1

WFD Article 5 Report Process & Results

Beyond characterisation

Yann LauransSeine-Normandy Water Agency, France

2

Three outputs of Art. 5

• 1. Analysis of uses

• 3. Baseline scenario

• 2. Cost-recovery assessment

3

1. Characterisation of uses

• Aim: Signals on main stakes /

potential consequences of decisions

• E.g.: Financial flows compared to

capital;

Richness and affordability /territorial

distribution

4

Illustration (1) (M€)

Households

Drinking watercommunal service

Sewagecommunal service

W agency State Communes& others

1.370 1.200

55793

100

496

Reservoirs & dams : 500

Plants : 7.600

Distribution networks :20.000

Private sewage equipment :7.000

Sewage networks : 15.500

Rain water network : 6.200

SSSeeewwwaaagggeee ppplllaaannntttsss ::: 333...777000000

5

Illustration (2)

6

1. What use for Prog of Measures ?

• Better knowledge of water uses

taken in significant issues

• Geographical (GIS) database on

water uses

80 % of needed data for

Hmodified argumentation, cost-

benefit & cost-effectiveness

7

Cost recovery

• Questions to answer (discussed

with stakeholders) :

• Public transfers

• External effects

• Proportion of environmental

costs to services payment

8

Subsidies from taxpayers

Drinkingwater1000M€

Sewageand

Sanitation890M€

Redevances & taxes470M€

VAT 120M€

Local or national

Taxpayer

Water&

SanitationServices

Households

105 M€

Navigation 2,5M€

Rural Fund17,5M€

Water Agency450M€

10M€

9

Transferts between UsersTransferts between Users

Contribute: 63M €, 2 % of total invoice

Contribute: 13M€, 2 % of total invoice

Receive: 59M€, 5 % of total invoice

Receive: 20 M€, 29 % total short term invoice; 17 % of long term invoice incl. Cap costs

H.hold

s

Sm. ind.

Industry

Agriculture

10

Who pays for who ?Who pays for who ?Pollution external costsPollution external costs

H.holds

Small ind.

Industry

Agriculture

Additional costs due to water treatment : 90M€

Additional treatment costs: 30M€

Additional treatment costs: 35M€ (self expense and connected industry)

Additional treatment costs: 0

Approx. share of user in the pollution

28%

7%

25%

40%

11

What beyondinitial C-recovery evaluation?

• Who will bear the cost of the PoM?

• Will that change the cost-recovery ratio?

12

Total costs per user category, sub-basin Orne,

(Baseline scenario)

Supplementary measures

Consumer (wash. Powder))

Municipalities

Industry

Agriculture

Distribution of costsHere: cost dedicated to implementation

sector (different from payer)

40 M€/year

20

BasicMeasures

13

5. Baseline scenario

• Questions to answer:

• Likely effects of current

changes & policies on risks

• Sensitive and insensitive

variables

= what is to be watched closely?

14

Pressures evolution in surface “classical” discharge : phosphorus

TreatmentCharge: 0,2Depoll.: 0,1

+13 %

1,0 1,5 32

-48 %

Epuration collectiveCharge: 36

Depollution: 28

Pre-treat.Ch.: 6,4

Dép.: 1,7

+11 % -65 %

18

Epurat. IndustrielleCharge: 12

Depollution: 11

-89 %

Rain water Municipalities15,9 M inhabitants

Industries

Spreading0,4

111

Indiv. Sew.Charge 4,3Depoll. 4,3

-85 %

Cattle4,3 M animals

Individual sewerage2,2 M inhabitants

Infiltrationenv. 0

0,8 2,20,1 7,6 0,70 0,1

4,3

-100 %

Spreading111 Infiltration

0,1

Separative Unitarycompliant0,1

Non Comp.

Rehab. Manure mngmt. Sys.

Charge 2Depoll. 2

15

3. Where are we now?

Starting from an existing “chain” of models

SENEQUE Model

No ecological model available, hand-made expert simulation

PROSE Model (lenght of Seine river, Paris to estuary)

SIAM1-D (Seine estuary)

SIAM1-ELISE (Seine bay)

No simulation available

Coverage of ecological quality models in Seine-Normandie Basin

16

Last decade of July Hydrological reference: low rainfall (« dry » year)

Situation 2000 Situation after works

St-Dizier

Blaise --Réservoir

Vitry Chalons Epernay Ourcq

St-Thibault

Noisy-SIAAP

Before Works

After Works

Upstream Paris

Quality simulation (Phosphorus) (2)

17

(Years)

Urban water investments consideredin Baseline Scenario:time needed to

implement

Number of needed years for implementing baseline scenario investments, based on present annual investment level,from 2000 on

Sewage networksWaste water treatment plants

18

1. What use for Prog of Measures ?

• Database on current “works”:

planned investments, costs

• ≈ basic measures evaluation,

and their effectiveness

assessment (this being limited

however)

19

Conclusion

• Article 5 looks like

a “technocratic” exercise

• However it is building tools

that are essential

for further programming of measures

20

Muchas gracias por su atención

• laurans.yann@aesn.fr

• www.eau-seine-normandie.fr