Water UK has published a new report on developing a long-term strategy for bioresources in England, working collaboratively on the project with regulators and stakeholders across the industry to develop a common understanding of the challenges and opportunities for bioresources.

The aim of the collaboration was to bring together the English water industry, environmental and economic regulators and other key industry stakeholders to co-create a long-term framework for the safe, sustainable management of bioresources through to 2050.

Water UK and its member water companies have been working with the Chartered Institution of Water and Environmental Management (CIWEM) and Atkins, CIWEM’s technical advisor, alongside regulators and other stakeholders.

Atkins acted as technical advisers to the project. Commenting on the strategy, Richard Lancaster Global Bioresources Director at Atkins said:

“Bioresources is positioned to play a major role in the transformation of the water industry; the potential to generate renewable energy, sequester carbon and provide a sustainable source for nutrients and other compounds is an exciting prospect. This will be essential for the UK to achieve its aims and goals. The opportunities detailed in this documents form a compelling narrative for bioresources to deliver on this potential.”

Four work packages (WP) formed the basis of the project as follows:

• WP1: Mobilisation and establishing approach to stakeholder engagement.
• WP2: Evaluate drivers for change (opportunities and challenges / risks).
• WP3: Develop options for bioresources management and assessing influence of research and regulations.
• WP4: Developing a strategy and route-map for managing bioresources.

Using a set of Critical Success Factors as a filter, potential strategies were rationalised into four viable options for bioresources management:

• incineration
• thermal conversion
• recovery to agriculture (food production) 
• resource production

Project findings

The project concluded that all four strategies had strengths and weaknesses in the shortterm and all remained potentially viable options to some extent for companies to pursue in the medium or longer-term. However, the work undertaken has highlighted that there is not one single ‘ideal’ strategy for the water industry to manage bioresources, attributable to several factors including:

• the level of uncertainty regarding the regulatory framework, (specifically with regards to emerging contaminants such as ‘forever chemicals’, microplastics, and anti-microbial resistance),
• the need for further research and development to enhance knowledge, markets for outputs and confidence in alternative strategies,
• associated potential deployment lead time, and
• each company’s local physical, economic, social and environmental context, individual asset base, and overall risk appetite.

Key recommendations

Key recommendations contained in the report include:

• The UK should examine and critically assess technology in other countries where new technology such as advanced thermal conversion (ATC) and resource recovery has already been adopted in order to make the right decision for the UK’s unique drivers and direction of travel.
• An understanding of the integration of technologies, their combinations and interactions as a system of processes must be developed by the WaSCs.
• A series of rapid responses need to be in place which can be supported by the establishment of a National Bioresources Strategy Governance Group to ensure ownership and delivery of the project’s outputs and programme, and ongoing positive dialogue with key stakeholders continues

According to the report, the direction of travel for the sector in England is following a similar pattern to global trends. However, the report’s authors are calling for greater clarity on over-arching regulatory policies and strategies. In the run-up to the 2024 Price Review, the report says that clarity is critical as currently Ofwat assume the investment needs for any AMP are built upon certainty at the point of Price Review submission.

The report states:

“There currently is a perceived detriment in being the first to invest in new technology, where the driver is a change in service standard. The initial investment to deploy a new technology may make that company appear inefficient when comparing totex spend in-AMP across companies as the investment may cost more than the modelled cost, potentially leading to ‘lumpy investment’ profiles; over the long-term initial versions of technologies are inherently less efficient and effective than subsequent versions.”

According to the report, this can leave a company locked into a less efficient asset-base than their peers in subsequent price reviews which may act as a disincentive to more innovative technologies, with WaSCs adopting “fast-follower” status and no “early-adopters” leading the way.

Commenting on the incineration option, the report warns that immediate investment in incineration strategies will close off other strategies or make them incrementally more expensive/ difficult to justify adaptation towards due to high asset value of the installations.

It also points out that the lead time required to immediately deploy an incineration strategy, due to activities such as site determination, planning approvals and construction, would require significant early start investment (as part of PR24 submission).

“Within England it is becoming increasingly difficult to obtain permissions with timescales in excess of five years,” the report suggests.

Immediate next steps

The project makes a number of recommendations for WaSCs, regulators and other stakeholders which together form a five year plan to build towards inputs for the Price Review in 2029 - outlined in Figure 33.

The report says all of the items are required urgently in AMP7 as part of the preparation for PR29 but follow a logical order.

In addition, in the immediate term, the uncertainties around technological readiness and contaminant fates mean that England should look to maintain asset-base flexibility through the next price review cycle (PR24).

Capital commitments in AMP8 (2025 – 2030) should focus on low-regrets investments

It also recommends that the capital commitments by the water industry in AMP8 (2025 – 2030) should focus on low-regrets investments that are common across strategies, deferring high-capital solutions (e.g., incineration) until there is more definition on the technologies available, and the optimal response to contaminants (e.g., PFAS, microplastics).

The report is also calling for the formation of a National Bioresources Strategy Steering Group to act as the ongoing owners to ensure the culture of communication and collaboration is maintained, and the next steps itemised in the report are delivered.

Click here to download Water UK's report Developing a long-term strategy for bioresources in England in full