This document discusses reducing costs for meeting the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) through payments for ecosystem services (PES) in upland areas in the UK. It provides examples of projects in Exmoor that improved water quality and wildlife habitats through land management changes. These examples demonstrated water quality benefits like reduced color and steady flows even during droughts. The document argues that supporting upland management through PES could provide large cost benefit ratios for water companies by delaying infrastructure upgrades and reducing treatment costs. It proposes developing PES projects, expertise networks, and contracts to incorporate these types of programs into water company planning and budgets going forward.

1. Reducing WFD costs through PES
Leeds, Wednesday 9 May 2012
‘Upstream Thinking’ – developing
into WFD delivery and PES
Martin Ross, Environmental Manager

2. Content
1. Meeting WFD in South West uplands
2. Some practical examples
3. PES and the economic case
4. Knowledge sharing

3. 1. Meeting WFD in South West Uplands

4. Strategic mains and river transfers

5. 93% upland/surface derived resources

6. Land
Water
Wildlife
The Upstream Thinking concept

7. 2. Some practical examples

8. Exmoor: water, peat and soil loss
.

9. Fernworthy Reservoir (Tottiford WTW) Raw Water colour
40
35
30
25
Colour as Hazen
20
15
10
5
0
12/09/2001 12/09/2002 12/09/2003 12/09/2004 12/09/2005 12/09/2006 12/09/2007 12/09/2008 12/09/2009 12/09/2010
00:00 00:00 00:00 00:00 00:00 00:00 00:00 00:00 00:00 00:00
DATE
Nine-year colour trend from Dartmoor

10. Moorland indicators of global warming

11. 2,000ha to improve 3,000ha SSSI*
* Sites of Special Scientific Interest

12. Steady water release in droughts & floods

13. Employee and volunteer involvement

14. Moss and sphagnum recovery

15. Bog (positive) indicators Drosera rotundifolia Dry (negative) indicators
300 Erica tetralix 600 Calluna
vulgaris
Narthecium
ossifragum Galium saxatile
250 500
Polygala serpyllifolia
Potentilla
Juncus bulbosus erecta
200 400
Carex echinata Vaccinium
myrtillus
150 Carex panicea Festuca spp
300
Eriophorum
vaginatum Molinia
100 Aulacomnium
caerulea
palustre 200
Juncus
Sphagnum squarrosus
50 capillifolium
Luzula
Sphagnum 100 multiflora
cuspidatum
Sphagnum Pleurozium
0 papillosum schreberi
Sphagnum tenellum 0
2006 2011 Deschampsia
2006 2011 flexuosa
Exmoor 2011/12 report - indicators

16. Technology Strategy Board’s KEP

17. Upland research – flow and colour

18. Innovation – radically cheaper surveys

19. 3. PES and the economic case

20. Support £40m/yr or £40m to resolve?

21. ‘The Polluter Pays’ (???)
‘The Provider
gets Paid’

22. Financial priorities
1. Benefit:cost could be 65:1 by delaying
water treatment upgrades
2. 20% water treatment opex saving
3. Innovative financial, legal and tax
treatments to benefit all parties
4. Strong financial control over project costs
5. Paid Ecosystem Services discussions to
encourage ‘farming cleaner water’

23. Valuation of open moorland alternatives

24. Carbon capture/storage to be traded?

25. Renewable yield up as a further PES

26. Avoided flooding – another PES?

27. PES as capital grants and revenue

28. 4. Knowledge sharing

29. Upland Hydrology Group, visits/meetings

30. PES from 2015
1. Develop PES projects from Upstream
Thinking funded by Ofwat at PR09
2. Identify local expertise willing to provide the
PESs and a basis for contracts
3. Develop regulator/company/third sector
consensus on viable PES rewards
associated with specific projects
4. Develop into cost beneficial plans for PR14

31. Finally, a
special
thank you
from our
beneficiaries