Water. desalination + reuse

Water Reuse: Drivers, Innovations and Public Perceptions October 2017 Executive summary 5 on rainwater harvesting, "rainwater harvesting and reuse," chemicals supplier, country manager, Asia Paci c; to the downright radical, "throw all drugs into the trash and not down the sink," project manager, engineering consultancy, Americas. Technology On technology, respondents scored the level of e• ectiveness of eight di• erent types of tech potentially applicable to reuse. The resulting ranking was unsurprising in that reverse osmosis (RO) topped the list with an enthusiastic score of eight out of 10 points, buoyed by respondents working in the Americas, who rated RO at 8.11, and those working in Asia Paci c, who scored it 8.05. In second place, ultra ltration (UF) was considered a more e• ective technology by respondents whose roles cover Asia Paci c, where it scores 7.12 out of a possible 10 points, compared to the overall average score of 6.81. Those who indicate that they work in the municipal sector also score UF higher than average, at 7.09. Membrane bioreactor technology was ranked as the third most e• ective technology in water reuse overall, scoring 6.17 out of a possible 10 points. Perspectives on its e• ectiveness were more positive among respondents who work in the Americas, Asia Paci c and Europe, where it scored 6.40, 6.41 and 6.34 respectively, compared to those working in MEA where it scored 5.96. Membrane bioreactor technology was seen as more e• ective by those who say they work in the municipal sector, where it scored 6.35 out of 10, compared to those working in the industrial sector, among whom it scores 6.27. Public perceptions In the comments on barriers to reuse, public opinions were repeatedly cited, from the general, "human perception," director, engineering consultancy, Asia Paci c; to the many comments focused on public understanding, such as "lack of proper education," consultant, municipality, Americas; to those picking up on public fears about about potential health risks, "sanitary concern," chief/ head of department, university, Europe. Public opinion was considered a stronger barrier to reuse where water is for drinking or irrigating food crops. Survey respondents considered public perceptions the biggest barrier by far in the case of direct potable reuse (DPR), scoring this at 3.94 out of a possible ve points, with 54.60 per cent of respondents seeing it as a "very strong" barrier. The score for public opinion as a barrier to DPR rises to 3.94 for those who work in the municipal sector. Public opinions on indirect potable reuse (IDPR) were rated second highest as a barrier, scoring 2.87 out of a possible ve points – meaning that it scores somewhere in between a "weak" and "mid-level" barrier. Again scores were higher for those working in the municipal sector, at 2.99. The score for public opinion as a barrier to water reuse for crop irrigation was 2.32 out of a possible ve. For the other two uses – industrial, and parks and golf courses – the scores were less than two points each, namely somewhere between a "very weak" and "weak" barrier, suggesting that the big concern in the industry is around public perceptions as they relate to DPR, and to a lesser extent IDPR. Asked what is most likely to be e• ective in improving public perceptions, respondents rated existing successful projects highest, with a score of 3.95 out of a possible ve. This was followed a close second by clear regulatory guidelines at 3.94, and public education on water scarcity at 3.89. Market outlook The various barriers and challenges do not appear to have dampened the industry's optimisim on the outlook for the water reuse market. Growth in water reuse revenues is expected to be 29 per cent on average in the 12 months ending 30 June 2018. Respondents whose role covers Asia Paci c and/ or MEA region(s) are the most bullish, pegging their growth expectations at 30 per cent in the coming year, while those working in the Americas anticipate growth of 28 per cent, and in Europe, it's 24 per cent. There was a di• erence in outlook between those working across the three di• erent sectors: those in agriculture are by far the most bullish, expecting 39 per cent growth, for industrial its 32 per cent, and in the municipal sector 28 per cent.

• Cover