Cost-Effective Water Saving Devices & Practices

GG67
GUIDE
COST-EFFECTIVE WATER
SAVING DEVICES AND
PRACTICES
GOOD PRACTICE: Proven technology and techniques for profitable environmental improvement
COST-EFFECTIVE WATER
SAVING DEVICES AND
PRACTICES
This Good Practice Guide was produced by the

Environmental Technology Best Practice Programme
Prepared with assistance from:
Ashact Ltd
© Crown copyright. First printed March 1997. This material may be freely reproduced except for sale or advertising purposes.
Printed on paper containing 75% post-consumer waste.
SUMMARY
All industrial and commercial organisations use water. Most organisations take water for granted
and few know exactly how much water they are using. Many organisations are paying more in
water and effluent charges than they need to and can probably reduce their water consumption
simply and inexpensively.
What company can afford to ignore the savings that could be achieved by following the advice given
in this Good Practice Guide? Other companies, including their competitors, may have already
implemented water saving measures and could be paying less in water and effluent charges per unit
of production or service.
This Guide describes a range of cost-effective water saving devices and practices - some with
paybacks of only a few days. It highlights the typical water savings that can be achieved for
industrial and commercial applications and explains how to identify the most appropriate devices
and practices for specific equipment, processes or sites.
Water saving devices and practices applicable to industrial and commercial sites are described in two
separate Sections. However, operators of industrial sites are also advised to read the practical advice
on saving water at commercial sites. The suggested actions are summarised in a series of
comprehensive tables, which include an indication of the potential costs and payback period.
The potential cost savings and other benefits of reducing water consumption are illustrated in
examples from industrial and commercial sites.
There is an Action Plan near the end of this Guide to help focus on the ideas that are most relevant
to individual organisations.
The water saving devices and practices described in this Guide are intended to be implemented as
part of a systematic water saving campaign. Such a campaign is described in Good Practice Guide
(GG26) Saving Money Through Waste Minimisation: Reducing Water Use, available free through the
Environmental Helpline on 0800 585794.
Water, water, everywhere and no one stops to think.

CONTENTS
Section Page
1 Introduction 1
1.1 How can this Guide help? 1
1.2 Carrying out a water use survey 2
1.3 The tale of one cubic metre of water 3
2 Choosing water saving devices and practices 4

2.1 First considerations 4
2.2 Estimating potential savings 4
2.3 The impact of water savings on operating costs 8
2.4 Setting the project budget 8
2.5 Identifying appropriate water saving devices and practices 9
2.6 Identifying project costs 9
2.7 Worked example for a commercial site 10
3 Water saving devices and practices for industrial sites 12

3.1 General water use 12
3.2 Cleaning and washdown 16
3.3 Process plant 18
4 Water saving devices and practices for commercial sites 22

4.1 General water use 22
4.2 Toilets 22
4.3 Sinks 24
4.4 Showers 25
4.5 Gardening 25
4.6 Laboratories 26
4.7 Garages 26
5 Measuring water use and flow 27
6 Action plan 30
Appendices
Appendix 1 A typical water saving campaign 31
Appendix 2 Water and effluent charges 33
Appendix 3 Estimating pumping, energy and treatment costs 34
Appendix 4 Converting between systems of units 37
Appendix 5 Further reading 38
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 HOW CAN THIS GUIDE HELP?

section
Water is used in many different ways by industry and commerce. Most organisations think they 1
know where their water goes. But do they really know?
On-line water and effluent monitoring at Walkers Snack Foods highlighted a process problem
which was costing £720/day. It was fixed in three days. If Walkers had waited for the water
bill, the fault might have gone undetected for four months. By then, it would have cost the
Company over £80 000. If Walkers had not known how much water was normally used to
produce each bag of crisps, £250 000/year could have been lost without Walkers realising it.
Mainswater flow measurement, which included a connection into an existing on-line

monitoring system for process control, cost less than £2 000 to install.
Also, effluent billing used to be based on incoming metered water. Following a change to
billing on the basis of effluent flow measurement, which cost less than £3 000 to install,
effluent billing has been reduced by £24 000/year.
Companies need to ask themselves the following questions:
Are we using too much water?

Are we paying too much in effluent charges?
Have we tried saving water?
Could we save any more water?
Have our competitors implemented water saving measures?
This Good Practice Guide describes a variety of cost-effective water saving projects with paybacks
from a few days to over one year. The Guide is intended to help identify the most appropriate water
saving devices and practices for specific equipment, processes or sites.
Sections 1 and 2 highlight the significant potential savings from different applications and explain
how to identify the best water saving options for individual organisations. Generic water uses and
typical applications are described in Section 3 (industry) and Section 4 (commerce); suitable control
equipment is suggested together with guidance on its application. Tables 7 - 9 (industrial sites) and
Table 10 (commercial sites), which should be used in conjunction with Sections 3 and 4 respectively,
summarise the guidance on water saving devices and practices.
Operators of industrial sites are advised to read the whole Guide, whereas those whose operations
are predominantly commercial, will find Section 4 most useful.
Inclusion of specific water saving devices and practices in this Guide is not a recommendation for
their universal implementation. Cost-effective application is often site-specific. In particular, water
saving devices and practices proposed for industrial processes should be evaluated, prior to
implementation, by those with a working knowledge of the processes.
1
Before adopting any water saving device or practice, companies should:
■ evaluate the technical issues;

■ carry out a COSHH* assessment;
■ consider the health and safety implications;
■ examine the financial considerations.
section
To help, this Guide highlights other benefits and possible disadvantages which should be taken into
1 account when selecting a water saving device.
The identification and evaluation of cost-effective water saving devices and practices should be part
of a wider water saving campaign. The phases and steps involved in a typical water saving
campaign are indicated in Appendix 1, and further advice and information are available through the
Environmental Helpline on 0800 585794.
1.2 CARRYING OUT A WATER USE SURVEY

Before beginning a water saving campaign, water and effluent costs should be looked at to make
sure it is worth taking action.
Information about comparative water consumption in various sectors has been collated by many
trade associations. Relative water use is also discussed in some of the Environmental Performance
Guides available through the Environmental Helpline and these will provide a useful benchmark.
As a rule-of-thumb, for sites that have not previously tried to save water, reductions of 20% in water
and effluent bills are usually achievable at little or no cost. As much as 40%, or more, might be
achievable if projects with paybacks of up to two years are included.
Before being able to identify how and where water can be saved, an understanding is needed of
how, where and why water is used on each particular site. These objectives can be achieved by
carrying out a water use survey and developing a water balance for a site.
First, the following questions should be asked:
How many projects, modifications and additions have been carried out since the last
water survey at a site?
Who performed the last survey and how thorough was it?
Are the drawings up to date?
Good Practice Guide (GG26) Saving Money Through Waste Minimisation: Reducing Water Use
outlines a systematic approach to the development of a water balance and reducing the costs
associated with water use and wastewater disposal. This includes the drawing up of a water mass
balance and allocating consumption. GG26 is one of a series of three complementary Good Practice
Guides on waste minimisation. The other two cover the use of raw materials (GG25) and teams and
Champions (GG27). All these Guides are available free through the Environmental Helpline.
Practical Tip
It will be extremely useful later if during the water use survey:
■ schematic diagrams of the water and effluent systems are produced;

■ pipework and valves are labelled.
* Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Regulations 1994

2
Regular surveys, eg annual, are essential to keep water and effluent systems in good order.
A survey of water distribution systems and points of use typically reveals:
■ unidentified connections;
■ cross connections;
■ broken valves;
section
■ incorrectly set valves;
■ leaks.
1
A survey of water use and patterns of use typically reveals:
■ excessive or unnecessary use;

■ unknown use;
■ unauthorised use.
A survey of effluent discharges and routes to sewer typically reveals:
■ clean water discharges direct to effluent;

■ unauthorised discharges to effluent;
■ unnecessary surface water discharges to effluent;
■ sources of potential failure of effluent discharge consents.
Details of how to measure water flow are given in Section 5.
1.3 THE TALE OF ONE CUBIC METRE OF WATER

For those without a technical background it is sometimes helpful to illustrate flow as detailed below,
to give an indication of what water might be costing a company.
A flow rate of 1 m3/hour of water is approximately equivalent to:
■ the flow from a garden hose; or

■ filling a 9 litre (2 gallon) bucket in half a minute; or
■ half a pint/second.
The range of ‘water only’ and ‘water and effluent’ costs vary throughout the UK. The 1996 - 1997
water and effluent charges levied in different areas of England, Scotland and Wales are given in
Appendix 2. Prices are lower in Scotland, but the situation is changing. For current information
please contact the local water authority.
Water companies charge by the cubic metre (m3). The lowest and highest charges in England and
Wales for water only in 1996 were 48 - 77 pence/m3 and for water and effluent 62 - 134 pence/m3.
So at 1996 prices, a flow rate of 1 m3/hour will cost between:
■ 48 pence and £1.34 every hour; or

■ £12 and £32 every day; or
■ £80 and £225 every week; or
■ £4 205 and £11 740 every year.
Remember, one cubic metre of water weighs one tonne and one litre of clean water weighs one
kilogramme*.
* The density of clean water is 1 g/ml or 1 000 kg/m3
3
2 C H O O S I N G W AT E R S A V I N G
DEVICES AND PRACTICES
2.1 FIRST CONSIDERATIONS

Before starting to identify and evaluate water saving devices and practices, the following need to be
agreed:
■ a target for net savings based on preliminary water survey (Section 1.2);
section
2 ■ payback periods for any water saving projects.
And the following should be considered:
How are savings in water use estimated?

What impact will water savings have on overall operating costs?
How much can be spent on water saving measures?
How can appropriate water saving devices and practices be identified?
How much will it cost?
Appendix 1 contains a flow chart showing the steps involved in a typical water saving project. This
will help implement a water reduction programme. In practice, the individual steps are simple.
However, to produce the most cost-effective water saving system, each step must be carried out in
order.
2.2 ESTIMATING POTENTIAL SAVINGS

Once the water balance has been established and water use in each area of the site is understood,
the water saving team can start to identify water saving opportunities. Advice on the selection and
management of waste minimisation teams is given in Good Practice Guide (GG27) Saving Money
Through Waste Minimisation: Teams and Champions, available free through the Environmental
Helpline on 0800 585794.
Table 1 shows the typical percentage reductions for commercial and industrial applications which
can be assumed when estimating potential savings. Although these are typical realistic reductions,
they will vary between applications and sites and should not be relied upon for design purposes.
Table 1 will, however, help to rule out projects which are non-starters.
4
Water saving initiative Typical reduction
Per project Per site
Commercial applications
Toilets, men’s toilets, showers and taps 40% (combined)
Industrial applications
Closed loop recycle 90%
Closed loop recycle with treatment 60%
Automatic shut-off 15%
Countercurrent rinsing 40%
section
Spray/jet upgrades 20%
2
Re-use of wash water 50%
Scrapers 30%
Cleaning in Place (CIP) 60%
Pressure reduction See Fig 1
Cooling tower heat load reduction See Fig 2
Table 1 Typical achievable reduction in water use
6
jets, nozzles and orifices (%)
5
Reduction in water usage at
0 2 4 6 8 10
Percentage reduction in water distribution pressure
Fig 1 Effect of pressure reduction on water use at jets, nozzles and orifices
20
water requirement (%)
Reduction in make-up
15
10
0 5 10 15 20
Percentage reduction in heat load on cooling tower
Fig 2 Effect of heat load reduction on make-up water requirement for a cooling tower
5
Figs 3 and 4 provide estimates, at 1996 prices, of the significant annual losses from taps, joints on
pipes, seals in pumps, hoses and valves. Although the figures are taken from real water surveys,
they are intended for guidance only. The leaks and other losses of individual organisations may be
different.
In Figs 3 and 4, ‘water only’ refers to water use either where the water does not enter the drains or
at sites which have a fixed effluent charge. In Fig 3 the range of ‘water only’ and ‘water and
effluent’ costs are based on the lowest and highest charges in England and Wales in 1996,
ie 48 - 77 pence/m3 and 62 - 134 pence/m3 respectively.
section
2 Two drops/second
1 minute loss 18 ml
Annual loss 9.5 m3
Annual water only cost £5 - £7
Annual water and effluent cost £6 - £13
Drops breaking into a stream

1 minute loss 59 ml
Annual loss 31 m3
2 mm stream
1 minute loss 277 ml
Annual loss 146 m3
3 mm stream
1 minute loss 638 ml
Annual loss 336 m3
5 mm stream
1 minute loss 1 litre
Annual loss 528 m3
Fig 3 Water losses from an open tap
In Fig 4, ‘minimum annual water cost’ refers to the cost of water in areas with low water charges,
while ‘maximum water and effluent cost’ represents the amount levied in areas with high water and
effluent charges. These annual costs are calculated on the basis of 48 pence/m3 for water only and
134 pence/m3 for water and effluent (1996 prices).
1996 - 1997 water and effluent charges levied in different areas of England, Scotland and Wales are
given in Appendix 2.
6
Practical Tip
A training programme should increase employee awareness of:
■ the cost of filling sinks;

■ the cost of using hoses;
■ the cost of overfilling process tanks;
■ the importance of identifying, reporting and mending leaks.
section
One drop/second 2
Hourly loss 0.5 litres Union
Annual loss 4.7 m3
Minimum annual water only cost £2
Maximum annual water and effluent cost £6
Flange
Valve 0.1 litre/minute

Hourly loss 6 litres
Annual loss 53 m3
Minimum annual water only cost £25
Maximum annual water and effluent cost £71
Pump
shaft seal
0 - 4 litres/minute
Hourly loss 0 - 240 litres
Annual loss 0 - 2 100 m3
Minimum annual water only cost £1 010
Maximum annual water and effluent cost £2 810
7 - 14 litres/minute
Hourly loss 420 - 840 litres
Annual loss 3 680- 7 360 m3
1/ " Minimum annual water only cost £1 770
2 Ballvalve
30 - 66 litres/minute
1" Hose
Hourly loss 1 800 - 4 000 litres
Annual loss 15 770 - 34 690 m3
2" Pipe
700 litres/minute
Hourly loss 4 200 litres
Annual loss 367 920 m3
Fig 4 Typical water losses from leaking valves, joints, pipes, pump seals and hoses
7
2.3 THE IMPACT OF WATER SAVINGS ON OPERATING COSTS
Cost savings can arise from reductions in:
■ water use;
■ on-site water pumping and associated maintenance;
■ water treatment, eg lower chemical costs and filter backwash;
■ water heating or cooling requirements;
■ effluent pumping;
■ effluent treatment;
section
■ effluent cooling requirements;
2 ■ effluent discharge.
Savings can also arise from:
■ a delayed requirement for additional capacity for water storage;

■ increased production without having to upgrade the water supply system;
■ less product discharged as effluent;
■ lower capital investment in future effluent treatment plant;
■ reduced corrosion and improved working conditions through the elimination of leaks.
2.4 SETTING THE PROJECT BUDGET

Once the potential impact of water savings on overall operating costs has been estimated, it is useful
to work out how much money could reasonably be spent on the project. This will eliminate obvious
non-starters. One simple way of doing this is to work out the ‘Maximum Project Budget’ (MPB).
Maximum Project Budget (£) = Calculated saving (£/year) x Required payback period (years)
The overall capital and operating costs of any water saving project must be less than the MPB in
order to achieve the required payback. Operating costs should also be low enough to remain
attractive in the long-term.
An organisation may use other methods of financial appraisal to determine the viability of proposed
projects. If so, it may be wise to seek advice from the financial department.
2.4.1 Worked example

This fictitious example illustrates the ‘project budget first’ approach. For the initial evaluation, the
following assumptions are made:
■ implementing the water saving project would reduce water use on a particular item of plant
by 50%;
■ this corresponds to a 16% reduction in water use for that area of the factory.
Table 2 shows the net cost of increased production with and without the water saving project. Using
13 290 m3/year less water would reduce operating costs by £78 907 - £64 481 = £14 426. This is
not money saved, as the costs have not yet been taken into account. To achieve a one year payback,
the MPB will be £14 426, ie, the combined capital and first year operating costs of the new water
saving devices and practices must be less than £14 426.
8
Item Without water saving With water saving
Production (including planned increase) 1 444 500 units/year 1 444 500 units/year
Specific water use 0.0575 m3/unit 0.0483 m3/unit
Total annual use 83 060 m3 69 770 m3
Water and effluent charge 95 pence/m3 95 pence/m3
Water and effluent bill £78 907 £66 281
Other reductions in operating costs (chemicals, 0 (£1 800)
pumping) associated with lower water use
Net cost £78 907 £64 481
section
Table 2 Net costs of increased production with and without water saving in a fictitious company 2
2.5 IDENTIFYING APPROPRIATE WATER SAVING DEVICES AND
PRACTICES
Once the water saving team has identified potentially attractive opportunities for saving water, then
appropriate water saving devices and practices can be investigated.
Water saving devices and practices in industrial applications are considered in Section 3 and
summarised in Tables 7, 8 and 9.
Water saving devices and practices in commercial applications are considered in Section 4 and
summarised in Table 10.
To identify appropriate water saving devices and practices for evaluation at a site, start with the
tables and then turn to the associated text for further explanation.
2.6 IDENTIFYING PROJECT COSTS

Given the Maximum Project Budget, the costs associated with the necessary equipment now need
to be evaluated. In practice, this may be an on-going process as water savings and costs usually
depend on the equipment selected.
For accurate evaluation, it is best to obtain quotations for the equipment costs and estimated water
savings from potential suppliers or installation contractors. Also, the costs of the initial water survey
and management time need to be allocated.
Project costs occur in two stages:
■ Implementation
- design and project management;
- equipment purchase;
- installation and commissioning of all equipment and instrumentation;
- disruption of work during installation and commissioning.
■ Operation
- employee training;
- utilities use and maintenance;
- disposal of wastes from any treatment processes;
- monitoring (including water quality);
- reporting.
9
Appendix 3 gives some guidance on how to estimate:
■ the effect of reduced water use on pumping costs;

■ water heating and cooling costs;
■ on-site water treatment costs.
2.7 WORKED EXAMPLE FOR A COMMERCIAL SITE

This example from a fictitious small hotel highlights the importance of evaluating possible water
saving measures for their economic viability.
section A 20 bedroom hotel with a restaurant and a bar (open to non-residents) has decided to investigate
2 ways of reducing its water and sewage bills. These are based on a charge of £1.34/m3 of water
used. The hotel has also decided to implement water saving projects for which the expected
payback is less than two years.
Following a water use survey and brainstorming session to discuss ideas, the hotel has:
■ ruled out evaluation of dishwashers and other washing machines as these are new;
■ ruled out sinks which are used for food, glass and utensil washing as these require controlled
flow;
■ ruled out baths and showers because these are relatively new;
■ discovered that bedroom washbasins are used much less frequently than others elsewhere in
the building;
■ realised that the flushing volume of the toilets with cisterns could be reduced from nine litres
to about seven litres;
■ discovered that a pair of men’s toilets in the bar toilet share a cistern and could thus share a
flush control unit.
Tables 3 and 4 summarise the survey findings.
Area of hotel Washbasins WC Men’s

Rooms Other toilets toilets
Bedrooms 20 - 20 0
Restaurant toilet - 3 3 1
Bar/reception and toilet - 5 5 2
Kitchen staff toilet - 2 2 0
Total 20 10 30 3
Table 3 Possible sources of water savings in the hotel
Current water use (litres/day) Washbasins WC Men’s Total

Rooms Other toilets toilets
Bedrooms (1.25 people/room) 680 - 900 - 1 580
Restaurant toilet - 512 346 864 1 722
Bar/reception and toilet - 1 344 864 1 134 3 342
Kitchen staff toilet - 410 144 - 554
Total water use (litres/day) 680 2 266 2 254 1 998 7198
Total water use (m3/day) 0.68 2.266 2.254 1.998 7.198
Annual cost (for 360 days) £328 £1 093 £1 087 £964 £3 472
Table 4 Current water use at the hotel
10
Possible water saving devices (see Section 4) included:
■ fitting percussion (push) taps on all washbasins (50% reduction);

■ installing cistern volume adjusters in the WC toilets (16% reduction);
■ installing passive infrared flush controls in the men’s toilet areas (70% reduction).
Table 5 shows the potential savings from these measures.
Future water use (litres/day) Washbasins WC Men’s Total

after water saving measures Rooms Other toilets toilets
Bedrooms (1.25 people/room) 340 - 756 - 1 096
section
Restaurant toilet - 256 291 261 808
Bar/reception and toilet - 672 726 340 1 738
2
Kitchen staff toilet - 205 121 - 326
Total water use (litres/day) 340 1 133 1 894 601 3 968
Total water use (m3/day) 0.34 1.133 1.894 0.601 3.968
Present annual cost (for 360 days) £328 £1 093 £1 087 £964 £3 472
Annual predicted cost (for 360 days) £164 £547 £914 £290 £1 915
Annual reduction in water £164 £546 £173 £674 £1 557
and sewerage bill
Table 5 Predicted savings from three water saving measures
When the project costs were compared with the expected savings, the conclusions were:
■ conversion to percussion taps on washbasins in frequent use is cost-effective;

■ conversion to percussion taps on bedroom washbasins is not cost-effective in this case;
■ fitting cistern bags to WC toilets is cost-effective;
■ fitting passive infrared control systems in urinal areas is cost-effective.
The estimated project economics are summarised in Table 6.
Washbasins WC Men’s Total of

Rooms Other toilets toilets cost-effective
projects
Total number of devices required 40 20 30 2 52
Cost of each device £30 £30 £4 £120 £154
Total cost (including installation) £1 800 £840 £150 £350 £1 340
Expected saving £164 £546 £173 £674 £1 393
Payback (years) 11 1.5 0.9 0.5 about 1
Table 6 Economic analysis of possible water saving measures at the hotel
The total cost of the three water saving measures identified as cost-effective is £1 340. Savings of
£1 393 are predicted, giving an overall payback of about one year.
11
3 W AT E R S A V I N G D E V I C E S A N D
PRACTICES FOR INDUSTRIAL SITES
This Section suggests cost-effective devices and practices to reduce water consumption at industrial
sites. The advice is summarised in Tables 7 - 9. Case Studies are used to illustrate the savings that
can be achieved.
Water saving devices and practices proposed for an industrial process should be evaluated,
on a case-by-case basis, by someone with a working knowledge of the process.
3.1 GENERAL WATER USE
section The following Section should be read in conjunction with Table 7. Look for the sub-headings in the
3 column labelled ‘Method’.
3.1.1 Monitoring
Although water flow rates can be displayed on meters fitted to pipelines, these are often out of
sight. Transmitting a flow signal to the process operator can allow more effective use of the
information. Some existing turbine type flowmeters - with simple dial displays - can be uprated
in situ to provide a pulsed flow signal. This signal can either be transmitted to the site control system
or, with suitable cables and an interface board, be logged in and displayed on a standard office
computer.
A company’s water use could be nearly zero during ‘silent’ hours. Does this apply to your company?
J W Lees and Company achieved savings of over £32 500/year by monitoring water flows
through the brewery and ensuring actual consumption was as close as possible to theoretical
consumption. Payback was effectively instantaneous. For full details, see Good Practice Case
Study (GC41), available free through the Environmental Helpline.
The electroplating company, N T Frost, reduced its water consumption by nearly 60 000
m3/year, saving almost £45 000/year. Good housekeeping, use of flow monitors and some
flow restrictors significantly reduced water use without any major modifications. The payback
period was six months. For details, see Good Practice Case Study (GC22), available free
through the Environmental Helpline.
3.1.2 Leakage identification and elimination
Leaks can arise from:
■ damaged pipeline connections, flanges and fittings;

■ worn valves;
■ flooded floats (balls) on water tank or cistern valves;
■ corroded pipework and tanks.
12
Item/application Aim Method Description/ Equipment/ Applicability Other benefits Other factors Potential Potential
purpose technique cost payback
Training for water Water saving Awareness by Make people Training All areas of use Med Med
saving awareness training conscious of the
cost of water use
Water saving Water saving Communication Comparison of use Discussion All areas of use Shared experience Med Med
culture between users between similar users
Water use survey Water saving Identify and Site-wide survey Site records and All areas of use Med Short
measure flow measurements
General water use Minimisation Monitoring On-line water Flow meters/ Processes using Med Short
(Section 3.1) use display transmitters water
Leakage identification Inspection and repair Regular inspection Pipes/tanks/glands/ Reduced Med Med
and elimination of equipment gaskets/flanges maintenance
Overflow Avoiding overflows Level controllers Tanks Reduced risk Med Med
identification and of flooding
elimination
Use of block valves Using block valves Block valves Plant with preset Consistent Low Short
instead of preset instead of control or adjustable flow process efficiency
control valves for valves avoids need to of water
isolation change preset positions
Flood prevention Automatic shut-off Rupture valves Pressurised systems Site protection Low-med Risk Assesment
of excess flow required
Tamper prevention Preventing Straps/chains/locks Widespread Consistent Low Med
unauthorised process efficiency
adjustment
Plan temporary Avoiding waste during Examination of Pre-construction, Low Short
supplies abnormal activities temporary water during process
supplies modification, etc
Reduce undesirable Maintaining water at Insulation Long distribution Reduced Med Med
heat loss or gain required temp. systems energy costs
Trace heating High temp. Med Med
Heating/cooling Acute water temp. Equipment costs Med-high Med-long
at point of use sensitivity
Table 7 Cost-effective water saving devices and practices for industrial sites: general water use
13
Potential costs and paybacks are for guidance only. Actual costs and paybacks will vary due to project-specific details.
Potential cost: Low = Minor alterations to existing plant (£0 - a few £100s); Med = Some alterations to existing plant (a few £100s - a few £1 000s); High = Extensive alterations or new plant (many £1 000s).
Potential payback: Short = Months; Med = Less than a year; Long = Over a year.
This Table should be read in conjunction with Section 3.1.

3.1.3 Overflow identification and elimination
Most overflows run to drain without being measured. However, the flow rate during overflow can
be as high as the delivery pumping flow rate.
Overflows are usually due to poor control. The following devices are usually adequate to avoid
overflows:
■ simple level sensors and on/off control systems for pumps;

■ shut-off valves.
3.1.4 Use of block valves instead of preset control valves for isolation
Many systems, eg liquid ring vacuum pumps, require preset water flow rates. The flow rate in such
systems is usually adjusted by careful setting of a control valve. However, the same valve is often
used to isolate the water supply and is not reset to the same position when flow resumes.
section A simple and cheap solution is to:

3 ■ fit a quarter turn isolation valve, eg ball valve;
■ preset the existing flow control valve to the optimum flow rate;
■ remove the handwheel from the flow control valve;
■ use the quarter turn valve for isolation as required.
3.1.5 Flood prevention

If the pipework fails and floods the site, you will probably be charged for the water you wasted. You
will also suffer the inconvenience and damage caused by the flood. Blow-out preventers, which are
not expensive, could save most of the costs of a flood.
3.1.6 Tamper prevention

Fitting straps, chains or padlocks should eliminate unauthorised valve operation. Leather or cloth
straps which can be cut easily are preferable where emergency use of the water supply is required.
The removal of handwheels from isolation valves tempts operators to use spanners. This is bad
practice as the valves frequently become inoperable due to spindle damage.
3.1.7 Plan temporary supplies

Temporary water supplies are often necessary during process modifications and may be required for
many months. Such supplies are often taken from the nearest available water system, which may
be at a higher pressure than the normal supply. Using water at a higher pressure leads to equipment
such as sprays and jets using higher than normal quantities of water.
Pressure reduction valves may be required for temporary water supplies.
3.1.8 Reduce undesirable heat loss or gain

In situations where the temperature of the water is crucial to its suitability for use and water is used
intermittently, long pipework can be lagged and/or trace heated to reduce heat losses or heat gain.
This avoids the practice of water being run to drain until it achieves the correct temperature.
At one site, the need to route the drinking water supply through hot areas made the water
unpleasant to drink. The solution was to install a chiller at the point of use rather than running
water to drain continuously. The cost of £400 was paid back in less than two months. An
alternative could be to provide bottled water in a refridgerator.
14
Item/application Aim Method Description/ Equipment/
purpose technique
Cleaning and Minimisation Flow restriction/ Reducing Valves, orifices,
washdown pressure control instantaneous flow pressure reducing
at point of use valves
Countercurrent Re-use of rinse water Tanks/pumps
rinsing
Sprays/jets Appropriate application Nozzles
of water
Spray nozzles
High pressure
spray packages
Automatic Use of water only Solenoid valves in
supply shut-off when needed pipelines
Actuated valves in
pipelines
Jets/spray guns
on hoses
Re-use of wash Re-use of wash water Tanks/pumps
water in other areas
Substitution Scrapers/ Sweeping up Dry cleaning
squeegees/ brushes of slurries methods
Short term Cleaning in Place (CIP) Countercurrent re-use Proprietary plant
re-use technology of rinse water with
multiple re-use of
chemical cleaners
Long term Recycle after Treatment of Filtration/
re-use treatment wastewater to an sedimentation
acceptable standard
for re-use
Centrifugation/
flotation
Biological
treatment
Ion exchange
Distillation/
stripping
Absorption/
adsorption
Table 8 Cost-effective water saving devices and pra
Potential cost: Low = Minor alterations to existing plant (£0 - a few £100s); Med = Some alterations to existing plant (a few £100s - a few £1 000s); Hig
15
Applicability Other benefits Other factors Potential Potential
cost payback
Variable or Low Short
intermittent supply
pressure or demand
Multi-stage unit Water quality High Long
processes
Widespread Improved cleaning Low-med Short-med
Widespread Improved cleaning Spray/mist drift Low-med Short-med

Washing processes Improved cleaning Power Med-high Short-med
consumption
Small bore pipes Essential water Low-med Med
requirement
Solenoid power supply
Large bore pipes Essential water Med Med
requirement
Widespread More efficient Theft of spray guns Low V. short
application
Widespread Cross contamination/ Med Short-med
water quality control
Large areas Possible re-use Dry collection system Low Short
of materials
Processes with Hygienic plant/ Water quality High Short-med
frequent cleaning minimal downtime
for cleaning
Coarse solids Waste disposal Med Med-long

removal/phase Water quality
separation
High quality solids Waste disposal High Med-long

separation
Removal of dissolved Waste disposal High Med-long
biodegradable solids Water quality
contaminants Water quality
Solvent recovery By-product Waste disposal High Med-long
Water quality
High quality Disposal of High Med-long
treatment, solvent spent absorbent
recovery, removal
of toxic substances,
colour, etc
actices for industrial sites: cleaning and washdown
gh = Extensive alterations or new plant (many £1 000s).

cost payback
Variable or Low Short
intermittent supply
pressure or demand
Multi-stage unit Water quality High Long
processes
Widespread Improved cleaning Low-med Short-med
Widespread Improved cleaning Spray/mist drift Low-med Short-med

Washing processes Improved cleaning Power Med-high Short-med
consumption
Small bore pipes Essential water Low-med Med
requirement
Solenoid power supply
Large bore pipes Essential water Med Med
requirement
Widespread More efficient Theft of spray guns Low V. short
application
Widespread Cross contamination/ Med Short-med
water quality control
Large areas Possible re-use Dry collection system Low Short
of materials
Processes with Hygienic plant/ Water quality High Short-med
frequent cleaning minimal downtime
for cleaning
Coarse solids Waste disposal Med Med-long

separation
High quality solids Waste disposal High Med-long

separation
biodegradable solids Water quality
contaminants Water quality
Solvent recovery By-product Waste disposal High Med-long
Water quality
High quality Disposal of High Med-long
treatment, solvent spent absorbent
recovery, removal
of toxic substances,
colour, etc
actices for industrial sites: cleaning and washdown

Successful switching methods include:
■ limit switches;
■ signals from existing process controls;
■ signals from existing interlocks.
However, the water isolation system must ‘fail safe’ where supplies are essential, eg for large
gearbox cooling.
Trigger-operated spray guns on hoses can achieve significant reductions in water use because the
flow stops when the hose is put down.
A small washdown hose can use 1 m3 of water every hour. If this is hidden under a piece of
equipment and forgotten for a week (it does happen), then at a combined water and effluent
cost of 80 pence/m3 this will cost £19.20/day or £134.40/week. A trigger-operated spray gun
costs about £70; the payback period - allowing £35 for fitting - could be as low as 51/2 days. section
3
3.2.5 Re-use of wash water
Used wash water is often flushed down the drain on the basis that it has been ‘used’. Careful
examination of the quality and availability of wash water, together with an understanding of water
requirements elsewhere on-site, may reveal opportunities for re-use.
Typical final uses of wash water include:
■ first washdown/rinse of floors and containers (inside or outside);

■ making up raw material slurries (not applicable to the food or drink industries).
3.2.6 Scrapers/squeegees/brushes
During cleaning, large quantities of water from hoses are frequently used to wash slurries from
floors and walls down the drain. Hand-held scrapers will move most of the slurry across the floor
efficiently.
The combined use of scrapers, brushes and hoses can reduce the time taken to clean an area.
Removing slurries from surfaces before they start to dry or pre-wetting dry areas can reduce:
■ the volume of water needed for washdown;

■ the time taken.
Pipelines can often be cleaned effectively using ‘pigging’ systems. A pig is typically an engineered
plug or ball which fits inside the pipe and is pushed through mechanically or hydraulically to clear
material ahead of the pig.
3.2.7 Cleaning in Place (CIP) technology

CIP systems are used to clean process plant in situ. They typically re-use final rinse water for first
rinses and re-use concentrated cleaning chemicals many times for intermediate washing cycles.
3.2.8 Recycle after treatment

Re-use of used water is often feasible following suitable treatment to remove unacceptable
impurities. Possible treatment technologies include:
■ filtration;
■ clarification/sedimentation;
■ centrifugation;
17
■ flotation;
■ ion exchange;
■ distillation/stripping;
■ absorption/adsorption.
However, it should be remembered that:
■ a small flow to drain may be required to control impurities which are not removed by the
treatment process(es);
■ treatment processes give rise to sludges, dirty filters, etc which will require controlled disposal;
■ closed-loop flows may increase in temperature and thus require cooling.
Water minimisation measures are saving Chloride Motive Power Batteries Ltd £110 000/year
(payback period of 1 - 2 years).
section
3 ■ Replacement of a wet filtration system with a membrane filter saved £12 000/year.
■ Use of a crossflow filtration system allowed water recycling, saving £9 000/year.
■ Re-use of treated effluent at various stages of the process saved £50 000/year.
For details see Industry Example 2 from Good Practice Guide (GG26), available free through the
Environmental Helpline.
The use of ion exchange technology to treat effluent from an electroplating shop at Amphenol
Ltd allowed the water to be re-used in a closed-loop system. The Company saved £108 000
in the first year alone. The reduction in water consumption was 89%, with a payback of less
than 16 months. For details see Good Practice Case Study (GC24), available free through the
Environmental Helpline.
The costs associated with on-site water treatment are outlined in Appendix 3.
3.3 PROCESS PLANT

The following Section should be read in conjunction with Table 9. Look for the sub-headings in the
columns labelled ‘Item/application’ and ‘Method’.
3.3.1 Liquid ring vacuum pumps

This type of pump uses a continuous supply of water to provide the seal. There may also be a
requirement for some water to cool bearings or lubricate the shaft seal. Such pumps, which need
a continuous supply of seal water during operation, consume large volumes of water.
The seal water is typically heated by 15°C in the pump and, in some cases, is discharged directly to
drain. This water can often be recovered for re-use. However, direct recirculation as sealing water
is limited by its temperature; the higher the water temperature, the lower the efficiency of the
vacuum pump especially when drawing air saturated with water vapour. Seal water may require
cooling and other treatment before re-use. Installing cyclone pre-separators on the vacuum side of
the pump can help to minimise contamination of the seal water.
18
Item/application Aim Method Description/ Equipment/ Applicability Other benefits Other factors Potential Potential
purpose technique cost payback
Liquid ring Recycle Recycle sealing Re-use of sealing Tanks/pumps/ Widespread Energy savings Seal water High Med
vacuum pumps water water after treatment separators/cooling from cooling quality control
seal water Seal water
temperature
Substitution Change to Avoid use of water Mechanical Widespread Liquid trap High Med
mechanical system vacuum pumps
Cooling towers Minimisation Automatic Operation at Conductivity-based Widespread Reduced Med Short
blowdown control maximum acceptable control chemicals use
TDS* concentration
Cooling load Minimise evaporation Process Widespread Reduced Med Med
reduction and blowdown optimisation chemicals use
Heat recovery
elsewhere
Substitution Use of alternative Avoid evaporation Air blast High cooled water Monitoring High Med-long
cooling processes of water temp. requirements
(temp above 40°C)
Heat exchangers Widespread Waste heat High Med
could be used
elsewhere
Heat exchangers Long-term Closed-loop Re-use Tanks/pumps/ Widespread Heat sink/ High Med-long
re-use water cycle heating source/ cooling tower/
cooling source water quality
Hydraulic Minimisation Cooling water Optimise water use by Bulb-and-capillary Widespread Essential cooling Low-med Short
power packs flow control from varying water flow operated flow requirement
oil temp. depending on oil control valves
temp.
Long-term Closed-loop Re-use after cooling Tanks/pumps/ Large installations Cooling tower/ High Long
re-use cooling water cycle cooling source water quality
Table 9 Cost-effective water saving devices and practices for industrial sites: process plant
Potential cost: Low = Minor alterations to existing plant (£0 - a few £100s); Med = Some alterations to existing plant (a few £100s - a few £1 000s); High = Extensive alterations or new plant (many £1 000s).
Potential payback: Short = Months; Med = Less than a year; Long = Over a year. *TDS = total dissolved solids

19
section
3
Options for controlling the temperature of the seal water include:
■ simple systems which bleed off warm water and top up with fresh cold water;
■ cooling towers;
■ integrated heat recovery systems.
Significant energy savings may be achieved by cooling seal water as this could enable the vacuum
pump to be run at lower speeds.
For detailed information on the optimum use of water in liquid ring vacuum pumps and the re-use
of seal water, see Good Practice Guide 83, Energy Efficient Liquid Ring Vacuum Pump Installations
in the Paper Industry. This Guide is available free from the Energy Efficiency Enquiries Bureau at ETSU
on 01235 436747.
For some duties, the liquid ring vacuum pump could be replaced with a purely mechanical vacuum
pump. This may have the added attraction of energy savings.
section
3 C Davidson and Sons saved £65 000/year by cooling and re-using water from the site’s liquid
ring vacuum pumps. The payback period was 14 weeks. In addition, electricity costs fell by
£173 000/year. For details see Good Practice Case Study 127, available free from the Energy
Efficiency Enquiries Bureau at ETSU on 01235 436747.
3.3.2 Cooling towers

Automatic blowdown control
Cooling towers operate with a small flow of water moving from the cold well to drain (blowdown).
This is intended to keep the level of dissolved solids to a minimum. Build-up of solid deposits in the
tower packing or plant cooling system can reduce cooling efficiency.
Cooling towers are often operated with a constant blowdown flow. This flow can be minimised by
using automatic control systems which measure the total dissolved solids content of the cooling
water.
Cooling load reduction

Cooling towers require fresh make-up water to replace evaporative losses and blowdown. The
amount of make-up water depends directly on the cooling load. Minimising the cooling load by
using the waste heat elsewhere in the factory will reduce the use of fresh water as make-up water.
For a 1 000 kW cooling duty, a typical cooling tower uses 2 m3/hour of fresh water and produces
0.75 m3/hour of blowdown to drain. These amounts will depend on the air temperature and relative
humidity.
Spray/mist recovery
Cooling towers also lose water as spray/mist. This water loss depends on the effectiveness, or even
the existence, of a mist eliminator.
In a cooling tower operating with optimised automatic blowdown control, losses of usable water are
small as the spray loss is effectively blowdown. However, in a cooling tower operated with a fixed
blowdown, spray loss represents a loss of usable water. It is likely to be more cost-effective to install
automatic blowdown control than to upgrade the spray/mist eliminator.
Use of alternative cooling processes

Conventional cooling towers can be replaced by air blast coolers in situations where ‘cooled’ water
temperatures of up to 40°C can be tolerated during the summer months.
20
In some cases, cooling systems can be integrated with other systems to cool one stream and heat
another. Heat exchange with incoming cold water can often achieve lower temperatures than
cooling towers.
3.3.3 Heat exchangers

Closed-loop water cycle
Heat exchanger cooling water does not always have to be discharged direct to drain. After cooling,
the water may be re-usable. A small flow to drain, or a filter, may be required to control the build-
up of contaminants. Most sites already make use of the energy content of the hot water stream
from heat exchangers.
Installation of cooling water recycle loops for reciprocating air compressors at Stoves plc
reduced water consumption by 30%. The water saving was worth about £35 000/year and
the payback period was around three months. For details see Industry Example 5 from Good
Practice Guide (GG26), available free through the Environmental Helpline. section
3
Wallcoverings manufacturer, Borden Decorative Products Ltd, has reduced water consumption at
its Lancashire site by nearly 40%. Most of the reduction was due to good practice and the
installation of a cooling loop recycle in place of an existing open loop system. The payback period
on the installation was seven months. For details see Industry Example 6, also from Good Practice
Guide (GG26).
3.3.4 Hydraulic power packs

Cooling water flow control from oil temperature
Large hydraulic power packs typically require a supply of cold water to cool the hydraulic oil. Often,
the flow of cooling water is uncontrolled.
The cooling water flow can be controlled by a control valve linked to a thermostat in the oil. Simple,
adjustable bulb-and-capillary operated flow control valves are available which do not require
electrical supplies. If cooling is essential to avoid damage to equipment, the valve should be set to
fail open rather than closed.
Closed-loop cooling water cycle

Hydraulic-power-pack oil coolers are often plumbed into the nearest water supply and discharged
to drain. Cooling water for the oil could be obtained from, and returned to, alternative sources, eg
site process cooling water systems. The heat load is relatively small when compared with process
cooling duties.
21
4 W AT E R S A V I N G D E V I C E S A N D
PRACTICES FOR COMMERCIAL SITES
This Section suggests cost-effective devices and practices to reduce water consumption at
commercial sites. The advice is summarised in Table 10. A Case Study from a wholesale food
distributor is used to illustrate the savings that can be achieved.
The following Sections should be read in conjunction with Table 10. Look for the sub-headings in
the column labelled ‘Method’.
Contact a plumber or building maintenance service for information about how to obtain the water
saving devices mentioned.
4.1 GENERAL WATER USE

4.1.1 Automatic/manual isolation of water supply
section
Passive infrared (PIR) sensors can be used to detect activity in areas and thus control water supplies
4 to suit the activity. These sensors typically use long-life batteries, lasting 3 - 4 years. Replacement
batteries should be obtained from the original supplier.
PIR systems are particularly appropriate for washrooms and toilets and can be extended to control
lighting and fans as well as water supplies.
Control of water supplies using a timer is suitable when work hours can be predicted. A cheap
alternative is to use a single valve for area isolation which is closed manually by the ‘last person out’.
4.2 TOILETS
4.2.1 Flush control
The rate at which men’s toilet cisterns fill and
empty is often controlled by a needle valve.
Water consumption can be significantly improved
by PIR controlled devices.
However, the toilets must be flushed at the

minimum frequency necessary to remain hygienic.
When retrofitting flush controls in existing toilets,
readers are advised to consult their supplier about
the minimum flushing frequency desirable for
their site’s specific circumstances. Control of
flushes is required under current water by-laws.
Flush controls are now fitted as standard on men’s
toilets in new commercial buildings.
Installation of infrared flush control

devices in 2 000 buildings reduced a large
telecommunications company’s water
consumption by over one million m3/year.
Fig 5 Flush control using passive infrared sensor
22
Item/application Aim Method Description/ Equipment/
purpose technique
Training for water Water saving Awareness Make people conscious Training
saving awareness by training of the cost of water use
Water saving culture Water saving Communication Comparison of use Clubs
between users between similar users
Water use survey Water saving Identify and measure Site-wide survey Site records, flow measureme
General water use Minimisation Automatic/manual Shut off water when PIR sensor and solenoid
(Section 4.1) isolation of water supply not required
Seven day timer
Manual valve last person out
Toilets (Section 4.2) Minimisation Men’s toilet Optimised flushing PIR sensor and solenoid
flush control frequency
Optimised flushing rate Flow limiting valves/orifices
Reduced cistern Reduced water Smaller cisterns
volume volume per flush
Cistern volume adjuster (CVA
Substitution Chemical Chemical treatment Waterless men’s
treatment of toilet effluent toilet
Sinks (Section 4.3) Minimisation Reduced bowl filling Use of a smaller Small sink
working volume
Automatic supply Use of water only Self-closing taps
shut-off when required
Showers (Section 4.4) Minimisation Flow restriction Reduced flow shower Low flow shower
Gardening (Section 4.5) Minimisation Sprays/jets Appropriate Spray nozzles
application of water
Automatic Use water only Solenoid valves
supply shut-off when required
Spray guns
Abandon grass Do not water grass. Nothing
watering Leave it to recover
during autumn
Minimise Reduce evaporation Nothing
evaporation by watering during the
coolest part of the day
Water released in required Permeable pipe
area by underground
permeable pipe
Rainwater collection Collection of rainwater Pipes/containers
from guttering
Laboratories (Section 4.6) Minimisation Condensers Using minimum flow Nothing
Substitution Mechanical Alternative provision Mechanical

vacuum pumps of vacuum vacuum pumps
Garages (Section 4.7) Minimisation Sprays/jets Appropriate Spray nozzles
application of water
High pressure spray packages
Long term Recycle through Treatment of wash Proprietary plant
re-use treatment water to an acceptable
standard for re-use
Table 10 Cost-effective water saving de
Potential cost: Low = Minor alterations to existing plant (£0 - a few £100s); Med = Some alterations to existing plant (a few £100s - a few £1 000s); Hig
This Table should be read in conjunction with Section 4
23
cost payback
All areas of use Med Med
All areas of use Shared experience Med Med
ent All areas of use Med Short

Wash rooms Reduced flood risk Med Med
Fixed work hours Med Short-med

Distribution systems Med Short-med
Men’s toilets Med Short-med
Out-of-date Hygiene requirements Med Short-med

New installations Med Med
A) Old toilets Hygiene requirements Low Short

Remote areas Solid waste High Med
disposal/hygiene
New installations Washing requirements Med Med
Widespread Reduced flood risk Med Med
Widespread Energy savings Med Med

Widespread Low Med
Widespread Low Med
Widespread Low Short

Widespread Some areas may suffer Zero Instant
Widespread Overtime Zero Instant
Widespread Med Med
Widespread Med Med
Widespread Condenser efficiency Zero Instant
Widespread Liquid trapping High Long
Improved cleaning Low Short-med
s Improved cleaning High Short-med

Vehicle Waste disposal High Med-long
evices and practices for commercial sites

cost payback
All areas of use Med Med
All areas of use Shared experience Med Med
ent All areas of use Med Short

Wash rooms Reduced flood risk Med Med
Fixed work hours Med Short-med

Distribution systems Med Short-med
Men’s toilets Med Short-med
Out-of-date Hygiene requirements Med Short-med

New installations Med Med
A) Old toilets Hygiene requirements Low Short

Remote areas Solid waste High Med
disposal/hygiene
New installations Washing requirements Med Med
Widespread Reduced flood risk Med Med
Widespread Energy savings Med Med

Widespread Low Med
Widespread Low Med
Widespread Low Short

Widespread Some areas may suffer Zero Instant
Widespread Overtime Zero Instant
Widespread Med Med
Widespread Med Med
Widespread Condenser efficiency Zero Instant
Widespread Liquid trapping High Long
Improved cleaning Low Short-med
s Improved cleaning High Short-med

Vehicle Waste disposal High Med-long
evices and practices for commercial sites

Booker Belmont Wholesale Ltd manages utility use at the 160 Booker Cash & Carry wholesale
outlets in the UK. Water costs represented less than 5% of utility costs and were originally
given a low priority. However, closer examination revealed that significant savings could be
achieved quickly at many depots by installing simple, low-cost devices.
Booker installed the following water saving devices at 109 selected branches across the UK:
■ 975 percussion taps which closed after one to 30 seconds;

■ 235 cistern volume adjusters;
■ 115 flush controls.
The benefits of this water saving project, which cost around £74 000 to implement, include:
■ average reduction in water use and wastewater generation of over 65%;

■ total cost savings of £106 700/year for the 109 depots;
■ average reduction in annual water and effluent charges of over £970/depot;
■ payback period of under nine months.
Full details of this successful water saving project are given in Good Practice Case Study (GC61),
section
Low-cost Measures Save Water at a Multi-site Company, and is available free through the
Environmental Helpline on 0800 585794. 4
4.4 SHOWERS
4.4.1 Flow restriction
Low flow, high velocity showers use water efficiently. Typical, conventional shower use is 35 litres.
Power showers use substantially more water.
4.5 GARDENING
4.5.1 Sprays/jets
When watering plants and gardens, water can be misused by spraying over too wide or too narrow
an area. Sprays and jets allow water to be evenly distributed where it is actually needed.
4.5.2 Automatic supply shut-off

A garden hose can use 1 m3 of water every hour. If the hose is hidden under a bush and forgotten,
then at a water cost of 55 pence/m3, this will cost £13.20/day. A lightweight, trigger-operated spray
gun costs about £25 (1996 prices). The payback in this case - allowing £15 for fitting - would be
about three days.
4.5.3 Abandon grass watering

Unless green lawns are essential, grass does not need to be watered regularly. Most areas of grass
in the UK will recover to a respectable green colour during the autumn without any artificial
watering during the summer. Only well-drained or shallow areas may suffer.
Sprinkler users can expect to either pay an additional fee or have their water supply metered.
25
4.5.4 Minimise evaporation
Evaporation from soil and plants can be minimised by:
■ watering in the cool of the evening;

■ subsurface watering with permeable pipes;
■ using mulches.
4.5.5 Rainwater collection

Rainwater from guttering is usually adequate for use on gardens and may also be suitable in
untreated form for other low-grade uses. Drums or tanks can be used to collect the rainwater with
minor modifications to downpipes. Attention should be given to diverting any overflow back to the
rainwater drain.
Untreated rainwater should not be used for drinking.
4.6 LABORATORIES
4.6.1 Condensers
section Condensers are usually connected to a tap and set to operate at full flow.
4 4.6.2 Vacuum pumps
Many small vacuum pumps used in laboratories are driven by mains water and require a continuous
supply of water to operate. Such pumps can usually be replaced with mechanical vacuum pumps,
but with attention to liquid trapping to protect the pump.
4.7 GARAGES
Spray systems can improve water use in vehicle washing. High pressure jetting systems can be
efficient, but require careful use.
Washing water can be recycled following treatment in proprietary equipment.
26
5 M E A S U R I N G W AT E R U S E
AND FLOW
Water flow can be measured either in pipelines or in channels. The numerous options for flow
measurement each have their own advantages and disadvantages.
The following questions should be considered before selecting a flow measurement system or
contacting a supplier of flow measurement equipment:
■ What accuracy is required?

■ Will the flow rate obtained by ‘bucket and stopwatch’ methods be sufficiently accurate?
■ How big are the pipes and can they be opened to insert an invasive flow measurement
system?
■ What is the temperature, pressure and range of speed of the water?
■ Is the water clean or dirty? If dirty, what is the nature of the contamination?
■ Is the pipework old and corroded? Corrosion can cause problems for strap-on systems.
■ Is the pipework insulated or trace heated?
■ Will a pressure drop across an invasive metering element be acceptable?
■ Is a signal for output to on-line monitoring or recording systems required?
Where flows are accessible, measuring the time taken to fill a bucket or other container is usually section
an extremely effective, cheap and simple method of measuring flows. Bucket and stopwatch 5
measurements of clean water flows can be speeded up using a spring balance, as one litre of clean
water weighs one kg. Don’t forget the weight of the bucket.
Water use in toilets can be estimated from the frequency of use and cistern volume. WC cistern
volumes can be calculated from measurements obtained by tying up the ballcock gently, flushing
and filling the cistern from a graduated bucket.
Use in washbasins can be estimated by temporarily disconnecting the ‘U’ bend and then running
the waste into a large, graduated plastic bucket while using clean water to simulate normal use, eg
washing hands.
Details of other commonly used flow measurement techniques are summarised in Table 11.
Electrical signals produced by flow measurement systems can be collected in data loggers for trend
analysis.
27
Sensor element Type Principle Applicability Common problems
Turbine Invasive Rotation of turbine Clean water Solids or solvents
blades by flow Pipes
Rotameter Invasive Variable area Clean water Must be vertical
Pipes
Orifice Invasive Pressure differential Clean water Solids may block pressure
Pipes tappings
Magnetic Invasive Distortion of Clean or dirty water Must remain full*
magnetic field Pipes
Thermal dilution Invasive Rate of cooling Clean or dirty water
Pipes or channels
Ultrasonic - Invasive/ Vector addition Clean or slightly Might not work in dirty
time-of-flight Non-invasive of velocities dirty water water
Pipes
Ultrasonic - Invasive/ Reflections from Dirty water Will not work in
Doppler Non-invasive particles in water Pipes clean water
Ultrasonic + Invasive Doppler for flow Dirty water Small weir may be required
pressure Pressure for depth Pipes or channels
or sewers
Weir Invasive Level upstream Clean or dirty water Settling solids will
of weir Channels require removal
Flume Invasive Level upstream Clean or dirty water Settling solids will
of flume Channels require removal
section Bucket and - Time taken to Clean or dirty water ‘Spot’ flow measurement
5 stopwatch collect a known

volume
Drop tank test - Rate of change of ‘Spot’ flow measurement
depth in tank
* Some new systems will measure flow in part-full pipes
Table 11 Commonly used flow measurement techniques
Other specialised systems include oval rotors, venturi tubes, Pitot tubes, averaging Pitot tubes and
vortex shedders.
Turbine meters usually provide a direct visual display of cumulative flow. Instantaneous flow signals
can usually be acquired from optional sensors which bolt onto the turbine casing and provide pulsed
electrical outputs.
Installing a few inexpensive turbine-type water meters at key points in the water distribution system
can enhance the results obtained from a water use survey. At 1996 prices, a flowmeter for a
0.5 inch (1.25 cm) pipe costs about £60 and for a 2 inch (5 cm) pipe the cost is about £260.
Numerous versions of inexpensive orifice meters which give direct readings of instantaneous flow
are available.
Strap-on ultrasonic flowmeters can give good results, but older pipework may cause problems.
Levels at weirs or flumes, and hence the flow, can be measured non-invasively by ultrasonic distance
measuring systems or invasively by pressure gauges. Foam on the surface can cause problems with
ultrasonic systems. Large diameter diaphragm-based pressure systems are available for use in cases
where solids could block standard pressure transmitters. Such systems are also available with
hygienic fittings.
Drop tank tests can be used to calibrate flow measurement systems.
28
Another method of measuring the water level - a variant of the pressure technique - uses a small
dip tube to gently blow air bubbles in the water from below the surface. The amount of excess air
pressure required to expel air is related to the depth of water above the end of the dip tube; the
deeper the water, the higher the pressure required to expel air.
The accuracy of flow measurement equipment is affected by the proximity of:
■ valves;
■ bends;
■ other items which affect the flow.
The selection and application of flow measurement systems are described in An Introductory Guide
to Flow Measurement by R C Baker and published by Mechanical Engineering Publications Ltd in
1989 (ISBN 0-85298-670-X).
Flow which falls from the end of horizontal pipes or channels can be estimated by critical depth
measurements. The tables, equations and other guidance needed to calculate flow from an
estimate of critical depth are given in A Handbook of Hydraulics by Brater, King and Lindell,
7th edition, McGraw Hill (ISBN 0-07007-247-7).
section
29
6 ACTION PLAN
Find out how much your organisation is paying in water and effluent charges.
Carry out a water use survey for your site.
Develop a water balance for your site.
Agree a target for water saving.
Estimate potential savings from reducing water use and effluent generation.
Identify other benefits from saving water.
Decide how much it is worth spending on water saving projects.
Identify and evaluate appropriate water saving devices and practices.
Identify project costs.
Consider the impact of the water saving measures on your particular industrial
process.
Implement cost-effective water saving devices and practices.
If necessary, obtain help. The Environmental Helpline (0800 585794) can:
send you copies of relevant Environmental Technology Best Practice Programme

section
publications;
6 suggest other sources of information;
provide free up-to-date information on a wide range of environmental issues,
legislation and technology;
arrange for a specialist to visit your company if you employ fewer than 250 people.
Identification and implementation of cost-effective water saving devices and practices should be
carried out as part of a campaign to minimise water use and wastewater generation at your site. A
systematic approach to waste minimisation is described in Good Practice Guide (GG26) Saving
Money through Waste Minimisation: Reducing Water Use, available free through the Environmental
Helpline on 0800 585794.
30
Appendix 1
A T Y P I C A L W AT E R S A V I N G
CAMPAIGN
A typical water saving campaign involves the four phases summarised in Fig A1.
PHASE 1 - Initiation
■ Involve staff and appoint the leader (‘Champion’) of the water saving team.
■ Find out about water saving devices and their application, eg read this Good Practice
Guide, contact the Environmental Helpline on 0800 585794 for advice.
■ Talk to other interested people in the organisation.
■ Develop a simple programme.
■ Allocate sufficient resources.
PHASE 2 - Water use survey and development of the water balance

■ Identify where, how and why water is used.
■ Identify the water quality requirement at each point of use.
■ Determine the water quality and availability at each point of discharge.
PHASE 3 - Evaluation of water saving options

■ Evaluate current and future water costs by area or item of equipment.
■ Identify and evaluate cost-effective water saving devices and practices.
■ Carry out trials of likely options.
PHASE 4 - Implementation
■ Train staff (if necessary).
appx
■ Implement cost-effective water saving devices and practices.
■ Monitor the implemented devices and practices.
A1
■ Communicate successes and savings to employees.
■ Obtain feedback from employees.
Fig A1 The four phases of a typical water saving campaign
The main steps involved in a typical water saving campaign are shown in Fig A2. These steps are
broadly similar for both industrial and commercial sites.
31
Start
Staff
Team and resources
Water usage survey

Ideas
Good Practice Guide
Manufacturer's information Brainstorming
Similar units elsewhere
Other sources
Outline a potential project
Estimate potential cost

Water and effluent costs reductions
Production figures
Water saving potential
Maximum Project Budget
Target saving Elimination by rule No

Target payback of thumb methods.
Is this an attractive
project?
Yes
Detailed design
Manufacturers
Obtain accurate equipment

costs and associated cost
reductions
Calculate real costs and

Associated cost reductions cost reductions
appx
A1 Is this still
attractive?
No
Yes
Do it
Measure it
Report it
Continue
Fig A2 Water saving campaign flow chart
32
Appendix 2
W AT E R A N D E F F L U E N T
CHARGES
Table A1 shows charges typical of those levied by water companies and authorities in England,
Scotland and Wales in 1996 - 1997. The figures are only indicative and should not be used for
detailed evaluation of a water savings project. Readers are advised to contact their local water
company (water authority in Scotland) for information relevant to their site.
The charges shown in Table A1 include only the flow-related elements of the effluent charges
(reception and volume) since the water saving methods outlined in this Guide are aimed at volume
reduction. The total effluent charges levied by individual water companies and authorities include
an element for pollutant concentration.
Water company/ Water supply Effluent charges Total charges

authority (pence/m3) (reception and volume only) (pence/m3)
(pence/m3)
Anglian 58 24 82
Northumbrian 53 27 80
North West 60 18 78
Severn Trent 63 25 88
Southern 55 34 89
South West 75 59 134
Thames 48 14 62
Wessex 68 21 89
Yorkshire 64 29 93
Welsh 77 19 96
West of Scotland Water Authority 44 13 57
(WOSWA)
East of Scotland Water Authority 30 N/A* 30
(EOSWA)
North of Scotland Water Authority** ~61 ~15 ~76
appx
(NOSWA)
* Standing charge (changes in volume have no effect on effluent bill) A2
** Approximate quantities
Table A1 Typical water and effluent charges levied in 1996 - 1997
NB The standing or fixed charge element of a water bill depends on meter size. For example, if
an office block has a 100 mm meter where an 80 mm meter would suffice, annual charges
may be over £1 000 more than necessary.
33
Appendix 3
E S T I M AT I N G P U M P I N G , E N E R G Y
A N D T R E AT M E N T C O S T S
ESTIMATING THE EFFECT OF REDUCED WATER USE ON PUMPING

COSTS
Pumping costs depend mainly on:
■ the mode of operation of the pumping system;

■ the flow being pumped;
■ the pressure at which it is being pumped.
Fixed speed pumps
Pumping costs for a pumping station with fixed speed pumps which start and stop to meet demand
can be estimated pro rata from the total flow and pump power consumption.
Variable speed pumps
Systems which use variable speed pumps to maintain either a constant liquid level (eg drainage
sumps) or constant pressure (eg ring mains) require more thought.
Estimating the power consumption for variable speed systems is more complicated. For example,
pumping at half the flow rate reduces the instantaneous power requirement to overcome the static
head (pressure or gravity) to half but reduces the instantaneous power requirement to overcome the
dynamic head (friction) to approximately one eighth. The process also takes twice as long.
Potential reductions in pumping costs for variable speed pumping systems are best estimated - if the
data are available - from hours-run meters, measured power consumption and total flow.
Pump maintenance costs can be estimated pro rata from the hours run.
ESTIMATING WATER HEATING AND COOLING COSTS

The power required to heat or cool water is much easier to estimate. You need to know:
■ the required temperature difference (°C);

■ the flow rate (litres/second);
■ the density (kg/m3);
appx
■ the heat capacity of the water (the heat capacity of clean water = 4.18 kJ/kg°C);
A3 ■ the cost of a kWh of heating or cooling.
As the density of clean water is 1 000 kg/m3, a flow rate of 1 litre/sec of clean water is equivalent
to 1 kg/second.
∴ Power requirement (kW*)
= Flow rate (kg/second) x temperature difference (°C) x heat capacity (kJ/kg°C)
NB Dirty water may have a different density and heat capacity compared with clean water. If
necessary, this should be taken into account.
* 1kW = 1 kJ/second
34
Heating costs can then be calculated from the utility unit cost.
The cost of cooling in a cooling tower can be estimated from the cost of the make-up and
blowdown to drain. For every 1 000 kW, this amounts to approximately 2 m3/hour make-up water
and approximately 0.75 m3/hour of blowdown to effluent.
In most cases, the cooling tower fan power consumption can be ignored. This should remain
constant unless controlled by the water temperature.
The cost of cooling by refrigeration can be calculated directly from the refrigeration plant costs.
Calculation example for a cooling tower:
A study in a fictitious factory has identified a process modification which would result in a reduction
of 100 kW in cooling load on an evaporative cooling tower. What is the estimated reduction in
water and effluent costs if the cooling tower operates for 330 days/year, the water charges are
55 pence/m3 and the effluent charges are 34 pence/m3?
Calculate the reduction in water usage for evaporation and blowdown pro rata:
Reduction in evaporation = 2 m3/hour x 100 kW/1 000 kW = 0.2 m3/hour
Reduction in blowdown = 0.75 m3/hour x 100 kW/1 000 kW = 0.075 m3/hour
Reduction in water usage =

reduction evaporation + reduction in blowdown =
0.2 m3/hour + 0.075 m3/hour = 0.275 m3/hour
Annual reduction in water usage =

0.275 m3/hour x 24 hours/day x 330 days/year = 2 180 m3/year
Annual reduction in water charges = 2 180 m3/year x £0.55/m3 = £1 199/year
Reduction in effluent generation = reduction in blowdown only = 0.075 m3/hour
Annual reduction in effluent generation =

0.075 m3/hour x 24 hours/day x 330 days/year = 594 m3/year
Annual reduction in effluent charges = 594 m3/year x £0.34/m3 = £202/year
appx
Estimated reduction in water and effluent charges = £1 199/year + £202/year = £1 401/year
A3
There will be small additional cost savings of a few pounds for water treatment chemicals.
The estimated cost reduction can be used in the calculation of the Maximum Project Budget.
35
ESTIMATING ON-SITE WATER TREATMENT COSTS
The costs associated with water treatment prior to use or re-use include:
■ consumables;
■ effluent and solid waste disposal;
■ energy.
A typical ion exchange system, eg base exchange with salt solution regeneration, used to reduce the
total hardness of mains water from 375 mg/litre (as calcium carbonate) to less than 10 mg/litre (as
calcium carbonate) uses the following resources to produce 1 m3 of usable treated water:
■ 1.05 m3 mains water;

■ 0.5 kg salt (typically £130/tonne at 1996 prices).
Treatment generates, for every 1 m3 of usable water, 0.05 m3 regeneration solution and rinse water,
ie the process achieves a 95% yield of treated water, with 5% waste as effluent to drain. The latter
will incur effluent charges.
Actual regeneration solution consumption depends on the quality of the mains water.
Reverse osmosis and membrane water treatment systems typically generate 0.25 m3 of effluent/m3
usable treated water.
Where mains water is treated, the effluent usually affects only the volume elements of effluent
charges.
Other water treatment systems, such as neutralisation, require more detailed examination.
If you need help on how to calculate the costs associated with water treatment, seek advice or
contact the Environmental Helpline on 0800 585794.
appx
A3
36
Appendix 4
CONVERTING BETWEEN
SYSTEMS OF UNITS
To Convert From: To: Multiply By:

US gallons UK gallons 0.8327
UK gallons Cubic metres 0.0045
UK gallons/hour Cubic metres/hour 0.0045
UK gallons/minute Cubic metres/hour 0.2728
UK gallons/second Cubic metres/hour 16.36
Cubic metres/hour Litres/second 0.278
Litres/second Cubic metres/hour 3.6
Cubic metres Litres 1 000
Cubic metres of clean water Kilogrammes 1 000
Litres of clean water Kilogrammes 1
appx
A4
37
Appendix 5
FURTHER READING
Further information about water saving devices and practices can be obtained from the following
publications. This is not an exhaustive list.
The Water Friendly Garden, The Royal Horticultural Society

Charles Baker Publishing Ltd.
Water Wise, Environment Agency (Jun 1996)
Available on request from the Environment Agency’s Water Demand Management Centre
Helpdesk on 01903 832073.
Cutting Water and Effluent Costs, John S Hills, Institution of Chemical Engineers, 1995
(ISBN 0-85295-361-5)
Water Conservation - Government Action, Water Supply and Regulation Division,

Department of the Environment (Aug 1995)
Available from the Water Supply and Regulation Division, Department of the Environment
on 0171 276 8120.
Green Office Manual, Earthscan/Kogan Page. Tel: 0171 278 0433.
The Green Office Guide, Macmillan Press, 1997.
Water and process industry trade journals may also give useful ideas and information about
equipment for water saving projects. Ask your trade association to recommend appropriate
journals.
USEFUL PUBLICATIONS FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL

TECHNOLOGY BEST PRACTICE PROGRAMME
Relevant publications available free through the Environmental Helpline on 0800 585794 include:
■ Good Practice Guide (GG25) Saving Money Through Waste Minimisation: Raw Material
Use;
■ Good Practice Guide (GG26) Saving Money Through Waste Minimisation: Reducing Water
Use;
■ Good Practice Guide (GG27) Saving Money Through Waste Minimisation: Teams and
Champions.
The development and benefits of a waste minimisation culture which include water minimisation are
described in Good Practice Case Study (GC19), Waste Minimisation Pays Major Dividends.
appx
A5
38
Appendix 5
FURTHER READING
Further information about water saving devices and practices can be obtained from the following
publications. This is not an exhaustive list.
The Water Friendly Garden, The Royal Horticultural Society

Charles Baker Publishing Ltd.
Water Wise, Environment Agency (Jun 1996)
Available on request from the Environment Agency’s Water Demand Management Centre
Helpdesk on 01903 832073.
Cutting Water and Effluent Costs, John S Hills, Institution of Chemical Engineers, 1995
(ISBN 0-85295-361-5)
Water Conservation - Government Action, Water Supply and Regulation Division,

Department of the Environment (Aug 1995)
Available from the Water Supply and Regulation Division, Department of the Environment
on 0171 276 8120.
Green Office Manual, Earthscan/Kogan Page. Tel: 0171 278 0433.
The Green Office Guide, Macmillan Press, 1997.
Water and process industry trade journals may also give useful ideas and information about
equipment for water saving projects. Ask your trade association to recommend appropriate
journals.
USEFUL PUBLICATIONS FROM THE ENVIRONMENTAL

TECHNOLOGY BEST PRACTICE PROGRAMME
Relevant publications available free through the Environmental Helpline on 0800 585794 include:
■ Good Practice Guide (GG25) Saving Money Through Waste Minimisation: Raw Material
Use;
■ Good Practice Guide (GG26) Saving Money Through Waste Minimisation: Reducing Water
Use;
■ Good Practice Guide (GG27) Saving Money Through Waste Minimisation: Teams and
Champions.
The development and benefits of a waste minimisation culture which include water minimisation are
described in Good Practice Case Study (GC19), Waste Minimisation Pays Major Dividends.
appx
A5
38
The Environmental Technology Best Practice Programme is a joint Department of Trade and
Industry and Department of the Environment initiative. It is managed by AEA Technology plc
through ETSU and the National Environmental Technology Centre.
The Programme offers free advice and information for UK businesses and promotes
environmental practices that:
■ increase profits for UK industry and commerce;
■ reduce waste and pollution at source.
To find out more about the Programme please call the Environmental Helpline on freephone
0800 585794. As well as giving information about the Programme, the Helpline has access to
a wide range of environmental information. It offers free advice to UK businesses on technical
matters, environmental legislation, conferences and promotional seminars. For smaller
companies, a free counselling service may be offered at the discretion of the Helpline Manager.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE ENVIRONMENTAL HELPLINE
0800 585794
e-mail address: etbppenvhelp@aeat.co.uk
World wide web: http://www.etsu.com/ETBPP/

Cost-Effective Water Saving Devices &amp; Practices

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Cost-Effective Water Saving Devices &amp; Practices

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

GG67

This Good Practice Guide was produced by the

Prepared with assistance from:

Water, water, everywhere and no one stops to think.

2 Choosing water saving devices and practices 4

3 Water saving devices and practices for industrial sites 12

4 Water saving devices and practices for commercial sites 22

5 Measuring water use and flow 27

1.1 HOW CAN THIS GUIDE HELP?

Mainswater flow measurement, which included a connection into an existing on-line

Companies need to ask themselves the following questions:

Are we using too much water?

■ evaluate the technical issues;

1.2 CARRYING OUT A WATER USE SURVEY

First, the following questions should be asked:

■ schematic diagrams of the water and effluent systems are produced;

* Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) Regulations 1994

A survey of water distribution systems and points of use typically reveals:

■ excessive or unnecessary use;

A survey of effluent discharges and routes to sewer typically reveals:

■ clean water discharges direct to effluent;

Details of how to measure water flow are given in Section 5.

1.3 THE TALE OF ONE CUBIC METRE OF WATER

A flow rate of 1 m3/hour of water is approximately equivalent to:

■ the flow from a garden hose; or

So at 1996 prices, a flow rate of 1 m3/hour will cost between:

■ 48 pence and £1.34 every hour; or

* The density of clean water is 1 g/ml or 1 000 kg/m3

2.1 FIRST CONSIDERATIONS

2 ■ payback periods for any water saving projects.

And the following should be considered:

How are savings in water use estimated?

2.2 ESTIMATING POTENTIAL SAVINGS

Percentage reduction in water distribution pressure

Percentage reduction in heat load on cooling tower

Drops breaking into a stream

Fig 3 Water losses from an open tap

■ the cost of filling sinks;

Valve 0.1 litre/minute

Savings can also arise from:

■ a delayed requirement for additional capacity for water storage;

2.4 SETTING THE PROJECT BUDGET

2.4.1 Worked example

2.6 IDENTIFYING PROJECT COSTS

Project costs occur in two stages:

■ the effect of reduced water use on pumping costs;

2.7 WORKED EXAMPLE FOR A COMMERCIAL SITE

Tables 3 and 4 summarise the survey findings.

Area of hotel Washbasins WC Men’s

Current water use (litres/day) Washbasins WC Men’s Total

■ fitting percussion (push) taps on all washbasins (50% reduction);

Table 5 shows the potential savings from these measures.

Future water use (litres/day) Washbasins WC Men’s Total

■ conversion to percussion taps on washbasins in frequent use is cost-effective;

The estimated project economics are summarised in Table 6.

Washbasins WC Men’s Total of

3.1 GENERAL WATER USE

3.1.2 Leakage identification and elimination

Leaks can arise from:

■ damaged pipeline connections, flanges and fittings;

This Table should be read in conjunction with Section 3.1.

■ simple level sensors and on/off control systems for pumps;

section A simple and cheap solution is to:

3.1.5 Flood prevention

Cost-Effective Water Saving Devices & Practices

Cost-Effective Water Saving Devices & Practices