Showing posts with label resilience. Show all posts
Showing posts with label resilience. Show all posts

11 February, 2013

Sustainable & Resilient Water & Sewerage Infrasturcture





EPBC

A Senate inquiry is underway into a Bill that amends the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 to prevent the Commonwealth from handing responsibility for approving proposed actions that significantly impact matters protected under the EPBC Act to a State or Territory.






Sustainable & Resilient Water & Sewerage Infrastructure

Engineering Consultants: Arup have provided some interesting commentary on properly understanding resilience following on from natural disasters.   The rationale: knowing if replacement infrastructure will be any more resilient than that which it replaces.

David Singleton has been asking on twitter: "what do you think are the key planks of ?"

If water and sewerage infrastructure is to be truly sustainable, one needs a way to understand what resilient infrastructure looks like.  One also needs a way to compare infrastructure designs and systems to achieve the most resilient outcome. Sustainability ratings tools have the potential to do this.

It is no longer enough to merely say that one is ‘building green’.  Australian consumer law is clear on the obligations regarding environmental claims under the Competition and Consumer Act 2010.  Manufacturers, suppliers, advertisers and others are required to assess the strength of any environmental claims.  Claims have to be demonstrated and certified.  Methods of measuring sustainability are vital.  There is also a renaissance in driving sustainability up and down one’s supply chain.

The Green Building Council of Australia’s Green Star environmental rating system for buildings and communities and the Australian Green Infrastructure Council’s IS rating scheme for infrastructure setting benchmarks.  Ratings tools allow one to assess and certify best practice.  
These ratings credentials will demonstrate that one can create better water and sewerage infrastructure for communities and cities in Australia. 
There are also opportunities to export these skills.  Sustainability ratings tools will be vital if Australians are to realise the opportunities from the current scale and pace of urbanisation in Asia.

The Australian Government’s recently-releasedAustralia in the Asian Centurywhite paper points to the fact that Asia will soon be home to the majority of the world’s middle class, all of whom need water and sewage networks, treatment infrastructure and utilities.  In the wake of recent natural disasters like Hurricane Sandy and the Queensland floods, major infrastructure programmes are planned or are underway in several countries.

The Great Stink in the summer of 1858, the city of London (an overwhelming stench from the River Thames, that shut down Parliament) led to the construction of sewer in London.  Infrastructure investment decisions have long-term consequences, as the assets can shape development for decades – often beyond their lifetime.  So decisions on infrastructure should anticipate the long-term environment, needs and constraints under which it will function.

However, our ability to predict the future has been shown to be limited.  Climate change is introducing deep uncertainty that makes this even more difficult. The environmental conditions under which infrastructure performs are likely to change radically and its design needs to take this into account.

Sustainability thinking is crucial for making clear the connections between the infrastructure project and the local and wider society, economy, environment and businesses. It is also vital to spotting where these connections could cause serious vulnerabilities that put the entire system at risk. Ensuring that these connections are elastic, adaptable and resilient will benefit society, the economy and the environment.

Rating tools not only provide a way to determine an infrastructure asset's sustainability, they also enable comparison of the sustainability of different assets, or of different design solutions for a single asset. While the principal use for these tools is to determine the asset's rating, they can also be used – informally – in 'design' mode.

Using ratings tools to understand resilience is an important area for the development of infrastructure sustainability tools. Significant progress will be made in this direction over the next years, as ratings organisations and universities (University of Leeds Institute for Resilient Infrastructure for example) develop the means to measure water and sewerage infrastructure resilience.

30 Year Water Strategy Policy Reference Group

How can Australians lead by example to ensure affordable, secure, sustainable water and sewerage services in our own communities and developing communities?


On Tuesday 5th March 2013 from 12 noon until 2pm ASBG are organising a policy reference group for ASBG members to discuss the discussion paper, hosted by Aurecon.

The Department of Energy and Water Supply has launched a discussion paper to guide the development of a 30 Year Water Sector Strategy to ensure affordable, secure, sustainable and high quality water and sewerage services across Queensland. Submissions close Friday 29 March 2013.

The Queensland Water Sector Discussion Paper is designed to facilitate active discussion and participation in creating a new path for Queensland’s water future in urban, rural, regional and remote communities.

If you wish to attend the forum at Aurecon, please RSVP to rowan@asbg.net.au

13 June, 2011

What is Sustainable Sanitation?





In light of the earthquakes in Christchurch, floods in Brisbane & elsewhere.....it is apparent that modern centralised sewerage & sewage treatment systems are particularly vulnerable to earthquakes & floods.

I seriously believe we need to re-think the strategy of mixing our poo with our wee & diluting it with vast quantities of 'food-grade' water, then transporting the slurry over vast distances, only to have to separate the poo, wee & water at the other end of the pipe with energy intensive processes.



The following article is reposted from the SuSana website.....


The main objective of a sanitation system is to protect and promote human health by providing a clean environment and breaking the cycle of disease. In order to be sustainable, a sanitation system has to be not only economically viable, socially acceptable, and technically and institutionally appropriate, it should also protect the environment and the natural resources.

When improving an existing and/or designing a new sanitation system, sustainability criteria related to the following aspects should be considered:
  1. Health and hygiene: includes the risk of exposure to pathogens and hazardous substances that could affect public health at all points of the sanitation system from the toilet via the collection and treatment system to the point of reuse or disposal and downstream populations. This topic also covers aspects such as hygiene, nutrition and improvement of livelihood achieved by the application of a certain sanitation system, as well as downstream effects.
  2. Environment and natural resources: involves the required energy, water and other natural resources for construction, operation and maintenance of the system, as well as the potential emissions to the environment resulting from its use. It also includes the degree of recycling and reuse practiced and the effects of these (e.g. reusing wastewater; returning nutrients and organic material to agriculture), and the protection of other non-renewable resources, e.g. through the production of renewable energies (such as biogas).
  3. Technology and operation: incorporates the functionality and the ease with which the entire system including the collection, transport, treatment and reuse and/or final disposal can be constructed, operated and monitored by the local community and/or the technical teams of the local utilities. Furthermore, the robustness of the system, its vulnerability towards power cuts, water shortages, floods, earthquakes etc. and the flexibility and adaptability of its technical elements to the existing infrastructure and to demographic and socio-economic developments are important aspects.
  4. Financial and economic issues: relate to the capacity of households and communities to pay for sanitation, including the construction, operation, maintenance and necessary reinvestments in the system. Besides the evaluation of these direct costs also direct benefits e.g. from recycled products (soil conditioner, fertiliser, energy and reclaimed water) and external costs and benefits have to be taken into account. Such external costs are e.g. environmental pollution and health hazards, while benefits include increased agricultural productivity and subsistence economy, employment creation, improved health and reduced environmental risks.
  5. Socio-cultural and institutional aspects: the criteria in this category refer to the socio-cultural acceptance and appropriateness of the system, convenience, system perceptions, gender issues and impacts on human dignity, the contribution to food security, compliance with the legal framework and stable and efficient institutional settings.

Most sanitation systems have been designed with these aspects in mind, but in practice they fail far too often because some of the criteria are not met. In fact, there is probably no system which is absolutely sustainable. The concept of sustainability is more of a direction rather than a stage to reach. Nevertheless, it is crucial, that sanitation systems are evaluated carefully with regard to all dimensions of sustainability. Since there is no one-for-all sanitation solution which fulfils the sustainability criteria in different circumstances to the same extent, this system evaluation will depend on the local framework and has to take into consideration existing environmental, technical, socio-cultural and economic conditions. Taking into consideration the entire range of sustainability criteria, it is important to observe some basic principles when planning and implementing a sanitation system. These were already developed some years ago by a group of experts and were endorsed by the members of the Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council as the "Bellagio Principles for Sustainable Sanitation" during its 5th Global Forum in November 2000:

  1. Human dignity, quality of life and environmental security at household level should be at the centre of any sanitation approach.
  2. In line with good governance principles, decision making should involve participation of all stakeholders, especially the consumers and providers of services.
  3. Waste should be considered a resource, and its management should be holistic and form part of integrated water resources, nutrient flow and waste management processes.
  4. The domain in which environmental sanitation problems are resolved should be kept to the minimum practicable size (household, neighbourhood, community, town, district, catchment, city).