Federation House Commitment (FHC) - Progress to date
As we move towards a more sustainable, low-carbon
future it is clear that good environmental practice also
makes excellent business sense. The efficient use of
resources can contribute directly to reducing costs and
increasing the efficiency of our process operations.
The benefits that accrue from making a real difference
to the environment are doubly important at a time
when the economy remains under pressure.
In this context, and set against increased output and
growth of the sector as a whole, over the last two years
FHC signatories have made continued progress in
reducing their water use.
To maintain individual company data confidentiality,
water usage data is aggregated and reported on a
collective basis. In order to determine progress on
a like-for-like basis, during the first two years of the
FHC only data provided from signatory sites (190 sites)
for both 2007 (baseline year) and 2009 have been
considered in this analysis.
From the data provided, total water use (excluding that
embedded in products) by FHC signatories in 2009 has
reduced by 5.6% from 36,559,054m3 to 34,500,091m3,
equating to a saving of more than 2,060,000m3 against
the 2007 baseline.
When considering total water consumed per tonne of
product manufactured, it is clear that this reduction
correlates to actual water savings rather than
variations in production rates. Since 2007 production
by FHC signatories has increased by 4.2% and water
used (not embedded in products) per tonne of product
has decreased from 2.48m3/tonne of product to
2.24m3/tonne of product, a reduction of 9.4% against
the 2007 baseline.
Figure 2 demonstrates the annual progress achieved by FHC signatories. In 2008,
total water used (not embedded in products) per tonne of product decreased by
1.4% compared to the 2007 baseline[8].
This was reduced further in 2009 to 9.4%
against the baseline,
calculated from water use data for 2009 provided by 190 sites. However, a small
proportion of savings were made in 2008 but not reported at that time (data
from
29 sites). In total, 117 sites have reduced their water
consumption per tonne of product since 2007.
The collective progress of FHC signatories over the last two years has been
encouraging and indicates that the FHC is making a significant contribution to
the
20% reduction target (against the 2007 baseline) by 2020, particularly as some
of
the actions under consideration have the potential to save large quantities of
water.
In addition to the significant water savings that have been achieved, further
environmental benefits including savings in energy, raw materials and
associated
carbon impacts will also have been realised. Assuming all water savings are
from
the public water supply and an average cost of £1.18/m3 of water is applied,
savings of around £2.5 million in
the purchase of water alone will have been achieved.
Further cost savings can be expected through changes in water treatment,
effluent disposal and raw materials.
top
FHC water reduction trend
To determine the year-on-year trend since 2007, a like-for-like comparison of
the water use data provided from signatory sites (186 sites) for 2007, 2008 and
2009 was considered. Figure 3 shows the volume of water (not embedded in
products)
as m3 consumed per tonne of product for this period. Since this dataset is a
subset of the data utilised to derive the benchmark figures for 2007 and 2009
there
is a small degree of variation to the figures reported.
The graph in Figure 3 demonstrates that FHC signatories have continued to make
good progress, which was accelerated in 2009.
The acceleration of progress in 2009 clearly demonstrates the FHC signatories'
commitment to reduce their water consumption. A total of 117 sites within the
FHC
have achieved a reduction in on-site water use since 2007, while many are still
in the early stages of implementing water saving initiatives.
Some sites have already made significant savings and a number of these are
illustrated in the case study examples throughout this report.
Signatories signing up to the FHC pledge to follow five steps to progress:
- Step 1 – Develop a 2007 water use baseline.
- Step 2 – Assess water use at each manufacturing site by mapping water use and
preparing a
water mass balance.
- Step 3 – Develop a site-specific action plan.
- Step 4 – Implement the actions identified.
- Step 5 – Report annual water and cost savings.
Sites that are well advanced in the process have progressed onto programmes of
work that require capital investment. Some of these longer-term actions require
significant changes to operational processes and time is required for
investigation and planning. As
such, some of the actions being taken forward now will
not necessarily result in savings in the short term.
Other sites remain in the early stages of progress and
are, for example, learning the benefits of preparing a
water mass balance and undertaking staff awareness
raising campaigns on water efficiency.
Going forward, greater savings can be expected as more sites identify and
implement water saving initiatives and some of the longer-term actions start to
provide a return. Similarly, time is required for multi-site organisations to
share
the learning from exemplar sites across others within the company.
A summary of the number of sites at each stage of the process is shown in Figure
4. To drive progress further, from summer 2010 new and existing signatories
will
be offered up to three days of on-site technical support to develop water mass
balances and to develop and implement water action plans.
The 42 signatories have collectively registered 210
manufacturing sites within the FHC. Since 2007
9 of these sites have closed. A site may have closed
because production has ceased or been relocated.
Production may relocate to another site within the
same organisation or the site itself may be divested to
an organisation outside of the FHC.
All sites are required to work through each stage of the FHC, but multi-site
companies may start with just one site and introduce others to the process on
an
ongoing basis, thus enabling best practice to be shared across a company.
top
Sources of processing water
From the data provided, it is clear that most signatories are drawing on the
public water
supply. However, some of the water being used for processing is abstracted from
other sources, such as groundwater (borehole) and surface water (river).
Figure 5 illustrates where water is currently being sourced within the FHC
signatories' sites.
Water efficiency action
Developing an action plan enables manufacturing sites to assess environmental
performance, prioritise actions and set targets to:
- identify and implement achievable savings within specified timescales;
- motivate and delegate responsibilities to employees; and
- encourage water reduction programmes to maintain
momentum.
Site actions have been categorised to identify trends
within the sector. Currently, many of the water
efficiency actions being explored are associated with
cleaning, are process related, and address domestic
water use (see Figure 6).
Examples of some of the types of actions within each
category are discussed below.
Alternative water source – Rainwater harvesting is
the most common alternative water source considered and can be an effective way
to cut back on mains water usage and reduce costs. Collection and storage of
rainwater can provide supply for non-production parts of the site, such as
toilet
flushing and cooling water, particularly as the 'soft' nature of the water
means
lime-scale deposit can be reduced. Storing rainwater
may also help to prevent local flooding.
Cleaning – Some of the major water uses within the food and drink sector are for
cleaning procedures. Cleaning is vital for food safety but can account for up
to
70% of
a company's water usage particularly when a 'better safe than sorry' approach
to
cleaning
is adopted. Reducing water use for cleaning without compromising hygiene
standards is possible. Examples of water saving actions in this category
include: cleaning in place (CIP), pigging (product recovery) and transferring
to
dry cleaning operations.
Effluent treatment – Effluent is usually treated to reduce its strength and discharge costs.
Effluent treatment tends to be a longer-term consideration
requiring capital investment for the installation of a
treatment plant and equipment.
Recovery and reuse – Water efficiency actions within this category typically include the recycling
of condensate for boiler feed and the installation of
recirculation systems.
Domestic – Water saving actions typically involve replacing taps, fitting more water
efficient toilets and urinals, and reducing water use in site canteens.
Actions of this nature are usually simple, low cost
solutions with quick payback periods.
Process – Characteristically, process-related actions
focus on the efficiency of the equipment used during
processing. For example, the optimisation of spray bar
function, the replacement of faulty solenoid valves and
the balancing of water circulation systems.
Other – Not categorised above, these actions can cover
a range of different initiatives, including:
- the installation of sub-metering; this is often a requirement if there is an
area that needs to be investigated in more detail, either to improve water
mapping
or to monitor areas of high water usage. The water balance is used to highlight
whether this
is necessary; and
- education of staff; running a water awareness
campaign can be beneficial in terms of helping staff
to understand how they can reduce water use and
help the company reach its water efficiency targets.
Water saving initiatives range from low cost and easy to implement solutions
through to those that require capital investment with longer lead in times,
allowing for investigation and planning. As such, some of the actions being
taken
forward will not necessarily result in immediate savings. Financial support is
available to businesses investing in water saving products, such as
CIP, through the Water Technology List[9].
Within the FHC a site can indicate the progress of each of the water saving
actions it is considering implementing. Figure 7 indicates the status of the
actions recorded.
Of the actions recorded with the FHC, 18% have been completed and 45% are either
in the process of being investigated or implemented. Only 3% have been
cancelled
or are currently on hold, mostly because they are no longer relevant to the
situation on site.
Some of the actions that companies can take to improve water efficiency are
highlighted in the
accompanying case studies.
top
Notes:
4 & 6. Based on comparable 2007 and 2009 datasets from 190 sites
5 & 7. The 2007 baseline is not static; it will increase as more sites
contribute
data. The 2007 baseline is derived from the sites that also provide the
corresponding comparison year's data
8. As previously reported in the 2009 Progress Report (168 sites)
9. www.businesslink.gov.uk/wtl
More Information
Last reviewed: 08 Sep 2010