2:2015(en), 3.25]
3.9
operating expenditure
OPEX
money used to operate and maintain, including associated costs such as logistics and spares
[SOURCE: ISO 15663-3:2001(en), 2.1.12]
SIST CWA 17031:2016
3.10
Sustainable Water Management
meeting the present water needs and handling without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs, incorporating environmental, societal and economic
considerations to come to a robust water system
[SOURCE: based on the UN sustainable development definition: United Nations, 1987, “Report of
the World Commission on Environment and Development” General Assembly Resolution
42/187, 11 December 1987. Retrieved: 2007-04-12]
3.11
Total Cost of Ownership
TCO
The CAPEX and OPEX are used to calculate the TCO (Total Costs of Ownership)
3.12
wastewater
water composed of any combination of water discharged from domestic, industrial or
commercial premises, surface run-off and accidentally any sewer infiltration water
[SOURCE: DIN EN 1085:2007, 1010]
3.13
water-fit-for-purpose
providing water in a quality appropriate to the requirements of a specific use
3.14
water footprint
metric(s) that quantifies the potential environmental impacts related to water
Note 1 to entry: If water related potential environmental impacts have not been comprehensively
assessed, then the term “water footprint” can only be applied with a qualifier. A qualifier is one or several
additional words used in conjunction with the term “water footprint” to describe the impact
category/categories studied in the water footprint assessment, e.g. “water scarcity footprint”, “water
eutrophication footprint”, “non-comprehensive water footprint”.
[SOURCE: ISO14046:2014(en), 3.5.14]
3.15
water related risks
risk of negative impact to process industry or an industrial process induced by water
3.16
water reuse
use of treated wastewater for beneficial use
Note 1 to entry: Synonymous also to water reclamation and water recycling.
[SOURCE: ISO 16075-1:2015(en), 3.1.23]
SIST CWA 17031:2016
4 Drivers for sustainable integrated water use and treatment
4.1 Incentives/leverages of companies as driver (process industry)
In a challenging economic environment with growing international competition and natural
resource scarcity, efficient resource management has become a strategic imperative for any
resource-intensive industry. Water plays a crucial role in this equation, as it is not only the single
most important chemical compound for human survival, but also a vital element of the
manufacturing process as well as for the development of the Bio Based Economy. Furthermore
water is also important in the development of a circular economy. There is a variety of driving
forces why a company works on sustainable water use:
• ‘To do the right thing‘: Many companies have established their own sustainability program
via which they commit themselves to improve their water efficiency. Several companies will
also join forces at national, international or industry federation level (e.g. U.N. Global
Compact CEO Water Mandate, WBCSD, etc.) to share experiences. Cooperation within the
same watershed is done to protect the common ‘water as raw material‘ or because this gives
additional efficiency opportunities (e.g. symbiosis where wastewater from one partner is
becoming the raw water for another partner) as part of the circular economy concept).
Some companies demonstrate their water responsibility by the application of water
stewardship schemes (e.g. European Water Stewardship or Alliance for Water Stewardship
at international level).
• Protection against water related risks: Manufacturing sites can face a variety of water
related risks with a huge impact if they are not well understood. Working to improve water
efficiency will typically be a first step of any mitigation plan. Water related risks can be very
diverse, changing over time and can depend heavily on external factors:
o Limits/Reduction in available water quantity due to fewer water supplies (e.g. linked
with global warming), growing water needs by others and/or changing priorities of
water allocations.
o Loss in water quality due to pollution (by others) or impact by e.g. climate change (e.g.
higher silt index in dam reservoirs, growth of tidal areas due to sea water level rise
causing more chloride in raw water, etc.).
o Non-technical: for example, press coverage on water related topics, non-governmental
organization (NGO) activities, public perception, and engagement, etc. can change the
way water needs to be looked at in a certain location.
• Legislation controlling the water intake:
o In several cases, companies see that the continuation of their activity is submitted to a
tendency to a lower water uptake at equivalent production capacity or an unchanged
water uptake is considered for an increased capacity.
o In other cases, manufacturing sites are getting water efficiency targets in their permits
specifying the maximum water intake to produce 1 ton of product.
• Legislation controlling the water discharge:
o While it is very common to have permit requirements on the water quality which is
discharged (with limits determined by the river basin approach directed in the EU
Water Framework Directive [3]), there are more and more permit requirements which
are limiting discharged volumes; sometimes with lower targets for ‘dry periods’ to
SIST CWA 17031:2016
ensure that the total of industrial discharges will stay low relative to the water volume
in the receiving water body.
• Lack of reliable water supply infrastructure:
o Some companies face a public water supply infrastructure which is limited in capacity
and/or is not reliable over time.
• Lack of water discharge capability:
o Some sites, that depend on wastewater treatment by public wastewater treatment
plants (WWTP) can only discharge limited volumes of wastewater into the public sewer
system, or are located in areas where there is no public sewer system available. For
sites with direct discharge (performing their own treatment of wastewater) surface
water bodies eligible for discharge may not be easy to reach.
• Cost of water: direct and indirect:
o In most places, the price of water is trending up and there is no reason why this trend
will change. So the raising price of water on itself can be sufficient to justify water
saving investments.
o But also the indirect water costs can be very significant: Operating expenses for the
internal fresh water treatment (quality and temperature), wastewater treatments and
the public fee to discharge the water, needs to be included and can make water savings
even more attractive.
• Business opportunities: In a world where fresh water is more and more scarce, it can be a
competitive advantage to be water efficient and/or to have water efficient products on the
market:
o In business-to-business (B2B) environment: More and more, big cooperations/
multinationals look for water efficiency through their supply chain and make
sourcing/purchase decisions in which water efficiency plays a role. This may be part of
their internal sustainability program or they do it to protect their business against
water related risks.
o Towards the consumers:
▪ Consumers which face in their private life water scarcity will most likely take water
efficiency of products into consideration when doing their purchases. They will be
willing to pay a higher price for water efficient product forms.
▪ Other consumers, not confronted with water scarcity, will in several cases also
choose for water efficient solutions if they can do this at equal cost and
performance.
▪ Although customers will typically look to the performance of the products they buy,
they will assume that these products are produced in a water efficient way.
Producers of the products will therefore work also on the water efficiency of their
production process.
▪ Recent initiatives by big retailers (e.g. Walmart in USA) or governmental
organizations (e.g. France) are trying to communicate the environmental footprint
of products to the consumers. As such, more information becomes available to them
and will more and more influence their purchase habits.
SIST CWA 17031:2016
• General expectation to be water efficient by the external world, the image of the company:
The recent droughts in several countries across the globe, the public concern on pollution of
water, the growing water needs by the growing global population and the impact of climate
change on water availability has created a general public concern on water availability.
• Proudness of the company/ general expectation to be water efficient by own employees:
Especially the younger generations in some countries are very sensitive to the way their
employer acts on sustainability and even has become a criterion to accept employment.
Having sustainability programs can play a role to attract, motivate, and retain qualified
people.
4.2 Other stakeholder as drivers (municipalities, technology providers etc.)
Stakeholders other than industry themselves can also act as drivers for improving managing
water resources.
It is increasingly recognized that public private partnerships are able to facilitate a structural
approach for managing water resources beyond the strict boundaries of a single user. Especially
in water stressed areas we see municipalities, provinces, country states, etc taking the initiative
to call for a broad regional collaboration to develop a sustainable and robust system that allows
multiple stakeholders to benefit from an integrated approach. Successful examples exist, where
regional approaches have been established in Spain (Catalonia), United States (Orange County),
The Netherlands, Australia, and others.
On the other hand, municipalities play an important role in the industrial use of reclaimed water
as part of an integrated sustainable water use and treatment.
Also technology providers seem to broaden their scope of supply to service end-users.
Historically their focus was on selling single technologies or unit operations, whereas their
current target is to offer “complete solutions”. This basically means an integrated water
approach, which may even go outside classical boundaries of the factory complex – they offer
partnerships for sustainability rather than technical solutions and not seldom the solution is
more a roadmap to get to a final target years ahead than fixing a quick implementation of a
single technology.
5 Non-technical aspects
5.1 Framework
As described in the introduction the site surrounding environment and the non-technical
framework provide the basis for the further steps in moving towards sustainable integrated
industrial water use and treatment.
Water surmounts political, geographical and social borders with a transboundary scale that
makes its governance truly complex since it implies the need to integrate diverse private sector
interests with those of the public sector at a river basin scale. Since water is local and shared by
multiple users which presents complex challenges different non-technical aspects must be
considered including political, legal and environmental drivers in different regions. Besides
these non-technical aspects, education and public awareness are also crucial for the acceptance
of the solutions to be implemented.
To improve the state of European water resources, numerous non-technical challenges and
opportunities (e.g. cooperation or interaction with other stakeholders as municipalities,
regulatory compliance) must still be considered in order to improve the interaction and
cooperation between all the actors needed for long-term sustainable water management within
the river basin context. We will focus on those that limit the application of optimum technical
solutions having a broad perspective that includes aspects from “inside a site” to “beyond-the-
fence”. This “beyond-the-fence approach” aligns meaningful risk management for businesses
SIST CWA 17031:2016
with the goals of the Water Framework Directive 2000/60/EC (WFD) [3] or e.g. the EU Marine
Strategy Framework Directive 2008/56/EC [4], by having water users in a river basin examine
their contribution to existing poor water quality while keeping river basin goals in mind.
In all cases, sustainable integrated water approaches must be built up within existing national
and international administration as well as within sustainable water practices/policies existing
in companies with plants in several world regions. Therefore global approaches need to be
considered but solutions must be optimized with a local perspective.
5.1.1 Global strategies and local water challenges
A sustainable long-term water use and treatment strategy evaluates the impacts related to the
water use and defines strategies based on a general and integral approach that guides
companies to define their global strategy for mitigating water related risks, but also to reach
strategic water related goals by: exploring alternative water sources, reducing consumption
throughout the value chain or improving the quality of discharge water. With this general
approach, local water challenges and alternatives can be identified for each production site
which will be the base for an optimum site-by-site solution that has to be developed under the
local/regional perspective and integrated in the global strategy. Working with local actors
within the river basin and along supply chains allows businesses to identify specific hot spots for
long-term improvement thereby stimulating a demand for increasingly innovative solutions to
water use and treatment.
It is clear that there is not a unique solution and therefore the global solution is achieved by the
sum of local solutions. On the other side, local solutions matched to users’ needs and resource
availability must be developed with a wide perspective, considering approaches and innovative
solutions in other sectors and regions to avoid reinventing the wheel. These solutions may
require a further adaptation and validation for each specific case.
5.1.2 Broad acceptance and support of the chosen solutions
Once the envisaged water solutions (e.g. reuse) are assessed to be feasible from a technical point
of view, it is in addition necessary to get a broad acceptance and support for these solutions.
Drivers, risks and opportunities related to the specific water reuse play an important role in who
has to be involved and how to obtain the required level of acceptance.
In general, one can state that long term support and commitment from the highest management
level within companies has to be seen as an absolute minimum.
Depending on the envisaged water reuse it might also be needed to get additional acceptance by
society and/or administrations. Acceptance by society is typically needed in those cases where
water is reused for external purposes like land irrigation, whereas clear commitments of
authorities will be typically needed in cases where the current legal framework may hinder a
certain water reuse option.
Broad acceptance by stakeholders is considered to be a key factor for sustainable water reuse. It
is therefore recommended to get the required level of acceptance before water reuse options are
implemented.
5.2 Integrated water use and treatment: Set up of new systems and integration in
existing concepts
5.2.1 General approach and local solutions
For the set-up and integration of new water use and treatment concepts, and to tackle the water
challenges we face both globally and locally, it is essential that in the first place water users
collaborate on how they can minimize their impacts on water resources. The overall
productivity of water use must be privileged over seeking endless sources of new supply. This
approach has proven to work at local and community scales and it is clearly necessary to protect
the critical ecological services in river basins such as nutrient cycling, flood protection, aquatic
SIST CWA 17031:2016
habitat and waste dilution and removal that water also provides. Corporate sustainable
integrated water use and treatment must reflect a general approach that includes local
conditions and must take into consideration the potential influence on the environment and its
role in the wider community. In order to achieve these aims a high level of flexibility is required
in public and private institutions, and centralized and new decentralized facilities should be
integrated to generate potential and more efficient technologies.
To enable sustainable and most efficient solutions, elaboration has to start on a large scale –
catchment related – to ensure that all interdependencies are considered and no potential
solutions or synergies are excluded due to a to narrow scale. Once the broader, catchment
related picture is understood and described, in the second step the site related concepts and
approaches have to be developed and described. In the third step they both should feed into a
modelling approach, at least as conceptual model, that proves consistency of the first two steps.
A more advanced modelling approach allows the integration of potential solutions for impact
assessment.
Catchment related aspects and boundary conditions (broader picture)
For the catchment scale the following aspects should be considered. They are not exhaustive but
provide the framework:
• Wider integral water concept:
Which natural water resources are available (surface water, groundwater)?
Which relevant water users are present (industry, urban, agriculture) and how do they act
(water demand, established interactions)?
• Alternative water resources:
Are there alternative water resources available (already established or potential)?
How are they characterized (industrial wastewater, municipal wastewater, rainwater)?
Where are they localized (site – local – regional)?
• Knowledge on spatiotemporal stress and sensitivity of water supplies:
Where in the catchment does water stress or scarcity exist or can occur?
Is the situation changing by monthly/seasonal/periodical variations and peaks?
What renewable and fossil water resources are involved?
Do sensitive ecosystem services exist?
• Synergy potentials beyond water:
Are there starting points for circular economy/industrial symbiosis elements (e.g. use of
heat/energy or effluents (sludge, residuals, solid waste, etc.) as a source for other
applications)?
Site related aspects (local picture)
Once the broader picture is characterized and described, the set-up of new and upgrading of
existing water use and treatment concepts must identify and consider boundary conditions,
interactions, and synergy potentials on local level (e.g. adjoining sites and neighbours) and on
site level:
• Water availabilities (supply):
What water quantities are available and what is their quality?
Are qualities and quantities constant or varying (e.g. weather, climate or process
dependant)?
Where is the available water located?
• Water requirements (demand):
What water quantities and qualities are required?
SIST CWA 17031:2016
Are required qualities and quantities constant or varying?
Where are the water users located?
• Comparison of water demand and supply characteristics:
Does a matrix of water demand and supply characteristics show synergy potentials?
Are these potentials still feasible under spatiotemporal aspects (Is the spatial situation
between/at supply and demand locations suitable? Are supply and demand congruent over
time?)
• Legal, organisational and financial aspects:
Are there legal boundaries (e.g. classification of aqueous streams as waste)?
What liabilities have to be regulated?
How will CAPEX and OPEX be distributed between supply and demand side?
Modelling of the broader picture (e.g. related to industrial symbiosis)
Modelling should take into consideration both natural and reclaimed resources, integrated in
different combinations, especially to the demand and supply sources (quantity, quality and heat)
(see chapter 5.2.2, administration/regulation)
Be sure that all the non-technical barriers are included into the technical model
The solutions should take in consideration the ‘engineering vision’ for the company strategy
and/or for the entire area and consider if these are in harmony with this vision, and possibly
facilitate its development.
• Conceptual model of the catchment and site actual status (quantity, quality and heat)
(= reference)
• Model and identify demand and supply gaps
• Identify opportunities for combination of sources
• Link with modelling of technical solutions
5.2.2 Acceptance of solutions by different stakeholders
Society
It is absolutely necessary that the solution takes into consideration its impact on potentially
affected communities. This requires a minimum social understanding of the problem, and also,
to some extent, an idea of the expectance of the society in relation to it. A specific
technology/solution could be involved with the reutilization of industrial wastewaters for
domestic uses, irrigation or food industry for example. For these specific applications the
affected communities must have a basic understanding of both the overall process and the
effective monitoring and standards of the reused water quality.
Furthermore, the technology/solution must have a neutral impact on environment especially on
the region surrounding the wastewater treatment plant, and not simply for healthy and safety
reasons. The infrastructure of the wastewater treatment plant should not affect the landscape
and therefore tourism (if present) and most important, operating the wastewater treatment
plant should not generate noise or odor nuisance.
Administration/regulation
The choice of technical solutions should consider the existing regulations and the ability of the
administrators/authorities to make them effective. Ideally the administrators/authorities
should be involved in the problem solution to some extent. However, it is pivotal to remember
that closing water loops fits in the circular economy concept while current legislations are
mainly drafted considering the linear economy. Therefore, reuse of water on a broad integral
SIST CWA 17031:2016
scale requires the intervention of regulators with a completely different mind-set and vision.
This ‘new generation’ of regulators should change the current water regulations and adapt the
regulatory framework to remove regulatory barriers. Furthermore, maximization of this broad
water reuse options by companies should not be imposed by regulation, as it is always a balance
between needs, technical feasibilities, (product) quality requirements and opportunities. In
conclusion, regulators should focus on facilitating all sustainable options/ways to satisfy the
needs of people and businesses.
Decision makers
Companies’ decision makers should first of all recognize the complexities of water economics,
including the power of economies of scope. An economy of scope exists when a combined
decision-making process would allow specific services to be delivered at a lower cost than
would result from separate decision-making. In this context it is important to point out that
water reuse creates several opportunities: it makes industries less dependent from available
fresh water resources, less sensitive to water pricing, it anticipates future water policies and
increases license to operate. However, they should also take into account long term benefits and,
most important, benefits that are not exclusively economic (e.g. environmental impact, resource
requirements and recovery). Finally, decision makers should always considers potential risks
that derive from the choice of a given technology. One important risk that is always present is
that the feasibility of the chosen technology might be uncertain on full scale, and that water
reuse on large scale may cause unexpected issues or introduce new technical challenges,
certainly on the longer term.
Collaboration between actors (companies, municipalities/society)
It is essential to point out that the final decision and acceptance of the technologies/solutions
should not take separately in consideration the information and views of all
...