Learning from International Best Practices

Learning from International Best Practices

2020 Water & Wastewater Benchmark

2EBC – 2020 Water & Wastewater Benchmark

Contents

Contents

EBC...................... 3

Participants........ 4

Facts & figures.... 5

Foreword............ 6

Introduction....... 8

SDG annex........ 40

Endnotes.......... 42

Colophon........... 43

Drinking water....................................................11

Wastewater.........................................................18

Good practices....................................................25

• Smart metering in Seville .............................................26

• Smart Water Meters at Aquanet S.A. ................................30

• RIOTHERMIA ...........................................................32

• Dunea prepares for the future: shift, be agile and deliver .........34

Participants’ experiences...................................37

• Online Knowledge Picnic Marathon..................................38

DANUBEWATER


The European Benchmarking Co-operation

The European Benchmarking Co-operationThe European Benchmarking Co-operation (EBC Foundation) assists

water- & wastewater utilities in improving their services through

benchmarking and learning from each other.

EBC Foundation is structured as a foundation under Dutch law and

governed by a Board composed of representatives from the water utility

associations FIWA (Finland), Norsk Vann (Norway) and Vewin

(The Netherlands), EurEau (the European federation of national water

utility associations) and the Danube Water Program (a joint capacity

building program of the World Bank and IAWD for the Danube region).

EBC Foundation annually organises benchmarking exercises for water-

& wastewater utilities in Europe and beyond. Next to its core programme

for Western Europe, EBC facilitates regional benchmarking programmes

in close collaboration with local partners.

Participation in EBC’s benchmarking programme is on a voluntary basis.

The programme is aligned with the IWA/AWWA-benchmarking

framework and applies the IWA Performance Indicator System.

This provides a standard for exchange between different regional

programmes.

What does EBC’s benchmarking programme offer?EBC offers a learning-orientated utility improvement programme.

It consists of two consecutive steps: performance assessment and

performance improvement. To serve both large and small utilities,

experienced and less experienced ones, EBC uses a Performance

Assessment Model with three different levels of detail: basic, standard

and advanced. While at the basic level only elementary statistics and

performance indicators are investigated, the advanced level offers quite

detailed indicators for deeper analysis. Participants can choose the

benchmarking level that matches their aspirations and availability of

internal information. Six key performance areas are analysed to provide

a balanced view on utilities’ performance:

• Access

• Water quality

• Reliability

• Service quality

• Sustainability

• Finance &efficiency

Next to these key areas, EBC analyses context information and asset

management indicators and monitors progress towards the UN SDGs.

To secure the high-quality standard of the programme EBC’s bench-

marking team and the participating utilities closely work together on

data collection, data quality control and performance reporting.

In the performance improvement step utilities meet their peers in

the annual benchmarking workshops as well as during topic specific

Knowledge Picnics where they exchange knowledge and best practices

in technology, management and operations.


Participants

Participants 2020 exercise

Belgium

• Brussels Waste Water

• Compagnie Intercommunale

Liégeoise des Eaux scrl

• in BW

• Société Publique de Gestion

de l’Eau

• Société wallonne des eaux

• VIVAQUA

Cyprus

• Water Board of Larnaca

• Water Board of Lemesos

• Water Board of Nicosia

Finland

• Helsinki Region Environmental

Services Authority, Water

Services (HSY)

• Turun Vesihuolto Oy

Germany

• Hamburg Wasser

• Hansewasser Bremen GmbH

Greece

• Athens Water Supply and

Sewerage Company SA (EYDAP)

Italy

• Societa’ Metropolitana Acque

Torino S.p.A

Norway

• City of Oslo, Agency for Water

and Wastewater Services

• Municipality of Trondheim

Oman

• Public Authority for Water

(DIAM)

Poland

• Aquanet SA

• Miejskie Przedsi biorstwo

Wodoci gów i Kanalizacji

w m.st. Warszawa S.A.

• MPWik S.A. W Krakowie

• Municipal Water and Sewage

Company S.A. Wroclaw

Republic of Singapore

• Public Utilities Board

Romania

• APASERV Satu Mare S.A.

• Compania APA Brasov

Russian Federation

• Joint-stock company

Mosvodokanal

Spain

• Aqualia Oviedo

• Canal de Isabel II

• Empresa Metropolitana de

Abastecimiento Y Saneamiento

de Aguas de Sevilla SA

Sweden

• Sydvatten AB

• VA SYD

Switzerland

• Services industriels de Genève

The Netherlands

• Brabant Water N.V.

• Evides Waterbedrijf N.V.

• N.V. Dunea

• N.V. PWN Waterleidingbedrijf

Noord-Holland

• N.V. Waterbedrijf Groningen

• N.V. Waterleiding Maatschappij

Limburg

• N.V. Waterleidingmaatschappij

Drenthe

• Oasen N.V.

• Stichting Waternet

• Vitens N.V.

United Kingdom

• Bristol Water

United Arab Emirates

• Abu Dhabi Sewerage Services

Company

• Al Ain Distribution Company

• Dubai Municipality

United States

• Charleston Water System


Facts & figures

Drinking water

Wastewater

Facts & figures

Total number of consumers supplied with drinking water by

the participating utilities

Which equals to 15.4% of the EU27 population!

Total number of consumers connected to a WWTP operated

by the participating utilities


Annual turnover of the participating

drinking water utilities

Annual investment by participating


Annual turnover of the participating wastewater utilities


wastewater utilities

68.812.948 49.269.292

€ 4.871.011.905 € 3.722.145.909

€ 1.662.575.878 € 1.209.483.261














68.812.948 49.269.292

€ 4.871.011.905 € 3.722.145.909

€ 1.662.575.878 € 1.209.483.261














68.812.948 49.269.292

€ 4.871.011.905 € 3.722.145.909

€ 1.662.575.878 € 1.209.483.261














68.812.948 49.269.292

€ 4.871.011.905 € 3.722.145.909

€ 1.662.575.878 € 1.209.483.261














68.812.948 49.269.292

€ 4.871.011.905 € 3.722.145.909

€ 1.662.575.878 € 1.209.483.261














68.812.948 49.269.292

€ 4.871.011.905 € 3.722.145.909

€ 1.662.575.878 € 1.209.483.261


Foreword

Western EuropeDespite the COVID-19 pandemic, EBC attracted more participants for

the Western European programme compared to the previous edition.

47 Utilities from 19 countries participated in the 2020 benchmarking

exercise for Western Europe (IB2019). Seven of them (Aqualia Oviedo from

Spain, AADC and ADSSC from Abu Dhabi, CILE and SPGE from Belgium

and SIG from Switzerland) are new to the programme or have returned

after some time of absence.

Fortunately, in the past few years most of the benchmarking activities

were already organised in an online environment. Data is entered

through a secured online platform, resulting company reports are

published online and most of the communication happens via the

platform and via e-mail. Yet EBC had to adjust to the new situation on

several fronts. The Orientation & Training workshop was replaced by

extra online support. Over the year people became more used to and

comfortable with online-/tele-working, which resulted in more helpdesk

sessions via Teams and led to more frequent and more extensive contacts

with the participants compared to previous years.

Foreword

Osmo Seppälä

Managing Director FIWA

Chair of the Board of

EBC Foundation

2020 Proved to be a challenging year for EBC’s

benchmarking programme, with many new opportunities.

The latter may sound a bit strange for a year during which

the COVID-19 pandemic held grip on the global society.

Indeed it offered plenty of challenges to the water sector

and to the EBC office, though also opportunities. EBC was

challenged to reinvent the way how to facilitate

knowledge exchange and offer training and helpdesk

sessions to participants without travelling and how to

deal with the daily operations without being in the office.

On top of that, the discussions with participating utilities

on the Sustainable Development Goals had to be finalised

to produce the first SDG-pilot report.


Foreword

As 2020 proved, sharing knowledge is the key in the programme. Lessons

will be learned from utilities’ experiences, positive and negative, which

will make the sector more resilient. We can do this more easily and more

efficiently if we work together.

I would like to use this opportunity to encourage utilities across Europe

to join EBC’s benchmarking- and improvement programme!

The annual workshop also had to be moved online. Being the most

important knowledge exchange event within our programme this was

quite a challenge. Despite missing the social element, this also proved

to be a new success and opportunity. Spreading the event over several

weeks in a Teams format offered more people from utilities the chance

to participate. The overall response from participants was very positive.

And although not a replacement for the regular physical workshop, the

‘Knowledge Picnic Marathon’ will be added to the pallet of tools of EBC

to facilitate knowledge exchange.

EBC and the Sustainable Development GoalsBy the end of 2020, the participants received a first pilot report

dedicated to the utility’s performance in relation to the UN Sustainable

Development Goals. The report is a beautiful example of co-creation

between the utilities and EBC, where the process was initiated by two

leading utilities, taken further by a larger group of frontrunners and

elaborated and facilitated by EBC. The unique SDG-monitor for water

utilities was developed during several sessions and knowledge picnics,

of which the last in-person edition was hosted by Canal de Isabel in

Madrid (March, 2020). The current SDG-pilot report forms a good

starting point for further discussions on sustainability.

2021: Are you in?2021 will pose partly the same challenges as in 2020, although this

year EBC will be even better prepared and ready for another online

edition of the programme.

It was great to see how quickly the EBC team

set up an online knowledge picnic marathon as

an alternative. The meetings were very well

prepared and sophisticated. It was a good idea

to spread these sessions over five weeks to

prevent exhaustion by an online marathon.

The EBC team did an excellent job.

Uta Kirschling - hanseWasser Bremen GmbH


Introduction

EBC offers three levels of participation (basic, standard and advanced)

to make the benchmarking programme accessible to all type of water

utilities, no matter if they are used to advanced data collection, or just

begin with basic data collection. During the data collection process,

participants are supported by EBC through an expert helpdesk assuring

a high quality of the data.

The benchmarking process started early 2020 with an invitation to

European water utilities to join EBC’s benchmarking exercise.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Orientation & Training workshop

was cancelled and replaced by extra online support for new participants.

The data collection started in May, using the benchmarking platform

www.waterbenchmark.org.

As always, EBC paid a lot of attention to the data quality. After the

initial collection phase, with several checks online, the submitted data

were subject to three rounds of analysis and correction, resulting in a

validated data set which was used for the detailed, individual company

reports and for this brief public report. Data entry results that could not

be verified by the EBC team were deleted from the dataset for the public

report.

Like every year, in the 2020 benchmarking exercise improvements have

been made in the set of questions and definitions of various indicators

were clarified. Additional effort was put in creating a pilot report on

utilities’ performance in relation to the UN Sustainable Development

Goals. As of the IB2019 exercise EBC now offers a new annex to the

company report focussing on this topic.

EBCs annual benchmarking workshop also had to move online. Instead

of joining a two day workshop in Krakow (Poland) as originally planned,

colleagues could now tune in to 6 different online Knowledge Picnics:

The Knowledge Picnic Marathon.

Spread over 5 consecutive Thursdays (between 19 November and

17 December, 2020) sessions were offered on: Plenary, COVID-19, Smart

metering, EBCs pilot report on the Sustainable Development Goals,

Aquathermia, Climate Resilience and Digitalization. During the Picnics

one or more participating utilities shared their best practices and

discussed possible challenges.

During the online plenary at the start of the Marathon, the Bench-

marking Co-ordinator of the Year Award was handed to the team of

Joint-stock company Mosvodokanal (Russia) and to the team of

Introduction

Since 2007, the European Benchmarking Co-operation

(EBC) operates an international benchmarking

programme for European water- & wastewater utilities,

with the objective to help them improving their services.

This publication briefly reports on EBC’s core programme

for Western Europe.

see map

http://www.waterbenchmark.org


Introduction

Utility representatives

participating in one of

the IB2019 Knowledge

Picnic Marathon

sessions

Turun Vesihuolto Oy (Finland). The EBC-team congratulates the winners

of this year’s award and encourages them to continue their good work!

With very positive feedback from participants and double the number of

participants (>170) compared to the regular workshop, the new format

proved to be successful. And while not being a replacement for the

regular event, it is definitely a very useful and effective tool to exchange

knowledge and experiences. Based on the experiences so far one thing is

clear: the online Knowledge Picnic is here to stay!

Map

1

2

2

2

1

2

1

1

1

3

4

10

6

2

3

47 participants from

19 different countries.

Belgium (6)

Cyprus (3)

Finland (2)

Germany (2)

Greece (1)

Italy (1)

Norway (2)

Poland (4)

Russian Federation (1)

Romania (2)

Spain (3)

Switzerland (1)

Sweden (2)

The Netherlands (10)

United Kingdom (1)

Outside Europe:

Oman (1)

Republic of Singapore (1)

United Arab Emirates (3)

United States (1)


Introduction

Drinking waterThis section contains an overview of this year’s performance assessment on drinking water services. Data of

other services that the participating companies may have provided (i.e. wastewater or gas distribution) are

excluded from the analysis. In EBC’s benchmarking programme, the indicators are divided into six performance

areas: access, water quality, reliability, service quality, sustainability and finance & efficiency. This public report

only shows a subset of the available performance indicators in the EBC programme, to illustrate key findings.

In the ideal situation the group of participants that compares performance would be the same over time.

The group of utilities that participated in the 2020 exercise however differs from the one in previous years.

Hence, the current group level results cannot be compared with those of previous years. In the individual

company reports, participants can however track changes both in their own and in their peers’ performance.


Drinking water


Drinking water

AccessThe percentage of resident population served by utilities of the current

EBC group is high. Most utilities in the group serve 100% of the total

resident population. The median value for the group is 100%.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100median

Figure 1: Population coverage (%)

Water qualityWater quality is generally seen as the most important aspect of the

drinking water service. Consumers need safe and clean water as a basic

commodity. To assess the water quality of the participating utilities,

EBC measures the percentage of quality tests in compliance with

national regulatory standards. Since the standards for water quality

differ between countries, test compliance does not allow for an absolute

comparison. However, the variation between standards is limited,

since the majority of the participating utilities originates from Europe,

where the national standards are based on the European Drinking Water

Directive.

Water quality compliance is very high across the current EBC group.

Most companies score close to 100% and the median value is 99,91%.

It is worth mentioning that a non-compliant test does not necessarily

mean an imminent health risk for the consumer. It can for example

be a non-hazardous flaw (i.e. an abnormal colour). Furthermore,

many regulatory standards contain a safety margin, so that a case of

non-compliance does not necessarily mean public health is at risk.

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

100median

Figure 2: Quality of supplied water (%)


Drinking water

In addition to mains failures the programme also looks at distribution

losses and (at the advanced level) at customer minutes lost to assess

reliability of the service. Utilities in the current EBC group face

distribution losses between 0,8 and 71,3 m3 per km mains length per day.

The median value for the group is 8,5 m3 / km / day.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

median

Figure 4: Distribution losses per mains length (m3/km/day)

ReliabilityReliability also is an essential performance indicator for a water utility.

The customers expect a continuous supply of safe and clear water.

EBC uses mains failures as a key indicator for reliability. Mains failures

are breaks and leakages of mains pipes, valves and fittings leading to

interruption or low-pressure supply. Results of reliability vary widely

within the current EBC group with values ranging from 2,7 to 370,6

failures per 100 km. Factors that may influence the mains failure

rate include the network condition, soil condition, traffic load and

water pressure. It is also worth mentioning that an improvement in

monitoring failures may (at first) cause an increase in mains failures,

as not in all cases failures are currently properly registered. The median

value is 13,6 failures per 100 km.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

median

Figure 3: Mains failures (No./100 km)


Drinking water

SustainabilitySustainability is a key issue on the agenda of many water utilities. It can

be approached and measured in various ways. The EBC programme uses

the widely recognised Triple Bottom Line approach, which investigates

social, environmental and economic sustainability.

Social sustainability

Water is a basic necessity, and customers usually do not have viable

alternatives to their local water supplier. This unilateral reliance

leaves it to the utility to make sure its product is affordable. Hence,

EBC determines social sustainability of the drinking water services by

means of the indicator affordability, showing the water bill as a share

of household consumption expenditures. In the current EBC group this

ranges from 0,15% to 0,95%, with a median of 0,41%.

0,0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

0,9

1,0

median

Figure 6: Affordability based on household consumption expenditures (%)

Service QualityIf the service of a water utility is not up to the required standard of

the customer, the customer can file a complaint. Hence the number

of complaints filed by utilities’ customers is an adequate measure for

service quality. EBC measures service complaints. These complaints are

related to the actual supply of drinking water, including water pressure,

(short term) interruptions, (medium to long term) continuity and water

quality. Complaints on billing are also measured but not taken into

account in this indicator. The majority of the current EBC group scores

very well with a median value of 1,12 complaints / 1000 properties.

The emergence of social media has created a new channel of

communication between consumers and utilities. Many water utilities

are currently using social media to better inform their customers. Hence,

through these new channels, mutual understanding is facilitated and

formal complaints may be prevented.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

median

Figure 5: Service complaints per connected property (complaints/1000 properties)


Drinking water

At the advanced level, the EBC programme the greenhouse gas

emissions at scope 1, scope 2 and scope 3 level to determine the climate

footprint of the drinking water service, expressed in kg CO2 equivalent

per m3 drinking water sold. The companies participating in this years’

benchmarking exercise show a range of scores from 0,1 kg till 0,73 kg

CO2-equivalent per m3 drinking water, with a median value of 0,14 kg

CO2-eq./m3.

0,0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

median

Figure 8: Climate footprint per m3 drinking water sold (kg CO2-eq./m3)

Environmental sustainability

At advanced level the EBC programme determines environmental

sustainability through several indicators, which include electricity

use for water production, energy recovery, inefficiency of use of water

resources, the reuse of treatment residuals and climate footprint.

Figure 7 shows the electricity used by pumps in the abstraction,

treatment and distribution of water, per m3 that is produced. The use

of electricity is influenced by the type of water resources, geography

and treatment processes. Pumps are the most voracious consumers

of electricity, which makes their efficiency an important factor in

the reduction of electricity use. This benchmarking exercise resulted

in a median electricity usage for pumping of 0,51 kWh / m3.

0,0

0,2

0,4

0,6

0,8

1,0

1,2

1,4

1,6

1,8

2,0

median

Figure 7: Electricity use for production and distribution per m3 water produced (kWh/m3)


Drinking water

Furthermore, the infrastructure needs to be kept fit for future use.

Utilities renovate or replace mains to keep the network in good condition.

The percentage of mains rehabilitation is the share of the network that

has been renovated or replaced because the condition of the mains

deteriorates. Higher percentages of main rehabilitation can be caused

by a higher average network age. All utilities in the current EBC group

rehabilitate between 0 and 4,4 % of their network. The median value is

0,64% / year.

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

3,5

4,0

4,5

5,0

median

Figure 10: Mains rehabilitation (%/year)

Economic sustainability

Next to making sure that water is available and affordable for consumers

and next to limiting the environmental footprint of the activities,

water utilities need to make sure that their activities are economically

sustainable.

First of all this requires that sales revenues cover the total costs by a

ratio of 1 or more. About two third of the EBC participants meet this

criterion. With a ratio below 1, utilities will have to rely on other sources

of income (e.g. subsidies, reserves or income from other activities).

These utilities are less sustainable on the long run. The median value for

the current EBC group is 1,03.

0,0

0,4

0,8

1,2

1,6

2,0

2,4

median

Figure 9: Total cost by sales coverage ratio


Drinking water

Personnel intensity is a relevant performance indicator on the efficiency

side. It is measured as the number of full-time employees (fte) per 1000

properties. The scores on this indicator are computed using a standard

40 hour full-time working week. In the current EBC group the personnel

intensity ranges from 0,39 to 5,89 fte per 1000 properties with a median

value of 0,9 fte / 1000 properties.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

median

Figure 12: Personnel intensity (fte/1000 properties)

Finance and efficiency The EBC performance assessment framework contains an extensive

set of indicators on finance and efficiency. This set includes total cost,

running cost, personnel intensity and charges. Since water utilities are

committed to provide water of the highest possible quality at the lowest

possible price, water charges are an important financial performance

indicator. Average water charges for direct consumption are calculated

by dividing total direct revenues by the sold volume. Many utilities have

a tariff structure with a fixed connection fee and a variable rate per unit

sold. As a result the price per m3 a household actually pays will often

depend on its consumption. The median price of water for the current

EBC group is 1,16 € / m3 (excluding VAT).

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

3,5

median

Figure 11: Average water charges for direct consumption (€/m3)

WastewaterThis section presents an overview of the performance comparison of this year’s benchmarking exercise for

wastewater services. We use the same performance areas as for drinking water: access, water quality,

reliability, service quality, sustainability and finance & efficiency. The data is gathered on the wastewater

activities specifically. This means that measures and costs of other services that a participant may provide

(i.e. drinking water or district heating) are excluded. The performance indicators shown in this section are only

a subset of the available indicators in the EBC programme.

The group of utilities that participated in the 2020 exercise differs from the one in previous years. Hence, the

current group level results cannot be compared with those of previous years. In the individual company reports,

participants can however track changes both in their own and in their peers’ performance.


Wastewater


Wastewater

AccessThe percentage of resident population in the service area of utilities in

the current EBC group that is connected to the sewer system managed

by those utilities is high. The median value is 99%.

80

85

90

95

100

median

Figure 13: Resident population connected to sewer system (%)

Wastewater qualityFor hygienic and environmental reasons the wastewater that is

collected by a utility (often mixed with stormwater) needs to be treated.

The treated water should be in compliance with discharge consents to

minimize the negative impact on the environment. These consents vary

between and within countries, which means the same percentage can

have different meaning for the different utilities. The compliance within

the current EBC group is generally high with a median value of 100%.

88

90

92

94

96

98

100

102median

Figure 14: WWTP compliance with discharge consents (%)


Wastewater

Also the number of flooding incidents from combined sewers show large

variations within the current EBC group. The number of flooding incidents

per 100 km sewer vary for the vast majority of utilities in the current EBC

group between 0 and 2 with a median value of 0,2 per 100 km sewer.

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

median

Figure 16: Flooding from combined sewers (No./100 km sewer)

ReliabilityTo assess wastewater reliability EBC uses sewer blockages as the main

indicator. These blockages include all occurrences under the company’s

responsibility, whether they are due to collapse, root ingress, grease

or debris. Utilities within the current EBC group strive to improve

monitoring. This may (at first) result in an increase in the detection rates,

as not all blockages are currently properly registered. However, eventually

this should improve the service of the water companies. Utilities can

also reduce blockages by educating customers (especially in the case of

blockages caused by grease). The results on sewer blockages vary widely

within the current EBC group: between 1 and 765 blockages per 100 km

sewer, per year, with a median value of 21 blockages per 100 km.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

median

Figure 15: Sewer and connection blockages (No./100 km sewer)


Wastewater

SustainabilitySimilar to drinking water services, sustainability of the wastewater

services is benchmarked using the Triple Bottom Line approach which

takes into account social, environmental and economic sustainability.

Social sustainability

The EBC programme determines the social sustainability of wastewater

services by means of the indicator affordability, defined as the share

of the wastewater bill in household consumption expenditures.

This indicator accounts for differences in wealth between nations.

The current EBC group shows a profound range from 0,1% to 0,74%

with a median value for this indicator of 0,37%.

0,0

0,1

0,2

0,3

0,4

0,5

0,6

0,7

0,8

median

Figure 18: Affordability based on household consumption expenditures (%)

Service QualityService quality for wastewater services is measured using the same

indicators as for drinking water. The customer can file a complaint if

the service of a wastewater utility is not up to the required standards.

The majority of the current EBC group scores very well with a median

of 0,52 / 1000 inhabitants / year.

Different types of complaints are occurring in different part of the

wastewater chain. For instance, blockages and flooding complaints

occur more often in the collection and transport mains (network), while

the treatment facilities are usually faced with complaints regarding

pollution, odour and rodents.

0

4

8

12

16

20

median

Figure 17: Total complaints (No./1000 inhabitants/year)


Wastewater

At the advanced level, the EBC programme analyses the greenhouse gas

emissions at scope 1, scope 2 and scope 3 level to determine the climate

footprint of the wastewater service, expressed in kg CO2 equivalent per

population equivalent. In this report the (most significant) scope 2 is

highlighted: the emissions from the generation of purchased energy

for own use by the utility. Utilities in the current EBC group report values

between 0 and 35,7 kg CO2-equivalent per population equivalent.

The median value for the entire group is 7,4 kg CO2-eq./p.e.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

median

Figure 20: Climate footprint scope 2 per population equivalent served (kg CO2-eq./p.e.)

Environmental sustainability

EBC’s benchmarking programme determines environmental

sustainability through several indicators. Examples are the electricity

used for treating wastewater as well as generating electricity from it,

the percentage of the sludge generated in the treatment process that is

utilised in a sustainable way or the frequency of use of overflow devices

to surface water. In this report we reveal the results for the energy

consumption of the wastewater treatment plants as well as results

for the climate footprint analysis.

The energy consumption of the majority of participants is distributed

between 18,8 kWh and 68,3 kWh per population equivalent served.

The median value for the current EBC group is 33,6 kWh / p.e. served

by WWTP. The energy consumption of the wastewater treatment plants

can differ depending on the level of treatment, which in its turn depends

on the local discharge consents.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

median

Figure 19: WWT energy consumption (kWh/p.e. served by WWTP)


Wastewater

Furthermore, the infrastructure needs to be kept fit for future use.

Utilities renovate or replace sewers to keep the network in good

condition. The percentage of sewer rehabilitation is the share of the

network that has been renovated or replaced because the condition of

the sewers deteriorates. Higher percentages of sewer rehabilitation can

be caused by a higher average network age. The median value for sewer

rehabilitation for the current EBC group is 0,26 % / year.

0

1

2

3

median

Figure 22: Sewer rehabilitation (%/year)

Economic sustainability

Like with drinking water utilities, wastewater utilities need to make

sure their activities are economically sustainable.

First of all, this requires that the total costs are covered by the revenues.

The indicator total cost by sales coverage ratio identifies if a utility

is able to recover its costs from its sales revenues. These revenues

consist of all charges to the customers for the collection, transport and

treatment of wastewater. With a ratio below 1, utilities will have to rely

on other sources of income like subsidies, reserves or income from other

activities. More than half of the EBC participants score above 1, making

these utilities more likely to be economically sustainable on the long run.

The scores range from 0,32 till 1,44, with a median value of 0,99.

0,0

0,4

0,8

1,2

1,6

median

Figure 21: Total cost service coverage ratio


Wastewater

Finance and efficiencyLike with drinking water utilities, finance & efficiency is a highly relevant

topic for wastewater utilities. There is a high variance between the EBC

participants for the amount spent on sewage services per connected

property. The average of the 3 highest charges registered is over

6 times higher than the average of the three lowest (€ 278 versus € 46 per

property). The median value for the current EBC group is 151 € / property.

Corrected for differences in purchasing power the gap between highest

and lowest charges reduces to 8,8.

Cost reduction (and, consequently, lower charges) are an important goal

for most wastewater utilities. Hence this indicator is a great example of

where exchange of best practices could be beneficial for utilities.

0

100

200

300

400

median

Figure 23: Average charges per connected property (€/property)

Personnel intensity is a relevant performance indicator on the efficiency

side. It is measured as the number of full-time employees (fte) per 1000

properties. The scores on this indicator are computed using a standard

40 hour full-time working week. In the current EBC group the personnel

intensity ranges from 0,14 to 2,56 fte per 1000 properties with a median

value of 0,62 fte / 1000 properties.

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

median

Figure 24: Personnel intensity (fte/1000 properties)

Good practices


Good practices


Good practices

Smart metering in Seville

Seville is the capital and largest city of the Spanish autonomous community of Andalusia and the Province of Seville.

It is situated on the lower reaches of the River Guadalquivir, in the southwest of the Iberian Peninsula. Seville has a

municipal population of about 690,000, and a metropolitan population of about 1.5 million, making it the largest city

in Andalusia, and the fourth-largest city in Spain.

EMASESA, “Empresa Metropolitana de abastecimiento y

Saneamiento de Aguas de Sevilla, Sociedad Anónima” is a public

organisation that provides services relating to the water cycle, including

reservoir management, conveyance, purification, distribution, sewerage,

filtering and waste management. The company directly supplies drinking

water to the municipalities of Seville and eleven towns around the

metropolitan area. EMASESA also supplies raw, untreated water to

28 towns in Aljarafe in the Province of Seville.

The history of Smart Metering at EMASESA began long time ago,

when EMASESA started individual metering as a measure for financial,

environmental and social justice. Up to now, there are more than 350.000

meters installed. The average age of the meters is 4.4 years; 97.44 % are

electronic meters which allow automatic- rather than visual reading.

Good practices

www.emasesa.com

http://www.emasesa.com


Good practices

With this background, EMASESA has been developing its own

metering strategy for more than 20 years. This strategy is supported

by three pillars.

• Accuracy > Metrology, legal requirement

• Data > More than the measure for billing

• Communication > A way to get the data from the meter

For EMASESA smart metering is more than getting meter readings for

the purpose of billing. Smart metering is about gathering information

on the patterns of consumption, in order to provide better service to

the customer and a better customer experience.

Analog or digital meters?In some way, smart meter devices usually are electronic. If the only

purpose of the meter is to get readings for billing, it is possible to use

analog meters. But, if the goal of the facility is to gather information

about trends and patterns in order to increase the customer experience

and to acquire data, an electronic device is required.

This is the reason why EMASESA is implementing electronic meters in

its service area. Since we started the smart meter program several years

ago, we have increased the number of meters annually. Up to now, there

are more than 390.000 smart meters, around 98 % of the whole number

of meters in EMASESA metropolitan service area.

Metrology & legal requirementIn contrast to gathering information about the consumption trends,

for billing it is (legally) required that the metering device is certified.

In the case of smart meters, all legal procedures are covered once the

device is provided. The accuracy of the reading of the meter is guaranteed

by the provider, who has covered the whole administrative and legal

process in order to certify the device.

What are the PROS of a smart meter device?The certification guarantees that the accuracy of the metering is

constant in time. This ensures the correct readings of the metering

system, is mandatory and is included in electronic devices, as it is used

as billing system.

Also, the electronic devices provide information about the consumption,

meter reading time, patterns (big data), night rate etc, which gives extra

info that helps us to improve the relationship with the customer. For

instance, it helps us to detect anomalous consumptions, like leaks in the

drinking water system, and allows us to advise the customer about it.

The night rate allows us to improve the water network pressure, as

during the night, the consumption is not zero and in this way it is easier

to maintain the pressure in the network (the Sevilla water network is not

pressurised by pumps but by gravity). The only way to determine a night

rate is by smart metering system, because we can analyse the readings

along the 24 h of the day.


Good practices

The smart meter devices have a buffer in which the consumption data

is stored. As the devices are certified, it guarantees the data integrity of

the system. And, in this way, it is possible to gather time series from the

device’s memory, in order to reveal patterns or trends.

At the last fact, a smart metering system can improve the Customer

Management System, by integrating data from the reading processes

in to the customer management data base. As this task is done

automatically, it increases the speed of the process and ensures the data

stored in the billing system.


Good practices

CommunicationsDifferent technologies have been developed up to now. The quick deploy

of NBIoT and 5G has shown a great potential, but there also are other

technologies. LoRa WAN technology is developed as a technology to

cover areas in which 5G is not going to be deployed and as an alternative

low power wide area communication technology.

Despite the fact that EMASESA has recently started installing NBIoT

devices, practically almost all the devices managed are read today

by Walk By. The Walk By system is considered as one of the most

extended methods for device reading, as it does not depend on any

communication technology that could limit its development.

Nowadays, with the deployment of 5G, the communication technology

has reached a high level of development. That fact has moved the

providers to implement new communication chipsets, and to renew

their portfolio with devices communicated by radio.

The development of technology is growing quickly, so we can dream of

new solutions to be developed, with low power and greater autonomy

(tens of years), different communication systems and integrated AI

technology that could improve the new functionalities, which are not

available today.

Smart Water Meters at Aquanet S.A.

Stanisław Kozłowski

Head of Water Metering

and Billing Department

Aquanet SAwww.aquanet.pl


Good practices

First stepsAquanet investigated the smart meter market in the period

2010-2016. Devices from various manufacturers were tested and first

tests focused on readings in hard-to-reach places. Special attention

was also paid to the quality and reading speed. In the first phase of the

project we installed and thoroughly tested around 400 walk-by system

devices, both smart meters and radio modules. All this has enabled us to

select the right solution to suit Aquanet’s needs.

Decision factorsSeveral important decision factors were crucial for the implementation

of the project. At first, there was a steady increase in the number of

billing points and the number of readings. Also, employees age increases,

resulting in higher absence and difficulties in recruitment due to the

nature of the work. Another factor was the limited access to water

meters and difficult readings in water meter wells and chambers in view

of health and safety regulations. Furthermore, Aquanet responded to

customer expectations by shortening billing periods and introducing

fewer forecast invoices. With improved reading efficiency and reduction

in manual reading errors, a more reliable balance of produced and sold

water could be obtained.

The beginningIn 2018 a decision was made and two manufacturers’ systems were

selected. One of them was to provide devices for installation in areas

with impeded wave propagation (5% of the cases). The remaining ones

Good practices

Aquanet SA is one of Poland’s leading providers of drinking water and sewerage

services. We operate in Poznan and neighbouring municipalities and serve over

800.000 inhabitants (incl. bulk supply) We operate several water intakes and

water treatment plants as well as six wastewater treatment plants. We constantly

modernize and expand our infrastructure to improve quality of services and to

ensure development.

https://www.aquanet.pl/


Good practices

were supplied by the other manufacturer. Implementation was gradual

– new radio meters were installed after the end of the legalization period

of traditional meters. This meant that on a given route readings were

taken both manually and, where new deviced were already installed,

remotely.

The first contract was signed in October 2018 and involved the

installation of over 7,3k devices.

Where are we now and where we want to be at the end of 2022At the end of 2020 we have installed more than 81,3k devices,

both smart meters and radio modules, which gives us approx.

56% coverage of all meters.

By the end of 2022 we plan to achieve a coverage rate of around 71%.

Ups and DownsAmong the advantages we recorded a significant increase in reading

efficiency (from 77% for manual reading up to 88% for manual + radio

reading). By installing radio modules there will be a significant reduction

in project duration (approx. 2 years) and cost (approx. 20%). Despite the

hygienic restrictions related to COVID-19 and limitations on physical

access to the water meter, we now charge our customers in 88% of the

cases for their actual water consumption and significantly reduced

forecast invoicing.

With the smart meter project we are building an image of a modern

company that meets customer expectations. Some problems were also

encoutered. Incorrectly entered radio module numbers and/or types

cause lack of reading. Some customers remove and reinstall the radio

module, and an incorrect reading is obtained. Reading of submerged

devices is difficult as humidity affects their operation. There are meter

location problems (long distance, wells, building wall structure etc.) as

well as additional customer cabinets or boxes installed on devices that

interfere radio wave propagation.

SummaryThe project is a major challenge but at the same time leads to an

improvement in day-to-day operations. Radio readings are convenient

both for customers, whose presence is not required, and for our

employees as there is no need to enter the property. Despite the

prevailing pandemic the advancement of the project has contributed to

increased reading efficiency. We have significantly increased the safety

of our customers and employees by minimising physical contact. We are

currently continuing the project while monitoring the market for new

emerging solutions. We aim to provide efficient, secure and accurate

billing to our customers for actually provided services.


Good practices

Good practices

Life underground, in the sewage network, is full of surprises

at times. For example, did you know that the temperature in

the sewers is more or less constant throughout the whole year? Or that

in the winter, when it is cold outside, it is warmer in the sewer and,

conversely, that when it is hot in the summer, it is cool in the sewer?

Recovering these a priori ‘lost’ residual calories would enable buildings

to be heated or air-conditioned.

That is what VIVAQUA, the public company who manages the

distribution of drinking water and the sewage network in the Brussels

Region, tries to realise since a few years. The process of recovering the

calories of sewage water is called ‘riothermia.’

Each year, 20 to 25km of the Brussels sewage network are renovated.

VIVAQUA intends to take advantage of these renovation works to install

riothermal systems in the networks where the flow of wastewater is

sufficient.

However, this process requires materials capable of resisting the

aggressive environment of the sewers and the wastewater flows which

move through them. Those materials are often very expensive, such as

stainless steel and aluminium. The challenge which VIVAQUA has taken

up is to create a very resistant heat exchanger in a less costly synthetic

material: HDPE (high density polyethylene).

Riothermia at VIVAQUA

Aquathermia is a relatively new source of renewable energy. Several utilities in the

EBC programme have recently developed practical applications to recover energy

from surface water, groundwater or sewers. In this contribution the water utility

for the Brussels region VIVAQUA explains how they recover heat from their sewers

with the goal to reduce CO2-emissions.Ir Olivier Broers

Director

Investment Studieswww.vivaqua.be

http://www.vivaqua.be


Good practices

The heat exchangers installed by VIVAQUA will supply up to 25% of

this administrative building’s needs in terms of cooling and heating.

This will enable a reduction in the annual CO2 emissions of between

40 and 60 tons.

With an ambition to install 20 km of exchangers, this would mean that

26,000 tons of CO2 will be saved each year for the air-conditioning and

heating of buildings.

The sewer renovation with heat exchangers manufactured from this

material is an innovation for which VIVAQUA has obtained a European

patent. Connected to a heat pump, the exchangers will enable the

extraction of the calories to heat buildings in the winter and cool them

in the summer.

Uccle, a borough in the Brussels Region, has already banked on

this technology to heat and to cool its new administrative centre.


Good practices

Good practices

Dunea supplies pure drinking water in harmony with nature in The Hague and Leiden area. Dunea strives

for sustainable products and services that are continuously adapted to the needs of the region and its 1.3

million customers. The management seeks a healthy balance between drinking water quality and cost,

but recognizes that challenges are ahead and need te be addressed. And future proofing means investing.

One of the possible new sources for drinking water is brackish water.

FreshmanIn the coastal dunes of The Hague, a fresh water lens is present on top of

a brackish water layer, with salt water underneath. The thickness of the

brackish water layer can be up to 30 meters. Can we use this brackish water

to produce tasty and reliable drinking water? Does extracting brackish

water mean we gain more space for fresh water in stock? Dunea (NL),

De Watergroep (BE), IWVA (BE), KWR and Allied Waters are investigating

this challenge in the EU project Freshman, between 1 July 2020 and the

end of 2025. Firstly in the dunes of The Hague, the Netherlands - protected

Dunea’s main source for the production of drinking water is

the river Meuse. However, as river flow relies solely on rainfall,

long periods of drought may occur during summer and fall, leading to

a decline of water quality. Such low flow periods are expected to occur

more frequently and more intensively in the future due to climate

change. Whilst water supply may become short during droughts, water

demand increases due to the fast growing urban population in The Hague

and Leiden area. Therefore, Dunea has chosen a multiple-sources strategy.

If problems pile-up, customers still need and expect good quality

drinking water straight from the tap. With multiple sources we can shift,

be agile and deliver.

Dunea prepares for the future: shift, be agile and deliver

www.LIFE-freshman.eu

http://www.LIFE-freshman.eu


Good practices

under Natura 2000-law. And secondly in the Belgian coastal zone

(Avekapelle), where the pilot will be replicated. This project will provide

reliable data and experience to value brackish groundwater as a source of

drinking water and future application opportunities.

We need to fight climate change as much as possible, but also adapt

to it. Clean fresh water is important for public health, well-being and

prosperity. If brackish groundwater proves to be a good source of

drinking water, it can offer drinking water companies along the coast an

extra option to be less dependent from other sources and/or to continue

to provide drinking water to the growing population in the region.

Having fresh water in stock helps to get through dry times. The more, the

better. Removing brackish groundwater at the edge of the freshwater

lens can make the deep (freshwater) extractions in the dunes less

susceptible to salinization (the Freshkeeper effect). It also increases the

freshwater stock in the dunes, which is a reservoir to be used in case of

calamities. The European Union considers this research so important

for Europe that they have awarded a sustainability grant from the Life

programme to enable carrying out the ‘Freshman’ project.

Monitors Schematic illustration of the three different groundwater layers

below the dunes


Good practices

Process steps

Participants’ experiences



This year, life was different in many ways from what we are

used to - including the European Benchmarking. Unfortunately,

the COVID-19 pandemic inhibited the scheduled workshop in Krakow.

Therefore, it was great to see how quickly the EBC team set up an online

knowledge picnic marathon as an alternative. The meetings were very

well prepared and sophisticated. It was a good idea to spread these

sessions over five weeks to prevent exhaustion by an online marathon.

The EBC team did an excellent job!

The individual knowledge picnics offered a rich variety of topics and

insights. It showed with which issues other water and wastewater

utilities are currently occupied with and how they deal with the resulting

Online Knowledge Picnic Marathon

hanseWasser is the wastewater company for Bremen and the surrounding area.

Since 1999, we have been operating Bremen’s 2,300-kilometre-long sewer

network. Furthermore we have two wastewater treatment plants in operation

to ensure an economical and environmentally sound treatment process for

around 50 million cubic metres of wastewater per year from Bremen,

neighbouring municipalities and industrial and commercial customers.Uta Kirschling

Business Controller

hanseWasser Bremen GmbH

Germany


www.hansewasser.de

challenges. We really appreciated the opportunity to contribute to the

online sessions with our presentation about climate adaption strategies.

The professional exchange on this and further topics like digitalization

allowed us to take home some new ideas.

We would particularly like to highlight the knowledge picnic on the

Sustainable Development Goals. This exchange - as well as the EBC’s

discussion of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and their impact

on the water industry in general - gave us a good input on how to give

the sustainability-issue a wider basis within our company. In the last

reporting period, the EBC evaluated the relevant sub-goals of the SDGs in

terms of relevance and substantiated them with key figures. This year,



http://www.hansewasser.de



A sewage collector in Bremen Findorff was rehabilitated using the pipe liner

method. The pipe liner - 148 metres long, 2.55 × 1.80 metres (mouth profile) - is the

largest the construction company has ever installed.

Aeration basin of the wastewater treatment plant at Bremen-Seehausen.

we will try to incorporate these results into our own performance

indicator system and to develop derivable goals from them. This

knowledge picnic showed us once again how intense the discussions on

sustainability still are.

It became clear, how important this path is and what positive examples

in the water- and wastewater-sector already exist. We are glad that

the EBC has taken up this topic and has begun to develop standards for

water- and wastewater-companies, which simplify the introduction and

controlling of sustainability goals!

It was a bit of a pity that during the picnic marathon almost no informal

and personal exchange could take place. The “coincidental” personal

meetings during the breaks at the normal EBC workshops were missed a

lot, as well as the common dinner parties or the visits to a local sewage

treatment plant.

The hybrid version, which is currently planned for next year, can therefore

perhaps offer the best of both worlds. We are curious about next year’s

EBC-workshop!


Upgrading the Company Report

At the end of 2020, water-and wastewater utilities

participating in EBCs benchmarking programme received a

pilot report on their performance in relation to the UN’s

Sustainable Development Goals. The report is an initiative of

a number of frontrunner utilities and the result of extensive

(ongoing) discussions.

The SDG annex

It started with an initiative of two utilities (VA SYD, Malmö & Waternet,

Amsterdam) within EBC’s benchmarking programme, on finding relevant

indicators for sustainable development in the European water sector.

The focus of the initiative soon shifted to the Sustainable Development

Goals as a useful framework. Water utilities are expected to contribute to

SDG 6 (providing Clean Water and Sanitation) in particular. In addition,

in their daily activities water utilities also touch on and can positively

Discussing the reporting elements (Madrid, March 2020)


Upgrading the Company Report

contribute to other SDGs like Gender Equality, Affordable and Clean

Energy, Industry Innovation and Infrastructure, Sustainable Cities and

Communities, Climate Action and Life below Water.

Though the underlaying SDG targets and indicators proved to be difficult

to use for the (daily) operations of a water utility. We were able to select

and develop a first set of relevant indicators with the support, input and

enthusiasm of a large group of colleague utilities. Combining this set

with a comprehensive literature review and EBC’s existing assessment

methodology this resulted in the pilot report.

Using the SDG-framework in the benchmarking programme helps to

track sustainable development from a wide perspective and can also

count on a great deal of enthusiasm among our participants.

The pilot report now forms the starting point of further discussions.

As of November 2020, a MSc. student, together with the EBC Team,

is reviewing the methodology to further improve and complete the

indicator list by collecting feedback from participants and stakeholders.

The next benchmarking cycle (IB2020, starting May 2021) will give new

participants the chance to join the discussion. Interested utilities are

cordially invited to participate in our next benchmarking cycle which

also includes the SDGs now!


Endnotes

Endnotes

1. Share of (waste)water bill in household consumption

expenditures is the percentage that the average (waste)water

charges per property represents of the calculated household

consumption expenditures.

2. Average water charges are calculated by dividing a company’s

revenues (direct revenues, residential, non-residential, or revenues

from exported water), by the number of m3 of authorized consumption,

connected properties, or exported water (direct, residential or

non-residential respectively).

3. The total costs are the sum of capital and running costs. Capital

costs are defined as net interest plus depreciation, while running

costs include personnel costs plus operational costs (external services,

energy costs, purchased merchandises, leasing and rentals, levies and

fees, exceptional earnings/losses, other operating costs).

4. Average wastewater charges are calculated by dividing a

company’s revenue (fees for collecting, transporting and treating

the wastewater), by the number of properties connected to the

sewer system managed by the utility (in apartment buildings, each

household/property is counted separately).


Colophon

ColophonStichting EBC Foundation

Koninginnegracht 19

2514 AB Den Haag

The Netherlands

Tel. +31 (0)70 205 78 30

www.waterbenchmark.org

Contact

[email protected]

Photos

Cover: MPWiK Krakow

Page 6: EurEau

Page 9: EBC

Page 11: WML

Page 18: MPWiK Krakow

Page 25: WML

Page 26 - 29: EMASESA

Page 30 – 31: Aquanet SA

Page 32 – 33: VIVAQUA

Page 34 - 36: Dunea

Page 37: Dunea

Page 38 – 39 hanseWasser Bremen

Page 40 - 41 - EBC

Colophon: HSY

Design

Haagsblauw

The Hague, The Netherlands

February 2021

http://www.waterbenchmark.org

mailto:info%40waterbenchmark.org?subject=

http://www.haagsblauw.nl

Learning from International Best Practices

Documents

Transcript of Learning from International Best Practices