Environmental Science & Engineering - www.esemag.com - September 2003
Comments? send them to the editor.

Ontario faces drinking water supply challenges

By Cam Vatandoust,
Ontario Ministry of the Environment

It is estimated that in some municipalities up to 30% of treated water is lost due to leaks. Aging pipes are a major factor in this loss. A 1991 study estimated that Canada will need to spend $90 billion to maintain its water system infrastructure.

Ontario’s Safe Drinking Water Act received Royal Assent by proclamation of the Lieutenant Governor and came into force in December, 2002. The Act includes a number of basic areas of concern including General Requirements, Accreditation of the Operating Authority, Regulations for Municipal and non-Municipal Drinking Water Systems, Testing, Inspections, as well as Compliance and Enforcement. The Act also deals with Offences and details procedures for Appeals.

In August 2000, Ontario’s Drinking Water Protection Regulation O. Reg 459/00 (DWPR) gave the former Ontario Drinking Water Objectives (now called Ontario Drinking Water Standards) the force of law. The DWPR deals with specific water parameters pertaining to the characteristics and safety of municipal drinking water.

Most Ontario municipalities are currently working to upgrade their water systems to comply with the DWPR. A portion of the capital cost upgrades for these facilities is eligible for funding under SuperBuild’s Ostar funding program.

Sustaining our infrastructure Two main aspects that directly relate to providing users with safe drinking water are:

1. Water supply and quality issues - Although the public’s perception is that we are blessed with an abundance of freshwater, the reality is quite different. Decline in the quality of water after our use causes decline in general source water quality. Some water quality deterioration always remains after our use, this contributes to the decline of water for other communities that use the same source. Source pollution is caused by our household use in the form of improperly treated sewage. For instance, only 75% of Canada is serviced by some form of communal sewage treatment system. Source contamination is an even greater factor for the remaining 25% of the population, that are served by private wells and septic systems.
Other causes of deterioration of water quality in our supply include urban and agricultural runoff containing residues of fertilizers, pesticides and other chemicals, industrial pollution either directly from facilities, or indirectly through leaching landfills, air pollution and other source contamination. Our treatment facilities are also unable to treat many household chemicals that we deposit into the system.

2. Treatment and Delivery Infrastructure issues - In 1991, it was estimated that Canada needs an investment of $90B to maintain its aging water infrastructure, including treatment works, buried pipes and services, reservoirs and other storage facilities. Over recent years, we have been suffering from the consequences of this aging infrastructure, and our municipalities have been struggling to provide necessary funds to ensure safe upkeep and proper maintenance of our waterworks.

Although different funding programs have been provided by the Province to municipalities to meet this need for infrastructure upgrades, some municipalities still cannot afford their share of the capital works costs due to their small number of residents and/or extent and physical characteristics of the systems.

The economics of water Traditionally, the cost of delivering safe drinking water in Ontario has been and continues to be heavily subsidized by municipalities and eventually the Province. This means that most of us do not pay what it actually costs to treat water and supply it to our homes.

The cost of the capital works required to supply safe drinking water to residents is often too high for any single municipality to bear. The Province, therefore, has historically been providing funds through different programs for these upgrades. However, more and more municipalities are realizing that they need to change the water rate structure for their residents.

The actual cost to get water delivered to our homes includes:

Capital costs to put in place the infrastructure;
Interest costs on the borrowed money for the works (debenture costs);
Cost of safe operations as per Ministry of Environment requirements;
Cost for infrastructure maintenance and repairs; and
Reserve costs (a portion of the water income should be put aside for future upgrades and major capital work repairs and expansion).

As we work towards resolving our water challenges, we are forced to address and examine new ways of thinking including full cost recovery pricing, and conservation-oriented pricing.

Conservation as part of the solution In recent years, there have also been programs within most municipalities to install water meters to determine the actual amount of water usage. These meters are used for billing purposes, as well as determining the total volume of losses in the aging pipes due to leaks and exfiltration.

We are now aware more than ever that leaks affect both the cost of water and its delivery to the users to a great extent. In most cases, if the unaccounted- for water in a municipal system exceeds 10 to 15 percent, a leak detection program is deemed to be a costeffective option. It is estimated that in some municipalities up to 30 percent of the treated water is lost due to leaks both in the municipal works and in users’ facilities.

Studies have shown that a typical Canadian household can reduce its water consumption by up to 40 percent with little change in behaviour of the occupants, by doing the same tasks more efficiently, and, therefore, using much less water.

Water efficient residential technology is another important factor in reducing our use. This becomes very important because the large residential sector represents a logical target for demand management activities.

Education, the ultimate tool An important part of solving our water challenge is to educate users on how they can help their municipality defer construction of capital works by simple means such as conservation of this important resource. This means that the municipality has more time to raise funds to undertake the major capital works, major works can be deferred, and the funds can be used to carry out infrastructure maintenance programs necessary for the operation of a successful and safe potable water system.

The proposed solution Due to the nature of our intricate water issues, and the complexities of our water challenge, it is quite difficult to provide a step by step map to success for all water systems. However, the successful solution must consider public safety, environmental issues, operational factors, and the economic aspects of providing safe drinking water to Ontario residents.

The ideal and optimum solution must consider factors including but not limited to: public information and education, operator training and education, promoting efficient sprinkler/irrigation methodologies, new process technologies, plant modifications and improvements, rate structures and pricing reviews, incentives through rebates and tax credits, sanctions and fines, efficient fixtures, leak detection and repairs, water use restrictions, elimination of combined sewers, and regulatory codes, standards and bylaws.

Many other jurisdictions also face the same challenges as the public water systems, and this is our opportunity to lead the way in using innovation and education to provide safe water to the public.

Cam Vatandoust, P.Eng., is a senior engineer with Ontario Ministry of the Environment in Toronto, specializing in water and wastewater standards and infrastructure capital works. He also is an instructor for Seneca College’s School of Civil Engineering Technology. E-mail: Cam.Vatandoust @ene.gov.on.ca.

See our home page on how to order your subscription. We regret we can only accept orders from Canada and the United States.