overview of the model, it's application in GAMA and a summary of the early use case results

1. Resilience.IO WASH Prototype
Rembrandt Koppelaar, Xiaonan Wang,
Department of Chemical Engineering, Imperial College London, UK
IIER – Institute for Integrated Economic Research
Accra - June 2016
Resilience.IO platform

2. Resilience.IO Overview
2

3. We need realistic insights to understand which investment
and policy decisions in reality can work to achieve our plans
To evaluate the result of decision options
Expectations, Goals, Plans
Investment and policy decisions
2015 2020 2025
Option A
Option B
Option C
Decision
choice
?
Situation today
Aims for this decade
Future changes
Environmental, Economic, Social Needs

4. n A data-driven simulation model of a synthetic
population
n To experiment with different scenarios by generating
demand profiles, and to find supply from a
description of technologies and networks using
optimisation with key performance metrics
n A fully open-source approach at ‘laptop’ scale
The approach: Resilience.IO Model
4

5. To make this possible a large set of
technology input – output datasets is being built
5
Labour input
Hours/day
No. people
Job-types
Waste heat
Material inputs
Quantity/hour
’’ /day
’’ /week
’’ /month
’’ /year
Goods outputs
Quantity/hour
’’ /day
’’ /week
’’ /month
’’ /year
Energy input
Electricity
Heat
Fuels
Liquids Wastes
Volume/time
Solid Wastes
Mass/time
GHG Emissions
Operational cost
Currency/time for labour, energy, materials
Investment cost
Currency/facility

6. 6
Technology example – Sachet Water Facility
Sachet Bag
Production
Facility
Labour hours – 4 hours per m3
HDPE sachet bags – 7.7 kg/m3
HDPE container bags – 0.6 kg/m3
Electricity – 15.1 MJ/m3
Jobs – 3 jobs per 1100 m3
Sachet – 1 m3
2000 x 500 ml
Gasoline – 19.4 MJ/m3
Carbon dioxide – 1.39 kg/m3
Water vapour – 0.64 kg/m3
Nitrogen emissions – 5.85 kg/m3
Plastic Waste – 8.3 kg/m3

7. 7
Technology example – Sachet Water Facility
Sachet Bag
Production
Facility
Labour hours – 4 hours per m3
HDPE sachet bags – 7.7 kg/m3
HDPE container bags – 0.6 kg/m3
Electricity – 15.1 MJ/m3
Jobs – 3 jobs per 1100 m3
Sachet – 1 m3
2000 x 500 ml
Gasoline – 19.4 MJ/m3
Carbon dioxide – 1.39 kg/m3
Water vapour – 0.64 kg/m3
Nitrogen emissions – 5.85 kg/m3
Plastic Waste – 8.3 kg/m3
Example: the estimated sachet water in 2015 used is 1015 m3 per day (+- 2
million sachet bags of 500 ml) à 8.4 tons of HDPE plastic waste

8. Resilience.IO Model
8
Physical infrastructure
Physical Processes to model
resource conversions
People as ‘agents’changing
the human ecosystem
Resource Flows across
Networks
Policy & Investment
Decisions

9. Application: WASH in GAMA
9
n Explore per district water and wastewater related
outcomes for the Greater Accra Metropolitan Area:
n Socio-economic scenarios
n Source water treatment
n Potable water distribution
n Water demands and usage
n Toilet use
n Waste water collection
n Waste water treatment

10. Simulating water and
sanitation demands
10

11. Population characteristics
11
Agent

12. Data-driven Synthetic population
n A population “in the computer” is generated based on
real data collected for GAMA, leading to a representative
synthetic population (~0.1% of real population)
n Socio-economic data inputs
¨ Gender (male or female)
¨ Age (0-14 years or 15+)
¨ Work force status (Employed / Not active or unemployed)
¨ Income status (Low income / Medium income / High income)
n Spatial data inputs
¨ Home location (point in district)
¨ Work location, based on distance from home
12

13. Calculation method (simplified)
13
n The population characteristics sets the water demands for
each individual (e.g. lower income à lower water
demands)
n The water use is evaluated for every 5 minutes based on
a time dependent mathematical function.
n Multiply output to aggregate total water demands of the
whole population

14. Similar approach for toilet usage
n Total toilet use profile per MMDA over 24 hours
14
Use Times

15. Demonstration
15
1. Creation of Synthetic
Population Change
2. Simulate demands
3. Examine what
infrastructure can best
supply demands

16. What happens? Calculation (simplified)
Various settings:
n Initialize model with demands (set by user or from simulation)
n Set initial infrastructure (facilities, pipes, their technology, capacity),
and capital and operational cost values.
n Set desired objectives for calculation: a) to meet % demands for
potable water and b) to achieve % wastewater treatment,
Model calculates how to meet these targets by optimisation, set in our
simulation to find the lowest cost and GHG emissions, taking into
account all the additional settings.
16

17. Technology datasets - potable water
17

18. Technology datasets - wastewater
18

19. Many additional settings in prototype
19
Simulated or user
set demands
Inputs – outputs
- Materials
- Energy
- Labour
Demands
Capacity & load
Technology
facility
Facility Investment
Operational Cost
Networks
Pipe leakage %
Already available
facilities
Already available
connections
Newly allowed
connections
Water use per
population
characteristic
Birth / Deathrates
and Migration
Finance
Tarriffs for water,
wastewater, and
toilet usage
Energy cost per
MJ / kWh and
labour cost per
hour

20. Use Cases
20

21. Use Cases to demonstrate the Model
21
n Three use cases were selected by the GAMA Technical
Group in Accra, and developed to demonstrate the
functionality of the model from a user perspective:
¨ Use Case 1 – Assess outcomes of ongoing WASH projects and
gaps towards meeting macro-level targets for planning
¨ Use Case 2 – Examine possibilities and costs to increase
household access to improved potable water sources
¨ Use Case 3 – Analyse the availability of clean, accessible and
affordable toilet infrastructure

22. Which use case / scenarios to dive into?
22
Use Case 3
Toilets & Waste-water
Use Case 1:
Water & Waste-water
Baseline
Use Case 2
Water supply
Baseline
City-Wide
Decentralised districts
Low pipe leakage variants
Local Pipe Source
Central Pipe
Source
High immigration
variants
Baseline
Public toilet and local
district treatment
Sustainable Development
Goal targets
Private toilets and
central GAMA treatment

23. Use Case 1 Results
23

24. Use Case 1 “On-going projects”
24
n Baseline Scenario A) - assess water and waste-water
situation from 2010 to 2030 including on-going projects
underway since 2010 (investment already secured)
n Assess how to meet 100% improved water and waste-
water demands via scenario “B) City-Wide Systems”
and scenario “C) Decentralised Districts”
n Additional scenario’s of B) and C) with “Leakage
reduction” where a 10% reduction in pipe leakage
from 27% to 17% is set.

25. GAMA situation 2010-2015
25
n In the scenarios (except baseline) all unimproved sources are
phased out by 2025 as well as tanker/vendor supplies

26. Baseline Scenario included projects for
potable water
26
n On-going / completed projects 2010 - 2025:
¨ Kpone China Gezhouba (186,000 m3/day)
¨ Kpone Tahal (28,000 m3/day)
¨ Teshie Desalination plant (60,000 m3/day)
¨ GAMA additional boreholes (21,000 m3/day)
n Not included – already planned:
¨ Asutuare project at Volta River (200,000 m3/day)

27. Results – Use Case 1 “Baseline Scenario”
27
Simulated Values 2015 2025
Population 4.39 million 5.68 million
Water Net Demand (no leaks) 391 thousand m3/day 509 thousand m3/day
Water Losses (27% leaks) 226 thousand m3/day 270 thousand m3/day
Total Gross Demand (incl. leaks) 617 thousand m3/day 779 thousand m3/day
Total Potable Water Production 501 thousand m3/day 652 thousand m3/day
Improved water % Access 70.3% 75.1%
n Values for Potable Water
n Conclusion: Additional treatment capacity needed to
satisfy growing population water demands

28. 2015 : Existing potable water pipe connections
28

29. Results – Use Case 1 “Baseline Scenario”
29
Simulated Values 2015 2025
Population 4.39 million 5.68 million
WW Net Demand (no leaks) 313 thousand m3/day 408 thousand m3/day
WW Pipe Losses (27% leaks) 0 thousand m3/day 0 thousand m3/day
Total Wast-water (incl. leaks) 313 thousand m3/day 408 thousand m3/day
Waste-water Treatment 12 thousand m3/day 27 thousand m3/day
Waste-water % Treated 3.8% 5.6%
n Values for Waste-Water
n Conclusion: Improvements being made in waste-water
treatment, but far from 100% treatment goal by 2025

30. Results – Use Case 1 “Baseline Scenario”
30
Water Demand and Waste-water profile for 2025 for Baseline Scenario

31. Results – Use Case 1 “Baseline Scenario”
31
Water Demand and Production per District 2025 - % water demand met?
§ VOLTA RIVER provides an additional 388 thousand m3/day supply of
treated water.

32. Results – Use Case 1 “Baseline Scenario”
32
Electricity use per District 2025
n Conclusion: Electricity use for potable water increased
substantially due to new 60,000 m3/day desalination
plant

33. Results – Use Case 1 “Baseline Scenario”
33
Operational cost values per district in 2025

34. Results –“City-Wide Scenario”
34
Simulated Values Potable 2015 2025
Population 4.39 million 5.68 million
Water Net Demand (no leaks) 391 thousand m3/day 509 thousand m3/day
Water Losses (27% leaks) 226 thousand m3/day 280 thousand m3/day
Total Gross Demand (incl. leaks) 617 thousand m3/day 789 thousand m3/day
Total Potable Water Production 501 thousand m3/day 789 thousand m3/day
Improved water % Access 70.4% 100%
Simulated Values Waste-Water 2015 2025
WW Net Demand (no leaks) 313 thousand m3/day 407 thousand m3/day
WW Pipe Losses (27% leaks) 0 thousand m3/day 30 thousand m3/day
Total Waste-water (incl. leaks) 313 thousand m3/day 437 thousand m3/day
Waste-water Treatment 12 thousand m3/day 437 thousand m3/day
Waste-water % treated 3.8% 100%

35. Results –“City-Wide Scenario”
35
Potable Water Investment 2015 2025
Conventional Water Treatment n/a 559 thousand m3/day
Total Capital Costs 2015-2025 0.99 billion USD
Waste-Water Investment
Central Waste-Water Treatment n/a 259 thousand m3/day
Aerated Lagoon Systems n/a 419 thousand m3/day
Decentralised activated sludge n/a 63 thousand m3/day
Total Capital Costs 2015-2025 1.0 billion USD
Pipeline expansions
Potable Trunks 2015-2025 n/a 11
Cost of pipe expansion n/a 0.23 billion USD
n Conclusion: Additional 200 million USD per year needed
to meet 100% access and treatment goals by 2025

36. Results –“City-Wide Scenario” – Potable + waste
36
Operational situation 2015 (million USD) 2025 (million USD)
Total Operational Costs per year 105 136
Of which costs for electricity 2.5 18.2
Of which costs for labour 15.1 21.2
Revenues from water sales* 62.6 100.3
Revenues from sewerage 0.3 35.1
Costs per Citizen (USD) 23.9 24.0
n Conclusion: Revenues sufficient to meet operational
costs under central expansion - if NRW reduced
*If all water users paid at 2016 tariffs!

37. Results –“City-Wide Scenario” – Potable + waste
37
Operational situation 2015 (million USD) 2025 (million USD)
GHG emissions in kg per m3 6.7 60.7
Total electricity use in million kWh 35.7 174.9
Electricity use in kWh per m3
69.5 204.4
Total jobs for Water and WW 3081 4328
Labour hours per m3
12.4 7.1
n Conclusion: Substantial expansion in electricity use,
GHG emissions due to waste-water treatment, and jobs
in meeting 100% targets by 2025

38. 2025 : New pipes suggested to meet 100%
improved water demands
38

39. 2025 : Potable water flows simulated with new
infrastructure in m3 per day (excludes leaks)
39

40. Results – Use Case 1 “City-Wide Scenario”
40
Operational cost values per district in 2025

41. Results –“Decentralised Districts Scenario”
41
Simulated Values Potable 2015 2025
Population 4.39 million 5.68 million
Water Net Demand (no leaks) 391 thousand m3/day 509 thousand m3/day
Water Losses (27% leaks) 226 thousand m3/day 430 thousand m3/day
Total Gross Demand (incl. leaks) 617 thousand m3/day 939 thousand m3/day
Total Potable Water Production 501 thousand m3/day 939 thousand m3/day
Improved water % Access 70.4% 100%
Simulated Values Waste-Water 2015 2025
WW Net Demand (no leaks) 313 thousand m3/day 407 thousand m3/day
WW Pipe Losses (27% leaks) 0 thousand m3/day 0 thousand m3/day
Total Waste-water (incl. leaks) 313 thousand m3/day 407 thousand m3/day
Waste-water Treatment 12 thousand m3/day 407 thousand m3/day
Waste-water % treated 3.8% 100%

42. Results –“Decentralised Scenario”
42
Potable Water Investment 2015 2025
Conventional Water Treatment n/a 689 thousand m3/day
Improved Springs and Wells 40 thousand m3/day
Total Capital Costs 2015-2025 1.61 billion USD
Waste-Water Investment
Central Waste-Water Treatment n/a 0 thousand m3/day
Aerated Lagoon Systems n/a 539 thousand m3/day
Decentralised activated sludge n/a 167 thousand m3/day
Total Capital Costs 2015-2025 0.33 billion USD
Pipeline expansions
Potable Trunks 2015-2025 n/a 0
Cost of pipe expansion n/a 0 billion USD
n Conclusion: Central system expansion for potable water
+ per district treatment for waste-water much more cost
effective

43. 2025 : Potable pipe flows within existing
infrastructure in m3 per day (excludes leaks)
43

44. Results – Use Case 1 “Decentralised”
44
District by district capacity for aerated lagoon treatment in 2025

45. Results – Use Case 1 “Decentralised”
45
District by district capacity for activated sludge treatment in 2025

46. Results – Use Case 1 “Decentralised”
46
District by district waste-water investment expenditure

47. Results – Leakage Costs
47
Simulated Values City-wide 27% leakage - 2025 17% leakage - 2025
Potable Water Leakage m3/day
280 thousand
m3/day
180 thousand
m3/day
Gross Water Treatment needs
(including leaks)
802 thousand
m3/day
702 thousand
m3/day
Additional investment cost 2015
– 2025 for 100% improved
potable water access
999 million USD 680 million USD
Total System Operational costs
per year
136 million USD 126 million USD
n Conclusion: A 10% reduction in pipe water leakage
results in 300 million USD lower investment needs and a
10 million USD per year operational cost reduction

48. Use Case 2 Results
48

49. Use Case 2 “Improved Potable Water Sources ”
49
n Baseline Scenario A) - assess water and waste-water
situation from 2010 to 2030 including on-going projects
underway since 2010 (investment already secured)
n Assess how to meet 100% improved water demands via
scenario “B) Local Pipe Source” and scenario
“C) Central Pipe Source only”
n Additional scenario’s of A), B) and C) with “High
Immigration” where the population immigration rate is
50% higher then in the baseline

50. Results Comparison –“Central Pipe Immigration”
50
Central Pipe 2015 2025
Population 4.39 million 5.68 million
Water Net Demand (no leaks) 391 thousand m3/day 509 thousand m3/day
Water Losses (27% leaks) 226 thousand m3/day 281 thousand m3/day
Total Gross Demand (incl. leaks) 617 thousand m3/day 790 thousand m3/day
Total Potable Water Production 501 thousand m3/day 790 thousand m3/day
Improved water % Access 70.3% 100%
Central Pipe w. high Immigration 2015 2025
Population 4.70 million 7.02 million
Water Net Demand (no leaks) 417 thousand m3/day 629 thousand m3/day
Water Losses (27% leaks) 229 thousand m3/day 309 thousand m3/day
Total Gross Demand (incl. leaks) 646 thousand m3/day 938 thousand m3/day
Total Potable Water Production 513 thousand m3/day 938 thousand m3/day
Improved water % Access 68.0% 100%

51. Results - Central Pipe Immigration”
51
Central Pipe 2015 2025
Conventional Water Treatment n/a 663 thousand m3/day
Potable Trunks 2015-2025 n/a 6
Total Capital Costs 2015-2025 1.18 billion USD
Central Pipe w. High Immigration
Conventional Water Treatment n/a 893 thousand m3/day
Potable Trunks 2015-2025 n/a 7
Total Capital Costs 2015-2025 1.65 billion USD
n Conclusion: About 230,000 m3/day of capacity is
required to meet 100% improved water access by 2025
for high immigration, with an additional cost of 470
million USD

52. Results –“Central Pipe + Immigration”
52
Operational situation 2025
(baseline)
(million USD)
2025
(Central Pipe)
(million USD)
2025
(Central Pipe)
(million USD)
Population
as per baseline
High
immigration
Total Operational Costs per year 166 81 94
Of which costs for electricity 12.6 9.1 9.9
Of which costs for labour 18.6 1.8 2.1
Revenues from water sales* 100.4 100.3 123.9
Costs per Citizen (USD) 29.2 14.3 13.4
n Conclusion: Replacing local boreholes, spring, and well
systems with central conventional water treatment
substantially reduces system-wide operational costs

53. Use Case 3 Results
53

54. Use Case 3 “Availability of clean, accessible, and
affordable Toilet infrastructure”
54
n A) Baseline Scenario - assess waste-water and
sanitation situation from 2010 to 2030 including on-going
projects underway since 2010 (investment already
secured)
n B) Public toilet & decentralised treatment – toilet
demands are met by public infrastructure with local
district treatment options (no pipe flows)
n C) Private toilet & centralised treatment - toilet
demands are met by private infrastructure with central
faecal sludge treatment via a central waste-water
network

55. Results – “Private Central System”
55
Population and Demands 2015 2025
Population 4.39 million 5.68 million
Faecal Sludge Generation 6,651 m3/day 8,708 m3/day
Waste-Water Treatment Needs 243 thousand m3/day 325 thousand m3/day
Private Toilet Centralised 2010-2015 2015-2025
Private Toilets Built 103 thousand 309 thousand
Central Waste Water Treatment 0 thousand m3/day 856 thousand m3/day
Aerated Lagoon Treatment 0 thousand m3/day 0 thousand m3/day
Decentralised Activated Sludge 0 thousand m3/day 0 thousand m3/day
Faecal Sludge Separation & Drying 8.4 thousand m3/day 3.6 thousand m3/day
Faecal Septage Plant UASB 0 thousand m3/day 0 thousand m3/day

56. Results – Use Case 3
56
District by district Faecal Sludge Production in 2025

57. Results – “Public Decentral System”
57
Population and Demands 2015 2025
Population 4.39 million 5.68 million
Faecal Sludge Generation 6,651 m3/day 8,708 m3/day
Waste-Water Treatment Needs 243 thousand m3/day 325 thousand m3/day
Private Toilet Centralised 2010-2015 2015-2025
Public Toilets Built 1346 6169
Central Waste Water Treatment 16.2 thousand m3/day 0 thousand m3/day
Aerated Lagoon Treatment 0 thousand m3/day 619 thousand m3/day
Decentralised Activated Sludge 0 thousand m3/day 140 thousand m3/day
Faecal Sludge Separation & Drying 8.4 thousand m3/day 3.6 thousand m3/day
Faecal Septage Plant UASB 0 thousand m3/day 4 thousand m3/day

58. Results – “Public Decentral” vs “Private Central”
58
Private Central (billion USD) 2010-2015 2015-2025
Capital expenditure for treatment 0.02 2.79
Capital expenditure for private toilets* 0.025 0.099
Total Capital Costs 0.045 2.89
Public Decentralised (billion USD) 2010-2015 2015-2025
Capital expenditure for treatment 0.09 0.26
Capital expenditure for public toilets* 0.042 0.192
Total Capital Costs 0.132 0.352
n Conclusion: the decentralised local treatment of waste-
water and faecal sludge, in combination with public toilet
systems would be much more cost effective
*Based on a 244 USD cost for a private toilet, and a 31 thousand USD cost for a public toilet
** Private toilets with a central treatment system become economically favourable when the cost to build
one public toilet increases to more than 678.4 thousand USD

59. Results – Use Case 3 - “Private Centralised”
59
District by district Private Toilet Needs in 2025

60. Results – Use Case 3 - “Private Centralised”
60
District by district Central Waste Water Treatment in 2025

61. Results – Use Case 3 - “Private Centralised”
61
Waste-water + faecal sludge pipe flow map for 2025

62. Results – Use Case 3 - “Public Decentralised”
62
District by district Public Toilet Use Times per day (every 5 minutes)

63. Results – Use Case 3 - “Public Decentralised”
63
District by district Public Toilet Needs in 2025

64. Results – Use Case 3 - “Public Decentralised”
64
District by district Aerated Lagoon Capacity in 2025

65. Results – Use Case 3 - “Public Decentralised”
65
District by district Activated Sludge Capacity in 2025

66. Results – Use Case 3 - “Public Decentralised”
66
District by district Faecal Sludge Separation & Drying in 2025

67. Q & A / Interactive
67

68. Many additional settings in prototype
68
Simulated or user
set demands
Inputs – outputs
- Materials
- Energy
- Labour
Demands
Capacity & load
Technology
facility
Facility Investment
Operational Cost
Networks
Pipe leakage %
Already available
facilities
Already available
connections
Newly allowed
connections
Water use per
population
characteristic
Birth / Deathrates
and Migration
Finance
Tarriffs for water,
wastewater, and
toilet usage
Energy cost per
MJ / kWh and
labour cost per
hour

69. Next phase(s) of the project
n Construction of user friendly GIS graphical interface, to
upload data, run the model, and see results.
n Multi-sector model
¨ water-energy-food nexus integrated modelling
¨ entire urban economy (15 sectors)
n Domain use expansions
¨ Socio-economic dynamics
¨ Happiness and health metrics
¨ Climate scenarios and flooding
69