implementation of the urban wastewater treatment directive...
TRANSCRIPT
Directive 91/271/CE
Implementation of the Urban
Wastewater Treatment Directive
in France
Bruno RakedjianUWWTD programme manager for the French Ministry
of Environment between 2007 and 2013 UWWTD programme manager for the DG ENV of the EC
between July 2013 and July 2017
2
Why it is important to implement it
UWWTD Implementation
When Peru had a cholera outbreak in 1991, losses from tourism and agricultural revenue were three
times greater than the total money spent on sanitation in the previous
decade.
Rose George, Journalist and author
unclean water and poor sanitation are the world's second biggest killers of children
(2011).Inadequate water supply and sanitation cost economies $260 billion worldwide every year
(2015).
Ban Ki-moon, UN Secretary-General.
It is not strange that health improves when the population gives up using
diluted sewage as the principle beverage.
Dr. Thurman Rice, 1932.
Teacher à University of Indiana Schoolof Medicine
Avoid pathogen and chemical contaminations
to protectthe environment
and the health of people
3
Situation in 2007
UWWTD Implementation
UWWTD directive deadlines 1998 – 2000 – 2005
2006: 20 % of the treatment plants not compliant
In 2007,infringement procedures:
France at risk to be sentenced by
the European court of justice to
pay a fine of about 400 million
euros
UWWTD Implementation
• Lack of human resources, skill and willingness
in some of the water utilities (35 160 water andsanitation utilities)
• Lack of political support from the highest level
of the state
• Bad coordination between the different levels
of the French Government and Basin Agencies
• Poor knowledge about the real situation
• Local opposition to some of the projects
• Underestimation of the costs
(€16 billion estimated in 1994, €90 billion spent from 1990 to 2014)
4
Why was France late to comply?
• Creation of a national database and tools for monitoringand reporting
• Coercive and financial measures
• Implementation action plan with indicators
• Establish a coherent national and local implementationsystem with strong political support and designatedpeople at each administrative level
• Comprehensive training program and “hotline”
• Hiring of a senior sanitation expert to frequently monitorimplementation on the ground
5
Decisionstaken
UWWTD Implementation
6
National financialand technical support
UWWTD Implementation
11,6 billions euros subsidies and loans (2007 – 2012)
(60% sanitation, 11% drinking water, 10% management of local policies)
13,3 billions euros subsidies and loans (2013 - 2018)
(50% sanitation)
UWWTPs
subsidies between 30% and 45% of the total amount
Collecting systems
Subsidies between 20 and 35% of the total amount
Origin of the RBA budget
(Exemple of RMC, 9th programme)• 70%households• 19% local authorities• 7% industries• 1% agriculture• 3% pesticides• 1% other
RBA resource on the water bill
between 35 and 70 cents/m3
Solidarity between urban and rural areas in the same river bassin
River basin agencies RBA (since 1964)
7
National financial and technical support
UWWTD Implementation
The national water agencyONEMA ---> AFB (2017 biodiversity French Agency)
Missions of AFB
-The financial solidarity to the benefit of
Corsica and French ultramarine territories
20 millions euros subsidies each year
- Knowledge and national information system
- Water Research
The budget comes from the 6 rivers basin agencies
120 millions euros each year
Need to set up clear prioritiesfor urban waste water treatment
plants (UWWTP) works
8
DashboardsUWWTD Implementation
2007
2012
2013
2010 - Creation of a national urban waste water website
9
TransparencyUWWTD Implementation
http://assainissement.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/
A European reference:
500-600 visitors per day
A source of knowledge (data, indicators, regulation,...)
Created a positive implementation dynamic
Phosphorus removal lakes an fresh waters
Nitrogen and phosphorus removal coastal areas
10
Sensitive areasUWWTD Implementation
Chorophyll a concentration NASA 29 March 2017
11
Treatmentimplemented in 2012
UWWTD Implementation
12
Treatment implementedin France in 2015
UWWTD Implementation
Training support provided to help design systems:
Information on good practices
Information on what to study to determineand compare possible solutions
UWWTD Implementation
13
Advice given to French local authorities
Advice given to French local authorities
UWWTD Implementation
Collective or individual sanitation system (IAS) ?
Distance between houses, urban planning, geological layers, costs,…
What about IAS ?
14
Good practice about IAS
UWWTD Implementation
1
French does not have accurate information at nationallevel and does not report this information to EU. Irelandhas decided to report 5% for each agglomeration
• IAS in isolated areas does not pollute a lot compared to farmanimals and discharge of waste water of collecting systemswithout treatments.
• It is difficult at national level to have accurate information onthat. It is more difficult at EU level.
• Reporting more IAS is a way to reduce estimations of dischargeswithout treatment before collection for countries that havereported this information.
• Better management of IAS have to be implemented in a mid-term perspective.
Advice given to French local authorities
UWWTD Implementation
One UWWTP or several UWWTPs ?
Costs, size of the agglomeration, variation of altitudes,Sanitation system history, water body acceptance…
Where to build the UWWTP?
Take into account proximity of houses (noise, smells), flooding risk, protected areas, slope of the city,…
16
UWWTD Implementation
Which technology?
Performance requested, investment and operationcosts, operation complexity,Lots of different technologies with advanges anddisadvantages.Has to be compatible with potential futurimprovement.
17
Advice given to French local authorities
UWWTD Implementation
Which Design for the UWWTP?
Take into account the next ten years and leave possibilities of extension. Peak week has to be treated (tourism activity, rainevents, industrial discharges,…)Consider that extending the network and connectingall the buildings will take years, limiting flow to WWTPTake into account the basic measures requested by the UWWTD but also water quality objectives
18
Advice given to French local authorities
FrenchStatistics
UWWTD Implementation
French statistics about urban waste water 2014• Citizens : 66 million• Agglomerations : 19 400 (3 200 >= 2000 p.e.)• Generated load: 78 million p.e.• Design capacity: 102 million p.e.• Pipe lenght: 380 000 km• Volume of urban waste water: 5 billion m3/year• Investment in collecting systems : €2.5 billion• Investment in UWWTPs: €1.5 billion• Operation costs (with depreciation): €6.6 billion• Water bill (in 2013): €3.85/m3 (Water: €2;WW: €1.85)
19
UWWTD Implementation
About 210 billion euros
30 billion euros for UWWTPs
(300 € /pe x 100 million p.e)
114 billion euros for the collecting systems
(300 € /m x 380 000 km)
• 30 billion for pipe connection (building to CS)
(2000 € /connection x 15 million houses)
• 36 billion for individual sanitation systems
(9000 € per device x 4 million houses)
An investment of 3 150 € /person/50 years
(65 €/citizen/year)20
Rough estimation of the Sanitation Asset in France
Main results in France
UWWTD Implementation
21
Geneva Lake Phosphorus from 1955 to 2015 Estuary of Seine Ammonium 1970 to 2015
Estuary of Seine Eutrophication risk 1970 to 2015 Fish in Seine river
Main results in France and the EU
UWWTD Implementation
22BOD In rivers EEA website
1993 2012
Preliminaryresults in Bulgaria
UWWTD Implementation
2323
Iskar 8
Iskar 7
Iskar 6
Good practice about the deadlines
UWWTD Implementation
French experience shows that:• It took longer than anticipated to reach compliance;• Willingness and momentum are needed in the long
run (5-6 yrs to build large WWTPs + 3-5 years toachieve the last connections to the network);
• Mid/long term planning better for the economy andindustrial/building sector
25
ConclusionUWWTD Implementation
Reasons for France’s success to comply with UWWTD:
• National database and website for information dissemination
• Implementation action plan and indicators (yearly updated)
• Clear priorities (biggest agglomerations first)
• National regulation that does not over-translate EU regulation
• Financial instruments with clear allocation criteria (e.g. readiness)
• Coherent national and local organisation in place with support from thehighest political level and resource people at each sub-administrative level
• National manager that is also able to discuss solutions with localauthorities
• Comprehensive capacity-building programme and “hotline”
• Documentation and dissemination of best practices
• For each project studies looking at possible alternatives to determine themost cost efficient solution
