Implementing sustainable sanitation concepts in
Luxembourg – methodological approach and
outcomes
P. Schosseler*, T. Lohmann*, B. Schmitt*, S. Perbal*, C. Dubois*,
K. Sauerborn**, C. Muschwitz**,
A. Weidenhaupt***
bo01
city of tomorrow
Malmö (S)
* Public Research Institute Henri Tudor (L)
** TAURUS Institute, University of Trier (D)
*** Water Administration (L)
1
Table of contents
1. Urban water management in Luxembourg
2. Project ECOSAN “New concepts and innovative
technologies for a sustainable management of the urban
water cycle”
3. Involvement of stakeholders through interviews and a
survey, in order to assess barriers and identify needed
actions
4. Conclusions and outlook
2
Water management in Luxembourg
 Small rivers and important rural areas;
highest population density around
Luxembourg city and in the south
 Drinking water: 120’000 m3 per day
(2/3 groundwater & 1/3 surface water)
> 50% for households
 Wastewater treatment: 12 WWTP
(> 10’000 PE), 50% do not comply with
European legislation (91/271/CEE)
 Investments > 1’000’000 Euro
foreseen, but subsidies of up to 90%
will fade out due to polluter pays
principle (Water framework directive,
2000/60/CE)
3
ECOSAN project (2002-2006)
e n c o o p éra tio n a v e c
Q u e ls im p a c ts n o tre c o n s o m m a tio n e n e a u a t- e lle ?
Enquête concernant
to ta le -
p rin c i-
p a rtie l-
p a rtie l-
m ent
p a le -
le m e n t
le m e n t
fa u x
m ent
fa u x
e x a ct
(su ite )
1.
fa u x
L a co n s o m m a tio n a ctu e lle e n e a u e n tra în e u n
p rin c i-
to ta le -
p a le -
m ent
m ent
e x a ct
e x a ct
L’utilisation de l’eau%au
% %
Luxembourg
a b ais s e m e n t d u n iv e a u d e s n a p p e s p h ré a tiq u e s
% % % % % %
a in si q u ’u n a s s è ch em en t d e s co u rs d ’e au .
2.
A u L u x e m b o u rg , d e g ra n d e s q u a n tité s e n e au x
u s é e s n o n tra ité e s s o n t d é v e rs é e s d a n s le s
% % %
fle u v es à ca u s e d u n o m b re in s u ffisa n t d e s ta -
tio n s d ’é p u ra tio n s o u s ’in filtre n t d a n s le s n a p p e s p h réa tiq u e s p ar le b iais d e ca n alisa tio n s
d é fe c tu e u s e s .
3.

L a p ro d u ctio n e t la d istrib u tio n d ’ea u p o ta b le
a in si q u e le traite m e n t d e s e a u x u s é e s
% % % % % %
P rière d e b ie n v o u lo ir lire le s in d ica tio n s s u iva n te s a v a n t d e rem p lir le
co n so m m e n t d e g ra n d e s q u a n tité s e n p ro d u its
fo rm u la ire !
ch im iq u e s e t e n é n e rg ie .
A q u e l e n g a g e m e n t ê te s - v o u s p rê ts ?
M a d a m e , M o n s ie u r,
N o u s a im e rio n s s av o ir, p a r le b ia is d e s q u es tio n s s u iva n te s , si vo u s ê te s p rê ts à ch an g e r, d e
m a n ière a ctiv e e t d a n s v o tre p ro p re m ilie u , vo s h ab itu d es co n cern an t l’e a u p o ta b le e t le s e a u x
C e c i e s t u n e e n q u ê te p o u r u n p ro je t d e re c h erc h e d u « C en tre d e R ec h e rc h e P u b lic H e n r i T u -
u s é e s (e n vo u s in fo rm a n t, e n d is cu ta n t a v e c d e s a m is , p a r v o s h a b itu d e s d ’a ch a t, e tc.).
d o r » s itu é à E s c h - s u r- A lz e tte , à la q u e lle n o u s vo u s in vito n s à p a rtic ip er. N o u s a n a ly s o n s le s
to ta le -
p rin c i-
p a rtie l-
fa u x
m ent
fa u x
h a b itu d es d e s h a b ita n ts c o n c ern a n t l’ea u p o ta b le e t l’ea u u s é e a u Lu x e m b o u rgm.e nNt o u sp aaleim
- e -le m e n t
rio n s a in si co n n a ître vo tre o p in io n p e rs o n n e lle .
fa u x
p a rtie l-
p rin c i-
le m e n t
p a le -
m ent
m ent
e x a ct
e x a ct
to ta le -
e x a ct
B ie n e n te n d u , v o s d o n n é e s s e ro n t tra ité e s s tric te m e n t d e m a n ière a n o n ym e e t c o n fid e n tie lle .
4.
Je s u is p rê t à v e iller, lo rs d e l’a ch a t d ’a p p a reils
% % % % % %
L e b u t d e c e tte e n q u ê te n ’e s t p aésled
e te
r gvo
s co
nn
is sa
n in
c ees ,à m
re c u e illir vo tre o p in io n
ctro
mséte
na
e rs
(p .e
x .a m
a ch
laav is
er),d e
à ce
e t a v is p e rso n n els . Il n ’e x is te d oqnuce pceass adpep «a reils
bonn
e sn t» uonue dco
e n«sommam
u vaatio
is n
e se n
» rép o n s e s a u x q u e s a ie
au
tio n s . R ép o n d e z d e m a n iè re sp oen
ta p
narticu
é e : mliè
a rem
rq u eezn tlebsa scsaes. e s s a n s réflé c h ir tro p lo n g te m p s, n e
5 . es s
v o u s p e rd e z p a s d a n s d e s fin
dd’injetevo
rpisréta
s e t dn’e
’haéusite
s an
à su tilis
Qeusa n
u n tio
ro n
b in
ouz
v ep
rta d
d e s er c o m p lè te m e n t
l’é c h e lle d e ré p o n s e d e 1 à 6 .
6.
to ile tte s p u b liq u e s , je le fe rm e .
Je p e u x m ’im a g in e r ré d u ire le s ch a rg e s p o l-
% % % % % %
% % % % % %
V o ici u n e x e m p le : U n e p e rso n nlu
e alit
ire
is dtio
’a vis
n teles co
dam
n smleesneta
au
x ussuéiva
e s nptar: «u nJe
e su
u tilisa
n q u e la b o n n e q u a n oe
msiq
ue
d enstie
p ro
u its
e rm
nee
tto»y. aEgta
e net e
dx
e a c te m e n t d e c e tte
lité d e l’ea u p o ta b le a u L u x e m béoco
u rg
t g
a ra
à dlo
n g dte
s iv
g ee. re p ris c i- d e ss o u s , la ca s e « to ta le m e n t e x a c t » .
o p in io n , c e tte p e rso n n e re m p lit,lecs o
mam
7.
J’a ttire l’a tte n tio n d e m e s p ro ch e s e t am is su r
8.
J’e x p liq u e à m e s e n fan ts o u à m e s p ro ch es
le u r co n so m m a tio n in u tile e n e a u .
q u ’il n e fa u t d év e rs er n i p e in tu re s n i m é d ic a m e n ts d a n s le s to ile tte s .
% % % % % %
% % % % % %
WP3:
Stakeholder
interviews
and survey
WP1: Technology &
bibliographic watch
WP4: Thematic &
multi-criterae
analysis (LCA)
Drink water
Rainwater
WP2:
Dissemination
activities
WP5:
Pilot
Projects
4
ECOSAN project (2002-2006)
e n c o o p éra tio n a v e c
Q u e ls im p a c ts n o tre c o n s o m m a tio n e n e a u a t- e lle ?
Enquête concernant
to ta le -
p rin c i-
p a rtie l-
p a rtie l-
m ent
p a le -
le m e n t
le m e n t
fa u x
m ent
fa u x
e x a ct
(su ite )
1.
fa u x
L a co n s o m m a tio n a ctu e lle e n e a u e n tra în e u n
p rin c i-
to ta le -
p a le -
m ent
m ent
e x a ct
e x a ct
L’utilisation de l’eau%au
% %
Luxembourg
a b ais s e m e n t d u n iv e a u d e s n a p p e s p h ré a tiq u e s
% % % % % %
a in si q u ’u n a s s è ch em en t d e s co u rs d ’e au .
2.
A u L u x e m b o u rg , d e g ra n d e s q u a n tité s e n e au x
u s é e s n o n tra ité e s s o n t d é v e rs é e s d a n s le s
% % %
fle u v es à ca u s e d u n o m b re in s u ffisa n t d e s ta -
tio n s d ’é p u ra tio n s o u s ’in filtre n t d a n s le s n a p p e s p h réa tiq u e s p ar le b iais d e ca n alisa tio n s
d é fe c tu e u s e s .
3.

L a p ro d u ctio n e t la d istrib u tio n d ’ea u p o ta b le
a in si q u e le traite m e n t d e s e a u x u s é e s
% % % % % %
P rière d e b ie n v o u lo ir lire le s in d ica tio n s s u iva n te s a v a n t d e rem p lir le
co n so m m e n t d e g ra n d e s q u a n tité s e n p ro d u its
fo rm u la ire !
ch im iq u e s e t e n é n e rg ie .
A q u e l e n g a g e m e n t ê te s - v o u s p rê ts ?
M a d a m e , M o n s ie u r,
N o u s a im e rio n s s av o ir, p a r le b ia is d e s q u es tio n s s u iva n te s , si vo u s ê te s p rê ts à ch an g e r, d e
m a n ière a ctiv e e t d a n s v o tre p ro p re m ilie u , vo s h ab itu d es co n cern an t l’e a u p o ta b le e t le s e a u x
C e c i e s t u n e e n q u ê te p o u r u n p ro je t d e re c h erc h e d u « C en tre d e R ec h e rc h e P u b lic H e n r i T u -
u s é e s (e n vo u s in fo rm a n t, e n d is cu ta n t a v e c d e s a m is , p a r v o s h a b itu d e s d ’a ch a t, e tc.).
d o r » s itu é à E s c h - s u r- A lz e tte , à la q u e lle n o u s vo u s in vito n s à p a rtic ip er. N o u s a n a ly s o n s le s
to ta le -
p rin c i-
p a rtie l-
fa u x
m ent
fa u x
h a b itu d es d e s h a b ita n ts c o n c ern a n t l’ea u p o ta b le e t l’ea u u s é e a u Lu x e m b o u rgm.e nNt o u sp aaleim
- e -le m e n t
rio n s a in si co n n a ître vo tre o p in io n p e rs o n n e lle .
fa u x
p a rtie l-
p rin c i-
le m e n t
p a le -
m ent
m ent
e x a ct
e x a ct
to ta le -
e x a ct
B ie n e n te n d u , v o s d o n n é e s s e ro n t tra ité e s s tric te m e n t d e m a n ière a n o n ym e e t c o n fid e n tie lle .
4.
Je s u is p rê t à v e iller, lo rs d e l’a ch a t d ’a p p a reils
% % % % % %
L e b u t d e c e tte e n q u ê te n ’e s t p aésled
e te
r gvo
s co
nn
is sa
n in
c ees ,à m
re c u e illir vo tre o p in io n
ctro
mséte
na
e rs
(p .e
x .a m
a ch
laav is
er),d e
à ce
e t a v is p e rso n n els . Il n ’e x is te d oqnuce pceass adpep «a reils
bonn
e sn t» uonue dco
e n«sommam
u vaatio
is n
e se n
» rép o n s e s a u x q u e s a ie
au
tio n s . R ép o n d e z d e m a n iè re sp oen
ta p
narticu
é e : mliè
a rem
rq u eezn tlebsa scsaes. e s s a n s réflé c h ir tro p lo n g te m p s, n e
5 . es s
v o u s p e rd e z p a s d a n s d e s fin
dd’injetevo
rpisréta
s e t dn’e
’haéusite
s an
à su tilis
Qeusa n
u n tio
ro n
b in
ouz
v ep
rta d
d e s er c o m p lè te m e n t
l’é c h e lle d e ré p o n s e d e 1 à 6 .
6.
to ile tte s p u b liq u e s , je le fe rm e .
Je p e u x m ’im a g in e r ré d u ire le s ch a rg e s p o l-
% % % % % %
% % % % % %
V o ici u n e x e m p le : U n e p e rso n nlu
e alit
ire
is dtio
’a vis
n teles co
dam
n smleesneta
au
x ussuéiva
e s nptar: «u nJe
e su
u tilisa
n q u e la b o n n e q u a n oe
msiq
ue
d enstie
p ro
u its
e rm
nee
tto»y. aEgta
e net e
dx
e a c te m e n t d e c e tte
lité d e l’ea u p o ta b le a u L u x e m béoco
u rg
t g
a ra
à dlo
n g dte
s iv
g ee. re p ris c i- d e ss o u s , la ca s e « to ta le m e n t e x a c t » .
o p in io n , c e tte p e rso n n e re m p lit,lecs o
mam
7.
J’a ttire l’a tte n tio n d e m e s p ro ch e s e t am is su r
8.
J’e x p liq u e à m e s e n fan ts o u à m e s p ro ch es
le u r co n so m m a tio n in u tile e n e a u .
q u ’il n e fa u t d év e rs er n i p e in tu re s n i m é d ic a m e n ts d a n s le s to ile tte s .
% % % % % %
% % % % % %
WP3:
Stakeholder
interviews
and survey
WP1: Technology &
bibliographic watch
WP4: Thematic &
multi-criterae
analysis (LCA)
Drink water
Rainwater
WP2:
Dissemination
activities
WP5:
Pilot
Projects
5
WP2 / WP3: Stakeholder involvment
Stakeholders
A. Investors, Regulators
(state, communes, private)
B. Planning (architects,
engineers, project managers)
C. Execution (sanitary firms)
D. End user (individuals,
families, farmers)
Communication strategies
• seminars
• workshops
• semi-structured
interviews with
key actors
• Newsletter
EcoSanLux
• workshops, fairs
• survey (end user
attitude & behavior
towards water)
• Internet
• Articles in national
press
6
WP2/ WP3: Stakeholder involvment
Stakeholders
A. Investors, Regulators
(state, communes, private)
B. Planning (architects,
engineers, project managers)
C. Execution (sanitary firms)
D. End user (individuals,
families, farmers)
Communication strategies
• seminars
• workshops
• semi-structured
interviews with
key actors
• Newsletter
EcoSanLux
• workshops, fairs
• survey (end user
attitude & behavior
towards water)
• Internet
• Articles in national
press
7
WP3: Stakeholder interviews - methods
 Stakeholders A, B, C:
 investors, regulators, architects, sanitary firms (22 participants)
 Semi-structured interviews: general presentation about ecological
sanitation, followed by discussion, structured with help of simple
questionnaire (interviews of 2-3 hours)
 Items addressed:
 How to improve sustainability of water management in
Luxembourg?
 Applicability of various sanitation concepts, acceptance by enduser?
 Importance of different stakeholders to mobilise?
 Barriers to the implementation of ecological sanitation?
 …
8
WP3: Stakeholder Interviews - participants
 List of stakeholders involved in interviews
Stakeholder / Actor
Details
Specific items discussed
State (Regulator, Investor)
(Category A)
Ministry of Interior (water agency), Ministry of Public
Health (sanitary inspection department), Ministry of
Public Works (public buildings and new
constructions departments)
Regulations with respect to drinking
water and wastewater services, public
tenders for construction works
State (Investor)
(Category A)
Ministry of Public Works (Le Fonds Belval), Ministry
of Dwelling (Fonds du Logement)
Large urbanisation projects in
Luxembourg (e.g. Nonnewisen, BelvalOuest)
Municipalities (Regulator, Investor,
water service manager)
(Category A)
Ville d'Esch-sur-Alzette, Municipalities of Beckerich,
Sanem, Schifflange (politicians, engineers,
architects)
Urbanisation and public construction
projects (e.g. Nonnewisen, BelvalOuest) in urban and rural areas
Investor (public/private)
(Category A)
AGORA (Society for the recovery and development
of the ARBED/ARCELOR group brownfields in
Southern Luxembourg)
Urbanisation projects Belval-Ouest
Inter-communal syndicates (public
investor, water service manager)
(Category A)
Syndicat des Eaux du Barrage d’Esch-sur-Sûre
(SEBES, drinking water), Syndicat d’Epuration des
Eaux résiduaires du Nord (SIDEN, waste water)
Questions linked to water services,
especially in rural areas
Architects
(Category B)
5 private architecture companies
Questions linked to the design and
promotion of sanitation concepts
Engineering Companies and
Sanitary Firms
(Categories B/C)
5 engineering companies and firms involved in
water services at different levels (planning,
technical house installations, sanitary installations)
Questions linked to the implementation
of sanitation concepts
9
WP3: End-user survey - methods
 Actor model for environmental behavior adapted from
Montada/Kals (Kals 1998; Sauerborn, 2005; Muschwitz, 2005)
EMOTIONS
Social context
Anger / Irritation
Economic
viability
Fear / disgust
Environmental consciousness
Contentment
Willingness
for action
Actual
behaviour
COGNITIONS
Knowledge
Danger awareness
Control
Responsibility
Structural context
Socio-demographic
characteristics
10
WP3: End-user survey - methods
 Survey 2003 (Oekofoire / Science Festival)
& 2004 (Town Esch-sur-Alzette)
 Two languages: German / French
 158 questions in total
 136 related to water: cognitions (59),
emotions (14), structural context (21),
social context (6), economic viability (14),
actual behaviour (11), willingness for
action (11).
 17 control questions, 7 questions
socio-demographic characteristics
 Approval scale from 1 (completely false)
to 6 (absolutely true)
 Analysis of the results using
 Mean values
 Factor analysis (one/multi-factoral)
e n c o o p éra tio n a v e c
Enquête concernant
L’utilisation de l’eau au
Luxembourg

P rière d e b ie n v o u lo ir lire le s in d ica tio n s s u iva n te s a v a n t d e rem p lir le
fo rm u la ire !
M a d a m e , M o n s ie u r,
C e c i e s t u n e e n q u ê te p o u r u n p ro je t d e re c h erc h e d u « C en tre d e R ec h e rc h e P u b lic H e n r i T u d o r » s itu é à E s c h - s u r- A lz e tte , à la q u e lle n o u s vo u s in vito n s à p a rtic ip er. N o u s a n a ly s o n s le s
h a b itu d es d e s h a b ita n ts c o n c ern a n t l’ea u p o ta b le e t l’ea u u s é e a u Lu x e m b o u rg . N o u s a im e rio n s a in si co n n a ître vo tre o p in io n p e rs o n n e lle .
B ie n e n te n d u , v o s d o n n é e s s e ro n t tra ité e s s tric te m e n t d e m a n ière a n o n ym e e t c o n fid e n tie lle .
L e b u t d e c e tte e n q u ê te n ’e s t p a s d e te s te r vo s co n n a is sa n c e s , m a is d e re c u e illir vo tre o p in io n
e t a v is p e rso n n els . Il n ’e x is te d o n c p a s d e « b o n n e s » o u d e « m a u v a is e s » rép o n s e s a u x q u e s tio n s . R ép o n d e z d e m a n iè re sp o n ta n é e : m a rq u e z le s c a s e s s a n s réflé c h ir tro p lo n g te m p s, n e
v o u s p e rd e z p a s d a n s d e s fin es s e s d ’in te rp réta tio n s e t n ’h é site z p a s à u tilis er c o m p lè te m e n t
l’é c h e lle d e ré p o n s e d e 1 à 6 .
V o ici u n e x e m p le : U n e p e rso n n e lit le co m m e n ta ire s u iva n t : « Je su is d ’a vis q u e la b o n n e q u a lité d e l’ea u p o ta b le a u L u x e m b o u rg e s t g a ra n tie à lo n g te rm e » . E ta n t e x a c te m e n t d e c e tte
o p in io n , c e tte p e rso n n e re m p lit, c o m m e re p ris c i- d e ss o u s , la ca s e « to ta le m e n t e x a c t » .
11
WP3: Stakeholder interviews - results
 669 questionnaires distributed, 217 valid returns evaluated
 Socio-demographic characteristics:
 45% female, 55% male
 Average age: 38 years (4 years
below national average)
 Living in own estate: 80 %
 University degree: 54 %
 Willingness for action and actual behaviour:
 Participants show overall a high willingness towards action, the
willingness to convince others (close friends, relatives or
neighbours) is much weaker.
 Cognitions:
 Information lack with respect to the overall water problems the
country is facing (e.g. wastewater treatment), as well as towards
innovative sanitation concepts.
12
WP3: Stakeholder interviews - results
 Cognitions:
 50% of the participants attribute the responsibility for implementing
a sustainable water management to the public actors (state,
municipality) as well as to the politicians.
 Structural and social context:
 The information channels used by the participants with respect to
environmental issues are multiple.
 Collective information measures, e.g. within a group of individual
private investors, could lead to a higher impact of water saving
measures in housing.
 Economic viability:
 The participants conceive that water saving measures will result in
money savings.
 Willingness to pay more for water services (up to 100 Euro
per year, as compared to the current taxes) or invest into
measures for water saving (up to 1’000 Euro).
13
WP3: Stakeholder interviews - results
 Water saving technologies considered to be “state of the art” by
professionals, but limited to classical sanitary equipment
 For private households, investment costs are very important
(limited budgets), as well as the design and functionality of the
sanitary equipment.
 In addition to the investment costs, the question of maintenance
is frequently raised for alternative sanitation concepts, as the
decentralized systems may require more specific care by the
owners (service contracts).
 Limiting factor for companies (consulting engineers, sanitary
firms) to implement innovative sanitation concepts is the
reliability of technologies (warranty towards clients).
14
WP2: Dissemination activities




Conferences, workshops for professionals
Newsletter EcoSanLux (2005)
Homepage www.crte.lu (Ecosan)
Public events (Oekofoire 2003-2006)
(Science Festival 2003, 2005)
 Articles in local press and magazines
15
Conclusions
 Valuable conclusions for the project orientation have been derived
from this study in terms of further needs for awareness raising,
information and formation.
 Further research and development is needed, concerning the userfriendliness and reliability of sanitation technology (e.g. separation
toilets).
 All actors underline the importance of pilot projects, in view of
raising awareness both amongst professionals and end-users.
Large projects by public investors or projects subsidised with public
money are considered to be more suitable.
 Further research on ways on how to communicate efficiently the
complex issues of environmental impacts at various levels to the
stakeholders is important (e.g. results of LCA).
16
Outlook
 Pilot projects:
 Waterless urinals in schools, promoted by communes and ministry
of public works
 Separation toilets and waterless urinals in sanitary
block of exhibition “all wee need” on needs, resources,
and fairness
 Guidelines for architects and engineers:
 “Guideline for sustainable construction”, used as
basis for public procurement, with ecosan section
(www.crtib.lu/leitfaden)
 Guideline for sustainable rainwater management
(infiltration, evaporation, separate collection,
treatment and re-use)
17
Thank you for your attention!
More information:
www.crte.lu
WATER / ECOSAN
18
Descargar

Document