Water to the Army Moderated By: Kate McMordie Stoughton, PNNL - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
water to the army
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Water to the Army Moderated By: Kate McMordie Stoughton, PNNL - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Nov 29, 2023 99 likes •481 views

Mission Resilience & Sustainability Training The True Value of Water: Finding the Non-Market Value of Water to the Army Moderated By: Kate McMordie Stoughton, PNNL Presented By: Dr. Ray Quay, Arizona State University Trey Lewis, OCAR

slide-1
SLIDE 1
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

1

06 OCT 2017

The True Value of Water: Finding the Non-Market Value of Water to the Army

Mission Resilience & Sustainability Training

Presented By:

  • Dr. Ray Quay, Arizona State University

Trey Lewis, OCAR ARIMD

  • Dr. Marc Kodack, Water Program Manager, Office of DASA- E&S

Moderated By: Kate McMordie Stoughton, PNNL

slide-2
SLIDE 2
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

2

06 OCT 2017

Speakers

  • Dr. Marc Kodack
  • Water Program Manager
  • Office of Deputy Assistant Secretary of the

Army for Energy and Sustainability (DASA- E&S)

  • Dr. Ray Quay
  • Research Professional – Decision Center

for a Desert City

  • Arizona State University

Trey Lewis

  • Water Program Coordinator
  • Army Reserve Installation Management Directorate
slide-3
SLIDE 3
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

3

06 OCT 2017

Learning Objectives

  • The session will address these questions:
  • What are the challenges and risks facing water supplies now

and in the future?

  • What causes the cost of water to not match the value of

water?

  • What are some currently available tools for calculating non-

market values of water?

  • What are examples of Army projects that have successfully

used non-market valuation?

slide-4
SLIDE 4
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

4

06 OCT 2017

  • Dr. Ray Quay

Decision Center for a Desert City Arizona State University

slide-5
SLIDE 5
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

5

06 OCT 2017

Trey Lewis

Army Reserve Installation Management Directorate

slide-6
SLIDE 6
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

6

06 OCT 2017

PRICE QUANTITY Equilibrium Supply Demand

Economics 101

slide-7
SLIDE 7
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

7

06 OCT 2017

PRICE QUANTITY Supply < Demand = Higher Price Supply Demand

Economics 101

Supply Shortfall

slide-8
SLIDE 8
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

8

06 OCT 2017

PRICE QUANTITY Supply Demand

World Series Tickets

Lower “Willingness to Pay” Higher “Willingness to Pay” $50,000 $50 1 100,000

slide-9
SLIDE 9
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

9

06 OCT 2017

PRICE QUANTITY Equilibrium Marginal Cost Marginal Benefit

Economics 101

slide-10
SLIDE 10
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

10

06 OCT 2017

PRICE QUANTITY Equilibrium Cost1 Marginal Benefit

Economics 101

Cost Artificially Low = Overproduction/Overuse Cost2 Assumption: this is the full and complete cost for the product

slide-11
SLIDE 11
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

11

06 OCT 2017

Common Pool Goods

Excludable Non-excludable Rivalrous Private Goods (food, clothes, cars, parking spaces) Common Pool Goods (fish stocks, timber, coal, water) Non-rivalrous Club Goods (movie theater, private park, satellite television) Public Goods (public television, air, national defense) Source: Wikipedia RIVALROUS – If I use it, you can’t use it (and vice versa) EXCLUDABLE – Can control who uses the resource

slide-12
SLIDE 12
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

12

06 OCT 2017

Water as Goods

Excludable Non-Excludable Rivalrous Non- Rivalrous Bottled Water Lake Michigan Swimming Pool Treating Water

slide-13
SLIDE 13
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

13

06 OCT 2017

Externalities

  • Externalities – “the positive or negative consequences of economic

activities on unrelated third parties” (Quickonomics.com) POSITIVE NEGATIVE

https://www.flickr.com/photos/barbourians/8479006257 http://maxpixel.freegreatpicture.com/Butterfly-Insect-Spring-Flower- Garden-1939278

slide-14
SLIDE 14
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

14

06 OCT 2017

Non-Market Valuation

  • REVEALED, DIRECT COSTS: How much do you pay for a gallon of water

from your utility?

  • REVEALED, INDIRECT COSTS: If I gave you $1,000 to prepare for an

emergency, how much would you spend on each item (one of which is “ensuring access to clean water”?

  • STATED, DIRECT COSTS: How much is having clean water worth to you?
  • STATED, INDIRECT COSTS: Rank the importance of these choices

contingent on this scenario…

Revealed Preferences Stated Preferences Direct Costs Competitive Market Prices Simulated Market Prices Contingent valuation

  • Open-ended response format

Indirect Costs Household production function models Time Allocation Random utility and travel cost Averting behavior Hedonics (i.e. home prices) Production function models Referendum votes Contingent Valuation

  • Discrete-choice and interval

response formats

slide-15
SLIDE 15
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

15

06 OCT 2017

Real World Examples

  • LEED TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE LCCA
  • FORT RILEY STUDY
slide-16
SLIDE 16
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

16

06 OCT 2017

LEED Triple Bottom CBA

slide-17
SLIDE 17
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

17

06 OCT 2017

LEED Triple Bottom Line CBA

  • Combines cost-benefit analysis (CBA), triple bottom line accounting and

life cycle cost assessment (LCCA)

  • Eligible for a LEED Pilot Credit
  • Must be used in evaluating at least six LEED credits
  • AutoCase for Buildings and Autocase for Sites
  • DoD Examples
  • U.S. Defense Health Agency
  • USAG Humphreys (S. Korea)
  • Fort Belvoir Hospital
  • Fort Bliss Hospital
  • JB Pearl Harbor-Hickam
slide-18
SLIDE 18
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

18

06 OCT 2017

Autocase for Buildings

  • Utilizes location-based data
  • Relies on data readily available during a LEED credit submission
  • Provides the cost and benefit of the

LEED credits pursued over the lifetime

  • f the facility
  • Accuracy unclear when modeling

projects on existing facilities

  • Needs further study
slide-19
SLIDE 19
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

19

06 OCT 2017

Autocase for Sites

  • “Models the impacts for 25+ storm water design options, including

bioretention, swales, and permeable pavement”

slide-20
SLIDE 20
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

20

06 OCT 2017

Autocase Screenshot

slide-21
SLIDE 21
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

21

06 OCT 2017

Autocase Screenshot

slide-22
SLIDE 22
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

22

06 OCT 2017

Autocase Screenshot

slide-23
SLIDE 23
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

23

06 OCT 2017

Autocase Screenshot

slide-24
SLIDE 24
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

24

06 OCT 2017

Autocase Screenshot

slide-25
SLIDE 25
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

25

06 OCT 2017

Autocase Screenshot

slide-26
SLIDE 26
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

26

06 OCT 2017

Autocase Screenshot

slide-27
SLIDE 27
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

27

06 OCT 2017

Autocase Screenshot

slide-28
SLIDE 28
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

28

06 OCT 2017

Autocase Screenshot

slide-29
SLIDE 29
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

29

06 OCT 2017

Autocase Screenshot

slide-30
SLIDE 30
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

30

06 OCT 2017

Fort Riley Study

https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/styles/medium/public/2015- 09/containment_ft_riley.jpg

  • 2014 study funded by ODASA-E&S
  • PROJECT: Take wastewater from

before WWTP, divert some to a smaller MBR and use it at the Installation Vehicle Wash Facility (IVWF)

  • Would eliminate the need for

potable water use at the IVWF

  • Provide 4,000 gallons per day

(GPD)

  • Initial SIR: 0.34
  • Final SIR: 0.52 (53% increase)

Fort Riley Water Challenges

  • Growing water demand
  • Increased risk of drought
  • Disputed surface water rights in

the Lower Republican basin

  • Aging distribution system
  • Forecasted climate effects
  • Water recharge shorage
slide-31
SLIDE 31
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

31

06 OCT 2017

Fort Riley Study Methods

  • Steps:
  • 1. Identified Project Type (Used matrix)
  • 2. Identified Relevant Benefits and Costs
  • 3. Chose Appropriate NMV Methods
  • Substitute Cost Method
  • Indicator Method
  • Benefit Transfer Method
  • 4. Completed NMV Analysis and Incorporate into CBA
slide-32
SLIDE 32
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

32

06 OCT 2017

Fort Riley Study Results

slide-33
SLIDE 33
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

33

06 OCT 2017

Fort Riley Study Results

CONCLUSION 1. NMV Methods have the potential to provide important insight into the full range of benefits from Army infrastructure projects by providing a more comprehensive picture of the value of internal and external project effects. RECOMMENDATION:

  • Further development to:

1. Understand best application 2. Increase awareness of usefulness 3. Improve process of data identification 4. Reduce complexity CONCLUSION 2. Additional refinement and simplification of NMV methods is needed for practical Army applications. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Further refindment of the proposed framework 2. Complete additional demonstrations to understand data availability and NMV RECOMMENDATION: Army consider a future project to establish an Army-wide water demand curve

slide-34
SLIDE 34
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

34

06 OCT 2017

Fort Riley Study Results

CONCLUSION 3. Further use of NMV methods is hampered by a lack of awareness about their usefulness, prompting some stakeholders to remain unconvinced that the methods should be used. RECOMMENDATION: Army develop detailed guidance and procedures to implement use of NMV methods, including suggestions on the most potentially promising infrastructure project applications for water and energy. RECOMMENDATION: Army undertake education and training efforts for appropriate installation and budget personnel to increase awareness and practical understanding of the usefulness of NMV methods and how they can be applied effectively. CONCLUSION 4. Routine use of NMV methods for water project justification faces the important barrier

  • f a lack of easy access to data needed to perform NMV analysis.

RECOMMENDATION: Army investigate a variety of approaches to develop more readily accessible and possibly standardized data sources such as look-up tables for commonly used parameter values, e.g. water distribution system characteristics and cost data.

slide-35
SLIDE 35
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

35

06 OCT 2017

Fort Riley Study

  • 2014 pilot study funded by ODASA-E&S
  • “the Army seeks to identify, evaluate, and test acceptable methods

that incorporate the full range of benefits into Army cost-benefit analyses (CBAs).”

  • “ODASA(E&S) is interested in understanding the value of proposed

infrastructure projects that reduce mission risk associated with energy and water supply disruptions and decrease costs associated with environmental-related impacts and liabilities.“

  • DIG DEEPER:

http://www.asaie.army.mil/Public/ES/doc/NMV%20FINAL%20REPORT%2 0Sept%202014.pdf

slide-36
SLIDE 36
  • Leadership. Energy. Execution.

UNCLASSIFIED / FOUO

36

06 OCT 2017

  • Dr. Marc Kodack

Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary

  • f the Army for Energy & Sustainability