Department of Defense Water Challenges · 2017-10-17 · BUILDING STRONG Innovative solutions for a safer, better world ® Aging Infrastructure 240,000 water main breaks/year. >2

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


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


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


Shifting Demand Population Growth.

DoD Transformation.

Migration.

Aging Infrastructure.

Increased Energy.

Climate Driven Demand.

10Tetra Tech, Inc., July 2010; Maupin et al., 2014

Challenges


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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.


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


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.


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


[email protected]

Questions