Water & Wastewater Treatment Magazine
Issue link: https://fhpublishing.uberflip.com/i/1094482
8 | APRIL 2019 | WWT | www.wwtonline.co.uk The Talk: opinion JAMES BROCKETT, EDITOR, WATER & WASTEWATER TREATMENT (WWT) The dosing backstop Despite the security provided by phosphate dosing, it's now time to grasp the nettle on lead supply pipe replacement T his issue of WWT sees us return to the subject of a familiar foe for the water industry – lead piping, and the water quality issues it can cause. It's remarkable to think that as we approach the 50th anniversary of the banning of lead piping for use in conveying potable water that we are still talking about the topic. Yet the fact remains that there are hundreds of thousands of lead pipes still out there connecting up people's homes, and an unknown number of older houses which still have elements of lead in their internal plumbing. Removal and replacement is the only long-term solution to eliminating the problem, and as is noted in our feature starting on page 13, many people expect it to take at least another 25 years – if not another 50 – to achieve a lead-free future. In the meantime, orthophosphate dosing provides a security blanket for the water industry and the public against quality failures and health problems – a backstop, if you like – yet it is an incomplete patch-up to the problem which has unwelcome side- eƒ ects. Lead quality failures still occur, albeit in smaller numbers than would otherwise be the case, and putting phosphates in our water not only depletes a … nite resource but makes our wastewater more phosphorus- rich, causing environmental problems downstream. It's not surprising that the Drinking Water Inspectorate has bemoaned that phosphate dosing, like that other backstop that has been in the news, is a 'temporary solution that has become permanent'. It doesn't have to be this way. If granted suˆ cient money from Ofwat, water companies would be more than capable of replacing the remaining communication pipes that are their responsibility within a few years – and indeed many are well on the way to achieving this. The problem lies with the pipes that are the householder's responsibility, particularly the underground supply pipes that are within a property's boundary but largely inaccessible to the resident. Half a century's evidence has shown that relying on homeowners to check the materials of their pipes and actively request and pay for their replacement is a very slow route indeed. Grasping the nettle by giving water companies jurisdiction over supply pipes – and the money to intervene eƒ ectively – would surely be a quicker route to achieving consistently safe water that would allow unsustainable dosing to be switched oƒ . Savings in the cost of chemicals, and in tertiary wastewater treatment, may even mean that it is a smarter whole-life cost solution as well as being the right thing to do for people's health and the environment. Unfortunately, there's unlikely to be the political will to take this step any time soon, unless perhaps governmental and regulatory hands are forced by a tightened lead limit in the EU's Drinking Water Directive. So, will extra pressure applied from Europe be enough to persuade the UK to stop clinging to the security of its backstop? Watch this space. EXPERT VIEW SPONSORED BY MARTIN LAMBLEY, STORMWATER PROJECT MANAGER, WAVIN Can SuDs add value for new developments? It's time for all water's stakeholders to stop thinking SuDS are somebody else's problem and to be part of the solution S uDs (sustainable drainage systems) are nothing new - we have been discussing them as the way forward for around twenty years. Mimicking how nature works by managing surface water at source and using a range of structures to slow, store and … lter it rather than collecting it in a pipe and moving it downstream, just makes sense. Most will agree that the wider integration of SuDS could be the answer to some of the challenges we face around — ooding and climate resilience for the future, but there is yet to be a joined up and systematic approach to SuDS implementation on a wide scale. Part of the problem has been a lack of eƒ ective legislation. The Flood and Water Management Act 2010 included a framework to standardise the adoption of SuDS, but under pressure from various groups, the government eventually opted for a watered-down system that gave room from avoidance. The new Sewers for Adoption 8th edition, which is due to be released this year, gives further hope to the SuDS community but still may not be enough on its own to push SuDS into the mainstream. I believe that one of the reasons for this is that we don't really consider the true value of water. It is so simple to turn on a tap or — ush a toilet and we don't oœ en really think about what happens to all the water when it rains. Without this understanding and buy in from the many diƒ erent stakeholders involved, increasing the uptake of SuDS is always going to be an uphill battle. In comparison to energy, water management is much less considered as a 'value add' for property developers. The value of water is rarely quanti… ed and linked to a … nancial … gure in the same way as energy. Back in 2013, the government published … gures stating that increasing the EPC (energy performance certi… cate) for a property could increase its value by 14% on average and up to 38% in some parts of the UK. For new developments energy performance is a key consideration with a drive for smart buildings and new innovations aimed at optimising energy usage. Of course, the value of water is not just about the price of a house, it runs much deeper! The four pillars of SuDS highlight how a successful SuDS scheme can improve water quality, the biodiversity of the local area and amenities for its communities, improving quality of life as well as resilience from extreme weather events. Ultimately, all of these things can help to increase the desirability of a property, therefore increasing its value. The problem is that this value is yet to be fully quanti… ed, in a way that maximises stake holder buy in. In addition, I think that to really add value, SuDS need to be an integral part of the building design, not just an aœ erthought or added extra. Ensuring that they form part of the overall landscape will allow them to realise their full potential. It is time to stop thinking it's someone else's problem and start being part of the solution!