Ashfords Integrated Alternatives The Scale & Value of Uniting Utilities Dr. Sarah Ward University of Exeter & Dr. Sandip Deshmukh University of Surrey

Ashfords Integrated Alternatives What do we mean by Uniting Utilities? - Integration of services by : - technology (complementary options) - delivery (innovative business models) - administration (required skills) Opportunities for Uniting Utilities in Ashford - Scale of development - Technical feasibility - Valuing attributes of integrated systems Introduction

Ashfords Integrated Alternatives Water Supply Options Ashford Integrated Water Management Study Energy Supply Options Sustainable Energy Feasibility Study Technology Choices So far, choices have been made individually without investigating integration avenues… Water-Energy Integration (WEI) Options? WEI Study/Strategy?

Ashfords Integrated Alternatives Options for Uniting Utilities in Ashford 25% of domestic energy use is associated with hot water provision High performance water efficient appliances may use more energy Trade-off between water and energy efficiency Scales investigated: Sub-household (microcomponents) Household (PV & RWH) Semi-centralised (wastewater CHP) Sub-household Scale: Microcomponents

Ashfords Integrated Alternatives Household Scale: PV and RWH Dwelling-specific PV & RWH potential estimated PV could meet 42 to 78% of domestic electricity requirement for all dwelling types in Ashford Based on present FIT income calculations, the payback period for these systems could be 9 to 10 years and may reduce further due to escalation in fuel prices RWH could meet 26% of the non-potable demand, but at huge expense – no FIT-equivalent incentive for decentralised water supply technologies PV could meet energy requirements of RWH system

Ashfords Integrated Alternatives Semi-centralised Scale: Wastewater CHP UWOT? is used to estimate wastewater generation for stages of Chilmington Greens delivery Anaerobic digestion of wastewater sludge in CHP could meet 1.2% and 0.44% of annual domestic electricity and heat demand Highlights the need for supplementing with decentralised options (such as waste to energy or PV) Use of domestic solid waste to energy generation option would result in meeting 15-20% of annual electricity and heat demand If used only for meeting heat demand, planned development would need to have provision for deploying additional Ground Source Heat Pumps or Gas Boilers

Ashfords Integrated Alternatives Water Flows & Responsibilities Energy Flows & Responsibilities Responsibilities are managed separately Energy supplier could be a generator or infrastructure provider Customer can choose or become an energy supplier So, uniting utilities is feasible from a technical perspective, however: Water/sewerage undertakers may not interact Strict regulation limits non- standard approaches Customer cannot choose

Ashfords Integrated Alternatives PESTER Analysis – factors hindering technical integration Planning Phase –Interpretations of the term integrated –Timing –Knowledge –Conflicts of interest Design Phase Risk Scale Procedure/Practice Delivery phase Scepticism End-user Consultation

Ashfords Integrated Alternatives What attributes make uniting utilities a valuable option? Technical feasibility Vs Economic viability Accepted within the community? Complex role/interactions between stakeholders Effective resource use/reuse Use waste products as resources Reduce waste exports from area What attributes decrease its value? Help achieve environmental obligations Provide efficiency savings/economies of scale Unfamiliar delivery mechanisms New skills/services required

Ashfords Integrated Alternatives Conclusions: Utility services need to be investigated individually, then in conjunction to identify avenues for integration There are trade-offs/supplementary measures required at different scales ….the major challenge: Achieving value through uniting utilities and valuing the attributes of integrated systems in the planning phase Recommendations: Integration of utilities needs to be valued at the pre-planning and planning stages Innovative integrated utility options need to be demonstrated to develop confidence in planners and developers Inter and intra-utility partnership needs to be encouraged to facilitate integration Incentives and new operational models are required at the regulatory level Conclusions and Recommendations