CHANGING ATTITUDES AND MANAGEMENT OF RECLAIMED WATER. Don Vandertulip, PE, BCEE Vandertulip WateReuse Engineers

Transcription

1 CHANGING ATTITUDES AND MANAGEMENT OF RECLAIMED WATER Don Vandertulip, PE, BCEE Vandertulip WateReuse Engineers July 17, 2015

2 Discussion Context s Drought Return Flows 1968 Water Plan Reclaimed Water Unplanned Reuse 1997 Senate Bill 1 Reclaimed Water a Resource Impact of the 1950 s drought Water resource response in 1960 s to drought Concept of Return Flows First statewide Water Plan in 1968 Substitution of reclaimed water for potable supplies 1980 s 1990 s unplanned reuse, Legislative inaction 1997 Senate Bill 1 Clarified water reuse policy New water rights appropriation 2012 Plan Major advances with reclaimed water now a resource

3 Texas Drought of Record s drought 600-year record New interest in water planning Comment from the 60s still valid today: A good rain is the only quick solution to the problem of drouth Unfortunately a good rain washes away more than the drouth: it washes away much of mans interest in providing for the next one, and it washes the supports from under those who know another dry cycle is coming Walter Prescott Webb

4 State Response to the Drought 1957 Planning Act Water Resource Planning Division, Board of Water Engineers House Joint Resolution 3 amended state constitution allowed state financing of water projects June 15, 1960, Gov. Price Daniels requested: Planning report to meet 1980 municipal and industrial water demands River Authorities and Conservation Districts prepare plans for their supply

5 1961 Plan Meeting the 1980 Water Requirements of Texas Increased return flows from municipalities and industries may deleteriously affect the quality of streamflow Quality factor may result in water derived from developments being used for dilution of return flows Nature within the past decade has inscribed upon the wide-spreading Texas landscape grim warnings of greater disasters to come if development of the State's water resources is neglected.

6 Dilution was the Solution to Pollution Policy Use of water for pollution abatement by dilution should be avoided used only as a stopgap measure until pollution can be eliminated Increasing quality standards for stream discharge Technology may provide alternate sources or increase existing supplies People want water for everything and anything for industry, to dump their sewage in, to drink, to water ski. D. F. Smallhorst, Chair, TWPCB, 1966

7 1961 Report Recommendations Evaporation retardation, consider demineralization of brackish and sea water Desalinization research investigation should be continued Reduce irrigation by ground water at the present rate may not be sustainable in some areas Future use of surface water for irrigation will require a comprehensive appraisal And

8 1961 Report Recommendations Water Reuse Consider re-use of municipal return flows, and conversion of industrial processes to use less water Trend is toward a higher degree of treatment for municipal/industrial wastewaters and to re-use this water Many municipalities, to avoid dumping of waste in streams, are selling sewage for use in industry and to irrigate non-consumptive crops

9 U.S. Study Commission Texas Authorized by Congress in August Report 800 pg Plan covered only 62% of Texas Coastal Canal -418 miles Mississippi River water to the Texas Gulf coast Nicknamed Burleigh s Ditch (Harry Burleigh- BUREC) Austin

10 The Quiet Crisis 1963 Presentation to TWC 5 years of good rainfall led to false sense of security TWC Plan to address the Quiet Crisis: Necessary facilities for central / western basins Develop eastern basin supplies, divert flow west Proper use of underground water resources Maintain surface / groundwater quality Plan for the reuse of water inadequate facilities to meet our requirements, and loss of water resources by pollution. JJ Vandertulip

11 Texas Water Planning A State Responsibility Governor Connally August 12, 1964 Drouth conditions and BUREC/COE reports fall short of satisfying the water needs for all of Texas. Congress is considering a water pollution control bill that would supplant state authority concerned that the State exercise its responsibility in all areas of water conservation and development.

12 Governor Connally s 1964 Request Longer-range state plan to evaluate proposed Federal projects Develop comprehensive State Water Plan Explore all reasonable alternatives for development of our water resources to benefit the entire State I will take such additional steps to including necessary funds

13 1968 State Water Plan Wastewater return flows are... an essential and valuable water resource that should be managed and administered conjunctively with other water resources. Water quality control is an integral part of water resource development to enable maximum beneficial use, maximum reuse of waste waters, and to preservethe bays and estuaries. Goal 10: Use return flows and reclaimable waste waters to the maximum feasible extent

14 1968 Plan Included Return Flows and Diversion of Flows methods of renovating return flows for reuse must necessarily be employed. Coastal canal diversion (Burleigh s Ditch) Red River diversions to Pan Handle, West Texas and New Mexico

15 1984 State Water Plan Conservation measures based on technology for reducing municipal and agricultural water use Substitute reclaimed water for potable supplies supported for industrial water Develop unconventional supplies to ensure adequate future supplies Construct 65 idenfied reservoirs increase safe yield by 5.3 MAF (1.0 MAF from capturable sewage return flows)

16 1990 Water for Texas Recommended legislation creating policy unplanned reuse has been common in Texas as treated wastewater is discharged into streams to be later withdrawn as water supply by a downstream user NRC Report identified de facto reuse TWC and THD Implement reclaimed and graywater rules Because of the potential supply volume involved, water reclamation and reuse should be given the same level of consideration as development of additional water resources.

17 1992 Water for Texas (Update) Increasing reuse hampered by lack of: Legislative action on policy to guide water reuse Funding to study stream return flow needs Major constraints to reuse: 1. Legal issues 2. Health issues limits graywater 3. Economic broader view of downstream benefits 4. Institutional structures 5. Public understanding

18 1992 New Issues Water for Texas reuse promotion should notbe to encourage reuse universally and indiscriminately first identify cases where the potential for reuse is greatest, investigate that potential, and if positive, to educate the beneficiaries of its value, reliability and benefit. Cautious approach in 1992 Water importation recognized as prohibitively expensive and politically difficult.

19 1997 Water for Texas A Consensus-Based Update Senate Bill 1 clarified water reuse policy, amended Chapters 210, 295, 297 TAC Direct (reuse prior to discharge) and indirect reuse (use following discharge), bed and banks permits clarified Only direct reuse was considered available for new supply without a new water rights appropriation Statutory guidance on: Temporary water sales Authorization to reuse water Application for interbasin transfer of water

20 2002 Water for Texas Shift in planning emphasis from structural to conservation and water-efficient fixtures Incorporated long-range vision contained in 16 individual regional water plans Demand for surface, groundwater and reuse projected to decrease 18% -19 % by 2050 Water reuse projected to decrease from 340,000 AFY to 280,000 AFY Not resilient predictions

21 2007 Water for Texas Reclaimed water was recognized as a water source that has emerged as a valuable and competitive supply option Planning groups estimated that the existing supply will be approximately 360,000 acre-feet per year in 2010 and will increase slightly to about 370,000 acre-feet per year by 2060 Moving a little forward Plan estimates total water reuse to double from 800,000 AFY to 1.6 MAF in 2060

22 2012 Water for Texas Reduction in groundwater availability from 13.3 MAF in 2010 to 10.1 MAF in 2060 Aquifer recharge considered a resilient approach to reverse decline El Paso IPR as model Supplies (Fig 7.2) Reuse 10.2% Groundwater 8.9% Conservation 23.9% Desal 3.4% ASR 0.9%

23 Meeting the Unmet Demand Projected 2.4 MAF unmet demand in 2060 Reuse projections do not recognize de facto reuse or potential for indirect and direct potable reuse Resilient advanced treatment technologies available to meet the demand Figure EPA Guidelines for Water Reuse Treatment technologies are available to achieve any desired level of water quality

24 Indirect and Direct Potable Reuse Goreangab WTP, Windhoek, Namibia first DPR 1969 Wichita Falls and Big Spring, TX DPR examples Long-term IPR examples: Texas El Paso since 1985 Arizona Scottsdale Water Campus Virginia Upper Occoquan Service Authority-UOSA (36+ years) Georgia Gwinnett County California Los Angeles, (52+ years) Orange County WD (Water Factory 21+GWRP) West Basin MWD El Segundo Vander Lans WTP, Long Beach GREAT, Oxnard South Bay WRP San Jose City of San Diego Demo

25 Changing Times, Attitudes and Language Increased demand for water requires change Planning sustainable water resource solutions Improved technologies/efficiencies in water use Recognizing the words we chose Understanding the value of water Providing right level of treatment to produce second use of valuable product

26 Questions??? Don Vandertulip, PE, BCEE Vandertulip WateReusEngineers 2422 Garden Meadow San Antonio, Texas