Sustainable Water Issues

as applied to buildings
Eric Adams
Outline for Discussion in
Design for Sustainability (1.964)
November 15, 2006

Outline
Introduction (brief)
Context: Boston areas water supply
and wastewater treatment (brief)
(Is current system sustainable?)
Water-related sustainability
measures applicable to buildings

Indoor Environmental
Quality

23%
22%
Materials
and Resources

Sustainable
Sites

20%
8%

Water
Efficiency

27%
Energy and Atmosphere
Figure by MIT OCW.

LEEDTM Certification Categories

Water and Sustainablity

Sustainability => keeping consumption
within limits of natural replenishment
Broader view includes
Environmental
Economic
Social

Water vs Materials & Energy

Largely renewable

Indoor Environmental
Quality

23%
22%
Materials
and Resources

20%

8%
27%

Energy and Atmosphere

Figure by MIT OCW.

Sustainable
Sites

Water
Efficiency

Time scales of months

to few years => weve
had plenty of practice
Sustainability measures
driven more by
extremes than averages
(droughts, floods, peak
demand)

Multiple uses

Different levels of
treatment

More site specificity

5

A Buildings Impact on Water

Impacts associated with occupants water
use
Water supply
Generation of wastewater

Impacts on hydrology
Reduced recharge, increased storm water
runoff, altered WQ
Construction, operation, demolition phases

Water supply, wastewater,

stormwater
Potable

Central
Water
Supply

Central
Water
Treatment

Non-pot.

Landscape

Precip
Precip
Impervious

Bostons Water Supply

500
479.9
479.9

200

100

1848

1864

1872

1908

1946

1980

Upper Mystic Lake

Sudbury System

Wachusett Reservoir minus

Upper Mystic Lake

Quabbin Reservoir minus

part of Sudbury System
and Lake Cochituate

Remainder of Sudbury
System Discontinued

Lake Cochituate

Storage Capacity (BG)

400

1795-1870: Local
ponds & reservoirs
1875-78: Sudbury
Aque-duct & Chestnut
Hill Res
1895: Wachusett Res
1926: Quabbin Res.
1946-78: Pressure
Aqueducts
1996-present:
Integrated water
system improvements
Many towns
supplement MWRA
with local wells

1
Figure by MIT OCW.

Bostons Water Supply contd

Flickr image courtesy of pjmorse.

Prim. Disinfection: O3
Res. Disinfection:
Chloramine
Corrosion Control
Fluoridation
Modular for
expansion/contingency
Filtration

$0.34 billion

Million Gallons Per Day

350
System's long-term safe yield of 300 MGD (~13m3/s)

300

250

200

85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04

# Includes temporary supply to Cambridge during construction of local water

treatment plant

MWRA Water Demand vs. System Safe Yield

Figure by MIT OCW.

Sustainable?

10

Bostons Wastewater
Diffuser

Outfall Tunnel
In

ne

rH

arb

Deer Island
treatment plant
or

Dorchester
Bay

Fox Point
CSO treatment
facility

Moon Island

Commercial Point
CSO treatment
facility

Quincy Bay
Hingham Bay
Nut Island Headworks
(Former site of Nut
Island treatment plant)
0

1700s-mid
1800s: Convey
WW to nearest
water body
1876 First
sewer system ->
Moon Is
1952 Nut Is TP
1968 Deer Is TP
1997 New Deer
Is TP

5 Km

Figure by MIT OCW.

Fore River
pelletizing plant

Bostons Wastewater contd

Modern 2o TP
(Activated Sludge)
20 m3/s (ave); 50
m3/s (peak)
Room for Expansion
AWT for Nitrogen

15 km ocean outfall
Contingency plan
Figure by MIT OCW.

12

Should wastewater be returned

to watershed rather than
discharged to ocean?

13

1200

Average pounds per day discharged

Metals in MWRA Treatment Plant Discharges 1989-2002

Silver

1000

Nickel
Chromium

800

Lead
600

Copper
Zinc

400

200

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

Data from mwra.state.ma.us

98

99

00

01

02

14

Bostons Wastewater contd

Aggressive Source
Control
Sludge recycling at
Quincy

New England
Fertilizer Co.
Bay State Fertilizer
Co.

Total cost: $3.8

billion

Sustainable?
15

Stormwater (and freshwater and

stormwater)
Leaks

Central
Water
Treatment

Potable

Central
Water
Supply

Leaks

Non-pot.

Inflow

CSO

Landscape

Precip
Precip
Impervious

16

Infiltration

Combined Sewer Overflow

Figure by MIT OCW.

17

mwra.state.ma.us

Bostons CSOs

Sewer Separation
in Reserved Channel Outfall
Tributary Areas

Pleasure Bay
Storm Drain Connection
to Outfall BOS080
15 mgd Pump Station
for Tunnel Dewatering

Pleasure Bay Storm

Water Relocation
BOS085

BOS081

BOS083
BOS084
BOS086
BOS087

BOS082

Dewatering Force Main to

BWSC Sewer System

17-Foot Diameter
tunnel

Active CSOs
Treated CSOs
Closed CSOs

Odor Control
Building
Morrissey
Blvd Storm
Drain

Figure by MIT OCW.

Figure by MIT OCW.

18

CSOs (contd)
85% reduction in CSO volume since 1988 (3.3 -> 0.5
bgy).
95% of CSO will receive some treatment (4 plants)
Not 100% because marginal cost of CSO storage/
treatment increases as event frequency decreases
And stormwater will never be clean
Boston Harbor & Charles River will never be
completely swimmable
Total cost = $0.9 billion

Sustainable?

19

Annual CSO Events Remaining

10

20

Marginal Capital Cost ($ Million/Annual

Event Eliminated)
Marginal Capital Cost of Near-Surface Storage for Alewife/Mystic
River Basin

Figure by MIT OCW.

20

Central vs Distributed Systems

Advantages
Investment/sharing
in existing
infrastructure &
professionals
Stability under
transient water
demand/availability
Cheap!

Disadvantages

Disrupts hydrology,
people
Encourages waste
High energy costs
Large sludge production
More vulnerability
Complex, hard to
monitor
21
Hard to expand

System Expansion
Not all or nothing.
Most urban/suburban systems are
centralized but there is room (indeed
need!) for local systems: new hookups mean greater distances & flow
rates (hence pressure losses),
implying greater marginal costs
22

Sustainability measures
Water Conservation

On-site treatment/Re-use
Potable

Central
Water
Supply

Central
Water
Treatment

Non-pot.

Landscape

Stormwater
Management

Precip
Precip
Impervious

Rainwater Collection
23

1. Water Conservation
Mainly for non-potable and landscaping
flows
Low flow faucets, shower heads
Low flow, dual flush toilets, waterless
urinals, separation/dry toilets
Smart irrigation (and landscaping)
Greatest potential for institutional
sources

24

Smart Irrigation
30-70% of residential water use is for
landscaping; homeowners over-water by
2X
Method of delivery
Drip irrigation

Timing/quantity

Timers
Local weather reports
Rainfall, solar sensors (theoretical ET)
Moisture sensors

25

Frequency

6
4
2
0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

1.2

1.4

More

Ratio of actual to theoretical application

Sensor Based Irrigation Efficiency
Figure by MIT OCW.

DeOreo, et al., Boulder CO

26

Boston Globe August 2, 2006

Opened March 2005; Design by Hellmuth, Obata and Kassabaum

Annual water savings: 1.7 million gallons
Storm water filtration reduces pollution to Boston harbor

Figure by MIT OCW.

27

Synthetic Lawns
E.g., Residential Field Turf
No water (or mowing, fertilizer,
pesticides)
Drains through turf to underground
pipes (permeability approaches grass)
Comparable cost to sod
Trace metals, pathogens vs nutrients,
pesticides
Aesthetics? (Monet effect)
28

2. Rainwater Collection/Use
Potable

Central
Water
Supply

Central
Water
Treatment

Non-pot.

T
Landscape

Precip
Precip
Impervious

29

Rainwater collection systems

Order of increasing
quality requirements
Landscaping, (rain
barrels, SmartStorm)
Non-potable water (e.g.,
new MIT buildings)
Potable water (Toronto
Healthy House)

30

Fit for use quality/downcycling

External Supply
Class I

Rainwater
Tank
5.4

60.4
14.6

3.9

66.7

Storage Tank
Class I

- Bath
- Shower

First
phases: 25

Storage Tank
Class II

- Washbasin

Last phases: 7.8

- Laundry
- Dishwashing

Last phases: 17

Draining 52.4

- Food Prep
- Washing up
- Other
14.6

42.8

- Toilet

Storage Tank
Class III

First phases: 15.8

Draining 29.3

Class IV:
Discharge
86.7

Figure by MIT OCW.

31
Coombes, 2005

Toronto Healthy House

Figure by MIT OCW.

Pgutters
Rrain water cistern
Scombination filter
Tdrinkable cold water tank
Odrinkable hot water tank

Egrey water heat exchanger

Nreclaimed hot water tank
Useptic tank
Vrecirculation tank
WWaterloo biofilter
Xtwin combination filters
Yreclaimed cold water tank
Zgarden irrigation
32

Toronto Healthy House

Figure by MIT OCW.

33

Figure by MIT OCW.

34

Eden Project

35

1 Rainwater Collection Roof + Site

None

Collection

Previous Paving

Roof+Site
Capture

site s.f.
gal

0
0

Flow loss Factor

5%

74,537
1,681,316

s.f.
gal

Potable
Dishwasher
s.f.
gal

gal
gal

201,830

gal

Storage
Rain water
Cistern
1,545,533 gal

No Flow
Grey water
Cistern
gal
0

Irrigation

Flushing

803,346
Available
463,950

gal

541,587
40%
gal (demand)

gal

1,005,776

gal introduced
for recharge

1.4 million gallons higher (per year)

Urinals
127,495
127,435

gal
gal

6
To City
Sewer

Plumbing
Fixtures
0
0%

Process Water
gal

gal

0%
reintroduced
gal
0
0%
% of supply

N
30%
City SewerConstructed
Flow loss Factor
Bldg
wetland
734,776 gal
gal
0

RETURN

4
Ground Water Recharge

Grey
Irrigation
463.950 gal
463,350 gal
Grey

10% Flow loss Factor

Grey Water Demand

15%
Overflow factor

gal
gal

gal
gal

0
0

Potable
Potable
Pool
M-Ro/Coad
gal
gal
0
0
gal
0
0
gal
Grey
Potable
Drinking
WC Flashing
Fountain
gal 414,092 gal
0
21,072 gal 414,032 gal

Clothes Washer

Flow loss Factor

Pre-Treatment

City Strom Sewersite

gal
201,830

Potable
Showers
0
10,890
Potable

Cistem

gal
gal

Potable
Sinks
0
702,813

20%

Catch
Basins

0
0

Overflow
oil/water

gal potable water demand

FLOW PATHS

0
0

394.780

N
Impervious
Area

gal (roof collection)

in.(annual)

SUPPLY

Potable Water

Rainfall
968.274
41.2
Strom Sewer

Water Flows - Yearly

1.0 million gallons lower (per year)

Water Profile Tool

www.greenroundtable.org

Figure by MIT OCW.

36

2 If no water mesaure included

+1.3 Million Gallons Higher (per year)

Water Flows - Yearly

None

Flow loss Factor

5%

s.f.
gal

0
0

s.f.
gal

Potable
Dishwasher
gal
gal

gal
gal

gal

No Flow
Rain water
Cistern
gal
0

No Flow
Grey water
Cistern
gal
0

Pre-Treatment

Irrigation

Flushing

0
Available
463,950

gal

0
0%
gal (demand)

gal

gal introduced
for recharge

1.4 million gallons higher (per year)

To Citi
Sewer

Urinals
0
127,435

gal
gal

Plumbing
Fixtures
0
0%

Process Water
gal

gal

0%
reintroduced
gal
0
0%
% of supply

N
30%
Constructed
Over Loss factor
wetland
gal
0

Citi SewerBldg
1,276,362 gal

RETURN

4
Ground Water Recharge

Potable
Irrigation
0
gal
463,350 gal
Potable

10% Flow loss Factor

Grey Water Demand

15%
Overflow factor

Cistem

Overflow

gal
gal

gal
gal

0
0

Potable
Potable
Pool
M-Ro/Coad
gal
gal
0
0
gal
0
0
gal
Potable
Potable
Drinking
WC Flashing
Fountain
gal
gal
0
0
21,072 gal 414,032 gal

Clothes Washer

Flow loss Factor

oil/water

Citi Strom Sewersite

gal
1,681,916

Potable
Showers
0
10,890
Potable

20%

Catch
Basins

0
0

Potable
Sinks
0
702,813

FLOW PATHS

0
0

gal potable water demand

Roof . Site
Capture

Previous Paving
site s.f.
gal

1.740.312

None

Y
Impervious
Area
74,537
1,681,961

gal (roof collection)

in.(annual)

SUPPLY

Potable Water

Rainfall
0
41.2

1.0 millon gallons lower (per year)

Figure by MIT OCW.

37

One Bryant Park

(Bank of America Bldg NYC)
Cook and Fox, 54 stories, $1billion, const.
start: 2008
First LEED platinum skyscrapper
Rainwater, condensate, groundwater &
greywater collection, treatment and reuse (flushing, cooling)
Waterless urinals
Zero discharge to storm sewer (irrigation
instead)
Also:

On-site wind turbine, heat pumps

Low-e glass and daylight dimming lights\
Displacement ventilation, filtering
Digest cafeteria scraps -> CH4
90% recycling of construction debris,
blast furnace slag in place of cement

38

9900 Wilshire Bldv

(luxury condos in Beverly Hills)
Architect: Richard Meier; 252 units, average = 3300 sq ft.
First LEED Gold condo development in West
On-site WW treatment: 1) methane from sludge -> cogeneration, effluent -> Vegetative treatment (Living
Machines) -> toilet flushing, irrigation, cooling
Also on-site wind turbines, heat recovery, passive solar
features

39

3. Stormwater Management
Potable

Central
Water
Supply

Central
Water
Treatment

Non-pot.

Landscape

Precip
Precip

LID

BMP

Impervious

40

Effect of development: more runoff,

leaving site more quickly
(P. Shanahan)

Flow

Developed conditions
without controls

Pre-development
conditions

Time

41

Consequences

Damaged pilings
Lower water
level

Water level
Pilings

* Wood pilings bathed in ground water do not rot.

** If water level drops, the wood is exposed to oxygen, allowing fungi and
bacteria to attack

How Drops in Ground Water Damage Wooden Pilings

Flooding
Poor water quality
Reduced long-term
ground water
storage
Fluctuating ground
water table

Figure by MIT OCW.

Boston Globe May 16, 2005

42

Detention Ponds

Courtesy of Peter Shanahan.

Used with permission.

43

Detention Ponds

Courtesy of Peter Shanahan.

Used with permission.

44

Effect of site controls

(detention ponds)
Flow

Developed conditions
without controls
Developed conditions
with controls
Pre-development
conditions

Time

45

Effect of low-impact development

Flow
Pre-development
conditions

Developed conditions
with controls

Developed conditions
with LID

Time

46

Low-Impact Development

Figure by MIT OCW.

47

Vegetative Roofs

Flickr photograph courtesy of birdw0rks.

48

4. Wastewater treatment/re-use
Central
Water
Treatment

Potable

Central
Water
Supply

Non-pot.

Landscape

Precip
Precip
Impervious

49

(On-site) Wastewater
Treatment
Order of increasing quality
requirements

Recharge to GW or discharge to surface

water
Landscaping/irrigation
Non-potable water

Natural or mechanical

Large area vs High Energy

50

Small Footprint WWTPs

Sludge
Hydrocyclone
Polymer
M

Micro-sand & sludge to hydrocyclone

Microsand
M

Clarified
water

Coagulant
Raw
water

Figure by MIT OCW.

Injection
Coagulation
Maturation

Tube
Settling w/ Scraper

Biological aerated Filter (BAF)

(www.vertmarkets.com)

Ballasted flocculation (BF);

(www.brentwoodindustries.com)

Figure by MIT OCW.

Integrated fixed-film activated sludge (IFAS)

(www.brentwoodindustries.com)

Membrane Bio Reactor (MBR)

(www.brentwoodindustries.com)

51

Sandino, et al., Civil Engineering, 2003

Sustainable Sewage Treatment

(R. Fenner)

Land
Area

Constructed wetlands

Reed beds
Trickling filters
Rotating
biological
contactors

Activated
sludge
systems*

Membrane
bioreactors

Energy
requirements
52

Coagulant

Flocculent

Grit
Chamber

Primary Setting Tank

Bar Screens

Sludge Treatment
and Disposal

Figure by MIT OCW.

Suspended solids removal (%)

100
80
60
40

without chemical
addition

20
0

Figure by MIT OCW.

with ferric chloride

plus polymer addition

20

40

60

80

100

Surface overflow rate (m/d)

TSS Percent Removal vs. Surface Overflow Rate

120

Stonecutters Island:
worlds largest and
most efficient
CEPT plant

Hong Kong uses seawater to

flush toilets

54

Figure by MIT OCW.

55

Photograph courtesy of Brett Paci.

56

Gillette Stadium: Water and sewer

issues
Water supply

Limited municipal supply (100 gpm) vs.

Peak demands (3,500 gpm)
Summer water bans
No municipal water allowed for irrigation

Wastewater disposal

30 yr old treatment system

No municipal sanitary sewers
57

The solution
Develop a regional high pressure
district
Construct on-site WWTP (MBR, UV,
O 3)
Utilize a water reuse system
Daylight Neponset River
58

0.5 MG Reuse
Water Storage Tank

0.1 MG Potable
Water Storage Tank

Emergency
Interconnection

Potable Water System

Regional Potable
Water High Service
Pressure Zone

Reuse Water
System

Off-site Water System

Improvements
Future Irrigation
Use

3-Acre
Future
Leachfield Leachfield

Gravity Sewer

4" Dosing Forceman

0.25 MGD
WWTF

4" Low Flow

Future WWTF
Expansion

16" High Flow

0.70 MG Equalization
Tank

5 MGD Wastewater
Pump Station

Sewer Forcemain

Figure by MIT OCW.

59

Projected Stadium event water use

500,000 Gal
Re-Use Tank

Untreated Wastewater

Stadium Uses

Game

All Day Concert

Selected Toilets
(65%)

260,000 gal

390,000 gal

Potable Water Uses (35%)

(Sinks, Showers, Ect.)

120,000 gal

180,000 gal

Potable Water Losses (5%)

(Washdown, Ect.)

20,000 gal

30,000 gal

400,000 gal

600,000 gal

Total
700,000 Gal
Equalization
Tank

250,000 GPD
WWTP

Wastewater Reuse
Leach Field
Disposal

Rizzo Assoc

Figure by MIT OCW.

Living Machines, Inc.

Household to small town
Tertiary treatment
TSS (5 mg/L)
BOD (5 mg/L)
NH3-N (2 mg/l)

Figure by MIT OCW.

Landscaping & N-P water

Anaerobic reactor ->
Closed aerated reactor ->
aerated bioreactors
(floating plant racks) ->
clarifier -> Ecological
Fluidized Beds -> disposal
60

Living Machines, Inc.

1. Anaerobic

2. Closed Aerobic

3. Open Aerobic

Toilets

4. Clarifier

5. Planted Gravel Wetland

6. Effluent Tank, UV Filter, Booster Tank

DIAGRAM OF THE LIVING MACHINE

Figure by MIT OCW.

System designed for re-use

61

Wolverton Engineering, Inc

Figure by MIT OCW.

Household to small
town
Concentrated in rural
South (mainly outdoor
systems)
Mainly for discharge
back to environment,
but some re-use
Evolved from NASA
Septic tanks ->
rock/plant filters
(PhytoGroTM System) 62
> sand filters

The role for LCA

Influent

Effluent
Bar Screens

Cyclone
Degritter

Anoxic
tank

Primary
Clarifiers

Aeration

Secondary
Clarifiers

Sand Filters

UV
Disinfection

Dissolved Air
Flotation
Thickener
Solid Wastes
Belt Filter
Press

Anaerobic
Digesters
Biogas
Cogeneration
Plant

63