WATER GLOBAL PRACTICE WASTEWATER? Shifting Paradigms: From Waste to Resource Preliminary Insights for the Latin America and Caribbean Region for the World Water Forum 2018 MARCH 2018 Innovation, Significant Financial MAIN MESSAGES Investments, and Paradigm Shifts Are Innovation, significant financial investments, and paradigm shifts are necessary to achieve the Sustainable Development Goal for Necessary to Achieve the Sustainable water in the Latin America and the Caribbean region. Development Goal for Water in the Latin A paradigm shift is needed in the region regarding wastewater America and Caribbean Region planning, management, and financing at the regional and project levels toward a circular economy in which wastewater is Historically, countries in Latin America and the considered a valuable resource rather than a liability. Caribbean have prioritized investments in water A complete life cycle analysis that covers financial, environmental (including climate), and social aspects must be used to assess and supply, achieving good coverage in the past years. evaluate wastewater treatment plants. Around 96 percent of households have access to an Wastewater initiatives should be developed as part of a basin planning framework to maximize benefits, resources allocation, improved source of drinking water, although this and stakeholder engagement. average hides the gap between rural (86 percent) and For this paradigm shift to happen the region needs to focus on adequate legislation, intersectoral regulation, policies, and percent) coverage (WHO and UNICEF 2017) urban (99 ­ incentives to promote resource recovery. and the provision of a suitable level of service. Around 86  percent of the region’s population has access to for several countries in the region compared to OECD some form of basic sanitation, with an important averages. Wastewater management and treatment difference between rural (68 percent) and urban (90 levels vary significantly through countries in Latin percent) areas (WHO and UNICEF 2017). However, it America and the Caribbean and the regional averages is estimated that only about 60 percent of the popu- mask this significant variation. In some countries, lation is connected to a sewage system (14 percent in such as Chile, virtually all wastewater in urban areas rural and 72 ­percent in urban areas) (WHO and UNICEF is collected and treated, but in others, such as Costa 2017), and only about 40 percent of the region’s Rica, wastewater treatment is almost nonexistent. wastewater is treated (FAO 2017)—a low percentage Now the region is implementing massive programs to for the region’s levels of income and  urbanization— collect and treat its wastewater. with significant implications for  public health and environmental sustainability.1 Figure 1 and figure 2 The Development Bank of Latin America (CAF) show sewage connections and wastewater treatment estimates that over the period 2010–30, US$80 billion ­ 1 FIGURE.1. Sewerage Network for Selected Countries, 2015 100 90 80 % population connected 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 ile pe il Ur C Bo r in ost ua D ca a Am co a ge y H livia Pa as Ja lic ay Co ica Pa aica ru Ec na Re ica do m bi Ar ua az LA EC Pe r gu b i g Ch i ro er an a R x du nt m na ua Br ug pu ra m EC Me O Eu ra lo on D Ni D C EC ic O O m Do Sources: OECD data 2015; WHO and UNICEF 2017. Note: OECD = Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; LAC = Latin America and the Caribbean. FIGURE.2. Wastewater Treatment for Selected Countries, 2015 100 90 80 % population connected 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 ile pe Ec C Bo r Pa ma Am D M y il in Col via Re bia ge c Ja ua ca a Ur ica Pa ca st y ru o s on a do ra Ar bli Ni tin ua Co gua H Ric az ic LA D EC Pe ai g Ch ro er li ex du an m na ua Br ug pu ra n m EC O Eu a ra o D EC ic O O m Do Sources: OECD data 2015; WHO and UNICEF 2017. Note: OECD = Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; LAC = Latin America and the Caribbean. 2 Wastewater? Shifting Paradigms: From Waste to Resource should be spent on sewerage infrastructure and sustainable are  possible. Basin planning allows the US$33 billion on wastewater treatment in the region. identification of the optimal deployment of facilities In addition to the substantial investment costs, oper- and sanitation programs including the location, timing, ation and maintenance costs are very high and often and phasing of treatment infrastructure. It also enables neglected in many countries in the region. decision makers to set priorities for investment plan- ning and action. This planning approach moves away Given these infrastructure financing needs, the public from uniform or arbitrary water pollution control stan- sector alone cannot provide enough funding to satisfy dards to one in which investments are better matched the increasing demand for services. Private capital to both local environmental needs and resources. Basin must be involved to close the gap. Private investors planning involves a strategic mapping of a water body, are, however, usually reluctant to invest in water infra- the identification of critical areas and their respective structure projects because of the risks involved such as water quality objectives (set based on desirable use of a long pay-off period, low tariffs, lumpy investments, such areas: recreational, non-contact sports, drinking and the sunken nature of the investment. There is a water source, etc.), the identification of cost-effective need for an environment that enables private invest- priorities for water pollution control interventions to ment in infrastructure in tandem with improved effi- improve environmental quality, as well as the defini- ciency of public financing to promote sustainable tion of a process for prioritizing investment opportuni- service delivery, especially in the poorest countries. To ties and trade-offs of the different options considered. create this environment, countries need to strengthen This analysis is important for both environmental their institutional capacity to translate investments effectiveness and management efficiency to ensure into service assets and promote a favorable regulatory the best use of limited resources. It also shifts the environment to streamline project development pro- evaluation of projects from primarily cost focused to a cesses and attract investment in the sector. benefit-cost analysis that compares the cost with eco- ­ nomic benefits from a wide range of environmental and social improvements. Basin planning is, therefore, an A Paradigm Shift Is Needed in the Region Regarding Wastewater Planning, iterative process that allows decision makers to move Management, and Financing at Different from the traditional approach of being reactive to a seri- Levels ous environmental problem to a proactive approach to Regional or Country Level manage available resources in any given basin through Moving from ad-hoc and isolated wastewater solutions, a structured progressive approach. such as one treatment plant per municipality, to inte- In contrast, wastewater infrastructure projects driven by grated river basin planning approaches that incorporate political, social, and other non-scientific albeit powerful climate variables and yield sustainable and resilient factors do not lead to the best use of funds and resources. systems The basin should be the starting planning unit for waste- Basin planning is a coordinating framework for water water treatment because it steers away from ad hoc and resources management that focuses public and private isolated wastewater solutions, moving toward integrated sector efforts to address the highest priority problems regional planning. There must be a proper incorporation within ­ hydrologically-defined geographic areas, tak- of urban development, solid waste and sanitation plans, ing into consideration all sources of water. By plan- hygiene education, climate change awareness, pollution ning and  analyzing water quality and quantity at the control efforts, and other productive uses of water as part basin level, integrated solutions that are more finan- of the planning efforts. This means that environmental cially, socially, economically, and environmentally ministries or organizations in charge of environmental Wastewater? Shifting Paradigms: From Waste to Resource 3 standards, basin management organizations, municipal- and institutional capacity. Appropriate limits must be ities, city councils, and water utilities need to coordinate decided based on the basin characteristics, water uses, their plans and actions to ensure that all regulations can and options for reuse. Ideally, limits at the point of be met while the most cost-effective and sustainable out- source should be set on seasonal averages of concen- come can be achieved. A current challenge in the region trations (as opposed to a “never to be exceeded” limit). is an excessive emphasis on new infrastructure without There must also be coordination between separate considering the sustainability of the system (e.g., opera- legislation, and the wastewater effluent quality stan- tional and maintenance costs coverage) or evaluating the dards must match the legislation for water quality in existing infrastructure capacity. This could be minimized receiving water bodies. This can be achieved using the by an ex-ante evaluation of current infrastructure’s actual above-mentioned basin planning approach. As exem- capacity, with system optimization as a key objective. To plified in numerous cases in the Region, when setting achieve these goals, current basin planning efforts in the WWTP effluent limits, it is important to do a cost-­ region need to be strengthened: governments need to benefit analysis. If the cost (CapEx and OpEx) to meet support basin organizations so they can improve their those standards is too high compared to the benefits to technical expertise and exert oversight powers to enforce be achieved, then the limits must be reconsidered and the implementation of basin plans. Additionally, inter- adapted accordingly. ventions prioritized in basin plans should be aligned to The vast majority of the existing legislation in Latin municipal and regional priorities. America and the Caribbean was created with the sole purpose of meeting environmental standards. Moving from stringent imported environmental stan- However, the changes in the sector call for new legisla- dards to locally contextualized regulations and legisla- tion and regulation that embrace and promote gradual tion that are based on river basin analysis and promote resource recovery. Resource recovery (i.e., water reuse, resource recovery biosolids2) bioenergy generation, beneficial use of ­ Many Latin American and Caribbean countries have is key to the sustainability of WWT systems. Latin adopted legislation and environmental standards America and the Caribbean has numerous examples developed in high-income countries that have strong of legislation limiting or forbidding resource recovery. institutional and technical capacity and high finan- For instance, in some countries WWTP sludge is con- cial support from both government and users and sidered a hazardous waste, which has to be disposed adequate tariff structures. Often such legislation is in a confined cell, within a sanitary landfill. Not only designed without considering the economic implica- does this regulation eliminate the opportunity to take tions of their implementation (needed institutional advantage of nutrient-rich biosolids for agricultural capacity, capital expenditures [CapEx], or operation and forestry use, or for soil recovery, but it also imposes and maintenance costs [OpEx]) and imposes stan- an additional financial burden on the water utility. dards that are unrealistic and unaffordable. For exam- There are numerous examples of governments who ple, in Cordoba, Argentina, legislation implemented want to promote wastewater reuse for agriculture but in 2015 requires wastewater being discharged into a impose very stringent regulations that force the WWTP lake to never exceed specific concentrations of pollut- to remove most of the phosphorous content, which is ants, which leads to an average design effluent value beneficial for agriculture uses. In the case of electricity that few wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) in the generation from biogas from WWTPs, selling the elec- world even meet today. The CapEx and OpEx implica- tricity generated at the plant to the grid, or transport- tions of meeting this legislation at a new WWTP for the ing this electricity to another point to be used by the city of Cordoba far exceed the municipality’s financing water utility is not always permitted  by regulations 4 Wastewater? Shifting Paradigms: From Waste to Resource and seldom promoted. This is the case of SAGUAPAC, load forecasting procedures; however, the underlying the water utility of Santa Cruz de la  Sierra, Bolivia, assumption is that the conditions surrounding the which has anaerobic lagoons for  wastewater treat- facilities will be steady, stable and predictable. This ment. These lagoons generate  enough biogas that assumption is rarely the reality due to dynamic condi- when converted into ­ electricity would cover a large tions of the service area, available technology, climate percentage of the utility’s power demand. However, change, and the institutional framework, among other the transportation of this electricity to the points of use factors—all of which affect the operation of facilities. outside the WWTP is not permitted by current regula- tions. This results in biogas being burned at the WWTP Project Level without any other beneficial use except the significant Changing the region’s perspective of ‘wastewater reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (CO2 resulting treatment plants’ to ‘water resource recovery facilities,’ 3 from biogas combustion has 21 times less greenhouse recognizing the inherit value of water to be treated gas potential than the CH4 contained in the biogas). The practice of wastewater treatment continues to Changing from stable and rigid assumptions related evolve, not only technologically but functionally as to wastewater treatment planning to instead consider well. Traditionally, treatment focused on removing potential future environmental and system changes, contaminants and pathogens to recover water and while allowing for incremental growth of wastewater safely discharge it to the environment. Today’s view treatment facilities is that WWTPs are instead water resource recovery There is a lack of policy and regulatory mechanisms facilities (WRRFs). This comes with the realization that that promote the gradual improvement in the waste- many components in wastewater can be recovered water treatment sector. In most countries in the region, for beneficial purposes, starting with the water itself regulation is binding from the day of its passage, with (for agriculture, industry, and even human consump- no intermediate and incremental steps to enable its tion), followed by nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus) compliance. Without these gradual improvements, and energy generation. The region needs to acknowl- CapEx and OpEx can become prohibitive, thereby edge wastewater’s potential and value. In fact, the technically preventing any type of change. Instead, expected demographic growth and the urbanization regulations could offer a progressive path that would of the region make wastewater one of the only water allow utilities to gradually implement lower-cost solu- resources whose availability will increase in the next tions for wastewater treatment followed by upgrades years. Given the opportunity, recovered water can be to more advanced technologies as and when financial fully incorporated in the water balance already inside resources allow. As a first step, affordable treatment the urban areas (less transportation of water, which systems can positively impact the environment (e.g., incur major CapEx and OpEx). receiving water body quality) and public health (e.g., Improved wastewater management offers a double food safety), and, progressively, utilities can move value proposition if, in addition to the environmental toward expanded sewerage systems and more robust and health benefits of wastewater treatment, finan- treatment technologies as financial and operational cial returns are also possible that cover partially or all capacity grows. operations and maintenance (O&M) costs. Resource Traditional planning and project design use unchang- recovery from these facilities in the form of energy, ing assumptions that lead to rigid designs with no nutrients, reusable water, and biosolids represent an room to cope with uncertainty and dynamic changes in economic and financial benefit that contributes to the the future. Traditional design is based on well-known sustainability of these systems and the water utilities Wastewater? Shifting Paradigms: From Waste to Resource 5 FIGURE 3. Tenorio Project: Wastewater Reuse in San Luis Potosí Water reused for agriculture (500 ha) WASTEWATER is used in the cooling Environmental towers instead of enhancement freshwater Tenorio tank wetland 450 I/s 600 I/s Treated wastewater WASTEWATER THERMAL POWER PLANT TREATMENT PLANT (C.F.E.) TENORIO WASTEWATER $ from San Luis Potosí Source: World Bank design using data from Rojas, Equihua, and Gonzalez 2012. Note: Treatment plant image is by Tracey Saxby, Integration and Application Network, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science (ian.umces.edu/imagelibrary/). CFE = Comisión Federal de Electricidad (Federal Electricity Commission). operating them. For example, in Mexico, new water Moving from traditional to innovative financing and ­ roject contract incen- reuse regulations and a creative p business models that consider the long-term opera- ­ tivized wastewater reuse in San Luis Potosí. Instead of tion and management of assets, in addition to tak- using fresh water, a power plant uses treated effluent ­ dvantage of the potential for resource recovery ing a from a nearby WWTP in its cooling towers (see figure 3). in WWTPs This wastewater is 33% cheaper for the power plant than Financing (including efficient public spending) and groundwater, and this has resulted in savings of US$18 cost recovery for sanitation infrastructure is a chal- million for the power utility in 6 years. For the water lenge throughout the region. Many utilities do not utility, this extra revenue covers almost all operation have adequate tariffs for sanitation, and where such and maintenance costs of the WWTP. The remaining charges exist they are usually insufficient to finance wastewater is used for agricultural purposes. In addi- operation and maintenance costs, not to mention tion, the reuse scheme of San Luis Potosí has reduced capital nor future expansion costs. This problem is groundwater extractions by 48 million cubic meters in particularly acute in countries that embark on ambi- 6 years (equivalent to the water consumed by 110,000 tious investment programs to increase the coverage people in the same period). Wastewater resource recov- of wastewater treatment, like the ones needed in ery is being implemented in many countries around the Latin America and the Caribbean to meet the SDGs. world, but this is usually done in an ad-hoc basis and is Hence, there is considerable agreement that more not part of a long-term national strategy or policy. The efficient subsidies are needed for sanitation, at least region needs to focus on the institutional, regulatory, during a transition period. The challenge is to devise and policy frameworks that incentivize these schemes programs to channel these subsidies, while promot- and approaches. There is a need to move from linear to ing efficiency and operational and environmental circular thinking in the sector. ­ sustainability. 6 Wastewater? Shifting Paradigms: From Waste to Resource The existence of subsidies, however, does not mean legislation in several countries in Latin America and that the sector has to rely on conventional financ- the Caribbean. However, such legislation must be ing without taking advantage of market conditions evaluated considering the costs of implementation. and incentives to enhance sustainability. Given the Establishing tough effluent standards just to match potential for resource recovery in WWTPs, the sec- or copy those used in developed countries negatively tor should pursue innovative financial and business impacts the environment by forcing countries to spend models that leverage those potential extra revenue too much in a small number of plants, leaving other streams. One option is the development of financial sources of contamination untreated. incentives for operators to perform along the same Legislation must be consistent: whenever possible, philosophical lines as results-based financing. A WWTP effluent requirements must be adapted based good example of this is PRODES in Brazil, a federal on current and future water user’s needs and objec- program which did not directly invest in the cap- tives and improvement considerations for the receiv- ital costs of wastewater treatment infrastructure. ing water body. In such cases, effluent limits should be PRODES, instead, paid the operator for the delivery based on total maximum daily loads (TMDLs) accept- of specified volumes of treated wastewater at speci- able by the water body in question in a defined time- fied levels of quality after the investment was oper- frame feasible for implementation (average mass of ational. Such an approach has many advantages, not pollutant discharged per day, kg/d). For cases where least of which is the incentive for effective operation maximum loads to a specific water body cannot be and maintenance and improved public subsidies. established, legislation for both plant effluent and There are also examples of blended financing, suc- water bodies must be consistent. Gradual application cessful public-private partnerships (PPPs), and inno- of WWTP effluent quality standards (whether maxi- vative contract and partnership models that ensure mum concentrations or loads) should be permitted a stable revenue stream for the WWTP and therefore so that targets are realistic. Switching from no treat- enable access to finance. Examples of innovative ment to state of the art technologies to meet stringent projects that build stable revenue streams include limits can have costs that well exceed the capacity selling treated wastewater (as in the case of San of the responsible utilities and might never be met. Luis Potosí, Mexico or Durban, South Africa), sell- Therefore, the implementation of gradually increas- ing energy (as in the case of biogas sales by Aguas ing levels of treatment (preliminary, primary, second- Andinas to Metrogas, in Santiago de Chile), using bio- ary, etc.) must be regulated. Legislation and regulations energy in the WWTPs (as in the case of Ridgewood, should also allow for flexible and i ­nnovative financing USA), and the beneficial use of biosolids, among (efficient public spending with incentives, results-based others. Another option could be to capitalize on the financing, innovative contracts, private sector involve- potential land value capture increase that wastewa- ment, etc.). It is important to note that adequate leg- ter treatment can provide to nearby and downstream islation alone is not sufficient—strong enforcement areas given the improvements in water quality and agencies and clear enforcement mechanisms are also the environment. required. Focus Areas For This Paradigm Shift to Intersectoral Regulation, Policies, and Incentives Happen in the Region to Promote Resource Recovery Adequate Legislation Legislation, regulatory measures, policies, and incen- Minimum standards for effluent quality can be set tives must be adjusted, developed, and implemented to for an entire country, as is the case of blanket-type promote resource recovery at WWTPs in coordination Wastewater? Shifting Paradigms: From Waste to Resource 7 with other sectors. Water-sector-only initiatives may be considered and guaranteed prior to initiating new not permit water reuse or the use of biosolids as fertil- plants, expansions, and/or upgrades. When funding izer if health and agricultural policies are not properly for O&M is insufficient, lower-cost technologies must aligned. Revenue from bioenergy generation may not be evaluated, at least as an initial stage in the pro- be possible if the electricity sector or regulator does gram. The contribution of the plant to the environment not have any incentive to foster the use, purchase, should be seen not only as an improvement of the and/or transport of electricity generated from biogas water quality in the receiving water body, but also as at WWTPs. The water-energy-food nexus must be an environmental benefit associated with water reuse studied and understood at the basin level. Only such (e.g., substitution of alternative water sources), energy an understanding will adequately provide the positive generation from biogas (e.g., climate change mitigation reinforcement needed for combined policies and regu- and adaptation), and beneficial use of biosolids as fer- latory actions. tilizers (e.g., substitution of synthetic fertilizers, which contribute to pollution). Also, positive social implica- Basin Planning Framework tions of the facility should be considered for the whole Wastewater initiatives should be developed as part cycle—for example, jobs generated by the construction of a basin planning framework to maximize benefits, and O&M of the plant; an increase in the value of prop- ­ resources allocation, and stakeholder engagement. erties through improvement of the receiving water Basin planning is an effective tool to understand water body; adequate alternative water source to farmers quantity and quality requirements from different when reuse is implemented; low-cost, valuable fertil- water users. Basin planning allows the integration of izers to farmers when a biosolids ­ program is in place; benefits and impacts of the proposed interventions in improved health in the population from better quality multiple sectors, enabling the incorporation of climate in nearby water bodies. Tariffs for wastewater can then change risks and socio-environmental considerations. be approved and justified based on such a life-cycle Most recent basin planning methodologies are based analysis. OpEx can be covered through those tariffs and on strong participatory mechanisms that contribute through the extra revenue from the sale of recovered to multi-level stakeholder engagement, resulting in a resources (treated wastewater, energy, biosolids, etc.). reduction of water-related conflicts and the improve- ment project sustainability. Projects developed using To rise to the wastewater challenge in the region and this approach promote resource optimization and effi- promote a paradigm shift, the World Bank, together ciency gains and maximize economic and social wel- with CAF and other partners, is embarking on a new fare in an equitable manner without compromising the initiative: “Wastewater: From Waste to Resource.” The sustainability of vital ecosystems. As such, projects initiative promotes a paradigm shift in Latin America with an integrated basin approach should be given a and the Caribbean toward circular economy invest- higher priority. ments in the sector in which wastewater is considered an asset and a resource rather than a liability. The activ- Financial, Environmental, and Social ity will provide guidance on improved strategies for Considerations in Wastewater the planning and financing of wastewater treatment Treatment Plant Evaluations and resources recovery by exploring, analyzing, and A complete life cycle analysis that covers financial, envi- exemplifying all the above-mentioned issues and will ronmental (including climate), and social aspects must seek to improve current practice in terms of environ- be used to assess and evaluate wastewater ­ treatment mental effectiveness, economic efficiency, and finan- plants. Sources of funding for O&M of WWTPs must cial and institutional practicality and sustainability. 8 Wastewater? Shifting Paradigms: From Waste to Resource Basic Guidelines for Financing Wastewater Treatment Plants When financing wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs), priority must be given to projects that meet all or most of the following criteria: 1. Are part of a basin approach or Integrated Water Resources Management (IWRM) program and adequately prioritized within such program. 2. Have adequately analyzed life-cycle costs, including life-cycle evaluations of environmental, social, and financial aspects. 3. Can cover OpEx with approved tariffs and/or from innovative business models, such as income from sale of water for reuse, biosolids and/or energy generated by the facility (through biogas or hydropower). 4. Use clear effluent limits based on either receiving water body loading criteria (best option) or regulatory requirements based on scientifically/economically sound legislation. Projects may meet effluent criteria gradually (i.e., in stages). 5. Propose technologies adequate for the specific application and have unit costs (US$/p.e.) within a range observed in the country or region. 6. Promote resource recovery (e.g., water reuse, biosolids beneficial use, and/or energy generation from biogas or through hydropower) in a sustainable way. 7. Use industrial discharges identified through adequate monitoring and control systems. Either industries will pay for their treatment (e.g., $/kg of COD treated), or industries will reduce their discharges to previously agreed-upon concentrations by in-house treatment. 8. Incorporate private sector participation, while separating functions of regulation and control (in hands of the government) and O&M (in hands of the private operator). The project must clearly indicate how the private sector will contribute to the sustainability of the project. 9. Contribute to the development of the sector by assisting in the training of government employees, local university students, operators from government-run utilities, and other professionals in the region who can gain from the experience. Have climate resilience considerations built in and/or contribute to climate change mitigation. 10.  11. Have a measurable contribution to the Sustainable Development Goals. A weighted system to give higher or lower priority to some of these criteria could be proposed. However, such a system should have weights assigned based on local conditions rather than a blanket-type approach for all projects. A considerable level of complexity could be added the proposed criteria. However, as in most evaluations, the simpler the rules (or the criteria), the more applicable they are. Wastewater? Shifting Paradigms: From Waste to Resource 9 Gisclon, A., S. McCarley, and K. McNally. 2002. “The Durban Water Notes Recycling Project—The Vision Becomes Reality.” Paper presented at the 1. “…whilst substantial benefits can be realized from providing access to Biennial conference of the Water Institute of Southern Africa (WISA), water, sanitation and hygiene, there may also be some ‘disbenefits’ Durban, South Africa, May 19–23. along the way, depending on the sequencing of investments example, if access to water is provided without simultaneous (for  ­ Lackey, Katy, and Lauren Fillmore. 2017. “Energy Management for Water access to sanitation) ... In many countries, there is an initial focus Utilities in Latin America and the Caribbean: Exploring Energy Efficiency on investing in providing access to drinking water. However, even if and Energy Recovery Potential in Wastewater Treatment Plants.” World such investments have benefits, they can also have disbenefits as the Bank, Washington, DC. volume of untreated wastewater discharged in the local environment increases, thereby increasing the amount of dirty water lying around Nazareth, P. 2014. “PRODES (Programa Despolución de Cuencas (with increased risks of spreading diseases such as malaria via insects Hidrograficas de la Agencia Nacional de Aguas)—Agência Nacional de breeding in pools of dirty water), spreading the risk of epidemics and Águas (ANA), Brasil.” Presented at ANEAS Mérida, Yucatán, November 10. contaminating groundwater” (OECD 2011). Nolasco, D. 2014. “Electricity Use and Potential Generation at Wastewater 2. Biosolid is sludge from WWTPs treated to a level such that it can have Treatment Utilities—The Case of Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia.” beneficial uses and/or safe disposal. Presented at the Energy for Water Workshop organized by the King Abdullah Petroleum Studies and Research Center (KAPSARC), Paris, 3. Water resource recovery facility is a term promoted by the Water September 15. Environment Federation, among several other professional associa- tions and academic institutions, in lieu of wastewater treatment plant. OECD. 2011. Benefits of Investing in Water and Sanitation: An OECD The change reflects the paradigm shift that recognizes the inherit Perspective. Paris: OECD. value of water to be treated. Rojas, Alberto, Lucina Equihua, and Fernando Gonzalez. 2012. “Tenorio Project: A Successful Story of Sustainable Development.” In 2012 Guidelines for Water Reuse, produced by the U.S. Environmental Bibliography Protection Agency (EPA). Washington, DC: EPA. https://www3.epa.gov​ CAF (Development Bank of Latin America). 2012. Agua Potable y /­region1/npdes/merrimackstation/pdfs/ar/AR-1530.pdf. Saneamiento en América Latina y el Caribe: Metas Realistas y Soluciones Sostenibles [Drinking Water and Sanitation in Latin America and the WHO (World Health Organization) and UNICEF (United Nations Caribbean: Realistic Goals and Sustainable Solutions]. Caracas, Children’s Fund). 2017. Progress on Drinking Water, Sanitation and Venezuela: CAF. Hygiene: 2017 Update and SDG Baselines. Geneva: WHO and UNICEF. Corbin, C. 2014. “Value Added. Public-Private Partnership Brings Cost World Bank. 2014. “Applying Results-Based Financing in Water Savings, Energy Efficiency to New Jersey Plant.” Water and Wastes Investments.” Water Papers 89326. World Bank, Washington, DC. Digest, February 13. https://www.wwdmag.com/energy-efficiency/value​ -added. ———. 2015. “Wastewater to Energy: A Technical Note for Utility Managers in EAP Countries.” World Bank, Washington, DC. FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization). 2017. Reutilización de aguas para agricultura en América Latina y el Caribe: Estado, Principios y ———. 2017. Rethinking Infrastructure in Latin America and the Caribbean Necesidades. FAO, Washington, DC. Spending Better to Achieve More. Washington, DC: World Bank. ­ ank. Some rights ­ © 2018 International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World B reserved. The find- ings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this work do not necessarily reflect the views of The World Bank, represent. The World Bank does not guarantee the accuracy its Board of Executive Directors, or the governments they ­ of the data included in this w ­ .0 IGO license ­ ­ ork. This work is subject to a CC BY 3 /­ (https://creativecommons.org​ licenses​ by/3.0/igo). The World Bank does not necessarily own each component of the c /­ ­ ontent. It is your responsibility to ­ wner. If you have determine whether permission is needed for reuse and to obtain permission from the copyright o pubrights@worldbank.org. questions, email ­  SKU W17090 10