Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Alliance to Save Energy’s Watergy Program India and International Experience
Pradeep Kumar
27th December, 2016 , New Delhi
Watergy*- A Energy Efficiency Program
Designed for Water Supply & Wastewater System
Watergy began in 1999; implemented in >100 cities
* The Alliance to Save Energy Program
What is Watergy?
Term coined to define the nexus between water and energy
The goal is to provide cost effective water services while reducing energy
consumption, wastages and protecting the environment
And it has linkages to GHG Emission…
Power Plant T&D
Throttled
End Use (flow)
Pumping system
Motor
Need for proper design
Electric Utility
System
Emission Reductions in Municipal Water and Wastewater Operations
Energy Efficiency Interventions
Reduced GHG EmissionReduced fuel
consumption
Water Supply & Wastewater Operation is Energy-
Intensive
Stage Operation Energy-Using Systems
Extraction Deep well or surface Pumping systems
Treatment Chemical & physical
Piston-type dosing pumps,
pumping systems, fans, agitators,
centrifugal blowers
Between Source
and Distribution
Network
Sending drinking water to the
distribution gridPumping systems
Booster pumping Pumping systems
Distribution Distribution to end users Pumping systems
Storm and
Sanitary Sewer
Systems
Piping of sewage, rainwater Pumping systems
Wastewater treatment and
disposal
Pumps, fans, agitators, centrifugal
blowers
Support SystemsSupport functions of utility
building(s)Lighting systems, HVAC, etc.
It’s a System Not Merely Pumps and Motors
State/ULBs
Karnataka
Maharashtra
Andhra Pradesh
Tamil Nadu –29 Cities
Gujarat – State-wide
Madhya Pradesh
Water Utilities
Delhi Jal Board (DJB)
Municipal Corporation of Greater
Mumbai ( MCGM)
Vishakhapatnam MC
Pune water supply system
The Alliance’s Water & Wastewater EE Experience-India
Indian Water Supply & and Wastewater Sector
Second Largest Municipal System in the World
India’s Municipal sector consumes 4% of total electricity
Energy Consumption by Public Water Works
18,364 Million Units (2011‐12)
26,605 Million Units ( 2016-17)
36,3297 Million Units ( Estimated for 2021-22)
Data source: BEE/CEA 18EPS
The Context …..
Every liter of water that passes through a system has a significantenergy cost, compounded by the money invested to produce it.
In developing countries, the cost of energy for supply of water mayeasily consume up to half of a municipality’s budget (40-60%)
Energy expenditure is the second largest cost after manpower.
Cost recovery is big challenge for most of the municipalities andwater utilities ( NRW, metering, low tariff etc.)
1/3 of India's urban population lacks direct access to clean,affordable and reliable water services
10
What’s happening?
No existing Government policy/incentive for
reducing energy consumption;
Cities lack technical, managerial and financial
capacity to design & implement projects
Lack of metering & monitoring systems - difficult to
establish baseline
Procurement is based on ‘first cost’ ( L1) NOT on
Life Cycle Cost
What’s happening …..reasons for Poor Efficiency
12
What’s happening …..reasons for Poor Efficiency
Over design - in view of catering future need (factor
of safety margin)
Sewage pumping network are poorly designed
High rates of unaccounted for water; unreliable
water services
Changes in operating practices/schedules – to
cater the current needs ( pumping head changes)
Efficient component NOT installed and/or operated
properly
Case Studies
Energy Saving Potential & Implementation
Delhi Jal Board
Type of Proposal Nos. Saving
Potential, Rs.
Lakh
Investment Required,
Rs. lakh
No/low Cost 9 179 17
(Payback: 1 month)
Investment
Oriented proposals
6 355 448
(Payback: 15 months)
Total 15 534 465
(Payback: 10 months)
Low and medium cost measures implemented; Accruing Annual Savings of Rs. 7 Crore
Established Energy Management Cell
Karnataka – 4 Town Projects
Type of Proposal Nos. Saving
Potential, Rs.
Lakh
Investment Required,
Rs. lakh
No Cost
(immediate)
20 67 Nil
Short Term
(1 -12 months)
18 178 78
(Payback: 5 months)
Medium Term
(1 – 2 years)
6 63 77
(Payback: 15 months)
Total 44 308 155
(Payback: 6 months)
Mysore, Bellary, Hubli –Dharwad, Tipture-Arsikere
Type of
Proposal
Nos. of
EE
Measures
Saving
Potential, Rs.
Lakh
Investment Required,
Rs. lakh
No Cost
(immediate)
10 31.1 0
Short Term
(1 -12 months)
6 31.0 20
(Payback: 8 months)
Medium Term
(1 – 2 years)
2 1.8 2.5
(Payback: 17 months)
Total 18 63.9 22.5
(Payback: 5 months)
Andhra Pradesh
Vijaynagarm, Karimnagar
Pune Municipal Corporation
Type of
Proposal
No. of
EE Measures
Annual
Saving
Potential
Rs. Lakh
Cost of
Implementation
Rs. Lakh
Payback
Period,
months
Short term, 11 103.7 32 4
Medium term 4 42.1 55 16
Total 15 145.8 87 8
Pune Municipal Corporation
Additional 10% Water Delivered from existing infrastructure
Sri Lanka, National Water Supply and Drainage
Board – NWSDB
Number of Water Schemes : 285 +
Total Energy Bill : 100 + Million LKR
Potential Savings : 25% (Minimum)
Energy Cost Contribution:
34%66%
Total Operating Cost(salaries, M&O,cemicals, Rentals andcommunication)Elecrtricity Cost
NWSDB’ Action Plan and Energy Savings- Overview
PlantsAnnual Energy Saving Payback
Energy
Saving
Potential %
kWh - kVA LKR - Millons
Ambatale
(Section)
103,7000 +
800 kVA12.45
11 Month16 %
Anuradhapura478,304 + 81
kVA4.58
15 Months 25%
Five Year Energy Efficiency Roadmap (2007-2011)
EE Milestones – Targets and Performance Indicator
Appointed Technical Advisor
Watergy Mexico
Study Cases in 16 Water utilities of 14 Mexican States
• Baja California (Tijuana)
• Veracruz ( Veracruz and Boca del Rio)
• Oaxaca ( Oaxaca City )
• Sonora (Guaymas and Nogales )
• Chihuahua (Hidalgo de Parral)
• Coahuila (Monclova-Frontera)
• Guerrero ( Zihuatanejo City)
• Durango ( Durango City)
• Mexico City ( Sta Catarina funded by Clinton foundation)
• La Laguna Region ( Gomez Palacio and Lerdo Dgo)
• Mexico State ( Tecamac, Tultitlan, funded by CONAGUA and World
Bank )
• Puebla ( Atlixco )
Few Study Cases Summary Benefits
Better water service and less water production
CityPopulation
(thousands)
Current
water
produced
(L/s)
Water
continuity
service before
(Hours/day)
Water
production with
Watergy Project
(L/s)
Water continuity
service after
(Hours/day)
Monclova, Coah. 206 1092 7/24 801 24/24
Parral, Chih. 104 374 6/24 314 24/24
Nogales, Sonora 193 722 11/24 720 (*) 24/24
Guaymas, Son. 135 510 14/24 510 24/24
Durango, Dgo. 461 2695 10/24 2373 24/24
Lerdo, Durango 90 660 24/24 445 24/24
Tecamac, Edomex 271 1149 15/24 1100 24/24
Tultitlan , Edomex 524 1661 18/24 1450 24/24
Atlixco, Puebla 110 382 19/24 354 24/24
(*) With 20 % more population projected
Summary benefits cont…
More Energy Savings
City
Typical ES
measures
(%)
ES measures resulting
from Hydraulic
improvements (*)
(%)
Total Energy
Saving
(%)
Monclova, Coa. 18.0 18.4 36.4
Parral, Chi. 21.8 3.2 25.0
Nogales, Sonora 18.1 8.9 27.0
Guaymas, Son. 19.1 17.2 36.3
Durango, Dgo. 36.5 10.6 47.0
Lerdo, Durango 17.3 7.7 25.0
Tecamac, Edomex 18.2 3.3 21.5
Tultitlan , Edomex 15.5 5.0 20.5
Atlixco, Puebla 19.2 4.5 23.7
CASE STUDY: Fortaleza, BRAZIL
~ CAGECE, state water utility in Brazil’s arid NE ~
ISSUES
• System over-designed
~ Causes excessive energy use due to
oversized pumps, unnecessary booster
stations, etc.
• Many inefficiencies:
pumps, O&M, system management
• Many households not connected
to service
Figure 5. Booster Station at CAGECE
APPROACH
• Automation: pressure controls, centralized pumping controls
E.g., suspended pumping during high electricity rate periods
• Improved data collection & analysis
• Improved motor efficiency: replaced or re-wound them
• Operations manual for daily O&M procedures
RESULTS
88 million kWh saved over 4 years
…while adding 88,000 new connections for the poor
using the same amount of water
$2.5 M saved every year w/investment of only $1.1 M
Payback: 7 months
FORTALEZA CASE STUDY, cont.
Uncertainty over savings ?
Lack of confidence in success of such program ?
Is funding an Issue ?
Lack of supportive polices at state and city level?
Municipal sector seen as a risky client by pvt sector?
Market readiness (supplier, implementer, ESCO )
Behavioral issues ?
Why the replication or scaling-up so difficult ?
These questions are being asked today, and likely
will grow as the nation moves toward adoption of
climate and energy legislation;
It is the role of needed policy and evaluation,
measurement and verification (EM&V) to answer
these questions
Open Loop Decision Making System
Decision Making
Organization
Water supply and Wastewater operations
Without a Feedback System
• Lack of confidence:
• Inefficiencies may still exist
• Operations not being fully
optimizedImp
lem
en
tatio
n
Closed Loop Decision Making System
Decision Making
Organization
Imp
lem
en
tatio
n
Water supply and Wastewater operations
Monitoring &
Analysis
Information System
Data
Feedback
EM&V and M&V
Smart Cities
National Water Mission
National Mission On Sustainable Habitat
Atal Mission for Rejuvenation and Urban
Transformation (AMRUT) and
National Heritage City Development and
Augmentation Yojana (HRIDAY).
Intended Nationally Determined Contribution
(INDC)
The Missing Policy Link ………
The Country needs Policy that ………
Define Water sector energy efficiency as a
“Requirement” Not as an “Option” or
“Choice”
The Way forward …
The top level policy & decision makers in the government should
develop a long term strategic plan and support EE initiative
It’s important for the Government to strike a partnership with
the private sector to realize the large scale success of the state level
program
Municipality needs to build their capacity in project management,
M&V etc,
Banks/FIs should adopt cash flow based project evaluation for
larger EE projects
For More Information:
Pradeep Kumar
Alliance to Save Energy
Delhi, India
M:999-082763, 9845775008
