1. Water Energy Nexus: Estimating Embedded Water energy reductions FROM An electrical BILLING review
January 18, 2016

2. Agenda Study Origins and Objectives Methods Results Objective 1
Conclusions
Next Steps

3. Study ORIGIN and Objectives

4. Water Energy study Milestones
2015: CPUC commissioned water-energy calculator
February 2016: UC Davis water-energy web tool shows high electricity savings from water conservation
July 2016: Itron starts work on WE Nexus project
December: Presentation at the CPUC
December-January 2016: Incorporate stakeholder feedback in Draft Reporting
TODAY: Public Webinar
February 2017: Draft and Final Reporting

5. definitions
Per the current study
Embedded Energy (upstream of user): The amount of energy that is used to collect, convey, treat, and distribute a unit of water to end users
Energy Intensity (EI): The amount of energy that is required to extract, transport, and treat a parcel of water from its source to urban end-users. Unit: kwh per acre-ft

6. Study Origins/BASIS
High Potential Energy Reductions and a Data Opportunity
Historical lack of highly granular data for estimating embedded water energy reduction
Water-energy calculator approach: Hydrologic region level EIs are used to estimate water-energy reductionin 2015Q3
Shows high electricity reductions from water conservation
Data Opportunity: California 2015 water emergency mandate
25% urban water-use reduction
Water agencies report monthly water production

7. Study Objectives Objective 1:
Recalculate energy reductions associated with 2015 water conservation mandate using methods in literature
Objective 2:
Estimate embedded water energy reductions using an electricity billing review
Objective 3:
Provide commentary on the potential sensitivity and drivers of water agency EI variability

8. Levels of granularity for EI calcs
Most Granular : Water Agency System Component Energy Intensities
Hydrologic Region EI
Extraction/Conveyance
“Historical Supply”
Treatment
Distribution to User
Water Agency
Water Agency + +

9. Levels of granularity for EI calcs
Sum Water System Components for Water Agency Energy Intensity
Hydrologic Region EI
Extraction/Conveyance
“Historical Supply”
Treatment
Distribution to User
Water Agency
Water Agency + +

10. Extraction/Conveyance
A Simplified view
Visualization of Hydrologic Region EI
Hydrologic Region EI
Extraction/Conveyance
“Historical Supply”
Treatment
Distribution to User
Water Agency
Lowest Granularity
Average + +
Highest Granularity

11. EXISTING APPROACH to estimating embedded water energy Reductions
Hydrologic Region EI
Extraction/Conveyance
“Historical Supply”
Treatment
Distribution to User
Water Agency
Average + +
Water Agency Energy Reduction = Hydrologic Region EI Water Agency Water Savings

12. Methods

13. Objective 1
Recalculate energy reductions associated with 2015 water conservation mandate using methods in literature
Navigant 2015 Errata AVG Hydrologic Region Outdoor EI values
State Water Board Data (Lacks complete 2014 record)
Water Agency Energy Reduction = Hydrologic Region EI Water Agency Water Savings

14. + + Aggregate Water Agency Outdoor Electricity Accounts
Objective 2: estimating embedded water energy Reduction using billing review
Hydrologic Region EI
Extraction/Conveyance
“Historical Supply”
Treatment
Distribution to User
Water Agency
Aggregate Water Agency Outdoor Electricity Accounts + +

15. Objective 2: Defining Scope of Billing Analysis
Return to Environment
Extraction:
- Groundwater
- Surface Water
Water Treatment
Water Imports:
- Whole-Sale
- Conveyance
Distribution:
-Booster Pumps
-Storage/Tanks
User:
-Water End Use
Waste Water Treatment
Outdoor Water Agency Energy Consumption: Up-Stream of the User

16. Objective 2: Aggregating Water Agency Bills
Identifying accounts in CIS Billing Data
Urban Water Management Plans 2015
Google Earth
Extraction
kWh
Water Treatment kWh
Distribution
Itron Estimate kWh

17. Objective 2: bottom-up and Top-Down approach
Matching CIS Billing Data with Publicly Available Resources and Identifying Accounts: Extraction, Storage/Distribution, Treatment
Itron Identified Electric Accounts
UWMP Scotts Valley Well Sites
Corroborate Bottom-Up results with water agency supplied data

18. Objective 2: Methods breakdown
Distribution of methods for data collection:
Top-Down
Bottom-Up Dominated

19. Additional Considerations: Total water production of a water agency
Itron captures energy consumption associated with the production of a water agency’s total supply including water in use (SWB), raw water, recycled water, and exports
SWB:
Water in Use
Raw Water
Recycled Water
Water Exports
Itron:
Total Supply

20. For most water agencies in the itron sample:
Total reported supplies in the 2015 UWMP are within 10% of supplies reported to the SWB conservation data set
Select Agencies Exceed this Range Due to Large Percentages of Exported and Recycled Supplies in Total Supply

21. Solution and Future recommendations
For ~20% of Water Agencies in Itron Sample:
Percent of supply total > 15% different from SWB
Recycled Supply Water Agencies: Alameda, Scotts Valley
Exporting Water Agencies: East Niles, West Kern, Humboldt
Decision: Flag agencies especially when making comparisons with AVG EI derived analyses
Looking forward: Require water agencies to report total supplies for conservation data sets

22. Objective 3: Exploration of Trends in Water Agency kWh
2013 to 2015 Trends ?
Drought
Less Volume
Less Volume
Extraction EI
Water Treatment EI
Distribution
Itron Estimate EI
Implications for Water Agency EI?

23. Shifts in Water Agency Supply Mix
Objective 3: Focus on Groundwater Extraction EI and Shifts in supply mix
Implications for water agency energy intensities
Extraction:
- Groundwater Pumping
Water Treatment
Water Imports:
- Whole-Sale
- Conveyance
Distribution:
-Booster Pumps
-Storage/Tanks
User:
-Water End Use
Waste Water Treatment
Drought
Less Volume
Extraction
kWh
Water Treatment kWh
Distribution
Itron Estimate kWh
Extraction EI
Less Volume
Shifts in Water Agency Supply Mix

24. RESULTS Objective 1

25. Objective 1 Adjustments to Energy Reduction estimates in the literature
Adjusting existing estimates for comparability with Itron study:
UC Davis
Q3 2015
Itron
Itron AVG 2015 Quarter
460 GWh
223 GWh
130 GWh *
Includes wastewater treatment
Excludes wastewater treatment
IOU-ONLY
Water Agency Energy Reduction = Hydrologic Region EI Water Agency Water Savings
* Still requires filtering for non-IOU powered WAs

26. RESULTS Objective 2

27. Itron Water Agency Selection
32 Water Agencies
10 Hydrologic Regions
Diversity of Water Supplies
>70% groundwater Supply
>70% Imported Supply
Mixed Supply

28. Comparing Itron sample with CA
Itron sample broadly matches state-wide supply mix distribution
Itron sample mean is within 10% of CA mean for each supply mix source
State-Wide
Itron Selected WA
Close Match: Line Marks Supply Type Mean