Standard content for Members only

To continue reading this article, please login to your Utility Week account, Start 14 day trial or Become a member.

If your organisation already has a corporate membership and you haven’t activated it simply follow the register link below. Check here.

Become a member

Start 14 day trial

Login Register

UK water security at risk

The UK has one of the developed world’s lowest levels of renewable water resources, putting the country’s water security at risk.

That is according to the British Standards Institution (BSI), which assessed the water security of 40 developed nations.

It judged the UK’s water security as being at ‘medium risk’, with the country named among the worst 10 countries for levels of freshwater resources.

A tool developed by Waterwise and launched with BSI showed that the UK lags behind other developed countries on metrics such as per capita consumption (PCC) and the finite supplies available per head of population.

“We face huge challenges across the globe in ensuring water is available for people, business and the environment,” said Nicci Russel, chief executive of Waterwise. She cited the United Nations data that indicated more than 3.5 billion globally have inadequate access to water.

“These shocking figures are predicted to get much worse and it is increasingly clear that we can’t go on as we have been,” Russell said. “It is just not sustainable.”

In the report Thirst for change, each country is given a score on the BSI Water Security Indicator. It uses data on water availability, usage, water risk and wastage to calculate an overall score for each country and highlight where there are areas for improvements.

The lowest scores represent the best relative state of an indicator, where countries have taken steps towards securing future supplies. The seven factors are added together to give a score out of 35. The UK scored 20, making it medium-risk to scarcity. The lowest scores were the Netherlands and France at 18 and 19; Germany was on par with the UK while the US had the highest score – meaning it is at the greatest scarcity risk of assessed countries at 27. China and India each scored 26.

BSI said the relatively low price of water in the UK, coupled with high levels of PCC and leakage rates meant the overall score for water security was relatively high.

China, India and the United States had the highest scores. PCC and leakage rates in the US were by far higher than other countries included in the analysis.

Common recommendations included the need for a perception shift in how was is used by communities around the world and to recognise water wastage as a serious challenge.

Applying a circular economy mindset to the water challenge of water security can help tackle some of the key drivers to the issue. It advocates water reuse to lower the need for abstraction.

Compared to other countries included in the report, the UK’s PCC of 149litres daily is better than Australia at 200, Japan at 224 and the United States ahead at 379 litres per person daily.

However, the UK lags behind European neighbours France (147) and Germany (110) as well as China (147).

Abstraction levels are lowest in the UK however, as other countries take significantly more water from the environment for agriculture. In the US, for every person, 1,342 litres are abstracted daily to meet farming needs; while in the UK 124 litres per person are abstracted for agriculture.

 

The report also shows most countries withdraw less than 30% of total water for domestic purposes, however the UK is an outlier with around 74% used in pubic water supplies.

From 1962 to 2018, the amount of freshwater available globally fell by 57%. For the UK specifically the reduction in available supplies fell by 26%. Australia has had the greatest reduction in available freshwater with a 57% drop since the 1960s.

The report highlights that modest efficiency measures could save significant resources. For the UK, a 5-6% reduction in domestic water consumption could save around 1.33 MtCO2e per year.

Government promised at the passing of the Environment Act that a water efficiency label would be adopted. It has been consulted upon but not yet come to fruition.