MONITORING TO MANAGE WASTEWATER POLLUTION


Wastewater pollution from stormwater overfl ows or combined sewer overfl ows (CSOs) was in the news a lot in 2021, with Southern Water receiving a record fi ne of £90 million for unpermitted sewage discharges in July, and other water companies under scrutiny for polluting watercourses by environmental campaigners and the general public.


The Environment Agency is currently undertaking an investigation into more than 2,000 sewage treatment works to check whether they are being operated in compliance with their environmental permits. In response to public pressure, the fi nalised, post Brexit UK Environment Bill includes a statutory duty for water companies to achieve a progressive reduction in the negative impacts of CSOs, and a requirement to monitor river water quality upstream and downstream of each CSO. This is in addition to strategic priorities for Ofwat and the water companies it regulates, to signifi cantly reduce the discharge of sewage from CSOs in the next pricing review (PR24) amongst other targets to drive performance from 2024-2029. Another related issue is property fl ooding from the sewer network, especially in cellars below ground level. So how can water companies reduce wastewater pollution from sewer networks? Using Yorkshire Water as an example what are some of the contributing factors? What measures are already in place to tackle wastewater pollution? Which extra technologies do water companies need to tackle leakage? And what innovations are on the horizon to tackle this issue?


Taking Yorkshire Water as an example, the scale of the challenge becomes obvious. The area served by Yorkshire Water has approximately fi ve million customers in 2.6 million properties, 1,087 km of rivers, with 1 billion litres of sewage treated per day. Assets to operate and maintain include 12 long sea falls, 640 sewage treatment sites, 56,000 km of sewer, 2,700 pumping stations, 2,241 permitted storm overfl ows and more than 2 million manholes. Properties with cellars below ground level, typically Victorian terraces, are more prone to internal fl ooding. “The majority of fl ooding incidents are from lateral sewers serving Victorian terraces,” explains Thomas Ogden, innovation technical specialist at Yorkshire Water, “there are very few manholes on lateral sewers, so there’s a need for monitoring devices to go in gullies or soil stacks – we have 2,000 property level monitors.” Mr Ogden says that external property fl ooding is more of an issue in housing stock from the 1960s and 1970s onwards, as in this case there are generally no cellars, more manholes, a smaller network of sewers with narrow pipe diameter (150mm) and very little fl ow. Mr Ogden provides a wish list of technology that Yorkshire Water would fi nd useful to address property fl ooding (Table 1).


Table 1: Technology wish list to address property fl ooding


• Enhanced network mapping e.g. a GPS device to fl ush down a toilet • Devices to detect blockages in gullies, soil stacks and shallow manholes • Lower cost devices to enable a large-scale rollout • Smaller sized devices for discreet installation


In terms of wastewater pollution of watercourses, the majority of pollution incidents are from the sewer network, for example from rising mains, pumping stations, and from treatment works. A large proportion of the Yorkshire Water sewer network is within 50 metres of a watercourse, for example highway gullies, highway drains, and underground watercourses are often close to watercourses. There are currently 3,500 level monitors in the sewer network or about 1 per 15 km of sewer network, located to monitor CSOs and pollution hotspots in particular. There are 20 designated bathing waters (including one inland bathing water). Water companies are now monitoring discharges to watercourses, to comply with the 2021 Environment Bill. “It is no longer enough to know if spills are occurring,” explains Mr Ogden, “we want to know the volume of the spill and the make up of the spill, to understand the impact on the river water quality during heavy rainfall.” Mr Ogden says that analytics are needed to link the datasets for levels, fl ow and water quality together and provide a better understanding of the overall picture. You can only manage what you can measure, and various technologies could help improve understanding (Table 2).


Image 1: Future full pipe monitoring vs current point monitoring (©Yorkshire Water, 2021).


Various innovative technologies are available or in development to monitor water pollution, from a low-cost device which can monitor basic parameters up to a full-blown AI based sewer network control system. A brief overview of a selection is provided in Table 3. Some of these help to address the technology gaps identifi ed above.


With the current drive to cut sewage spills, water companies will be seeking technological solutions to help them go beyond regulatory requirements and meet customer expectations.


Table 2: Technology wish list to address wastewater pollution of watercourses


• Lower price devices to allow a larger scale rollout • Measurement of discharge volume and concentration at CSOs • Measurement of river water quality • Cost effective identifi cation of misconnections at surface water outfalls


In addition to the wish lists in Table 1 and 2, Mr Ogden suggests other technological solutions that would help including full pipe monitoring, power harvesting, ease of installation, low-cost fl ow monitoring and analytics to enable corrective action at the right time. Full pipe monitoring would help to identify blockages earlier than just point monitoring at a manhole which will only detect blockages once the sewage backs up the pipe (image 1). Power harvesting would help to extend asset life, enable an increase in the frequency of readings and the dial in frequency. Mr Ogden says that ideally monitors should be quick and easy to install; confi guration should be possible through a web-based platform, with all installation data available online; and site information should be collected to enable a correct fi rst time response (photos, access, traffi c management details). Flow monitoring should be low cost, and ideally permanent online fl ow monitoring rather than the expensive fl ow surveys which are currently undertaken. Importantly analytics are needed to combine all the data with rainfall predictions, including long range weather forecasts to predict when a developing blockage will cause a problem and when to intervene. Analytics could also help to quantify environmental harm.


IET MARCH / APRIL 2022


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  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68