Water in Future Cities Showcase Report final

25 Pages·2015·1.16 MB·English

30 JUNE 2015
WATER IN FUTURE
CITIES
RCUK Water Showcase 2015

The Crystal, London

Event Report
Disclaimer: this is report of what was recorded on the day and does not necessarily represent the
views of any of the organisations involved.
Contents

Introduction 2

Vision Workshop Outputs
Vision 1: Green Food & Garden Cityscapes 3
Vision 2: Flood-proof Cities 5
Vision 3: Smart Homes & City Networks 9
Vision 4: Cities & the Underworld 11
Vision 5: Community Transition Cities 14
Demonstrators & Simulators 17

Infrastructure Planning Workshop 18
Access to Finance & Funding for Innovation 19
InnovateUK Investment in Water: Revisiting the Case 20
Interdependencies workshop: scenarios for the future of water 20
in the national system of cities

Plenary Discussion and Next Steps 21

Annexes
A. Event agenda 23

1
Introduction
The aim of the showcase event Water in Future Cities was “Exploring visions for water in future
cities and how research, business and policy can work together to make them real.” The event was
set up to seek broader engagement and comment on the Future Visions for Water and Cities – A
Thought Piece; showcase Research Councils UK (RCUK) research and engage a range of
stakeholders in issues focused on water.
The Future Visions for Water and Cities – A Thought Piece was published in June 2015 by the UK
Water Partnership. The Thought Piece was submitted to the Expert Group of the Foresight ‘Future of
Cities’ Project by the Water and Cities Action Group of UKWRIP now the Research & Innovation
group of the UK Water Partnership, led by the Natural Environment Research Council on behalf of
RCUK. The aim of this project is to identify the opportunities and challenges that UK cities will face in
future and need to embrace in order to be resilient, to be adaptable and to thrive. Visions are intended
as a stimulus for further discussion around the issues presented.
Five different, non-exclusive visions that provide examples of how cities might potentially be tackling
the issue of water cycle management in the year 2065 were developed:
Vision 1 – Green Food & Garden Cityscapes: More food is grown both in and on buildings, while
water-sensitive urban design management plays a pivotal role.
Vision 2 – Flood-proof Cities: Existing cities and new city areas floating on stilts are designed to
withstand sea-level rise, extreme rainfall and expansion of river floodplains.
Vision 3 – Smart Homes & City Networks: Using the internet, appliances, networks and data-hubs
interact to ensure optimal management of water supply and demand.
Vision 4 – Cities & the Underworld: Deep geology beneath cities is harnessed to house combined
systems delivering effective drainage, water, heating and cooling services.
Vision 5 – Community Transition Cities: Utility-run programmes change communities’ water-related
habits and practices by ‘transitioning’ these to a more sustainable level.
Vision flyers setting out the concept and key features of the visions were provided to participants at
the event. A set of six challenge questions were used as the framework for workshop discussions.
The outputs of discussions are captured in this report along with original concept and key features of
each vision. The plenary feedback points were the top three or so issues from each Vision workshop
as summarised in the last session of the event. Full notes from the workshops are captured for each
question. An overall summary of points raised on the need for demonstrators and simulators to
support the visions is also captured.
Aside from the vision workshops, a further five workshops were held in parallel on more business
focused subjects: Infrastructure Planning, Access to Finance and Funding for Innovation, Innovate UK
Investment in Water – Revisiting the Case, Interdependencies workshop: scenarios for the future of
water in the national system of cities and Water Dragons. A summary of the main points arising from
the workshops is provided. Further detailed information resulting from some of the workshops will be
made available in due course.

2
Vision 1: Green Food & Garden Cityscapes
Key Concept: More food is grown in cities, both in and on buildings. Water
is subjected to a highly monitored, highly managed ‘system of systems’
spanning city, catchment and underground geology, ensuring climate-resilient
drainage, food production etc. Water- sensitive urban design management
helps to underpin this vision.

Vision features:
• 100% rainfall capture and recycling in all new buildings as a planning requirement.
• Water storage, solar thermal and PV systems and integrated green-roof surfaces.
• Biodiverse greenspace parks and management of groundwater recharge.
• Urban aquaculture
• Roof gardens, street allotments, food-crop networks and ecosystem parks.
• Community-scale composting and anaerobic digestion plants linked to CHP systems and ‘tropical
hot-houses’ and city farms.
• Local-produce food markets; new trading models for allotment owners.
• Robotic irrigation/ management systems
• Income opportunities for active, ageing population
• Recovery of energy resources from wastewater include: biogas, hydrogen (from electrolysis) and
N and P for fertilizers.

The Challenge

Plenary feedback points
Do the public really want green food growing in their
cities? How green do they expect a city to be and if
that costs money will they want to pay for it? There is
a need for public engagement to obtain buy-in and
change behaviours (eg. case studies, experienced
people to impart their knowledge). Need to make sure
it is not a question of imposing our values (eg.
architects, planners, etc. with the vision) on a much
more diverse community in the cities.
There are many research questions including: how do
you irrigate garden cities? What about safety? What
are the technologies that are needed? What is the
impact on the water supply? Need some more
numbers to provide evidence for this issue. Could we
deliver it reliably? Research topics will include:
investigation of efficiencies, energy, food, safety.
These need to be identified, realised and prioritised.
Generate world-class marketable expertise in vertical farming and technologies / SMEs. Who will deliver
this food to the public e.g. restaurants, canteens, supermarkets? If we adopt this it is not just a UK but a
global area.
3
Workshop Discussion

a) What are the needs of, and the benefits for, society?
Needs:
§ Supplement food production but not replace (rural) agriculture. Urban farming cannot
be considered solely responsible for food production.
§ Potential recycling of city waste – if feasible
§ Basic technology and traditional methods that are accessible to the public
Benefits:
§ Increase local employment
§ Connecting society to growing food & farming – increasing acceptability to production
systems and non-perfect produce (e.g. vegetables with blemishes)
§ The right plants grown in the right area at the right time (promoting seasonality)
§ More understanding of UK agriculture, influencing buying behaviour and increasing
understanding of food miles
§ Health and societal welfare - growing food is therapeutic and helps alleviate depression
and aids rehabilitation
§ Growth of more ornamental plants

b) How can we develop this vision further – what can we add?
Primarily, discussions centred on dissemination and greater public acceptance, including:
§ Creating models, examples and case studies to enable people to be able to farm
§ Sharing pockets of expertise – facilitated by companies or authorities
§ Website or drop-in hub for advice – sharing cityscape problems
§ Advocacy from Royal Horticultural Society
§ Create a social event e.g. garden shows
§ Access to green food kits – to help individuals with no previous experience in farming
§ Use curriculums in schools to enable green city start-ups and engage with kids (also by
using technology)
§ Corporates advocate or Corporate Social Responsibility sponsorship
o champion community
o composting schemes
o provide time, space and resource

In addition, the group made the following points:
§ Connect to other funding streams or community initiatives or venues
§ Tax incentives – for having green infrastructure
§ Sharing cityscape problems (silver surfers, city garden eagles, recycle foods)
§ Understanding what community hubs exist and what is already being done

4
c) What are the global business opportunities?
Unsure if there is a global market for this or the analysis exists to suggest there is. Could it be
created?
Generate innovative, exportable SMEs*
Generate world class 1st mover expertise – saleable*
A range of niche and key high value crops could be grown, particularly crops that do not travel
well or have a short shelf-life
Development of UK suitable modular kits

* Key points

d) What are the barriers and linkages eg. with energy

A supporting industry is needed to help develop urban farming, e.g. to develop technologies,
provide seeds.
Scaling-up by using knowledge (to create SMEs, identify key crops and seed lines)
High energy consumption
High capital costs

e) What are the research and innovation needs? Are there any quick wins?
Building design for sustainability and ease of maintenance
Using organic PV (solar energy) or LED lights
Aquaponics / hydroponics / aeroponics
Efficient heating / cooling / insulation – to increase resilience in winter
Grey water for irrigation
Reducing heavy metals
Rooftop gardens weight
Domestic AD plants producing fertiliser

Vision 2: Flood-proof Cities

Key Concept: Existing cities, as well as new city areas floating on stilts,
are designed to withstand sea-level rise, extreme rainfall events and
expansion of river floodplains. Alongside engineering methods, green
infrastructure and nature-based solutions help to reduce vulnerability to
flooding (i.e. by interception, storage and slow release of flood waters
and heavy rainfall).

5
Vision features:

• New buildings in floodplains allow ground-floor level flooding, with below-ground services either flood-proofed or
raised with new transport corridors 5-10m above the ground.
• Elevated light-transport corridors in floodplains catering for walking, cycling and electric city scooters and other

vehicles, as well as incorporating ducts for the utility services.

• Devel opments have vertical ‘water space’ provision of around 5m above current high-water sea and river levels.

• Tidal f lood barrages allow development of floating city areas, flood-proof buildings, transport corridors and water-
focuss ed recreational areas.

• Mega storm-tunnels and large storm drainage routes give resilience to extreme rainfall events.

• Communities may choose to pay upstream rural landowners to allow land to flood to avoid urban flooding

• TPhoend Cs,h waololedlnangdes and wetlands are created, preserved and restored.
• Green roofs, Sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) and permeable surfaces for domestic gardens, both in urban
centres and upstream catchments.
• Transport by water for both people and goods is more common.

Plenary feedback points
Do we mean flood-proof (which means it never floods) – or do we mean flood-adaptable? How flexible
should the city be and how much should we engage and inform the public? But we can’t make floods
disappear, so how adaptable do the public want to be and how much do the public want to accept?
Much better raising awareness of issues is needed, of the types of flooding, costs, and of the
consequences. A lot more work needed on pre-event resilience in vulnerable areas. The Somerset
floods should not have been a surprise to the public and the politicians. It wasn’t a surprise to the
Environmental Agency, flood people and technical people. We don’t do enough to share information and
be open and honest. The Flood-Proof Cities needs a lot more engagement around what are the issues,
challenges, and what are the choices?
In terms of solutions there is the feeling that we need to have flood-proofing as integrated across
everything you do in the city and in the catchments above and below a city as they have a role to play.
So, flexible multifunctional infrastructure that could be a park or a car park or a flood tank or all three.
Thinking in 3D (and we’ll hear about the Underground) the only spaces we have left to store things is
under the city – so more use of that. And integrating this upstream and downstream with the
ecosystems and deciding which areas you might flood and is acceptable to farmers, environmentalists,
the population and therefore an integration of infrastructure and ecosystem. We probably need some
demonstrators, to find out if this works and to use for education and information in that area.
In terms of communicating to other sectors, flooding appears to come out as probably the biggest
business risk to the energy sector’s infrastructure, transport
sector’s infrastructure and our domestic homes. So
communicating how the UK looks at this in an integrated manner
is a very important task.
In terms of global market, we’ve clearly got some skills but the
Dutch have got brand leadership. So what things can we do that
perhaps in partnership with the Dutch is a global offer in this
area? There are opportunities and capabilities that exist in the UK
now, but we probably need to think about a wider partnership
internationally. We could look at a joint workshop with Holland.

6
Workshop Discussion

a) What are the needs of, and the benefits for, society?
Flood resilient cities
Water literate citizens
Education – danger vs resource
Multi-functional spaces
Opportunities to combine spaces
Technology can follow
Wider programmes: water efficiency; whole catchment
Water supply / storage – catchment management and ecosystem services
Early warning systems
Property responsibilities
Protection of homes and businesses
Planning insurance
Avoid risk / increased resilience
Attractive places – liveable
Improvement – values increase – prices people out ?
Cooling – benefit of blue-green design
Recreation > water quality
Ecology / agriculture
Economic growth – natural capital
Health
Climate change adaptation
Who leads? Big government vs society

b) How can we develop this vision further – what can we add?

Rainfall. Happy Cities.
Water and land resource.
Embrace, not defence.
Small storms are as important as big storms.
Topography and planning long-term is key to flood defences
Informed community (of a flood) – real time data.
Comment on ‘flood-proof’ – don’t make promises!

c) What are the global business opportunities?
Incident responses
7
Risk assessment
Export of UK expertise (UKTI)
§ modelling capabilities
§ flood barriers and solutions
§ utilities
§ infrastructure
§ architecture
Innovation parks – demonstration site or developments
Rigor of UK Research – highly regarded by other countries
Research ---- translation---- education (global destination C.P.D, MSc, PhD, ENG.D)

d) What are the barriers and linkages eg with energy

Community acceptance of allowing areas to flood eg. Village green
Rule and regulations formulated to cope with system rather future proofing
Add riders to building codes
Cost of amphibious vs retrofit
Energy to move water – pump – flooding issues
Combined infrastructure – recovery of energy from sewers
Safeguarding energy infrastructure – electrical, & information systems – location of substations
Protection of services ---- change to future proof
Lack of capability and capacity in local authorities
Lack of cross-collaboration
Turning research into practice
Responsibilities – ie. Maintenance (long-term)
Waterborne diseases

e) What are the research and innovation needs? Are there any quick wins?

1) Hybrid engineered system – complexity and biodiversity functions ecosystem
services
2) Cost benefit analysis – data and evidence of soft vs hard flood defences
predictive power for performance and cost effectiveness & ecosystem services
Pre-event resilience in vulnerable areas
3) Flexible infrastructure/ design to future challenges. For eg. Transient population, finance,
technological advances. Demographic / people changes
4) Who pays? Who benefits? How is this calculated?

Quick wins
1) Sharing best practice of planning eg. Lewisham
2) Incentivising the developer, so that they are pro-active ie. Make more money through blue-
green infrastructure.
8
3) Pre and post evaluation. For example benefits to property development due to flood risk
reduction
Making data available
4) Raising awareness

Find out if people / communities want it

Vision 3: Smart Homes & City Networks

Key Concept: Harnessing the power of the internet, every domestic
appliance used by citizens and every utility network communicates key
data on current/anticipated needs, status, condition etc. to city data-
hubs, which manage water supply and demand to ensure optimal
efficiency and optimal economic/environmental performance.

Vision features:

• New buildings in floodplains allow ground-floor level flooding, with below-ground services either flood-proofed or
raised with new transport corridors 5-10m above the ground.
• Elevated light-transport corridors in floodplains catering for walking, cycling and electric city scooters and other
vehicles, as well as incorporating ducts for the utility services.
• Developments have vertical ‘water space’ provision of around 5m above current high-water sea and river levels.

• Tidal flood barrages allow development of floating city areas, flood-proof buildings, transport corridors and water-
focussed recreational areas.

• Mega storm-tunnels and large storm drainage routes give resilience to extreme rainfall events.
• Communities may choose to pay upstream rural landowners to allow land to flood to avoid urban flooding
• Ponds, woodlands and wetlands are created, preserved and restored.

• Green roofs, Sustainable drainage systems (SuDS) and permeable surfaces for domestic gardens, both in urban
centres and upstream catchments.
The Challenge
• Transport by water for both people and goods is more common.

Plenary feedback points
Smart is coming: whether you want it or not. So is water going to be a leader or follower? Everything is
going smart, so where do we reposition?
What is the value or business case for smart water?
§ energy has just about got there, persuading the government and utilities and the public seeing
how much their bills go up initially when they’ve got to pay for the installation of their smart
meter
§ can we justify going very smart, can we piggy back as value is 3 times for energy compared
with water (£1200 vs £400)
What is smart water? We need a lot more engagement with people to understand what they are looking
for. Is it that they want lower bills and ‘smart’ is a way to get that? Or do people want to be ‘green’?
Perhaps the ethos is ‘I want to be sustainable but I’ve no idea how the smart technologies do it’. Need
to engage with the public to find out what do they want smart to do for them? Could also learn lessons
from the energy sector.
9