Kathryn  A.  Buckner,  President  

Council  of  Great  Lakes  Industries  

 Study  Sponsors  � Great  Lakes  Protec3on  Fund  (GLPF)  

�  Council  of  Great  Lakes  Industries  (CGLI)  �  Na3onal  Council  for  Air  and  Stream  Improvement  (NCASI)  �  LimnoTech  (LTI)  

2  

Industry  needs  water  

Purpose  �  Process  support/transport  media  �  Serve  as  raw  material  �  Support  energy  produc3on  �  Provide  hea3ng  and  cooling  �  Treated  effluent  return  point  

AFributes  �  Withdrawal  volumes  can  be  high  �  Return  flows  oKen  high  �  Low  consump3ve  use  �  Water  quality  is  maintained    

NewPage  Corpora3on's  Escanaba  Paper  Company  Mill  

3  

Water  stewardship  is  important  

�  Relate  withdrawals  to  supply  

� Water  recycling  and  reuse  important  

�  Poten3al  for  impact  is  key  concern  

�  Rela3onships  with  other  users  are  important  

� Governance  plays  a  key  role  

Lake  Michigan  from  Beaver  Island  

4  

Can  water  stewardship  tools  help?  

5  

The  list  of  tools  is  long,  and  growing…..  �  Aquawareness  �  Alliance  for  Water  Stewardship  �  BIER  Water  Footprint  Working  

Group  �  Carbon  Disclosure  Project  -­‐Water  

Disclosure  �  Ceres  Aqua  Gage  �  Corporate  Water  Gauge  �  Federa3on  House  Commitment  

to  Water  Efficiency  �  Global  Environmental  

Management  Ini3a3ve  (GEMI)  �  Global  Repor3ng  Ini3a3ve  

�  Global  Water  Tool  (WBCSD)    �  UNEP/SETAC  Life  Cycle  Ini3a3ve  �  Strategic  Water  Management  

Framework  (Australia  minerals)  �  UN  CEO  Water  Mandate  �  Water  Brief  for  Business  �  Water  Footprint  Network  �  Water  Footprint  Neutrality  and  

Efficiency  Project  (UN)  �  Water  Neutral  Offset  Calculator  �  WaterSense  Cer3fica3on  Scheme  �  ISO  Water  Footprint  Standard  

Source:  NCASI  

6  

Evalua3ng  water  stewardship  tools  �  Explored  Great  Lakes  water  stewardship  priori3es  with  stakeholders  

�  Established  metrics  approach  for  field  tes3ng  

�  Carried  out  field  trials  at  Great  Lakes  industries  

�  VeFed  results  with  mul3-­‐stakeholder  Expert  Panel  

7  

Ini3al  field  trial  results  �  Poten3al  for  significant  value  

�  Context  is  cri3cal  to  defining  value  

�  Some  metrics  redundant,  insufficient  or  missing  

�  Exis3ng  tools  only  par3ally  addressed  water  stewardship  evalua3on  needs  

8  

GLPF:  “What  works  best  in  the  Great  Lakes?”  �  Current  objec3ve:  Find  or  develop  a  tool  people  will  “line  up  to  use.”  

�  Project  elements  �  Establish  characteris3cs  needed  for  tool  

�  Test  tool  elements  at  five  industrial  facili3es  

�  Establish  “home”  or  system  for  tool  use  

9  

Establishing  tool  characteris3cs  �  Extensive  collabora3on  process  �  Industry  stakeholders  �  Water  stewardship  advocates  �  Resource  managers  �  Academics  and  policy  personnel  

� Webinars,  mee3ngs,  and  personal  communica3on  

�  VeFed  through  Expert  Panel  

10  

What  are  the  “Needed  Tool  Characteris3cs?”  

Tool  Characteris.cs   Comments  Support  op(mized  internal  water  use  and  management  Understand  water  withdrawals,  consump3on  and  discharge   Measure  to  manage  Give  and  protect  context  to  numbers  reported   Large  use  may  be  OK  in  abundant  Great  Lakes  Reflect  trends  in  performance  in  water  use   Past  and  future  Understand  costs  associated  with  water  use  and  reduc3ons   Tool  won’t  include  complete  cost/benefit  analysis  Demonstrate  good  water  stewardship  

Assess  and  minimize  impacts  and  risks  of  water  use  Environmental  impacts;  physical,  reputa3onal,  regulatory  risks;  environmental  jus3ce  

Account  for  regulatory  context  and  legal  framework     Reflect  strong  governance,  processes  in  place  

Highlight  water  conserva3on  best  prac3ces  

Recognize  or  accommodate  compe33ve  needs  or  uses  for  capital;  consider  environmental  /energy  tradeoffs;  accommodate  differences  between  sectors  and  facili3es  in  same  sector  

Provide  “stamp  of  approval”/credibility  Full  cer3fica3on  an  op3on  but  not  always  the  end  game  

Report  on/demonstrate  local  facility  external  engagement     In  watershed  planning  and  management  Support  disclosure  and  transparency    Generate  informa3on  for  reports   Avoid  duplica3ve  repor3ng    

Demonstrate  water  management  decision  making  prac3ces  Illustrate  examples  and  communicate  with  stakeholders  

Respond  to  other  water  use  and  impacts  inquiries   Make  sure  data  not  used  out  of  context  Support  Great  Lakes  economic  development  

Communicate  poten3al  for  sustainable  use  Demonstrate  poten3al  for  posi3ve  or  neutral  influence  on  water  resources  

Highlight  social  and  economic  benefits  of  water  use   But  not  in  units  of  water  volume  (not  $/gal)  11  

Challenges  for  the  tool  Ultimately,  the  tool  must  ……..  

Demonstrate  value  to  industries     Need  to  know  “what  will  I  get  out  of  it?”    

Create  something  easy  to  use   Resources  are  limited  

Leverage  existing  tools  and  frameworks   Don’t  recreate  the  wheel  

Integrate/collate  available  data   Access  existing  data  collected  for  legal  requirements  

Make  sure  it’s  flexible   Account  for  variability  in  operations  &  across  sectors  

Serve  as  vehicle  for  common  dialogue    Provide  clarity,  improve  communications;  concerns  over  “worst”  or  “best”  comparisons;  may  include  a  glossary  of  terms.  

Protect  confidentiality  needs  of  industry   Results  will  be  public,  possible  barrier  for  industry  

Provide  a  voluntary  tool  that  should  not  lead  to  regulatory  use.   Don’t  want  this  to  be  a  barrier  for  use  

Develop  something  that  can  be  applied  to  an  individual  facility  or  group  of  facilities  

Improvements  may  be  more  apparent  than  on  facility-­‐basis  

Be  consistent  with  Compact  and  minimize  redundancy  with  State  tools  for  water  use  reporting.   Regulators  are  not  seeking  a  new  tool  

Recognize  the  tool  could  affect  positive  behaviors  by  users  and  potential  users  

The  tool  may  illustrate  good  stewardship  practices  for  others  

 

12  

Tools  vs.  characteris3cs  �  Field  tests  being  used  to  test  tool  inputs/outputs  against  needed  characteris3cs  

�  Is  AWS  the  answer?  � Metrics  mapping  exercise  conducted  

� A  “hybrid  approach”  has  been  adopted  for  field  test  work  

13  

14  

AWS  Core  Criteria  

AWS  

Characteris.cs  of  derived  tool  

AWS  Core  and  Advanced  Level  Criteria  

Overlap:  Tool  Characteris3cs/AWS  IWSS  

Team  Feedback  to  AWS  Developers  X  

X  

X  

X  

X  X  

X  

GL  Tool-­‐Specific  Criteria  

X  X  

X  

X   Overlapping  indicators  /  metrics  

+  +   +  +  +   +   Addi(onal  metrics  to  add  

X  

X  

X  

X  

X X XX

+  

Not  relevant  

15  

Preliminary  observa3ons  � Water  stewardship  can  be  an  element  of  broader  sustainability  efforts  

�  Corporate  objec3ves  vs.  local  facility  needs  may  differ  –  individual  facili3es  can  be  at  various  stages  of  stewardship  development  

� Desirable  to  use  governance  compliance  ac3ons  to  sa3sfy  tool  criteria  

 

16  

Preliminary  observa3ons  �  Important  to  evaluate  return  on  op3ons  vs.  taking  a  direct  goal  sejng  approach  �  Some  op3ons  may  “reduce  water  use”  but  offer  few  addi3onal  benefits  

� Water  stewardship  projects  must  compete  for  funding  with  other  projects  

�  Communi3es  may  priori3ze  sustainability  measures  geared  towards  economic  stability  

 

How  can  tools  accommodate  these  issues?    

17  

Primary  Project  Purpose    

To  iden3fy,  package,  or  create  water  stewardship  tool(s)  for  use  by  Great  Lakes  

industry  

18  

THANK  YOU!      

Council  of  Great  Lakes  Industries      

Kathryn  A.  Buckner  President  

kabuckner@cgli.org  734-­‐663-­‐1944  

 Dale  K.  Phenicie  

Technical/Projects  Director  dkphenicie@cgli.org  

 770  487-­‐7585