INTRODUCTION

Water is one of the necessities of life, and water utilities must meet extremely demanding
standards of reliability. Our case study is about the water supply system in the Municipality of
Kananga Leyte whose one of the sources is ____________. We reect upon the growing
urbanization trend and the climate variability which are predicted to make the water supply
system fragile in Kananga Leyte.

The Municipality of Kananga is geographically located within coordinate 1240 30 00 to

1240 4100 north latitude and 110 06 00 to 110 16 00 east latitude. It is in the southwest
portion of Region VIII and on the north-western hinterland of the Leyte province. The place is a
melting pot of the populace of 2nd, 3rd and 4th congressional districts being located in the
intersection of Palompon, Ormoc and Tacloban City.

Kananga is one of the 41 municipalities in the province within the 4th congressional
district. It can be accessed by means of an inland travel passing thru the national highway. It is
about 86 kilometers or approximately two hours ride to the City of Tacloban, the provincial
capital of Leyte and more or less twenty to twenty five minutes ride to the City of Ormoc. The
Municipalities of Capoocan and Leyte bound the northern part of the municipality, Carigara and
Jaro in the eastern portion, the City of Ormoc in the southern part and Matag-ob in the western
part.

Water strategies in areas will have to be developed considering a diversity of all the
available water sources. Key considerations will be to minimize the use of potable water, the
export of wastewater and losses in the distribution networks, considering at all times reliability
of source and environmental impact.
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1. Water Facts

It is a well-known fact that without water, life on this planet as we know it would not be
possible. The human body itself consists of 60-70% of water and can only last four days without
it. More than half of the earths surface is covered in water , the total volume of water on the
planet is apparently some 1,360,000,000 cubic kilometres that could cover the globe to a height
of 2.7 kilometres if spread evenly over its surface (Postel, 1992). But more than 97 percent of
that water is seawater, 2 percent is locked in icecaps and glaciers and a large portion of the
remaining 1 percent lies too far underground to exploit. In addition to this the amount of
freshwater in the world is not evenly distributed and not readily available for human use leaving
many areas in the world suffering from water stress and scarcity (WCC, 2010).

2.2. Water Stress and Scarcity

According to the World Business Council for Sustainable Development (2005) a

countrys renewable fresh water availability should be at least 1700m3 on an annual per capita
basis for it to be sufficient. If this value falls between 1000 and 1700m3 the country experiences
water stress, while if the value falls below 1000m3 then countries will experience water scarcity.

Water scarcity can be defined as economic or physical. Economic scarcity may occur in a
country where there is a lack of investment in infrastructure and unequal distribution of water.
Physical scarcity is present where water supply cannot meet the demands of a countrys
populations (BBC, 2006). Figure 2.1 indicates the areas of physical and economical scarcity.
Urbanization, population increase, increases in domestic and industrial water use and agriculture
have been identified as reasons causing water scarcity. Climate change exacerbates the situation,
especially in the driest areas of the world (Diouf, 2007).

According to UN-Water (2006) climate change is expected to account for about 20

percent of the global increase in water scarcity. Climate change is expected to worsen the
extremes of drought affecting most the countries that already suffer from water shortages. A
study conducted by the UK Meteorological office concluded that, with no mitigation of climate
change, the severe droughts that would have normally occurred once every 50 years will occur
every other year by 2100 (UN-Water, 2006).

2.3. Sustainable Water Management

The World Health Organisation (2009) emphasized the fact that water scarcity
underscores the need for better water management. The UN-Water (2006) rightly outlines that:
Addressing water scarcity requires an intersectional and multidisciplinary approach to
managing water resources in order to maximize economic and social welfare in an equitable
manner without compromising the sustainability of vital ecosystems. It follows on to say that
integration across different sectors will be essential where consideration is given to development,
supply, use and demand, and emphasis is placed on people and ecosystems. On the demand side,
enhancing water productivity (the volume of production per unit of water) in all sectors is
paramount to successful programmes of water scarcity alleviation.

Part of this management is ensuring that the least amount of water is lost between collection and
end users. Therefore efficiency in the whole distribution system is important to ensure that losses
are minimised thus saving financial and environmental cost.

2.4. Urban Water Management

Today the proportion of the worlds population living in urban areas surpasses that living
in rural areas (Wong and Brown, 2009). This trend for urbanisation however, according to Wong
and Brown (2009) has had un-avoided impacts on the land and water environments. To
exacerbate the situation global warming and climate change along with the increasing population
lead to uncertainties on the future water supplies of urban communities. Wong and Brown (2009)
move on to cite various others (Butler & Maksimovic 1999; Newman 2001; Ashley et al. 2003,
2005) who agree that the conventional urban water management approach needs to change in
order to adapt to these current and future sustainability issues.

This conventional urban water management approach includes removing storm water and
wastewater efficiently from urban areas and disposing it after treatment in water bodies, such as
rivers, lakes and the sea (Mitchell et al., 2001). Also there is a tendency in having centralised
systems and infrastructure where it would be more suited to have decentralised systems and
treatment of water at smaller scale thus minimising cost of transportation and distribution
(Barton and Argue, 2009). An example is presented by Wong and Brown (2009), who explain
how governments in Australia have tended to focus on large centralised infrastructure such as
desalination plants and indirect potable substitution schemes and overlooking the importance of
building a diversity of sources. They follow on to say that optimisation is the key in this instance
and that both centralised and decentralised water supply schemes should be considered and
included when designing infrastructure for urban areas.

The change of the conventional urban water management approach requires best-practice
but also complex urban water planning that will protect, maintain and enhance the various
benefits and services of the urban water cycle that society values. These benefits and services as
stated by Wong and Brown (2009) include supply security, public health protection, flood
protection, water-way health protection, amenity and recreation, greenhouse neutrality, economic
vitality, intra and intergenerational equity; and demonstrable long-term environmental
sustainability.

Wong and Brown (2009) rightly state that a strategy should be built around a diversity of
water sources and water infrastructure that will allow urban communities the flexibility in
assigning different water supplies to different water demands while taking cost, reliability of
source and environmental impact into account. Key considerations at this stage should be
minimising the use of potable of water and the export of wastewater and optimizing the use of
water resources in an area.

Alternative water supplies to the conventional rainfall-runoff from catchments, for urban
communities include groundwater, urban storm water, rainwater (roof runoff), recycled
wastewater and desalinated water. It should be considered that each of these sources have unique
reliability, environmental risk and cost profiles with sources that are of high reliability being of
higher cost and environmental risk profiles and vice versa (Wong and Brown, 2009).

2.5. Water Conservation Practices

As suggested by Chung et al. (2008) conservation practices may include population

growth controls in order to manage the increase in water demand. Also, to reduce indoor water
use, incentives for retrofitting shower heads, faucets and toilets with more efficient ones as well
as using front loading clothes washers should be offered by governments. As well as that a
planning requirement may be put in place whereby new homes must have a grey water reuse
system that collects grey water from indoor uses for use outdoors. For outdoor water
conservation the prohibition of fountains, swimming pools and evaporative coolers in new
homes could be introduced. In addition, requirements can be put in place where turf irrigation
systems must be replaced with drip irrigation or xeriscaping. Finally fines may be imposed
where an unreasonable amount of water is considered to be wasted.
 Storm water runoff volume which is considered of higher quality than wastewater may be
subdivided into road/lot runoff and roof runoff, with the roof runoff usually requiring minimal
treatment compared to road runoff (Barton and Argue, 2009). Barton and Argue, (2009) present
an example where roof runoff can be treated at household level and re-used for indoor use
(including drinking purposes after disinfection), surface runoff may be treated at neighbourhood
level and used for non-potable and outdoor uses and wastewater that could also be treated at
neighbourhood level in small-scale wastewater treatment systems and used for non-contact
application such as irrigation of parks and gardens.

Savings could also be made by improving losses from distribution networks. Chung et al.
2008 assumed the leakage rate from distribution and sewer pipes to be 10% of the flow, which
could prove to be a very large volume of water.

2.6. Losses in Water Distribution Networks

Water losses occur in all distribution systems. According to Farley and Trow (2003), the
volume of water lost in a distribution network depends on the characteristics of the pipe network
and other local factors as well as the water companys operational practices. It is also affected by
the level of technology and expertise applied to controlling it.

The expressions water loss and non-revenue water are now internationally accepted,
and have replace expressions such as unaccounted-for-water (UFW) which are less consistent
and which make inter-country comparisons more difficult (Farley and Trow, 2003).

Non-revenue water is defined as the difference between the water that has been inputted
in the system and billed water consumed. It therefore consists of unbilled authorised
consumption and water losses:

Water losses = water produced water billed or consumed

According to Farley and Trow (2003), the International Water Association (IWA) has
defined water loss as:

Water loss = real losses + apparent losses

2.7 Real Losses

Real losses are considered to be the volumes of water lost through all types of leaks,
bursts and overflows on mains, service reservoirs and service connections, up to the point of
customer metering. They comprise of leakage from pipes, joints and fittings, leakage through
service reservoir floors and walls, and from reservoir overflows.
 Real losses can be severe and can go undetected for months or even years. The volume of
water lost from these types of losses depends largely on the characteristics of the pipe network
and the leak detection and repair practised by the company, i.e.: the pressure in the network; the
frequency and typical flow rates of new leaks and bursts; the proportions of new leaks which are
reported; the time it takes to become aware of the leak; the time it takes to locate the leak; the
time it takes to repair a leak and the level of background leakage (Farley and Trow, 2003).

Leakage is the most common form of real losses and as stated by Thornton (2002) it can
occur for many reasons, such as: poor installation and workmanship; poor materials; mishandling
of materials prior to installation; incorrect back-fill; pressure transients; pressure fluctuations;
excess pressure; corrosion; vibration and traffic loading; environmental conditions (e.g. cold);
lack of proper scheduled maintenance. Leakage is usually the major component of water loss in
developed countries, but this is not always the case in developing or partially developed
countries, where illegal connections, meter errors, or accounting errors are often more significant
(Farley and Trow, 2003).

2.7.1. Apparent Losses

Apparent losses consist of unauthorised consumption and all types of metering

inaccuracies such as under-registration of customer meters and accounting errors (Farley and
Trow, 2003).

According to Thornton (2002) apparent losses are significant because firstly compared to
real losses; they typically have a much greater short-run marginal cost effect, since they affect
revenue at the retail customer rate. Secondly an inappropriate assessment of apparent losses often
results in real losses being overstated in the water audit, potentially misguiding water loss
optimization planning by placing inordinate emphasis on leakage while potential revenue
recovery goes unattended.

Apparent losses of water can be perceived as occurring in three primary ways:

* Errors in water flow measurement

* Errors in water accounting

* Unauthorized usage