Does this question also touch on the effect of the built environment on the return of rainwater to the water table as opposed to accumulating on impervious surfaces and the associated problems?

Large companies have the financial ability to invest in low water technologies. When the public see this they to will realise what is possible and we can all make a difference. At present, with so much water used in “behind the scene processes,” how can we label ourselves as green or sustainable. For example, each cup of coffee requires somewhere in the region of 140 litres of water in it’s lifecycle. No one thinks about this when we sit down in a cafe and it’s the same for construction. The amount of water used in any process can be minimised or perhaps substituted for grey water or salt water.
It is down to those with the power and ability to forge the way.

As previously mentioned, water is considered a “cheap” resource, and why would you look into spending money into saving water when it can be spent elsewhere to save more money…? But would your children’s children agree with you? Only 2-3% of the world’s water is drinkable but 1.6% is held in glaciers, hence less than 1% of the water supply can be used to sustain human life. Each individual is estimated to use 50litres of water a day (in Europe), that’s 19,507,425,000,000 litres used a year in Europe alone. As the population rises water will become scarcer.
So when weighed up against the cost of human life how much is water worth?
Firstly we need to consider what the general consensus for use of water in construction is. Most people will immediately think of running taps and broken pipes etc. But when weighing up the amounts of water used on site against the amounts used in the manufacturing of the building products we use the numbers will change significantly. Can we use salt water in manufacturing? Are there chemical agents which when combined with salt water are more viable than what we currently use?
There are effectively two types of water consumption on site, direct and indirect. We in the construction industry are responsible for BOTH;
Direct consumption would include – welfare facilities, mixing of concrete / mortar / plaster etc on site – You are taking water directly from the local area to add to a locally made building component.
Indirect consumption would include – Materials manufactured from over seas, materials made in other parts of the country, materials coming to site ready mixed etc.
Once a benchmark for each “standard” component is established (i.e. Brick / Block / Insulation panel etc) then we can look to utilise the materials manufacturing process which require less water. The “solutions” to both the Direct and Indirect consumptions will require different approaches, in some cases drastically different.
Do we start to consider where we purchase our materials from in the country because their manufacturing process is done in a more water abundant area?
Do you then cross reference that with the costs and carbon emissions to transport the material to the site?
Do we ensure as a minimum standard that we are selecting by default the most water / energy efficient solutions for welfare facilities?
Do we individually meter all water supplies and record them in monthly KPI’s to allow benchmarking for each individual cabin type and process type?
If a site has 1 tap and three trades are using it (i.e. Bricklayer, Plasterers and Painters (Selected due to High, med and low water consumption)) why not install 3 metered taps and designate one to each trade. Recording this information would enable us to identify what the water is being use on. In the case of a painter, does he need to run the tap flat out whilst washing his brushes / rollers etc or is it more efficient to put them into a bucket filled with water and a de-binding agent?
Without benchmarking our consumption we can speculate about answers all day.

Water conservation must involve asking people to play their part. It is vital to involve staff and operatives and give them a lot of support and encouragement to ‘turn off’ their water consumption.
The construction industry should start by targeting simpletried and tested methods for saving water such as ensuring there are no dripping taps or installing low flush/dual cisterns hippo bags to lavatory cisterns.

As identified in the Water Action Plan water is a relatively ‘cheap’ resource. It therefore makes it even more important to communicate the consequences of not reducing water consumption, particularly in areas of high water stress. Most companies are franticly trying to become more efficient and drive down cost through innovation and lean construction programmes. Focus is therefore on the areas that generate the largest savings. When it comes to water saving technologies, people might say, what is the point if they can save more money else where. This does not mean that water saving technolgies cannot be implemented but we must ensure that we educate people why they are so important. Education has a key role to play.

As well as taking actions to make sure we are tackling and reducing our direct water usage in our sites and projects, we must work together to get a better understanding of the embodied water in the materials and services we procure. Embodied water can be substantial in construction and make up a significant amount of water use over a buildings life cycle. By understanding this we can ensure we are minimising our environmental impact throughout our supply chain, and after all rising water costs for us = rising water costs for our suppliers. Those suppliers pro-actively reducing their water usage, will be amongst those able to offer best value to us.

I believe that the biggest thing that we can do is understand in much greater detail when and how we consume water on our projects. Water is only going to rise up the political (and therefore our) agenda, so we need to be prepared for the obvious increase in focus. It is good to know that the SFfC and the Water Action Plan identifies simple quick wins around awareness, good practice and high priority areas…so this is a great starting point for those that are yet to really start taking water usage seriously.

In water scare areas we should look to new innovations in black and grey water recycling. Rainwater harvesting should become a standard feature across building projects i.e. minimum expectation.

Balfour Beatty needs to take more responsibility to drive the industry to attempt to commonise/standardise sytems design such as rainwater harvesting. This is especially relevant to schools where seem to re-invent the wheel on every school we win.