Water Research Foundation Report
2 total works
Evaluating Water Loss and Planning Loss Reduction Strategies
by Paul Fanner
Published 31 August 2007
A comprehensive literature search was done on all aspects of water loss management. Standardization of water loss accounting was desirable due to widely varying reporting and evaluation methods prevalent in North America. The International Water Association's Manual of Best Practice Performance Indicators for Water Supply Services (2000) was the most valuable method of water loss accounting. However, some minor modifications of the methodology were necessary for North American utilities.
The research also found that there was no simple, standardized methodology for analyzing the economic level of leakage (ELL), but several good methods are described in detail in the report. A slightly modified IWA methodology for water loss accounting is presented, with each component of the water balance accompanied with a comprehensive definition. This ensures water balances created using this process have comparable results. Due to the widely varying definitions of "unaccounted-for water," it is strongly recommended that use of this term cease. The report strongly recommends against the use of the percentage of system input performance indicator for the management of real losses. This is because this indicator is highly influenced by the volume of consumption, which is not related to real loss volumes.
A range of new performance indicators is recommended. A critical performance indicator is recommended in the Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILL). The ILI is the ratio of current annual real losses to unavoidable annual real losses. A volumetric indicator, real losses in gallons per connection per day (or gallons per mile of main per day), is recommended for setting real loss management targets. Another volumetric indicator, gallons per customer per day, is recommended for managing apparent losses.
Please contact the Water Research Foundation to purchase this report.
The research also found that there was no simple, standardized methodology for analyzing the economic level of leakage (ELL), but several good methods are described in detail in the report. A slightly modified IWA methodology for water loss accounting is presented, with each component of the water balance accompanied with a comprehensive definition. This ensures water balances created using this process have comparable results. Due to the widely varying definitions of "unaccounted-for water," it is strongly recommended that use of this term cease. The report strongly recommends against the use of the percentage of system input performance indicator for the management of real losses. This is because this indicator is highly influenced by the volume of consumption, which is not related to real loss volumes.
A range of new performance indicators is recommended. A critical performance indicator is recommended in the Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILL). The ILI is the ratio of current annual real losses to unavoidable annual real losses. A volumetric indicator, real losses in gallons per connection per day (or gallons per mile of main per day), is recommended for setting real loss management targets. Another volumetric indicator, gallons per customer per day, is recommended for managing apparent losses.
Please contact the Water Research Foundation to purchase this report.
Leakage Management Technologies
by Paul Fanner, R Sturm, J Thornton, R. Liemberger, S Davis, and T. Hoogerwerf
Published 15 January 2008
In North America, leakage management programs are not pervasive, even though leakage can be reduced with some simple starting points that result in multiple benefits to the drinking water utility. North American governments are increasingly expressing interest in this area by mandating water audits and other initiatives to improve water supply efficiency. North American utilities can benefit from international experience in leakage management helping to reduce water losses, defer capital expenditure on new water resources, improve the service level and public health protection, and improve the efficiency of distribution system operations.
The primary objectives of this project were to (1) review proactive leakage management technologies used internationally, with a focus on the United Kingdom, (2) assess the applicability of these technologies to North American water utilities and select the most suitable technologies for pilot installations in participating utilities, and (3) provide guidance on how to practically and cost-effectively apply these technologies to North American water utilities based on the research and hands-on installation of promising techniques in controlled pilot areas.
The project found that a water audit provides utilities with the necessary information about their level of losses and how far they can be economically reduced. It is paramount that utilities first understand the nature and extent of their water losses in order to select the best water loss reduction strategy. Through the trial work carried out, the leakage management technologies of DMAs and pressure management were successfully implemented in the participating utilities. It can be concluded that by following the methodologies outlined in this report, both technologies can be successfully applied by most North American utilities. The tested leakage management technologies will be of significant benefit to North American utilities in helping them to assess, control, and reduce the level of real losses in their water supply and distribution networks.
The primary objectives of this project were to (1) review proactive leakage management technologies used internationally, with a focus on the United Kingdom, (2) assess the applicability of these technologies to North American water utilities and select the most suitable technologies for pilot installations in participating utilities, and (3) provide guidance on how to practically and cost-effectively apply these technologies to North American water utilities based on the research and hands-on installation of promising techniques in controlled pilot areas.
The project found that a water audit provides utilities with the necessary information about their level of losses and how far they can be economically reduced. It is paramount that utilities first understand the nature and extent of their water losses in order to select the best water loss reduction strategy. Through the trial work carried out, the leakage management technologies of DMAs and pressure management were successfully implemented in the participating utilities. It can be concluded that by following the methodologies outlined in this report, both technologies can be successfully applied by most North American utilities. The tested leakage management technologies will be of significant benefit to North American utilities in helping them to assess, control, and reduce the level of real losses in their water supply and distribution networks.