View
0
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
Department of Defense Water Challenges
Elisabeth Jenicek
US Army Corps of Engineers
11 October 2017
University of Kansas Workshop:
Fostering Forward-Thinking Interdisciplinary Water Solutions
The views, opinions, and findings contained in this report are those of the author(s) and should
not be construed as an official Department of the Army position, policy, or decision, unless so
designated by other official documentation.
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®
Outline
Drivers and challenges.
National screening.
Regional water assessments.
Water use intensity research.
Source water vulnerability.
Technology demonstrations.
Support for installations.
Barriers to resilience.
2
The Army Universe
3
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®
Top 10 Fortune 500 Companies (2016)
Company Revenue ($B)
1. Wal-Mart Stores 485.9
2. Berkshire Hathaway 223.6
3. Apple 215.6
4. Exxon Mobil 205
5. McKesson 192.5
6. United Health Group 184.8
7. CVS Health 177.5
8. General Motors 166.4
9. AT&T 163.8
10. Ford 151.8
Army Demographics
Mission: “To fight and win our
nation’s wars.”
Operating Locations: worldwide
Personnel
Active: 471,272
Guard: 341,589
Reserve: 198,395
Civilian: 248,810
TOTAL: 1,260,066
Funding: $147.6 Billion
The US Army is comparable to a major corporation in terms of
funding, assets and global reach. The Army would rank 11th in
comparison to Fortune 500 companies based on funding alone.
Corporate Comparison
Army, 2016 & Fortune, June 2017 4
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®5
United States Army Engineer
Research and Development Center
ERDC helps solve our Nation’s
most challenging problems in civil
and military engineering,
geospatial sciences, water
resources, and environmental
sciences for the Army, Department
of Defense, civilian agencies, and
our Nation’s public good.
ERDC conducts research
and development in 5
major areas:
1. Military Engineering
2. Environmental Quality
and Installations
3. Water Resources
4. Geospatial Research
and Engineering
5. Engineered Resilient
Systems
5
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®6
Construction Engineering Research Lab
Champaign, IL
Unique
Relationships
Unique
Facilities
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
6
Major Water MandatesDrivers
Net Zero (28/01/14)
• Addresses water, energy, and solid waste
• Emphasizes reduction and reuse.
• Applies to both technology and behavior.
• Contributes to installation security and
resilience.
Sustainable Design & Development (17/01/17)
• Green Buildings Council LEED.
• American Society of Heating, Refrigeration and Air
Conditioning Engineers requirements for outdoor
water use.
• Encourages alternate water use considering non-
market benefits.
Water Security (23/02/17)• 14 day supply for critical missions.
• Improve resilience: plan for restoration and reduce
risk.
7
Readiness
Data Source: Watershed Health Index – SIRRA;
Army Installation Population – ASIP Common Installation Picture, 31 Jan 2014.
31%
Watershed Vulnerability Effects on Army
Installation Population
Drivers
8
Readiness
9
Vicksburg Water Main Break
18 May 2017
Fort Leonard Wood tornado
31 December 2010Fort Leonard Wood flood
29-30 April 2017
Water Intake Pumps
Fort Bragg Water Main Break
11 August 2017
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®
Shifting Demand Population Growth.
DoD Transformation.
Migration.
Aging Infrastructure.
Increased Energy.
Climate Driven Demand.
10Tetra Tech, Inc., July 2010; Maupin et al., 2014
Challenges
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®
Aging Infrastructure
240,000 water main breaks/year.
>2 trillion gal/year lost costing $2.6 B.
AWWA targets 15% for unaccounted water.
ASCE 2017 Infrastructure Report Card: D.
$1T investment needed over next
25 years.
Pew Center and EPA
Challenges
11
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®
Unaccounted For Water
12
Challenges
Energy-Related Water in the U.S.
Source: Pacific Institute, Water for Energy: Future Water Needs for Electricity in the Intermountain West; River
Network, “The Carbon Footprint of Water,” 2009; Energy and Water in a Warming World, “Freshwater Use by
Power Plants,” 2011; USGS, 2014.13
45% of U.S. water
withdrawals are
used for
thermoelectric
power production.
Some concentrating solar
power plants consume
more water per unit of
electricity than the
average coal plant.
Carbon capture
technologies
could increase a
coal plant’s water
consumption by
30-100%.
Challenges
4
Effects of Climate Risk on Water Resilience
Projected Changes in Water Withdrawals:
Increasing temps and potential EvapoTranspiration
Brown et al, 2013; NCA, 2014
Projected Changes in Precipitation, 2005-2050
Higher temperatures
► Increased evaporation.
► Higher outdoor water demands.
► Greater water use for cooling.
Increased precip variability► Periods of drought punctuated with
large storm events.
More precipitation as rain
versus snow
When it comes to water,
the past is no longer a
reliable guide to the future.
~ Sandra Postel
Challenges
Supply/Demand
& Drought
Effects
Ken Dewey via Climate.gov; NDMC Lake Mead, NV
Massachusetts – April 2017
Georgia – April 2017
FL, OK, KS – Mar/Apr 2017
Washington DC – March 2017
Oklahoma – Feb 2017
Alabama – Sept 2016
Rochester – Aug 2016
Energy Production, Agriculture, Drinking Water Supplies, Pests, Wildfire, Alligators
Challenges
Cost of Water 264 small, medium and large water utilities.
Median U.S. cost is $4.62/Kgal.
Average increase of 5.34% annually, from 2004
to 2016 (7,480 gal or 1,000 CF/mo); CPI = 2.1%.
Shifting of cost recovery from consumption-
based fees to fixed fees.
More use of increasing
block rate structures.
Army Installations are subject to the
prevailing rates for water supply.
AWWA 2016 Water and Wastewater Rate Survey
Challenges
16
The Army’s Cost of Water is Rising
Army Energy and Water Reporting System, 2017
Traditional water pricing doesn’t capture the value of water
to the Army: the ability to support mission-critical activities.
$-
$0.50
$1.00
$1.50
$2.00
$2.50
$3.00
$3.50
0
2,000,000
4,000,000
6,000,000
8,000,000
10,000,000
12,000,000
14,000,000
16,000,000
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Cost Consumption
Army Water Use and Cost TrendsQuarterly, Active Installations
17
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®18
Cost of WaterReported by Army Installations
$2.61/kgal
18
$2.61/kgal$17,000/kgal
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/5b/US_Navy_071126-M-7696M-
132_Soldiers_and_Airmen_attached_to_a_US_Army_Medical_Team_from_Tripler_Army_Medical_Center_Hawaii%2C_sit_crammed_among_food%2C_bottled_water_and_medical_supplie
s_in_a_CH-53E_Sea_Stallion_helicopter.jpg
Cost of Water, Part 2
19
$2.61/kgal$17,000/kgal$31,000/kgal
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2017/08/30/99-for-a-case-of-bottled-water-texas-stores-accused-of-price-gouging-in-wake-of-harvey/?utm_term=.736122beb834
Cost of Water, Part 3
20
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®
Complex Water Rights Determined on the state level.
Riparian: Eastern states, reasonable use.
Prior Appropriation Doctrine: first in time, first in
right; water rights can be sold.
Law of the River (Colorado River)
Appalachicola/Chattahoochee/Flint
Lake Lanier
Tennessee River
Great Lakes Compact
National Water Rights Digest Reference, Ridenbaugh Press
BLUE states generally use riparian doctrine.
GREEN states generally are considered regulated riparian.
TAN states generally use the prior appropriation doctrine.
GRAY states use mixed approaches.
Challenges
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®
Quality Degradation
National Water Monitoring News, Spring 2015 and EPA
Degraded water cannot be
considered a viable source.
Challenes
Exceedances of human health benchmarks
by one or more contaminants.
National Water Sustainability
Screening:
Index of Watershed Health
24% of installations lie in watersheds vulnerable to issues of water supply or demand.
98 sites: highly vulnerable.
23
Identification and Prioritization of Watersheds
Applies common measures.
Uses a set of supply and demand indicators across the nation.
Provides results on overall watershed vulnerability.
Does NOT provide individual installation scores, although can report results by selected installation regions.
Watershed Vulnerability Impacts on Army
Installation Population
Data Source: Watershed Health Index – SIRRA,
https://datacenter.leamgroup.com/sirra/; Army Installation Population – ASIP
Common Installation Picture, 31 Jan 2014.
31%
24
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®
Installation Water Sustainability
AssessmentsInstallation Water Demand
Regional Supply and Demand
Overview
• Completed for 27 installations, 2008 - 2014.
• Long-term studies with broad applicability.
• Assess 30-year water supply and demand
for regions containing Army installations.
• Characterize region in terms of geography,
population, business climate, and hydrology.
• Develop alternate future scenarios for
regional water supply and demand.
• Project installation water demand taking into
accounted anticipated changes in mission.
25
Alternate Future Scenarios
• “What if” scenarios for demand and supply.
• Identify key stressors that could affect
continued regional water availability.
Water Use Intensity Factors for Army
Facilities
Data-driven and
modeling techniques.
Utilizing installation-
specific factors:
► Facility type
► Climate zone
► Mission
► End-use factors
Delivering WUI metrics
and techniques for
assessing minimum
water needs.
Outliers
Median
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®
Research Questions
What is the range of water demand for an
installation from meeting critical supply to all
end uses?
How does water demand vary compared to use
factors . . building area, population, meals,
patients?
Is there a correlation between water demand
and climate zone?
How long of an interruption of water supply can
be tolerated?
27
Water Use Intensity from Literature Review
28
Data/Metering
Lack of metering and meter quality
► Cost effectiveness criteria requires knowledge of
consumption and true water cost.
► Meter age and calibration.
► Meter integration and management.
► Validation of data.
29
Units of Measure
Common resource intensity metrics are limited:
► Gallons per square foot
► Gallons per person
► Mission-related (meals served, patients treated,
vehicles washed, Army-unique training)
“Mission critical” demands.
Significant unaccounted for water.
30
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®
Army-Unique Characteristics
31
≠
Army Barracks
College Dormitory
Ammunition Plant
Geospatial Assessment of Source
Water Vulnerability
Objectives:
Scalable framework for assessing
the resilience of potable water
supplies to disruption.
32
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/chemical-spill-threatens-
thousands/2014/01/10/638b739e-7a59-11e3-b1c5-
739e63e9c9a7_graphic.html?utm_term=.9e0a016f4b11
http://time.com/magazine/us/4188304/february-1st-2016-vol-187-no-
3-u-s/
Develop techniques for
projecting the duration
and severity of disruption.
Regionally-informed view
of installation water
resilience.
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®
Research Questions
How can geospatial data aid in contingency
planning for installation water sources?
How much backup water is required for
mission-critical demands?
What are potential water quality event
scenarios?
What are the levels of contamination and
potential uses of untreated water?
33
Methodology: Map-Making
Map-Making
Permits
Hydrology
GIS Layers
https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2015-09/documents/form_1.pdf; http://slideplayer.com/slide/9309512/
37
Methodology: More than just Map-
Making
Contaminant Modeling
Terrain Analysis
Historical Observations
2400 1200 2400 1200 2400 1200 2400 1200 240021Aug2000 22Aug2000 23Aug2000 24Aug2000
0
5
10
15
20
C:\Users\RDCERNWG\Documents\HEC Data\HEC-RAS\Example Projects\Water Quality\Nutr ient Example\WaterQualityExamp.wq01
T ime
Wate
r Tem
pera
ture
(C
),D
isso
lved O
xygen
(m
g/l),O
rgan
ic N
itro
ge
n (m
g/l)
Legend
Water T emperature (C)
Dis solved Oxygen (mg/l )
Organic Nitrogen (mg/l )
https://xkcd.com/1260/
Impact Modeling
38
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®36
Methodology: Water Quality Risks
Using available geospatial data, subdivide findings:
Agriculture
Energy
Hazardous Waste
Health Care Facilities
Landfills
Manufacturing Facilities
Mining
Transportation
Miscellaneous Permitted
40
Methodology: Field Validation
DATA
• HSIP
• Permits
• Terrain
PRECON
• Web
• Phone
• Map
RECON
• Status
• Condition
• Validation
http://slidepla;yer.com/slide/9309512/; http://www.bwaste.com/
41
38
Portable Acoustic Leak Detection(FY 2017 ACSIM ITTP)
Demonstrate and validate the
use of portable acoustic leak
detection for potable water.
Correlators identify leaks and
microphones pinpoint location.
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®
Ultrasonic Smart Water Meters (FY 2017 ACSIM ITTP)
Demonstrate and validate the
use of a compact ultrasonic
smart water meter to monitor
building water use.
Machine learning software
learns a structure’s water usage
and recognizes anomalies,
sending notifications.
Install ultrasonic and
conventional meters in
sequence and compare 3
months of data.
39
Commercial Pre-Rinse Spray Valve(FY 2016 ACSIM ITTP)
40
Demonstrate and validate the use of
WaterSense® PRSVs in food service.
Evaluation Criteria: GPM, spray
force, O&M, operator experience, life
cycle cost analysis.
Findings: Save 7,000 gal/year, $115 -
$240/year, 4-8 month payback.
Water Conservation for Training Areas(FY 2012 ACSIM ITTP)
Composting Toilet
Bulk Water Supply Point
Conservation Measures
Overview
• Demonstrate and validate the retrofit of
existing training area/range facilities with
water efficiency technologies.
• Reduce overall demand and maintenance
requirements/costs.
• Survey trainees on water efficiency
practices, Pre & post-retrofit.
• Document life cycle cost assessment.
• Recommend application at other Army
installations.
41
Within Building Gray Water Reuse(FY 2011 ESTCP)
Bathroom Scale Reuse
Building Scale Reuse
Overview
• Demonstrate retrofit of existing buildings
with water conservation and reuse.
• Evaluate multiple scales of reuse.
• Compare systems performance pre- and
post-retrofit.
• Recommend application of technologies by
facility, location, and water factors.
• Provide engineering guidance to support
DoE-wide adoption.
42
Performance Objectives
• Potable water usage.
• Gray water usage.
• Gray water quality.
• Life cycle cost.
• System maintenance.
• User satisfaction.
• Existing system: showers & sinks to flushing.
• Long-term monitoring instrumentation.
• Intermittent occupancy/high water cost.
IL DOH Inspection (6/2015)
Phase I Layout-Treatment system not directly
connected to sink deck or toilets
Fort Leonard Wood NZW Support(FLW 2013-Present)
Net Zero Water Support
43
• Initiated in 2013 with “Water Day.”
• Ranked installation water priorities.
• Water surveys of 27 buildings using audit app.
• Regular site visits, system surveys, data collection,
technology demonstrations.
• Actionable products e.g. work orders for building
water meters.
• Quarterly week-long ISSP feedback sessions
• Tech transfer/outreach via FLW & Army media.
Water Model Support
Completed and Ongoing Tasks
Water End Use Monitoring
• Flow recorder data analysis.
• Water infrastructure asset management.
• Potable water leak detection.
• Strategic water metering recommendations.
• Calculated the energy cost of water.
• Characterization of large water users.
• Evaluated the total cost of water.
• Developed technology retrofit guidelines.
• Irrigation of turfgrass with rainwater.
0 0.6 1.20.3 Miles
Legend
MainLine_Rebuilt_Feb2015
<all other values>
1940 - 1970
1971 - 2013
Asbestos Cement, 6
1940 - 1970
1971 - 2013
Asbestos Cement, 8
1940 - 1970
1971 - 2013
Asbestos Cement, 10
1940 - 1970
1971 - 2013
N
Region 1
Region 2
Watershed & Infrastructure Analysis
Barriers to Resilience of Water Systems at Army installations
Historic water rights are
limiting factors for some
installations.
Cost ≠ Value.
Low water cost inhibits
innovative conservation.
Lack of data is an obstacle
to conservation planning.
Climate change will worsen
scarcity and affect
availability in some regions.
Strategic asset master
planning required for aging
infrastructure.
Water loss is significant:
► Leaks, line flushing,
condensate, steam boilers.
Water quality implications of
reduced flows and changing
water chemistry.
44
Innovative solutions for a safer, better worldBUILDING STRONG®
elisabeth.m.jenicek@usace.army.mil
Questions
Recommended