Managing change and the Internet of Water Networks

Appearances can be deceiving. Drinking water is an industrial product, and networks comprising plants, pipes, valves, meters, sensors, etc... are very much machines. That said, delivering water service is first and foremost a people kind of job. The operation of machines is still, to a large extent, the work of humans who make decisions based on their often extensive knowledge of specific, local conditions, and often with limited access to information. 

It is my experience that, around the world, water/wastewater operators care deeply about their work, and develop intimate relationships with the networks or plants in their care. They are proud, highly specialized, and locally focused professionals who know a great deal about the specific infrastructure that they manage. This knowledge is often informal, rooted in experience rather than science or design, and leads to decision-making based on 'what works' rather than 'what the book/engineer says to do'.

The advent of the Internet of Water Networks, which I mentioned previously, will dramatically change the nature of the relationships that operators have developed with their networks. Indeed, the influx of operational data will threaten the status of the senior operator as the 'wise guru' who has traditionally passed on his knowledge to younger apprentices (an anecdote tells that, in Naples, technicians handed their sons their notebooks as a way of guaranteeing employment by the water utility).

With accurate, real-time monitoring and Big Data backed decision-making algorithms entering the field, local operators, particularly the more senior ones, will see their stock decrease. If a computer can accurately predict which electrical switch is likely to fail next, then the operator's intricate, unwritten knowledge looses value and he looses status within the organisation.

The repercussions of this loss of status can be catastrophic to the individual, but also to the utility. Both have an incentive to ensure that the coming revolution will be a win-win transformation, where the individual can continue to be dignified through his work, and the utility retains the specific, local knowledge that is only learned in the field. 

The solution, it seems, it to introduce the coming Internet of Water Networks as a desirable target for the utility, and therefore for its constituent individuals. Only when there is a shared desire for change can the challenge posed by this sea change in operational practices be successful. Not all individuals will buy into this proposition, but at least they'll have a choice.

To achieve this shared vision of a mutually beneficial future, the utility's management must explain why outside pressures are forcing a change, and propose an appealing target for this change. It must also be willing to increase the scope of the target to address the reservations and desires of the staff. Once everyone agrees on an ambitious objective, it is much easier for all to conclude that the Internet of Water Networks is necessary to achieve this objective.

No rugby player runs faster just because he's got new shoes; he uses the new shoes to run faster only if he wants to score more tries, if he wants to win. The assumption that operators will gladly adopt new technology "because it's cool" has proven wrong in the past. In addition, no competent person likes being told that the way they've been doing things is outdated, or wrong - especially if the management is not often seen in the trenches. 

The Internet of Water Networks is coming, and it will change what operators do, and the way they do it, but more importantly, it will threaten the status of the skilled and knowledgeable technician who has been a pillar of the utility for decades. Perhaps even more so than a technical challenge, the deployment of connected objects along water networks is a personnel challenge. 

Fixing leaks and the Internet of Things

In a previous post, I wrote about when it makes sense the fix leaks (or not) depending on local conditions. Unstated but looming large in that post are some important questions (non-exhaustive list) : 

• where are the leaks?
• how big is each leak?
• what is each leaks' financial cost?
• what is each leak's environmental cost?

I'll now discuss briefly the issue of finding leaks. Traditionally, we have looked for leaks using a combination of sound, gas, and modeling methods. Today, connected objects offer new opportunities.

Sound and gas methods basically involve surveying the water network to listen for leaks or detect leaking tracer gas. Fixed or mobile listening devices can help triangulate a leaks' location, and tracer gas will leak (or not) downstream of where it has been injected - so the search can be optimized. These methods either reveal little information about the size of the leak, or are limited in physical reach. 

Hydraulic modeling makes it possible to focus the search for leaks. However, hydraulic models need field data to be reliable. Unfortunately, it is very difficult to take an instantaneous picture of a water network unless one has a significant number of sensors that are well-calibrated, functioning, and transmitting all at once. As a result, hydraulic models, while sometimes very precise, do not provide instantaneous information about the location and volume of leaks.

Enter a number of companies (i.e.: Visenti) that have combined the power of connected sensors with Big Data to monitor water networks in real-time to identify leaks and bursts as they happen. Connected water networks can update centralized control centers like SAUR's CPO to make it possible to prioritize leaks and react accordingly. We will shortly see the proliferation of connected objects along water networks, from sensors to meters to valves, in step with the capital campaigns of water utilities. 

Water network sensors must be placed at critical points in physically extensive systems (100s to 1000s of km), often in wet, buried, or even corrosive environments. Changing batteries is expensive, and power is not always available. Sensors therefore must be highly energy efficient and resilient, and their communication protocols must be able to overcome specific challenges. Because utilities are often strapped for cash, a major challenge is establishing an appropriate price point and clearly spelling out the ROI of these investments.   

That said, the Internet of Things, and in particular the Internet of Water Networks, is clearly the way of the future for leakage management - and other aspects of water management too. It will provide that elusive instantaneous picture of what is happening on the network, and allow engineers and technicians to increase their efficiency in reducing leakage rates. 

In a future post, I'll discuss why it's not enough to deploy sensors: utilities have to learn how to use them and transform themselves correspondingly.