This is a presentation from PepsiCo, one of the finalists at the 5th CII-GBC National Award for Excellence in Water Management in 2008 The awards are in 2 categories, Within the Fence for work done on minimizing the organisations water footprint, and Beyond the Fence for work done in the community around the industry. This presentation was in the "Within the Fence" category. We thank CII and the respective companies for giving us permission to upload these presentations on the India Water Portal website for dissemination to a wider audience.

1. PepsiCo - Palakkad
Water Conservation
Water Conservation
CII National Award for Excellence in Water Management
Hy derabad
With in the Fence December 16, 2008
Plant Overview
• Plant located in Industrial Development Area, Kanjikode
in Kerala.
• Three filling lines
– Glass line for CSD
– PET line for CSD
– Aqua Fina line
• Plot Area - 50.48 Acres
• Employment - 250
1

2. Manufacturing Process
Sugar Purification CO2 Purification
SILICA
ALUMINA
Sugar CO CARBON
MICRON
2
SUG R
A CA B
R ON PA C LE
RTI T MA
HER L VAPORIZATION MULTI- MEDIA
DISSOLU N
TIO PUR C A N
IFI TIO FI TR
L ATIO N T TMEN
REA T FIL TRA ION
T
Tre ate d Tre ate d
Liquid S ugar CO2
Filling
Blendi ng
Concentrate
• Tech nol og y-in tensiv e Tre ate d Water
• High precisi on Water Purification
equi pme nt
COAGULATI N
O
OZONE SAND ULTRA
REVERS OSM
E OSIS
• Stringe nt proce ss ION-E
XCHANGE
CHLORINE CARBON V
IOLET
con trols to e nsure Water
adhere nce to q uality PRI A
M RY PR R
IMA Y PAR LE
TIC M O
ICR N FINAL
PUR A N
IFIC TIO DISINF TIO
EC N FILTR TIO
A N FILT TIO
RA N D FECTIO
ISIN N
stan dards.
PepsiCo’s Vision
Positive water balance — going beyond zero
Water Recharge a t
Plant lev el
+
Water I nitiativ es at
Com munity lev el
+
> Water used in
manufacturi ng plants
Promoting w ater
Conserv ation measures
in agriculture
CREDITS > DEBITS
As a result of this focus, water was revalued
2

3. What we’ve accomplished on “debit” side of the
equation
SCO RECARD 2008 4.5
4
• 60% water u sage reduction in 3.5
2008 over 2004 (4.41 to 1.77 3
L/L) 2.5
2
• 77% reduction in effluent over
1.5
2001(3.41 to 0.77 L/L) 1
• The journey continues… 0.5
0
2 004- 2 005- 2006- 2007-
05 06 07 08
2008 vs. 2004: > 250 Million L saved
2008: We could save another 16 Million liters
Now…
Now…what about the credits?
We continue to achieve water “credits” through
recharge of water resources
Surface water desilting chambers
• Roof water harve sting Water balance
at our facilities • Total Cons:153
• Surface water – million L/ yr
st ructure--pilots • Total recharge:
– Palakkad plant – 108 million
L/yr
• The results:
– 71%
recharge of
the aquifer at
Palakkad
Rain water su rface infiltration pond
These results reinforced that our goal of positive water
balance is possible!
3

4. Palakkad Water Strategy
In 4R
Process
RWH
Conse rve
Source
(Rechar ge)
Water Strategy
At
Discharge
ZERO
In T he
Co mm un ity
CSR
Rain Water Harvesting
De silting chamber for pond
for pond
Surf ace Water Harv esting – Palakkad Plant
4

5. Roof Water Harv esting – Palakkad Plant
5

6. Global Best in Class WUR in Beverages
from Benchmarking Survey
7
6.1
6
5.2
5 4.7
Water Use Ratio
4 0.8 L/L Better
3 2.5
2
2 1.6 1.7
1
Palakkad
0
CSD CSD w/ Spring Water Beer - Small Beer - Medium Beer - Large Dairy
Refillable Brewery Brewery Brewery
Containers Source: WBCSD R eport
Zero based targeting
Roadmap for reduction
• Define specifications of water to be used at each step
in the process
• Determine quantity and quality of discharge at each
stage
• Identify opportunities for recycling, treatment and
technology to be deployed
• Discard as effluent after establishing that it is unfit for
recycling
6

7. Water
Water use Water
sustainability
optimization
Consu mption ETP lo ad Rain water
Recycle Recover harvesting
Redu ction Redu ction
Imp act on
Energ y 4R Ground W ater
Table
“When the well is dry, we learn
the worth of water.”
--Benjamin Franklin
7

8. Approach TPM WAY
• Assess current situation
• Estimate Losses
• Take Loss Reduction Target
• Identify Losses PLAN
• Identify Projects
• Formation of Task force / Teams
• Deploy 4R Tool DO
• Implement Solutions ACT
• Check Results
• Plan further actions
CHECK
Estimate Losses
• Best in Pepsi 1.6 lits/lit
• Palakkad plant @ 4.4 lits/lit (25 lit/8oz case) in 2004
• Potential for reduction = 2.8 lits/lit ( 15.9 lit/8oz case)
– This translate s to 350 kL of water sa ving potential per day.
• Zero based calculation
– 8 oz case content s = 5.664 lits
– Evaporation losse s = 1.0 lits
– This equals to 1.2 lits/lit of water consumed – this is the ab solute
minimum if the effluent discharge from ETP is to be ZERO
8

9. Case Study
Target Present
1.69
Ltr/Ltr
Av g for
4.9 2004-05
4.4 lit / li t
4.4
3.9
3.4 G
O
2.9
O
2.4 D
1.9
1.4
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Target lit/lit Achieved
Reduction in Chemical Usage Over 2006
Chemical consumption Trend
45000
40000
35000
30000
25000
In Kgs
20000
15000
10000
5000
0
06
07
8
07
08
06
07
08
07
08
06
8
06
06
06
07
07
0
.0
n
p.
ar
ly
ay
ar
n
ly
ar
ly
n
ay
v
ep
y
p
v
Ja
Ja
No
Ja
No
Ma
Ju
Se
Se
Ju
Ju
M
M
M
M
M
S
Month
Caustic Salt HCL
9

10. Solid waste Management – ETP Sludge
Sludge Generation Avg/Month
3500
3000
3000
2500
Solid waste in Kgs
2000
1500
Tar get
1000
588
500
197
0
0
2006 - 07 2007 - 08 2008 - 09 2009 - 10
year
ETP Sludge
B ACKW ASH W ATER
RECOVER
STE AM CONDENS ATE
BOTTLE W ASHER
CIP WATER
REUSE
TRE ATED EFFLUENT
AF-RO REJ ECT
RECYCLE
PET RINSE W ATER
SF AIR SCORING
REDUCE
FLOOR CLE ANING
10

11. Case Study
Water Conservation
REDUCTION OF WATER USE BY
COMPLETE USAGE OF ETP
TREATED EFFLUENT
AFRO Reject – Opportunity to Improve
Opportunity: Currently AFRO reject being used in ETP
Tertiary Treatment & permeate used for Utilities & TDS
balancing.
ETP Treated Effluent is having all the required parameters
to treat through ETP UF RO, but due to AFRO reject
availability Plant is using effluent for own land discharge to
develop green field.
Effective use of Treated Effluent through ETP UF RO could
save another 17KL/Hr.
11

12. PDCA
PI
Guidelines
for Usage
Compile & Dis cus s
PLAN
Findings
M odificat ions & Reus e Pot ent ial
Addit ions
A CT DO
Why-Why
Pay Back Es timat e Cost Analysis
Effect ivenes s Rais e C APEX done
Sus t ainabilit y Define U s age
CHEC K
Analysis for Reuse Potential
• AFRO Reject is having more or less same Qualities of Raw Water
due to permeate re-circulation.
• Additional Generation of permeate through new CSD RO could save
another 12 KL/Hr out of 17KL which is now being pumped to ETP
UF RO.
• Proposed CSD RO can be able to treat this Reject.
• This phenomenon prompted team to work on e stimated reduction of
TDS through New RO.
12

13. Estimated Savings
• AFRO Run Hours/Day: 20
• Total Reject Generation @ 17KL= 17*20 = 340 KL
• Permeate Generation through proposed CSD RO @
12KL/Hr for 20 Hrs = 12*20 = 240 KL
• Balance 100KL will be pumped to ETP UF RO.
• There will be direct reduction of 240KL/Day in Gross
Water Usage of Plant.
Approximate 7 0 Mill ion L ann uali ze d Water Sav ings
TASK PLANNING – 5W-1H
What Where When Who Why How?
Reduce ETP UFRO Daily QC This Reuse
Usage of f eed Exec/ETP activ ity AFRO
AFRO associate propmts Reject in
Reject in complete the process
ETP UFRO recy cle of only .
Tre ated
Eff luent.
Reuse of WTP & Propose f or
AFRO Production During QC To optimi ze New RO in
Reject f or processes AFRO Exec/WTP the water CSD WTP
process Run associate consumptio to recycle
n of the AFRO
Plant reject.
13

14. PROPOSED CSD RO SCHEMATIC
WITH TDS BALANCING
Bore Well Water
BoreWel l Water ST-
UG Sump BoreWel l Water
450 KL
22 KL @ 550TDS < 10 T ,4 KL
DS
Rej ect
AQUA 26KL @500 TDS Permeate @<10 TDS
SUMP AF RO
PSF RAW
ACF Permeate
W R
ATE
2 3
RO Reject @ 800 TDS For Aqu n Producti on
afi a
11KL @ 15 ppm TDS
ST-
1 KL Mi scell aneous *
8 KL for G *
RB
SR.COAG 620TDS INTERME <400TDS PSF ACF ACF
38 KL @ 800 Tds DIATE 1 1 2 18 KL for PET*
Propose d Reuse
* Maximum LimitsMen tioned For FLO W
* Mi n mu L mits Mentioned For TDS
i m i
New CSD RO
Suppli er: GE Water
Capacity : 12KL/Hr
Project Cost: 40 Lac
Time : 6 Weeks
AF Reject
Collection Tank
14

15. Consumption Target – Total Plant
2
1.95 1.94
1.9
1.85
%
1.8
1.77
1.75
1.7
1.65
2007 2008
KL/Day
REDUCTION OF 0.17 L/L TRANSL A TES TO REDUCTION OF 120 KL/DAY
Actions towards Water reduction
Sr Actions Benefits Cost Date
Rs’000
1 Wor kout TD S esti mati ons Proper usag e i denti fication for Wk – 1
pre & exi t R O and Reject Str eam & D esign
proposed us e. consider ation
2 Esti mate N et Benefit to Esti mati ng Pay Bac k & Wk – 2
the Plant and esti mated Res ourc e Sustai nabilit y
water us age r ati o.
3 Provi de 50KL Storag e Storag e AFRO rej ect in c ase 450 Wk – 3
tanks for both feed & any s toppag es i n the new C SD
per meate. RO.
4 Re-dir ect Rej ect line to Enable AFR O storag e 100 Wk – 4
CSD R O F eed T ank.
5 Connect CSD R O Per meate us age opti miz ati on 100 Wk – 5
per meate to Stor age based on the r equirement
Tank.
15

16. Result of New CSD RO Project
300
70% of
Savings in KL
Targeted Overall
240 240 240
Savings
200 220 220 220
200 180 180
160
140
G
O
100
O
D
0
Y
Y
B
E
PT
G
EC
N
V
AR
R
A
N
FE
L
AU
O
JA
AP
JU
JU
SE
M
M
D
N
Month
Imple mentation
• 2 Major Projects Implemented in 2007-08 resulting in
Annualized Water Savings of 70,000 KL (CSD RO & AF
Rinse Water Recovery)
• Redesign, Rethink initiatives Identified & implemented,
resulting in a saving of 15,000 KL in the year 2008.
• 18 Core consumption points metered on daily basis.
• Abnormalities paid higher attention by top to bottom.
16

17. Results
4.9
4.4
3.9
Backwash
3.4
Recover y G
2.9 O
2.4 O
D
1.9
1.4
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Target lit/l it Actual l it/ lit
B/W NEW
Dacausticizer
Recovery
CSD RO
Overall Results
• Total Savings of 240 Million Ltrs over 2004.
• No.2 on YTD Basi s acro ss 43 Pepsi Plants in India with 1.69 Lit/Lit
Water Con sumption.
• Zero Di scharge from the plant
• Controlled Effluent Generation. (0.69 KL/KL of Bev)
17

18. Way Forward
•Identifying further opportunities to save water through proce ss
effectiveness.
•Rede sign & Rethink Strategy added to 4R (No other stream
available to deploy 4R)
•Reduction of Effluent by adopting latest technologies. (Electro
Chlorinator)
•Optimizing total recovery from the existing water recovery
sy stem s.
•Con sulting Experts to generate ideas on water con servation.
“The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level
of thinking we were at when we created them.”
--Albert Einstein
18

19. THANK YOU!
19