Water Supply and Energy Challenges

Transcription

1 4 th International Symposium on Energy & Environment: ACCESS, Dimensions of the Energy Water Nexus Session Water Supply and Energy Challenges Office of Research and Development James A. Goodrich, Ph.D and Cynthia Sonich-Mullin Dec. 11, 2012

2 Overview Provide an overview of the USEPA approach on Water Resources and Energy Research Water Utility as an Agent of Change Sustainability is the Issue that includes: Climate, Energy, Land Use, & Transportation 80% of Your Water Bill is Buried in the Ground Energy is the primary cost Innovation Almost Always Requires More Energy 1

3 Connections Between Energy and Water 2 Water and energy are linked: Water treatment and supply require energy Water is used in power generation, oil & gas production, and, increasingly, in the production of biofuels Water treatment and supply accounts for less than 3% of US electricity consumption, but electricity production accounts for about 41% of US water withdrawals and 6% of all water consumption Without more complete understanding and careful planning, energy production may be limited by water availability and water quality may degrade

4 Water Use in the Electric Sector Electricity demand is projected to increase 27% by 2035 Thermoelectric power plants generate 90% of all electricity produced in the U.S. and require large amounts of water for cooling Cooling systems have greatest impact on water use Certain ancillary systems such as CCS can have large water requirements as well Most renewable technologies, such as wind and solar PV, require virtually no water per unit of electricity generated Biofuel production can degrade watersheds and compromise downstream water quality

5 Water and Electric Sector Vulnerabilities 4 When water quality/quantity is compromised, generation from thermoelectric facilities may be reduced or units may be forced to temporarily shut down Examples of water resource effects: An increase in cooling water intake temperature from 70 to 90 F can reduce electricity output 5% Facility unable to keep temperature of cooling water discharge below predetermined (state, municipality, etc.) thresholds for water quality Water level of cooling water source falls below intake structures

6 Energy Water Comparisons 5 Differences Water typically locally based decision-making Public governance (water) vs. market based (energy) DW Federal regulations WQ state requirements Water easier to store Public Health Water Quality Treat, Distribute, Collect, Treat again, Discharge Water still tends to be too cheap to meter in some localities

7 Energy Water Comparisons (cont.) Similarities Dynamic real-time modeling needed Resource limitations Data Needs Integration of innovative technology to market (R, D, & D) needed Technology breakthroughs needed Most resilient = highest cost Customer acceptance issues 6

8 Stressors and Considerations 7 Aging Infrastructure, Emerging Contaminants, Population Demographics, Regulations, Budgets: Crumbling water and transportation infrastructure Land use change, population movement Aging population, more prone to respiratory diseases (Legionellosis etc.) Need to reduce greenhouse gases: Move less water over shorter distances/recycle, particularly reuse of greywater within homes Water footprint vs. Carbon footprint vs. Ecological footprint Renewable energy/recovery: Utilize energy within wastes / energy recovery Urban agriculture / recycle of local nutrients

9 Multiple Stressors Have the Potential to Impact: Energy Production Alternative Energy Production Impacts (e.g.marcellus Shale) Water Quality/Supply Water Demand Flood Management Aquatic Ecosystems Health 8

10 9 Water Infrastructure Sustainability and Adaptation in the 21 st Century Requires a Paradigm Shift towards: Integration of water, energy and transport services Technological and institutional changes to orient the systems towards more sustainable water services Watersheds as the functional governance structure Flexible and feasible tools that are able to holistically consider water quality, water quantity, management and reuse of separated waste including wastewater streams, and the energy utilization efficiencies

11 Urban Water Cycle is No Longer Sustainable 1) Big-Pipe-In/Big-Pipe-Out approach of the last 150 years not adequate to address future needs 2) Need for nutrient recycling to agriculture 3) Water-energy nexus consideration 10

12 USEPA PRINCIPLES FOR AN ENERGY - WATER FUTURE 1) Efficiency in the use of energy and water should form the foundation of how we develop, distribute, recover, and use energy and water. 2) The exploration, production, transmission and use of energy should have the smallest impact on water resources as possible, in terms of water quality and water quantity. 11 3) The pumping, treating, distribution, use, collection, reuse and ultimate disposal of water should have the smallest impact on energy resources as possible.

13 USEPA PRINCIPLES FOR AN ENERGY - WATER FUTURE (cont.) 4) Wastewater treatment facilities, which treat human and animal waste, should be viewed as renewable resource recovery facilities that produce clean water, recover energy and generate nutrients. 5) The water and energy sectors governments, utilities, manufacturers, and consumers should move toward integrated energy and water management from source, production and generation to end user. 12

14 Words Matter Aspect Old Paradigm New Paradigm Human waste Nuisance (odorous, pathogens) Resource (nutrients back to agriculture) Stormwater / used water Nuisance (flooding, should be removed quickly) Resource (alternate water source, should be retained, reused or allowed to infiltrate where possible) Demand & Supply Build supply capacity to meet growing demand Manage demand in line with resource (supply) limits. Quality Treat all to drinking quality Supply water fit-for-purpose Cycle Once through Reuse, reclaim, recycle Treatment infrastructure Grey i.e., unnatural, engineered systems Mimic or include use of natural ecosystem services to purify water Scale Centralized: bigger is better (economies of scale) Decentralized is an option (diseconomies of scale); avoidance of inter-basin transfers Diversity Standardize: limit complexity Allow diverse solutions, determined by local needs and situations Integration (physical) Water, stormwater, sewage separated physically Separation of water cycle is reduced because waste water is reused not discharged 13 Integration (institutional) Water, stormwater and sewage managed by different authorities / departments, under different budgets All phases of urban water cycle managed in coordination, allowing physical integration and reuse

15 USEPA Office of Research & Development Approach National Scale MARKAL energy system model Water Resource Adaptation Program (WRAP) Urban Scale Adaptive infrastructure engineering tools (MWAI) Utility System Level Process engineering, Real-time SCADA and Optimization of Water Quality/Energy Use (WTP) 14

16 MARKAL as a Tool for Scenario Analysis 15 EPA/NRMRL uses the MARKAL (MARKet AnaLysis) energy system model to evaluate scenarios of future energy production and use Linkages between electricity production and water resources Implications of CO 2 reduction scenarios on water use Regional differences Comparisons to estimates of water availability MARKAL is a bottom-up model that explicitly incorporates cost and performance data on energy resource, conversion, and end use technologies

17 MARKAL Energy Systems Model Primary energy resources Energy conversion End-use sectors 1 Oil Oil Refining Biochemical Conversion Thermochemical Conversion Transportation Natural Gas Residential MSW Gasification Industrial/Commercial Livestock waste Coal Coal Agriculture/ Construction Agricultural biomass Electricity Generation 16 Forestry biomass Uranium

18 Accounting for Water in MARKAL The MARKAL energy systems model selects the least cost technology and fuel pathway to meet current and future energy demands, while adhering to user-defined constraints The model also accounts for material flows and emissions of interest Water factors were added to electricity generation technologies to track water withdrawals and consumption Existing coal, natural gas, and nuclear generation was disaggregated to distinguish between capacity with open versus recirculating cooling technologies CCS technologies (new and retrofit) are also included Primary focus is water usage, not capturing water quality implications or downstream temperatures 17

19 EPA Mission To protect human health and the environment ORD Goal To solve problems of national significance and to support our program/regional office needs through integrated, multidisciplinary research WRAP Objectives To provide data, tools and engineering solutions for adaptation to climate, land use and socioeconomic changes 18

20 Hydroclimatic Provinces in Contiguous US IVb VI III VI Spatial correlations II Hydroclimatic province classification IIb I Time CA Time, AD Time NY Time, AD Period Period Time WI Time, AD Precipitation, Wavelet ,00 Frequency Frequency Period Period Wavelet Spectrum Frequency Frequency Period Period Wavelet Spectrum 10 10,00 Precipitation (cm/mn) Precipitation (cm/mn) Clipboard.W K1 Clipboard.W K1 Wavelet Spectrum Precipitation, Wavelet Frequency Frequency Clipboard.W K1 10, Precipitation (cm/mn) IIIb Precipitation, Wavelet V Temporal Periodicity

21 Urban process and modeling Climate Climate land use economics Water availability Urban center nucleation - Planning Water systems Urban development Water infrastructure, transportation Transportation. Urban centers Air pollution System feedbacks Adaptations Economics 20

22 Sustainable urban system: Paradigm change Centralized vs distributed infrastructure systems How decentralized is the optimal distributed system? Existing infrastructure utilization rate Institutional support Zhao et al (2010) 21

23 Footprints as the system judging metric 22 Evaluate development scenarios via common attributes. Carbon and water footprints represent natural constraints. Achieve system-level optimization in need to analyze interdependency

24 Carbon Footprint in Water Systems Transporting water/wastewater Hydraulic head Friction loss Water loss E H 2 v V g 2 head Water loss Kinetic energy Treatment of water/wastewater Energy input Water recovery rate Water resource protection / recovery Use / processing locally Decentralized systems Use-specific water quality standards Energy-efficient processes Q E f co, c, Q, V P G ET R S w T w R w R 1 w11 n n n n n 11 n R32 23

25 CO 2 footprint ( CO 2 / E) Energy footprint ( E/unit) Carbon Footprint in Water Systems Q P G ET R S w T w R w R 1 w11 n n n n n 11 n R T A 5 B 4 3 C 2 Water footprint ( Q/unit) Energy-intensive built infrastructure (1) Water pumping & distribution, water transfer (2) Water loss (leakage, evaporation ) (3) RO treatment (4) Biological treatment (5) Evaporation w/ water recovery (6) Water reuse 24 D (A) Hydropower (only usage) (B) Coal-fired power plant (C) Biofuels (D) Nuclear power plant (T) Transportation

26 25 Research Mechanisms International Collaborations China and Japan Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) India MOU expiring(?) Universities (Cooperative Agreements) Washington University, St. Louis University of Cincinnati University of Central Florida Utilities and Private Companies Greater Cincinnati Water Works Las Vegas Valley Water District Cooperative Research and Development Agreements (CRADAs)

27 In Summary Need to Design the Next Generation of the Built Infrastructure Integrate Water, Transportation, and Energy Infrastructure Embody materials management Leadership on social and cultural changes Smart systems Water Utility as an Agent of Change Engineering, planning, energy curriculum changes needed 26

28 THANK YOU Jim Goodrich (513) Thank You! Jim Goodrich (513)