Alp-Water-Scarce

Gestione dei rischi naturali in un clima che cambia:
Esperienze in Strategie d’Adattamento da alcuni Progetti Europei
14 dicembre 2011 Milano
Il progetto Alp-Water-Scarce.
Strategie di gestione della risorsa idrica nelle Alpi
L’analisi multicriteria per la selezione di impianti
idroelettrici
prof. ing. Maurizio ROSSO
Politecnico di Torino, Italy
[email protected]
Progetto Alpine Space
“Alp Water Scarce”
Water Management against water scarcity in the Alps
Ucem, Delegazione Piemontese
Project
THE PROJECT
Alp-Water-Scarce - Water Management Strategies against Water
Scarcity in the Alps - is a European project funded by the ALPINE
SPACE PROGRAMME under the European Territorial Cooperation
2007-2013.
It deals with developing water management strategies and an early
warning system to prevent the Alps from water scarcity
Alp-Water-Scarce started on the 1st of October 2008 and ended on the
30th of September 2011
Partners
PARTNERS
The Lead Partner is the Mountain Institute, situated in Bourget du Lac,
Savoy, Rhone-Alps and France.
The Project Consortium is composed of 17 Project Partners from
Austria (4), France (3), Italy (5), Slovenia (3), and Switzerland (2)
including local governments, provinces, federal institutes and offices,
universities, regional agencies, alpine societies, geological surveys,
as well as chambers of agriculture and forestry.
the project is supported by 16 official obsevers
Partners
PARTNERS
A Technical Committee consisting of 5 experts in the domain of
hydrological monitoring and modelling ensure the comparability of the
activities mainly concerning data integration, development of
interfaces and modelling frameworks across the Alpine Space.
A project Advisory Board, consisting of 6 experts creates a close link
between the scientific development of the project and the
Stakeholder Interaction Forum.
Activities
ACTIVITIES
Alp-Water-Scarce is organised in 8 closely linked work package
WP 1 Project Preparation
WP 2 Project Management
WP 3 Information and Publicity
WP 4 Stakeholder Interaction Forum
WP 5 Water System Characterisation
WP 6 Monitoring and Modelling
WP 7 Optimal Ecological Discharge
WP 8 Water Scarcity Warning System
OBJECTIVES
The long term aim of ALP-WATER-SCARCE is to reinforce authorities
and stakeholders to develop integrated and sustainable water
management and to suggest socio-economic adaptation and
mitigation strategies against water scarcity
On the short term, an early warning system against water shortage in the
Alps will be based on an operational methodology with strong
stakeholder participation taking into account present and future
zones as well as time periods of water scarcity.
NUMBER OF SUBSEQUENT DAYS WITH P<1MM
1957
2008
In the last 50 years, the frequency of drought
periods grew up in Piedmont and in the northern
Italy, especially after 1980.
The worst event
was registered in 2003
Up to 40% less than the mean yearly rainfall
(1971-2000) in Piedmont and all over the
Northern Italy
Up to 80% less than the mean yearly rainfall
(1990-1999) in the first half of 2003
Drought periods are
increasingly followed
by extreme
hydrological events.
M A I N U S E S O F WAT E R R E S O U R C E S
Italy’s mean yearly rainfall: 700 – 900 mm
Yearly volume of water: 220 – 280 Gm3
Yearly natural losses: 70 – 100 Gm3
Yearly available volume of water: 150 – 180 Gm3
Yearly water use: 44 Gm3  2.000 litres per person per day
M A I N U S E S O F WAT E R R E S O U R C E S
USES
EUROPE
ITALY
Energy production: 46%
Agriculture: 49%
Agriculture: 30%
Industry: 21%
Civilian purposes: 14%
Civilian purposes: 19%
Industry: 10%
Energy production: 11%
M A I N U S E S O F WAT E R R E S O U R C E S
USES
PO RIVER BASIN
Agriculture: 80%
M A I N U S E S O F WAT E R R E S O U R C E S
Lambro – Po 26/02/2010
In Italy most of the water supplied is lost,
due to pollution or
to inefficiency of the distribution network
30% – 50%
M A N A G E M E N T O F WAT E R R E S O U R C E S
In Italy, although the Government has attempted in recent years to carry out a
simplification of rules for the protection and management of water resources, it
is increasingly characterized by a dense and layered set of national laws, which
are further increased by the regional ones.
Decreto del Presidente
Decreto
del 24
Presidente
Legge
gennaio
1977,
Legge
7Legge
agosto
1982,1986,
n. n.
DPCM
22della
dicembre
1977
Repubblica
88luglio
Legge 4 febbraio
1963,
n.
della
Repubblica
15
n.
7
Legge 27 dicembre 1953,
529
giugno 1982, n.
470 349
Regio Decreto 11 gennaio
129
1972,
n.
8
Decreto ministerialen.16959
Legge 7 agosto 1990, n.
Regio Decreto
14 agosto
dicembre
1933, n. 1775
dicembre 1923
241
1920, n. 1285
Decreto legislativo 12
luglio 1993, n. 275
Legge 5 gennaio 1994, n.
Decreto Legislativo 3
37
aprile 2006, n. 152 Decreto-legge 8 agosto
Decreto legislativo
Parte III30
1994, n. 507
maggio
2008, n.
Decreto del Presidente
Decreto
legislativo
22116
del Consiglio dei Ministri
gennaio 2004, n. 42
Decreto ministeriale
4 marzo 1996
19 agosto 2003
Decreto ministeriale
Decreto ministeriale
1 agosto 1996
Decreto2003,
del Presidente
12 giugno
n. 185
Decreto ministeriale
della Repubblica 24
Decreto
del Presidente
Decreto
del Presidente
8 gennaio
1997,
legislativo
311997,
Decreto
Decreto
ministeriale
ministeriale
ministeriale
Legge
15Decreto
marzo
n. n.99
Decreto
ministeriale
Decreto
Decreto
legislativo
legislativo
2
18 Decreto
marzo
2003,
n. 136
delladei
Repubblica
del Consiglio
Ministri 18
marzo1998
1998,
112 1997, n. 90
18 settembre
22 novembre
2002 agosto
2001
25 n.
febbraio
59
febbraio
2001,2000,
n. 31 n. 267 23 aprile
1999, n. 238
29 febbraio
aprile 1999
M A N A G E M E N T O F WAT E R R E S O U R C E S
Too many actors
Too many established rights
Too many conflicting rules
Too few controls !!
M A N A G E M E N T O F WAT E R R E S O U R C E S
Intake for irrigation …..
No water downstream…..
M A N A G E M E N T O F WAT E R R E S O U R C E S
Even though the “Galli Law” has introduced the concept that the human
use should have priority over the agricultural and industrial sectors, the issue
was not solved at all and there is still much to be done.
During the 2003 water crisis, according to the law, many industrial and
agricultural users would have to stop all water derivations to ensure water
availability for human use.
However, they did not, because many exemptions were granted by the national
and local authorities.
1
• HUMAN USE
2
• AGRICULTURAL USE
3
• INDUSTRIAL USE
1
2
3
M A N A G E M E N T O F WAT E R R E S O U R C E S
i.e.: the Porto Tolle Thermal Power Plant, located in the municipality of Polesine
Camerini (RO), uses water from the Po River to cool its systems, according to its
concession (Decree no. II/AE544 30.04.1981). This establishes if the discharge
measured at Pontelagoscuro (FE) is less than 380 m3/s, then the Porto Tolle
Thermal Power Plant must be stopped. Indeed, in 2003 water crisis the Regione
Veneto has issued an ordinance to derogate from the limits and enable the
Central to get however a water supply of 80 m3/s.
M A N A G E M E N T O F WAT E R R E S O U R C E S
Po river at Isola Serafini (Cremona) “usually”
Po river at Isola Serafini (Cremona) “During the 2003 water crisis”
M A N A G E M E N T O F WAT E R R E S O U R C E S
As you surely know, to manage
the water crisis that in 2003 was
affecting the whole basin of the
Po River, an agreement was
signed between the Basin
Authority, the Regions Valle
d'Aosta, Piedmont, Lombardy,
Veneto and Emilia Romagna, the
AIPO, the GRTN, the lakes
management agencies, the ANBI
and the electric companies with
the goal of a unified management
of the scarce available water
resources.
The
agreement
guaranteed the water release
from mountain reservoirs to
ensure essential utilities, as
required by “Galli Law”. However,
private users of water resources
apply “obtorto collo” the principle
of solidarity, especially trying to
safeguard their business interests.
The water release from
alpine reservoirs began July 19th, 2003
3.690.000 m3/day
PROPOSALS
“much has been done, but much remains to be
done”
1
• ONCE AGAIN THE ITALIAN POPULATION HAS EXPRESSED VERY
CLEARLY ITS NEED FOR WATER IS AND REMAINS A COMMON
PUBLIC RESOURCE (REFERENDUM 2011).
•
2
3
IT IS NECESSARY TO FURTHER SIMPLIFY THE SET OF LAWS
GOVERNING THE MANAGEMENT OF WATER RESOURCES TO
FACILITATE THE EFFICIENT MANAGEMENT OF AN ASSET THAT
BECOMES INCREASINGLY SCARCE.
• IT
MUST BE QUICKLY REDUCED THE WASTE OF WATER
DUE TO BAD HABITS AND OLD INFRASTRUCTURES
(IRRIGATION INTAKES AND DISTRIBUTION NETWORK)
Pilot site: Valsesia, the Sesia River Basin
Valsesia map with the main river Sesia
and its affluents
the Stakeholder Interaction Forum.
STAKEHOLDERS are invited to join the network and contribute to the
Stakeholder Interaction Forum.
- to define water scarcity and associated problems at the
international, national and regional scale together with different
Stakeholder
- to establish communication network
MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS
“to provide a rational basis to problems of choice
characterized by multiple criteria evaluation”
In a social context, the objectives (projects of different types) are
characterized by a set of relevant attributes useful to their definition :
Economic indicators
Social indicators
Technical indicators
Environmental indicators
MCA MODEL SCHEMA
PHASING OF THE MCA MODEL
TARGET
PHASE 1
Hydropower plant classification
STAKEHOLDERS
Mountain Communities - Regions - Environmental agencies - Municipalities - Others…
CRITERIA
Environmental
Aree protette
Aree rischio idrogeologico
DMV/Qmed
Mitigazione impatti
Qmed deriv/Qmed
Qmax deriv/Qmed
Qualità acque
Quantità acque
Scala risalita ittiofauna
Economic
Technical
Costi di gestione
Fondi pubblica utilità
Incentivi
Investimento
Ricavi
Tempo ritorno investim.
T.I.R.
Utili
L tratto sotteso deriv/rest
Producibilità netta attesa
Q derivata (med, max)
Quota di presa
Rendimento
Salto
Tipologia impianto
Volume opere civili
Social
Project 2
PHASE 3
Fondi pubblica utilità/n° abitanti
Fondi pubblica utilità/reddito medio abitanti
Impatto su utilizzi plurimi
Ricaduta sul territorio
…….
ALTERNATIVES
Project 1
PHASE 2
Project 3 ….. Project n
PHASE 4
PHASE 5
RANKING ASSIGNMENT
Subcriteria ranking
Alternatives general ranking
After determining the ranking of the subcriteria it will be allowed to determine
the ordinal classification of the different project proposals
CHOOSING THE BEST DESIGN
THANK YOU FOR
YOUR KIND ATTENTION!
prof. ing. Maurizio ROSSO
Politecnico di Torino, Italy
[email protected]