WATER EFFICIENCY


Water efficiency in industry was the theme of a Round Table debate that took place in London on 17June, as this report shows, but the participants revealed that cutting water use is not always about cost


Reputation and risk underpin efficiency debate


T


he library of County Hall was the location of the latest Round Table debate on water efficiency, hosted by Sustainable Business,


a sister publication of WWT. A select group of business leaders from a range of industries was reminded of the theme by the magnificent view of the Thames skirting the walls of Parliament. The energy intensive nature of water


treatment, transport and heating inevitably feeds into big business’ priorities of energy efficiency and carbon reduction, especially for the likes of Nestle, Cadbury, PepsiCo and Branston. But with a lack of directed policy, fiscal incentives or regulation in this area, businesses are struggling to develop effective water efficiency strategies. Timely then to gather a selection of industry leaders along with Peter Jiggins, Defra’s head of water availability and quality, to discuss what they have done to date and what needs to happen next. Cranfield University’s Simon Parsons chaired the debate.


Simon Parsons: Water is back on the public agenda, but also corporate agendas. Back in the late 1980s and early 1990s, there was a big drive by industrial companies to reduce water use. But there has not been a substantial change in 10 or 15 years. So, how do you approach this? What strategies have you used that have been successful? And what’s the ideal starting point?


Martin Seal: Our starting point was senior commitment; the fact that we have a senior on the Board representing sustainability means that targets have been cascaded through. All our sites have a specific water reduction


target to aim for. We’ve then taken that to our staff and really driven a lot of that reduction through them. We managed to reduce the amount of water per unit by 42% over a seven- year period. At the moment, we are looking at the amount of water we can physically recycle within the factory. Can we reach a stage where we can take the wastewater from our factory, clean it to an appropriate level to re-use all of it? What are the food safety implications in that?


Richard Harpin: It would be interesting to start off with asking why companies want to reduce


Sustainability leaders from across industry gather in the library of County Hall to share expertise on water efficiency. WWT editor Natasha Wiseman and publisher Angela Himus look on


their water usage; it is probably not the cost of water. No. It’s about risk: physical risk from the lack of water; reputational risk; and regulatory risk. Companies are often multinational so their supply chains are in different countries. Some of those are water scarce – that is where the risk comes. You can be making improvements in areas where it may not be having any impact at all. There is a need for companies to come


“Companies are often multinational so their supply chains are in different countries. Some of those are water scarce – that is where the risk comes”


together in the catchments. It’s difficult because of competition and often companies do not want to disclose exactly what they are doing. But there is a really big advantage, especially in developing countries where there is often poor regulation, for companies to help raise their game, demonstrate best practice and influence governments to bring in water reforms.


Simon Parsons: There were lots of nods around the table when you asked why companies want to reduce their water use – and a lot of you agreed that it was not financial.


Holly Jasper: To say it’s not financial is not correct. Everyone’s business looks at the bottom line. Environmental impact and reputation is massive; it helps your supply chain relationships and it’s how you further your business strategy. We’ve dramatically decreased our water usage. We are 95% re-use at one of our sites and 45% at the other. We saved £92,000 just by setting up a water treatment plant and not deep injecting. That’s a lot for a small business, so you can’t rule out finance.


Vi Gururajan: For us, the total consumption of water in cost terms is negligible compared to consumables. We have looked into small things that might make a differences – not in cost terms, but ethically.


We have a balanced score card for the business as well as for the environment, and part of that is m3 of water consumed, per site, per tonne of potatoes. I said to my managers at each site, ‘give me a figure of m3 that you take in, as a site, from different sources, and tell me what you are putting out’. And that needs to be a 100%


September 2010 Water & Wastewater Treatment 35


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52