2. 1 - 3.9.- COST ASPECTS

3. 3.9. COST ASPECTS Mario Chilundo UNESCO-IHE Institute for Water Education Online Module Water Quality Assessment 2

4. Learning objectives After completing this unit the student will have a basic understanding of: The concept of costs in monitoring activities Items to consider when budgeting monitoring activities Requirements to optimize water quality networks For extra info, relevant links and papers discussing the concept of water quality monitoring costs and optimization are suggested 3

5. CONTENTS 1.Definitions 2.Costs of a WQ monitoring programme 3.Optimization of water quality monitoring (WQM) networks 4.Case study: South Florida 4

6. The Concept of Cost in WQM Costs refers to: –The burden sustained in order to perform certain activity, to accomplish certain production activity, to achieve specific goals –The value of money that has been used up to produce something, and hence is not available for use anymore In WQM activities, costs refer to the total expenses burden from the desk studies up to information dissemination to appropriate level of end users 5

7. CONTENTS 1.Definitions 2.Costs of a WQ monitoring programme 3.Optimization of water quality monitoring (WQM) networks 4.Additional reading 6

8. At the first stage costs are determined by the purpose of the program: –Operational –Surveillance –Investigative Costs of a WQ Monitoring Programme Refer to books by Chapman (1996) and Bartram & Ballance (1996) for more details 7

9. Monitoring activities requires access to resources in all its stages Costs of a WQ Monitoring Programme Monitoring Activities Field Equipment Office Facilities Others Certified Laboratory Qualified Personnel Transport All together these resources determine the involved costs 8

10. Costs of a WQ Monitoring Programme Specifically, monitoring costs are composed of the following items: –Equipment and maintenance (field equipment, parts, man- hours); –Sample collection and shipment (man-hours, preservation, shipping costs) –Laboratory analysis (cost of analytical services) –Results analysis and reporting (man-hours for data review, analysis and reporting) 9

11. Costs of a WQ Monitoring Programme Pitfalls that increase costs, which have to be avoided:  Lack of careful planning;  Absence of distinctive objectives;  Inappropriate equipment;  Erroneous programming;  Lack of systematic maintenance;  Change of activities focus, which is not reflected on the equipment;  Incompatible add-ons  Lack of careful planning;  Absence of distinctive objectives;  Inappropriate equipment;  Erroneous programming;  Lack of systematic maintenance;  Change of activities focus, which is not reflected on the equipment;  Incompatible add-ons Increase on data analysis time due to mismatched/missing data High Monitoring Costs Systematic planning is required to reduce costs 10

12. Costs of a WQ Monitoring Programme To avoid pitfalls programme, design should: 1.Determine the general needs as well as produce a written statement of the programme purpose; 2.Determine the type of information to be generated by the programme; 3.Estimate the equipment and operational costs; 4.Determine the need for additional information (e.g. purpose, collection method, interval) to be combined with monitoring data; 5.Determine how the data will be collected (automation, sampling sites, frequency, etc.). 11

13. Costs of a WQ Monitoring Programme To avoid pitfalls program design should (Cont..): 6.Determine the data to be collected and respective analysis method; 7.Assess the validity of data. Establish QA/QC (quality assurance/quality control) programme; 8.Determine the type of equipment required and its operation (costs, configuration, calibration, maintenance, tolerance to environment); 9.Get information of laboratory costs, conditions and analytical methods. Check if a contract is needed; 10.Develop a record system and a maintenance schedule. 12

14. CONTENTS 1.Definitions 2.Costs of a WQ monitoring programme 3.Optimization of water quality monitoring (WQM) networks 4.Additional reading 13

15. Optimization of Water Quality Monitoring Networks Statistical Optimisation:  Is essential to increase monitoring performance while reducing costs;  Important to simplify parameter schedules and therefore, to save resources;  But is rarely achievable, since it requires large amounts of statistic information on the monitored variables during the programme design stage (but possible for existing programmes; see Course 4)  Thus, system performance improvement should often be considered, rather that optimization. 14

16. Optimization of Water Quality Monitoring Networks Improvement of WQ Monitoring system  Is the collection or generation of the same information amount (e.g. for decision makers) with less financial resources demand;  Requires specific research to determine adequate amount of data for specific purposes;  Requires objective functions relating information and costs in order to select appropriate monitoring level;  First sampling stage (for 3 to 4 years) with dense monitoring stations is required to generate baseline data. 15

17. 16 EXAMPLE OF COSTS, NETHERLANDS Annual cost as percentage of total programme cost) of the programme for monitoring the chemical water quality of the Dutch part of the North Sea, per cost component.

18. CONTENTS 1.Definitions 2.Costs of a WQ monitoring programme 3.Optimization of water quality monitoring (WQM) networks 4.Case study: South Florida 17

19. Formed in 1949 as local sponsor of the Central & South Florida Flood Control Project Florida Water Resources Act of 1972 broadened the agency’s mission to include: ­ Water supply ­ Water quality protection ­ Environmental management ­ Flood protection CASE STUDY: South Florida Water Management District

20. 46,439 kilometer 2 2,898 km of canals 22 major pump stations 2,220 water control structures Infrastructure

21. Environmental Monitoring Total Projected Cost $53 Million ++++== SCADA & Hydro Data Management $23 Million Water Quality Monitoring $18 Million Watershed & CERP / RECOVER Regional: Periphyton Periphyton Vegetation Vegetation Invertebrates Invertebrates FishFish Wading birdsWading birds $12 Million Hydrometeorology Water Quality Biology ++= SFWMD Environmental Monitoring Program 3,200 Sensors: Flow Flow Stage Stage Groundwater levels Groundwater levels Weather Weather GeotechnicalGeotechnical 1,995 Stations Nutrients Nutrients Physical Parameters Physical Parameters Inorganics Inorganics Pesticides Pesticides Mercury (ultra-trace) Mercury (ultra-trace)

22. Water Quality Monitoring

23. OPTIMIZATION/”RE-ENGINEERING”OPTIMIZATION/”RE-ENGINEERING”  Review objectives from ORIGINAL sources  Question and evaluate all assumptions  Conduct statistical analyses  Get expert input, top down and bottom up  Involve users, internal and external  Study geographic area and local resources  Refine sampling programmes and go through review and revision process 22

24. Costs of Environmental Monitoring Must be Understood and Integrated  Annual sampling trips to each site ($10,000 - $15,000 per year)  Travel is the majority cost ($3,000 – 7,000)  Equipment installation/maintenance for automated sites (~$5,000)  Sampling accounts for a much smaller cost ($2,000 – 3,000)  Lab analyses (ca. $1,000 – 2,000)  Data processing, quality assurance and management  Cost uncertain but long-term can be important  Data analysis, evaluation and reporting  South Florida Environmental Report, more than $1 million to develop each year 23

25. - 442 square kilometers of Everglades marshland surrounded by levees, canals and other Everglades areas 24

26. Structures EFA/RECOVER TP Rule STA Permit EVPA, S.A. TP & EVPA TP & STA Permit TP & EFA/RECOVER S.A. & EFA/RECOVER Existing Monitoring in WCA-2A 25

27.  Meet regulatory requirements (Permits) Monitor water quality Estimate nutrient concentrations and loads Research the ecosystem  Track long-term status (Agency Mission) Original WCA-2A Monitoring Objectives 26

28. Sampling Water Management Structures  Travel to structures biweekly & sample only if flowing  Results for one set of structures in WCA-2A Approximately 25% of all discharge events missed by more than two weeks Approximately 50% of all sampling trips have one or more stations with no samples Overall, inefficient monitoring 27

29. CA27 CA28 CA2-15 F1 F2 F4 CA29 F3 F5 E5 U3 U1 C2 N1 N.25 N2 N4 C.25 C1 C4 S.25 S1 S2 S4 FS.25 FS1.0 FS2.0 FS3.0 CA223 CA2-6 404Z1 CA224 CA222 CA217 TP Rule WCA2A EVPA Original Project and Marsh Monitoring Station Overlap Diagram 41 stations 56 station visits per month Biweekly Monthly E2 E0 E3 E4 E1 F0 U2 Threshold Monthly 28

30.  Unified marsh sampling methods  Transferred 15 stations to water quality monitoring team to eliminate duplicative trips  Standardized frequency to monthly at seven stations, reducing sampling trips  Optimized existing stations 10 eliminated; 1 added  Reduced monthly station visits by 43% (56>>32)  Cut helicopter costs by > $100,000/yr WCA-2A Case Study Marsh Results 29

31. E3 FS.25 32 Monthly Stations F1 F2 F4 F0 F3 U2 F5 U3 E2 E0 E4 E1 E5 U1 CA223 404C2 C1 S4 N1 N.25 N4 CA2-6 CA29 FS1.0 FS3.0 CA217 404Z1 CA224 CA222 WCA2RT TP Rule EVPA Threshold WCA2A STA Reengineered WCA-2A Marsh Monitoring 30

32. Refined WCA-2A Marsh Monitoring Network Fewer stationsFewer stations Better distributionBetter distribution Standardized samplingStandardized sampling Reduced costsReduced costs 31

33. Helicopter Sampling in the Everglades Inefficient sampling trips are very wasteful Must eliminate redundant stations and optimize sampling flightsMust eliminate redundant stations and optimize sampling flights Need to stop flights when marsh is too shallow to sampleNeed to stop flights when marsh is too shallow to sample 32

34. Reengineering Annual Costs Savings  Southwest Coastal $10,000  Marsh Monitoring Frequency Change $30,000  Recorded Flow Demonstration Project $15,000  Redundant Station Reductions $30,000  S38B/NSID1 Monitoring $10,000  Biscayne Bay $30,000  Trace Metals Reduction $5,000 Total $130,000 33

35. New Monitoring: Annual Costs Savings  Compartment C treatment wetland$124,500  Compartment B treatment wetland $28,000  Downstream STAs marshes $72,500  Biscayne Bay marine water quality $20,000 Total $245,000 Other Costs Savings - Future Compartment B Capital $264,500 Compartment C Capital$289,500 Total$554,000 34

36.  Re-engineered monitoring produces equal or more data and information for less money  Monitoring must be rethought from the ground up for long- term sustainability  More data is not always better; look at needs and cost- benefit analysis  Review all monitoring assumptions  Apply re-engineering concepts to monitoring plans for new projects. Lessons Learned 35