Water utility of the future: a case study of conservation as a service

INTRODUCTION: Water utilities serving growing populations in dry climates face challenges in balancing increasing water demand with scarce supplies. New water supply sources are increasingly expensive and require construction of additional infrastructure for treatment and delivery. This poses a challenge for utilities to balance revenues and costs to remain financially viable. As a result, water utilities may face a difficult choice. If the utility chooses to develop new water supplies, they will have to increase their rates. However, they can also choose to assess alternative supply and demand management strategies to match revenues with the increasing marginal costs. Approaches such as water reuse, rainwater or condensate harvesting or harnessing other alternative sources are becoming increasingly widespread. Nonetheless, it is important to continuously assess and implement demand conservation programs, which often prove relatively quick, low-cost and straightforward to implement. [TRUNCATED

One Water strategies for New Braunfels Utilities

INTRODUCTION: In February of 2017, Boston University’s Institute for Sustainable Energy (ISE) and the Cynthia and George Mitchell Foundation (CGMF) initiated a multi-year project that aims to understand how water utilities in Texas cities can apply the principles of One Water to address the challenges of increasing urban populations, supply changes, and aging water infrastructure. Since summer 2018, the ISE team has engaged with New Braunfels Utility (NBU) to understand the opportunities relating to One Water for them as a mid-size utility serving a rapidly growing population. The One Water paradigm spans potable water, wastewater, and storm water, and considers opportunities for water sourcing, treatment, and use holistically. Discussions around One Water often focus on supply side strategies, such as how water reuse or rainwater harvesting can provide alternate sources of water. However, demand management and water conservation also play a role in One Water by promoting sustainability, resilience, and reducing the need for additional gray infrastructure. Ultimately, NBU may explore many strategies related to One Water. We chose to focus on demand reduction due to the utility’s concern over potentially large increases in New Braunfels’ water demand in the coming years. The ISE team analyzed meter-level data and also pumping data from NBU. We benchmarked NBU water demand, analyzed the demand by type of account, and identified the demand distribution by account. The findings led us to revisit projections of future water demand and generate a new demand projection that suggests demand growth may be slower than previously anticipated. While NBU’s supplies are more than sufficient to meet projected demand through 2030, there are other benefits to effective demand management and water conservation practices. Consequently, ISE developed recommendations for a targeted outreach program to high consumers and to promote rebates to developers. We also drafted ordinance revisions related to watering violations

Integrated urban water management in Texas: a review to inform a one water approach for the future

Texas has considerable experience grappling with historic droughts as well as flooding associated with tropical storms and hurricanes, yet the State’s water management challenges are projected to increase. Urban densification, increased frequency and severity of droughts and floods, aging infrastructure, and a management system that is not reflective of the true cost of water all influence water risk. Integrated urban water management strategies, like ‘One Water’, represent an emerging management paradigm that emphasizes the interconnectedness of water throughout the water cycle and capitalizes on opportunities that arise from this holistic viewpoint. Here, we review water management practices in five Texas cities and examine how the One Water approach could represent a viable framework to maintain a reliable, sustainable, and affordable water supply for the future. We also examine financial and business models that establish a foundational pathway towards the ‘utility of the future’ and the One Water paradigm more broadly

Key takeaways from partnership and innovative financing visioning labs

INTRODUCTION: The goals of this project were to increase the ambition of cities in the UK and the U.S. to set and achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions targets, to encourage more cities to commit to the UNFCCC “Race to Zero” in advance of COP 26 in November 2021, and to promote cross learning and collaboration between U.S. and UK cities. To support this, the Boston University Institute for Sustainable Energy (BU ISE) worked with the UK Government to deliver two virtual roundtables, branded as visioning labs to emphasize the interactivity, which convened stakeholders from city government, academia, and net zero experts from North America and the UK. The visioning labs convened a total of 51 stakeholders including representatives of 28 cities. [TRUNCATED]This report was made possible through funding by the UK Government, and with contributions from city, academic, and nonprofit climate leaders across the UK and North America whom were interviewed and/or attended the visioning labs on February 17 and 18. A full list of stakeholders is below. Thank you to our collaborators at the UK Government and UK Science & Innovation Network, including Consul General Dr. Peter Abbott OBE, Kristin Kelleher, Ella Fejer, Thomas Christensen, and Ronit Prawer, and our partners at MetroLab Network, PCAN, and C40 Cities

A survey of North American city climate leaders: the prospects for climate action in the COVID-19 era

In the final report of our three-part series, the Boston University Institute for Sustainable Energy presents the results of a survey of 25 U.S. and Canadian city climate leaders, conducted in July and August 2020, to assess the current priority of city climate action in the context of the pandemic. We surveyed twenty-five U.S. and Canadian city climate leaders in July and August 2020 to assess the current priority of city climate action in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Our key findings are summarized below. 1. Climate Action Still a Priority 2. Equity Takes Center Stage but Lacks a Clear Roadmap 3. Immediate Climate Action Can Advance Health, Equity, and Economic Recovery 4. Supporting Public Health and Mobility Increase in Importance 5. Decarbonization Programs and Ecosystem Support are Sustained 6. Community Engagement and Communication Continue to Challenge

More urgency, not less: The COVID-19 pandemic’s lessons for local climate leadership

This report is the first of three that will provide community leaders, inside and outside of local government, with guidance about navigating their climate action priorities through the gauntlet of challenges created by the COVID-19 pandemic and the ensuing economic crisis. Each document, based on a synthesis of expertise and analysis of local climate action options and current research, will address a different topic: 1. Why local climate action needs more urgency, not less; 2. How the pandemic response creates opportunities and risks for local climate action, and how socially vulnerable populations can benefit from purposeful responses to the pandemic and climate change; and, 3. Which local climate actions should be a priority for federal funding

Climate of crisis: how cities can use climate action to close the equity gap, drive economic recovery, and improve public health

This report is the second of three that provides community leaders, inside and outside of local government, with guidance about navigating their climate-action priorities through the gauntlet of challenges created by the COVID-19 pandemic and the ensuing economic crisis. Each report, based on a synthesis of peer-reviewed research, expert interviews, and the analysis of local climate action, address a different topic: 1. More Urgency, Not Less: The COVID-19 Pandemic’s Lessons for Local Climate Leadership (Published June 2020) 2. Climate of Crisis: How Cities Can Use Climate Action to Close the Equity Gap, Drive Economic Recovery, and Improve Public Health (Published September 2020) 3. A Survey of U.S. City Climate Leaders: The Prospects for Climate Action in the COVID-19 Era (October 2020) This work is supported by The Summit Foundation and The Grantham Foundation for the Protection of the Environment

One Water demand management: rethinking ratemaking

This report describes work done with New Braunfels Utilities by the Boston University Institute for Sustainable Energy. The work was carried out as part of a broad initiative on One Water opportunities in Texas funded by the Cynthia and George Mitchell Foundation.Many cities in the U.S. are experiencing population growth, causing water demand to grow and straining existing water supplies and infrastructure. Demand management offers opportunities for water utility rate structures to support the One Water approach, also known as integrated water management. ISE’s analysis in One Water Demand Management: Rethinking Ratemaking: - Helps water utilities to assess the interplay between ratemaking, water demand, and water conservation. - Advances consideration of equity for low-income customers in the new rate structure presented. - Presents a new rate structure case study for New Braunfels Utilities (NBU) in Texas to simultaneously increase revenue, encourage water demand management, and maintain equity.This work was carried out as part of a broad initiative on One Water opportunities in Texas funded by the Cynthia and George Mitchell Foundation

Linking field experiments to long-term simulation of impacts of nitrogen deposition on heathlands and moorlands

The results from three long-term field manipulation studies of the impacts of increased nitrogen deposition (0–120 kg N ha–1 yr–1) on lowland and upland heathlands in the UK were compared, to test if common responses are observed. Consistent increases in Calluna foliar N content and decreases in litter C:N ratios were found across all sites, while increases in N leaching were not observed at any site over the range 0–80 kg ha–1 yr–1. However, the response of Calluna biomass did vary between sites, possibly reflecting site differences in nutrient status and management histories. Five versions of a simulation model of heathland responses to N were developed, each reflecting different assumptions about the fate and turnover of soil N. Model outputs supported the deduction from mass balance calculations at two of the field sites that N additions have resulted in an increase in immobilisation; the latter was needed to prevent the model overestimating measured N leaching. However, this version of the model significantly underestimated Calluna biomass. Model versions, which included uptake of organic N by Calluna and re-mobilisation of N from the soil organic store provided some improvement in the fit between modelled and field biomass data, but re-mobilisation also led to an overestimation of N leaching. Quantification of these processes and their response to increased N deposition are therefore critical to interpreting experimental data and predicting the long-term impacts of atmospheric deposition on heathlands and moorlands