volume 1 - Halifax Regional Municipality
volume 1 - Halifax Regional Municipality volume 1 - Halifax Regional Municipality
Halifax Water Integrated Resource Plan Recommended IRP and Analysis Figure 6.5 Dartmouth WWTF Demand Reduction In order to assess the potential benefit to cost relationship associated with the demand reduction activity the following assumptions were made: • The bulk of the cost of the 30% future water/wastewater demand reduction would be incorporated into the cost of the new dwellings and buildings (through low-flow appliances and fixtures) and would not impact on the IRP capital requirements. • The cost of the demand reduction for existing water/wastewater usage would be small and would be largely achieved through existing public education programs The cost of the I/I program could not be determined precisely due to the absence of Halifax data. Instead a high-level analysis approach was based on the large scale, well resourced, multi-year program in King County, Washington. The King County program examined a wide range of on-lot and public system measures to achieve flow reductions. The overall goal of the program was a reduction equivalent to 30% of existing I/I rates. The program considered numerous major expansions of wastewater collection, conveyance and treatment facilities. An analysis of the King County costing data for I/I reduction projects was carried out for the IRP and is presented in Figure 6.6. The costs were indexed from 2005 to 2012 using the ENRCCI. The costs include a construction cost multiplier accounting for engineering and contingencies among other factors. Revision: 2012-10-29 Integrated Resource Plan 83 October 31 2012 Page 116 of 272
Halifax Water Integrated Resource Plan Recommended IRP and Analysis Figure 6.6 King County I/I Reduction Costs The capital and operating cost reduction with both water demand and I/I reduction is about a NPV of $21.2 million to 2043. Using I/I reduction alone corresponds to about $10 million NPV in cost reduction by 2043. The flow reduction of 30% in the existing I/I flow would cost about $8.4 million using King County data. This would provide a potential savings in NPV of $1.6 million ($10 million in savings - $8.4 million I/I program cost) for a future I/I reduction program. This of course must be tempered with the recognition that local conditions and costs may prove to be very different than King County and highlights the need for a comprehensive Halifax I/I program. The case study findings support the importance of including a robust treatment of demand reduction strategies in regional wastewater planning, including the proposed Wet Weather System Plan and Wastewater Master Plan. The results of such analysis may significantly impact the Recommended IRP and should be incorporated when the IRP is updated. Through a more comprehensive demand reduction analysis, Halifax Water will be able to assess the effectiveness and affordability of a range of demand reduction solutions for the wastewater system that may include additional system storage, sewer separation, sewer twinning, installation of deep storm sewers, and a range of solutions on the private portion of the network. The formal wet weather planning and I/I reduction pilot programs proposed in the current IRP will build on the preliminary Revision: 2012-10-29 Integrated Resource Plan 84 October 31 2012 Page 117 of 272
- Page 65 and 66: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 67 and 68: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 69 and 70: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 71 and 72: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 73 and 74: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 75 and 76: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 77 and 78: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 79 and 80: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 81 and 82: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 83 and 84: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 85 and 86: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 87 and 88: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 89 and 90: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 91 and 92: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 93 and 94: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 95 and 96: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 97 and 98: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 99 and 100: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 101 and 102: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 103 and 104: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 105 and 106: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 107 and 108: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 109 and 110: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 111 and 112: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 113 and 114: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 115: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 119 and 120: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 121 and 122: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 123 and 124: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 125 and 126: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 127 and 128: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 129 and 130: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 131 and 132: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 133 and 134: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 135 and 136: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 137 and 138: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 139 and 140: Halifax Water - Integrated Resource
- Page 141 and 142: Halifax Water - Integrated Resource
- Page 143 and 144: Halifax Water - Integrated Resource
- Page 145 and 146: Halifax Water - Integrated Resource
- Page 147 and 148: Halifax Water Integrated Resource P
- Page 149 and 150: Capital Expenditure Program All $ i
- Page 151 and 152: Page 1 of 3 Stormwater Projects Pro
- Page 153 and 154: Page 3 of 3 Stormwater Projects Pro
- Page 155 and 156: Page 1 of 7 Wastewater Projects Pro
- Page 157 and 158: Page 3 of 7 Wastewater Projects Pro
- Page 159 and 160: Page 5 of 7 Wastewater Projects Pro
- Page 161 and 162: Page 7 of 7 Wastewater Projects Pro
- Page 163 and 164: Water Projects Page 1 of 4 Project
- Page 165 and 166: Water Projects Page 3 of 4 Project
<strong>Halifax</strong> Water Integrated Resource Plan<br />
Recommended IRP and Analysis<br />
Figure 6.5<br />
Dartmouth WWTF Demand Reduction<br />
In order to assess the potential benefit to cost relationship associated with the demand<br />
reduction activity the following assumptions were made:<br />
• The bulk of the cost of the 30% future water/wastewater demand reduction would<br />
be incorporated into the cost of the new dwellings and buildings (through low-flow<br />
appliances and fixtures) and would not impact on the IRP capital requirements.<br />
• The cost of the demand reduction for existing water/wastewater usage would be<br />
small and would be largely achieved through existing public education programs<br />
The cost of the I/I program could not be determined precisely due to the absence of<br />
<strong>Halifax</strong> data. Instead a high-level analysis approach was based on the large scale,<br />
well resourced, multi-year program in King County, Washington.<br />
The King County program examined a wide range of on-lot and public system measures<br />
to achieve flow reductions. The overall goal of the program was a reduction equivalent<br />
to 30% of existing I/I rates. The program considered numerous major expansions of<br />
wastewater collection, conveyance and treatment facilities. An analysis of the King<br />
County costing data for I/I reduction projects was carried out for the IRP and is<br />
presented in Figure 6.6. The costs were indexed from 2005 to 2012 using the ENRCCI.<br />
The costs include a construction cost multiplier accounting for engineering and<br />
contingencies among other factors.<br />
Revision: 2012-10-29 Integrated Resource Plan 83<br />
October 31 2012 Page 116 of 272