Economic and environmental efficiency of UK and Ireland water companies: Influence of exogenous factors and rurality

Walker, Nathan; Norton, Andrew; Williams, A. Prysor; Styles, David

doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.03.093

Cited by 49 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Interestingly, although the bias taken out of the sample was large, it only changed the rank of two companies, swapping ranks 13 and 14 around. This result is rare and contrasts with other research (e.g., Ananda, 2014;Gómez et al, 2017;Molinos-Senante and Sala-Garrido, 2019;Walker et al, 2019) where their biases resulted in many rank changes. An explanation for this result could be that the sample is not large and does not lend itself to many rank changes naturally.…”

Section: Bias-corrected Scorescontrasting

confidence: 99%

“…The average corrected efficiency scores indicated that an average water utility could scale down their collective OPEX and CAPEX by 92.3%, whilst producing the same amount of drinking water. This is particularly large compared to the Walker et al (2019) study on UK and Irish water and sewerage utilities, where they calculated that the average utility could decrease their economic inputs by 19.4%. A possible reason for this was alluded to in Section 3.1, that having such a large theoretical drop in inputs is likely a result of the very considerable range in efficiency scores (1.286-42.467) brought about seemingly by the Non-bias corrected scores Bias-corrected scores mixture of WaSC and WoCs in the sample.…”

Section: Economic Efficiency Resultsmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…An elemental contributor of resource use for water companies is the quality of water they supply (Plappally and Lienhard, 2012). Utilities within efficiency analyses should not be penalised for contributing superior quality outputs than others; accordingly, this paper follows Saal et al, (2007) and Walker et al, (2019), and modifies the output variable that is used for both the energy and economic assessments according to water quality. The volume of water produced was amended by the quality of that water ( 1) as reported by the companies to the regulators Environment Agency and OFWAT.…”

Section: Data Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Energy efficiency studies on water utilities that evaluate explanatory factors are rare. Walker et al, (2019) evaluated the environmental efficiency of water utilities in terms of carbon intensity, and found no significant link with leakage, although they did incorporate embodied carbon as well as operational carbon over just a one-year period, therefore one single significant capital project may have skewed the data depending on method of amortisation.…”

Section: Role Of Explanatory Factors On Energy Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Key performance indicators to explain energy & economic efficiency across water utilities, and identifying suitable proxies

Walker

Williams

Styles

2020

Journal of Environmental Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Water companies consume up to 8% of global energy demand, at billions of dollars' cost.Benchmarking of performance between utilities can facilitate improvements in efficiency; however, inconsistencies in benchmarking practices may obscure pathways to improvement.The aspiration was to conduct an unbiased efficiency comparison within a sample of 17 water only companies and water and sewerage companies in England and Wales, accounting for exogenous factors, whilst evaluating the accuracy of common proxies. Proxies were tested, and bias-corrected energy and economic efficiency scores with explanatory factors were analysed using a double-bootstrap data envelopment method. Bias correction altered the rankings of two companies for energy efficiency only. Results imply that on average, companies could reduce energy inputs by 91.7%, and economic inputs by 92.3%, which was symptomatic of the companies specialising in drinking water supply considerably outperforming combined water and sewerage companies. As exogenous influences were likely to be a factor in the disparity between the companies, five indicators were evaluated. The results varied but of note were average pumping head height, which displayed a significant negative effect for energy efficiency, and proportion of water passing through the largest four treatment works, that exhibited a significant negative effect on economic efficiency. Within proxy performance, population served for drinking water was an adequate replacement for volume of water produced, with results matching the core variable apart from two companies changing rank in the economic analysis. Conversely, length of water mains performed poorly when replacing capital expenditure, implying companies were on average 12.6% more efficient, resulting in ten companies changing their rank and causing explanatory variables to contradict direction of influence and significance. The findings contribute new insights for benchmarking, including how different types of water companies perform under biascorrecting methods, the degree to which factors affect efficiency and how appropriate some proxies are.

show abstract

Section: Bias-corrected Scorescontrasting

confidence: 99%

Section: Economic Efficiency Resultsmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Data Descriptionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Role Of Explanatory Factors On Energy Efficiencymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Key performance indicators to explain energy & economic efficiency across water utilities, and identifying suitable proxies

Walker

Williams

Styles

2020

Journal of Environmental Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous authors in related disciplines have highlighted that operational variables (including company ownership, size, technology use, source of water, population density, energy consumption, construction year and the total area classed as rural) can affect efficiency levels in the water industry internationally (Conti, 2005 Walker et al, 2019). Thus, the operating environment of the WASCs could also impact pollution incident performance results calculated using the EPA performance indicator methodology.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessment of the pollution incident performance of water and sewerage companies in England

Purnell

Mills

Davis

et al. 2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparison of water and sewerage company pollution performance in relation to severity, frequency and self-reporting of pollution incidents is made difficult by differences in environmental and operational conditions. In England, the deterioration in pollution incident performance across the water industry, makes it important to investigate common trends that could be addressed at national and regional levels. Yet, to date there has been no external peer-reviewed analysis of national pollution incident data in England. This project aimed to analyse available pollution incident data to assess and compare the performance of water and sewerage companies in England. Results indicated that there was significant variation in pollution incident numbers and the severity of the impact on the water environment for different asset types (operational property of the water and sewerage company such as a sewage treatment works). Increasing numbers of pollution incidents from pumping stations and sewage treatment works, were largely responsible for overall increases in pollution incidents. The highest increase in pollution incidents in 2019, was observed from pumping stations. Variation was evident in company self-reporting percentages across asset types. There were significant positive relationships between the self-reporting percentages of pollution incidents and total numbers of reported pollution incidents per 10,000 km sewer length for pumping stations and sewage treatment works. These results indicate that in at least these asset types, an estimated 5% of pollution incidents could go unreported, if not self-reported by the company. Pollution events not reported quickly by companies, can lead to more severe impacts to the water environment so rapid and consistent reporting of incidents is crucial for limiting damage. The results have significance for the water industry internationally, because the issues presented here are not restricted to England. Whilst this research highlighted a number of key areas for more detailed analysis, in the short-term, research should focus on investigating best practice for reporting pollution incidents. It is important to get an accurate baseline of the number of pollution incidents and whether a proportion are currently going unreported. This research should seek to aid the standardisation of reporting practice across the water industry.

show abstract

Estimating the impact of carbon inefficiency and overuse of energy on the economics of water companies: A case study for England and Wales

Maziotis,

Sala‐Garrido,

Mocholi‐Arce

et al. 2023

Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the face of climate change, it becomes crucial to motivate action and policies within water companies towards achieving carbon neutrality. Estimating the economic consequences of inaction can be a compelling catalyst for change. In this study, the carbon inefficiency and overuse of energy among a selection of English and Welsh water companies were assessed, along with their impact on the operational costs of producing and delivering drinking water over the period from 2010 to 2019. In doing so, a stochastic frontier analysis primal system was employed. The findings revealed that, on average, water companies exhibited a carbon inefficiency of 0.699. The overuse of energy relative to other inputs was estimated to be 71.4%. Consequently, water companies incurred a production cost increase of 0.089 £/m3. This research demonstrates that transitioning towards a low‐carbon urban water cycle is not merely an environmental beneficial endeavor; it also involves significant economic advantages.

show abstract

Economic and environmental efficiency of UK and Ireland water companies: Influence of exogenous factors and rurality

Cited by 49 publications

References 41 publications

Key performance indicators to explain energy & economic efficiency across water utilities, and identifying suitable proxies

Key performance indicators to explain energy & economic efficiency across water utilities, and identifying suitable proxies

Assessment of the pollution incident performance of water and sewerage companies in England

Estimating the impact of carbon inefficiency and overuse of energy on the economics of water companies: A case study for England and Wales

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About