v1 Jan 2014

CALCULATING A WATER FOOTPRINT –

THE BENEFITS FOR YOUR BUSINESS

This work by Lucideon is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike

4.0 International License.

by Lucideon 2

INTRODUCTION

Water supplies in many parts of the world are

classified as ‘stressed’ where demand exceeds

the resources available. Although this issue is

usually associated with heavily populated regions

with limited rainfall (e.g. western USA and the

Middle East), it is also becoming increasingly

common in areas where rainfall is relatively

plentiful, particularly in developing nations where

rising and increasingly urban populations

combine with economic growth to create huge

water demands from industry and agriculture. In

extreme cases this could result in genuine water

shortages, and at the very least, excessive

abstraction which can lead to the deterioration of

natural habitats and loss of biodiversity.

Changes to rainfall patterns as a result of Climate

Change are likely to exacerbate this issue in the

future, and result in new areas of water stress.

Many European counties, and some regions of

the UK already have water supplies that are

classified as stressed; areas of south and south

east England have lower rainfall per capita than

many Mediterranean countries. High population

density and agriculture place huge demands

upon water resources.

A number of future water stress projections have

been made; Figure 1 is a typical example. The

areas of stress in Africa, the Middle East and

Indian sub-continent will not be surprising,

however it is concerning to observe that large

areas of the UK have been given a moderate and

high stress rating, with the SE rated as ‘extreme

stress’.

Figure 1. Predicted Global Water Stress Indicatorsi

The increasing demands on the UK’s water

resources have been recognised by the

Government; the recent Defra white paper ‘Water

for Life’ii outlines the proposals to ensure

adequate future supplies. Much of the supporting

evidence for the paper comes from an

Environment Agency (EA)ii study around water

availability. The EA report established:

- It is likely that water supplies to some parts of

the UK are threatened

- ‘Business as usual’ is not sustainable

- There must be a greater emphasis on

managing water demand

The ‘Water for Life’ paper highlights the need for

major investment in new infrastructure in order to

cope with the predicted and increasingly variable

rainfall patterns; additional reservoirs and the

capacity to transfer water between regions will

“We think of water of free, falling from the sky

in abundance. It is only when rivers start to run

dry, reservoirs fall low, cracks emerge in the

ground that the old certainties are shaken.

These are warning signs of what we might

expect to see in a changing climate.”

The Rt. Hon. Caroline Spelman MP, Secretary of

State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs,

December 2011ii

by Lucideon 3

be required. Significant reforms are also needed

for the abstraction licensing regime that was

developed in the 1960’s, when environmental

concerns were a low priority. Increased

restrictions and conditions will be attached to

future abstraction consents.

A principal conclusion from the paper explains

that water is unlikely to be regarded as it is

today, a cheap and freely available resource;

prices will increase and there could be supply

restrictions in some parts of the UK.

LIKELY IMPACTS ON UK MANUFACTURING

Electricity generation is the largest user of water

in the UK; supplies are directly abstracted from

major rivers and/or the sea. The water is primarily

used for cooling, and apart from some small

evaporative losses, all of the water is returned to

source. To prevent environmental damage, strict

limits are placed on the temperature of the

returned water. Climate change and low rainfall

can impact upon power generation: in 2003, the

French nuclear industryiv, which relies heavily on

abstracted river water for cooling, was severely

affected by an exceptionally hot summer; the low

river levels and high water temperatures resulted

in insufficient cooling and the temporary closure

of 17 reactors.

Water is used in many manufacturing operations,

and although the total cost of water may be

relatively small, it is a vital raw material. Within

the food, drink and paper making sectors, water

is a significant and costly manufacturing

resource, especially if the water is extracted from

the public supply network. Future cost increases

and/or restrictions on abstraction licenses would

have a considerable impact on water intensive

businesses. However, other manufacturers relying

upon water for their processes could also

encounter implications; supply disruptions can

interrupt production in extreme cases.

WHAT WILL THE FUTURE HOLD?

‘Water for Life’ discusses the future challenges

facing the UK: balancing the competing demands

of protecting the environment whilst ensuring

adequate and affordable future supplies. The

scale of these challenges is likely to increase as

the impacts of Climate Change are realised.

It is apparent that there will be changes to the

future abstraction licensing regime, with greater

weight given to the environmental impacts

associated with over-abstraction. Novel schemes

such as tradable licenses have already been

suggested. For industrial consumers of mains

water, proposals have been put forward to

increase the supply competition for large

consumers, those who use more than

5,000m3/year. Although this may well result in

lower prices in the short term, in the long term

prices will rise given the large investment

programmes planned by the water utilities.

A consistent thread throughout the paper is the

importance of greater water efficiency. Domestic

customers will be encouraged to adopt

sustainable water utilisation habits; this will be

introduced through a combination of awareness

campaigns and greater domestic appliance

labelling. For the industrial user of mains water, it

is envisaged that water companies will become

more proactive in encouraging water efficiency in

response to a more competitive market where

demand reduction advice will be an added value

service. This may be an optimistic assumption

based on the experience of the deregulated UK

energy market where price is the main driver,

with little evidence of energy suppliers offering

energy efficiency advice to industrial customers.

In the context of sustainability, water is becoming

an increasingly high profile issue with a number

of companies now including water consumption

as part of their overall sustainability report. It is

not surprising that high profile, water intensive

businesses such as Coca-Cola and the brewing

group SABMiller have made disclosures about

their water use; retailers (e.g. Marks and Spencer

and John Lewis) are beginning to follow suit and

take the issue seriously. Increasingly, these large

companies are making demands upon their

supply chain to disclose information about their

water use.

With increasing recognition of the environmental

impacts of the built environment and the greater

use of whole lifecycle approaches to buildings,

manufacturers of construction products are

- On average nearly 43 billion litres of water

per day is abstracted from UK rivers, lakes

and boreholes; 40% is for public water

supply and 43% for electricity generation.

- The average person uses approximately

150 litres of water per day.

- About 25% of the water entering the public supply network is lost through leaks.

by Lucideon 4

coming under increasing pressure to disclose the

quantity of water associated with the

manufacture of their products. In the UK, BRE’s

Green Guide schemev is the accepted assessment

for sustainability of construction materials and

products. Under this scheme, products are

classified according to a ranking system where

A+ has the least environmental impact and E the

greatest. The impacts are assessed under a whole

lifecycle approach against 13 criteria; one of

which is water extraction. With this in mind,

manufacturers will need an accurate picture of

their water usage when looking to achieve a

Green Guide rating.

All of these facts indicate a need for businesses

to develop a greater understanding of their water

consumption: how it is used, where it is used, and

the quantity used. Without this fundamental

information, progress cannot be made in

managing this vital resource; exposing businesses

to the risks associated with price rises and supply

restrictions. Developing a water footprint is an

ideal first step towards water management.

WHAT IS A WATER FOOTPRINT?

A water footprint provides a comprehensive

water consumption audit of a business, product

or an individual consumer. A business footprint is

calculated as an index related to output, and is

expressed in terms of m3 of water per tonne, or

alternatively through another unit of output. A

detailed footprint can include a full ‘cradle to

grave’ lifecycle analysis and consider all possible

water inputs including the ‘embedded’ water

consumption associated with raw materials. The

calculation provides a clear and meaningful water

consumption statement by which a business is

able to benchmark against for future

improvement measurements.

There are numerous guidance notes, procedures

and protocols for developing a water footprint;

the difficulty lies with developing a generic

methodology that can be applied to a wide

variety of scenarios. ISO 14046 is currently in

development and is likely to become the

accepted international standard for developing a

water footprint to ensure that all footprints are

calculated to a consistent standard. The

standard will also define how the different types

of water sources (e.g. mains or abstracted) and

discharges should be considered, and how the

context of local environmental and socio-

economic conditions should be taken into

account.

With the need to manage water resources more

effectively, combined with the increasing

pressures to report sustainability indicators,

businesses can derive a number of benefits from

conducting a water footprinting. The exercise

can: identify cost reduction opportunities,

provide a benchmark, and demonstrate a clear

commitment to environmental management in

support of corporate sustainability claims and

credentials.

CALCULATING A WATER FOOTPRINT

Calculating the full lifecycle water footprint of a

manufacturing business, including the embedded

water of the raw materials can be an extremely

complex and time consuming exercise. Suppliers

are often unable to provide information about

their products as water footprinting is a relatively

new concept. The situation becomes more

complicated if the end product consumes water

(e.g. a washing machine). With situations of this

ilk, much of the data is estimated and hence an

incomplete picture given; the footprint is

therefore of questionable value.

A more pragmatic approach is for manufacturers

to consider just the water footprint of their own

operation (i.e. the factory boundary); the base

information for the footprint would be a

compilation of all the water inputs and outputs

over a given time period (e.g. 12 months). This

approach is illustrated in Figure 2: all the possible

water inputs and outputs for a hypothetical

ceramics manufacturer. In this example, the

water inputs associated with raw clay materials

are significant; one of the major water outputs is

evaporation during the firing and drying

processes.

The drivers for increasing disclosure have

been recognised by some industry sectors, for

example the precast concrete manufacturers

in the UK have been reporting their collective

water consumption (as one of a number of

sustainability KPIs) since 2006. The average

mains water consumption in the industry has

fallen from 108.5 litres/tonne of finished

product in 2008 to 99.4.litres/tonne in 2010.

Source: British Precastvi

by Lucideon 5

Figure 2. Components of a ‘Product’ Water Footprint

The usual approach is to then express the

footprint as a production metric, e.g. litres of

water per tonne of product. This is a relatively

simple exercise and can provide a high level

performance benchmark which can serve to

show the importance of water to the business,

especially if the footprint is expressed in terms of

the cost, as well as the volume of water. This

exercise often highlights the true cost of water to

a business, including both the purchase cost of

mains water and trade effluent charges.

However, a more detailed disaggregated water

footprint would be much more useful, it allows

comparisons to be made between different

products and manufacturing lines within the

same factory. A major barrier in developing a

more detailed picture is a lack of data; many

businesses rely on a single water meter on the

main supply and sub-meters are often scarce.

Where meters do exist, they are often read

infrequently. A more detailed water balance can

be developed through conducting some simple

measurements; a bucket and stop watch can

yield very useful information, and more

sophisticated approaches using portable non-

invasive flow meters are extremely valuable. In a

number of manufacturing processes, the product

moisture content is a key production parameter

and held within strict limits, in these

circumstances water flows can be calculated

from production data.

From these various data sources, a detailed water

balance for the site, production line or product

can be compiled. This is often represented in the

form of a ‘Sankey’ diagram (reference Figure 3)

which gives an immediate picture of the relative

sizes of the various water inputs and outputs,

highlighting the priority areas.

by Lucideon 6

Figure 3. Sankey Diagram of the Water Balance in Ceramics Manufacturing

PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE OF WATER FOOTPRINTING

Lucideon has calculated several water footprints

for brick and ceramic manufacturers. The

quarried raw materials used by these

manufacturers frequently possess varied

moisture contents upon delivery, thus

representing a major water input. Water is

integral to most ceramic manufacturing

processes where the clay ‘body’ is moulded or

shaped. These operations only operate efficiently

if the clay body has a predictable and consistent

plasticity, which is directly related to water

content of the body; moisture content is a key

production parameter, and is usually closely

monitored and controlled.

Some businesses have already realised the

importance of water in their manufacturing

processes: Johnson Tiles have invested in a

recycling and collection system, saving the

company approximately 30,000m3 of water per

annum. In general, brick manufacturers do not

require high quality mains water for their

manufacturing processes; efforts are made to

substitute this with water drawn from their

quarrying operations.

Although each manufacturing site is different in

terms of their raw materials, processes, products

and the water use, a number of general

observations can be made:

- Billing is frequently confusing; water

companies take infrequent meter readings and

estimate the majority of bills. In many cases,

businesses pay bills without checking them

against actual meter readings.

- Compared to energy and raw materials, water

is relatively low cost, however the full picture

does reveal some hidden and less obvious

costs associated with water. Trade effluent

charges can be higher on a per m3 basis than

the cost of mains water and where there are

losses due to evaporation in a drying or firing

operation, there is an associated energy cost.

- Data collection and analysis is relatively poor,

even where meters are read on a regular basis,

data is often not analysed. In these situations,

historic data was used to calculate the

monthly specific water consumption in terms

of m3 per tonne. Performance was highly

variable; at one site the worst monthly

performance was 60% greater than the best

without any obvious explanation. This

indicates a lack of control and the potential for

significant savings through tighter

management.

- Where there are multiple products and unit

operations, it is generally more difficult to

accurately compile a water balance. In some

cases less than 50% of the site water

consumption could be accounted for. In these

by Lucideon 7

situations, without adequate sub-metering it

will be very difficult to implement a successful

water management programme.

Although these observations are derived from

brick and ceramic manufacturers, the lessons

learnt can be applied to many other

manufacturing sectors.

CONCLUSIONS

The recent Government white paper ‘Water for

Life’ has highlighted the growing importance of

water as a sustainability issue for business; the

current perception that water is a cheap and

almost limitless resource will have to change.

Increasing demands due to population growth,

mounting concerns around the health of river

eco-systems and the impacts of climate change

will all put pressure on our water supplies.

Investment in a new water infrastructure will

inevitably feed through into higher prices for

consumers of mains water, along with future

restrictions associated with abstraction licenses.

In many respects, the concerns around water are

following those around carbon. All businesses

are aware of how carbon has leapt up the

corporate agenda in the past decade; it is

apparent there will be strong drivers to reduce

future water demand.

Water footprinting is an ideal tool to:

- Understand how water is used in a business

- Gain an insight into how a water reduction

strategy can be developed.

Currently there is no standard methodology for

water footprinting; however an ISO standard is

under development. Although this is likely to be a

very comprehensive approach to developing a

‘cradle to grave’ footprint, practical experience

has shown that at present most manufacturing

businesses will struggle with this approach due to

a lack of available data. Initially, a more pragmatic

approach can be adopted; developing a water

footprint that is restricted to a defined factory

boundary, and expressing water consumption in

terms of litres per unit of output. This will

highlight the issue and provide a baseline for

more detailed investigation, and ultimately

identification of water saving opportunities.

REFERENCES

i Centre for Environmental Systems Research

http://www.usf.uni-

kassel.de/cesr/index.php?option=com_project&t

ask=view_detail&agid=39&lang=en

ii Water for Life, Defra, Dec 2011

http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/quality/water/legis

lation/whitepaper

iii The case for change – current and future water

availability, Environment Agency

http://publications.environment-

agency.gov.uk/PDF/GEHO1111BVEP-E-E.pdf

iv France faces nuclear power crisis, The

Guardian, Aug 2003

www.guardian.co.uk/news/2003/aug/13/france.i

nternationalnews?INTCMP=SRCH

v BRE Global Ltd

www.bre.co.uk/greenguide

vi British Precast

http://www.britishprecast.org/sustainableprecast

/downloads/downloads.php

by Lucideon

ABOUT LUCIDEON

Lucideon is a leading international provider of

materials development, testing and assurance.

Through its offices and laboratories in the UK, US

and the Far East, Lucideon provides materials

and assurance expertise to clients in a wide range

of sectors, including healthcare, construction,

ceramics and power engineering.

The company aims to improve the competitive

advantage and profitability of its clients by

providing them with the expertise, accurate

results and objective, innovative thinking that

they need to optimise their materials, products,

processes, systems and businesses.