Während der letzten zwei Jahrzehnte ist ausgehend von einer zunächst naturwissenschaftlichtechnisch orientierten Umweltforschung eine stärker inter- und transdisziplinäre Nachhaltigkeitsforschung entstanden, welche die Beziehungen zwischen Menschen, Gesellschaft und Natur und die dabei feststellbaren krisenhaften Entwicklungen zu ihrem Gegenstand gemacht hat. In diesem fächerübergreifenden Forschungsfeld entstanden unterschiedliche konzeptionelle Ansätze für die systemische Analyse und das Management von Mensch-Umwelt-Systemen. Insbesondere im anglo-amerikanischen Sprachraum und in Skandinavien wurden verschiedene Konzeptionen von Resilienz entwickelt. Im Folgenden werden deren Potenziale diskutiert und für den Einsatz in der sozial-ökologischen Stadt- und Infrastrukturforschung mit anderen integrativen Konzepten wie Klimagerechtigkeit verglichen.

This report analyses a number of processes for material recovery at municipal wastewater treatment plants in their environmental impacts. Based on the method of Life Cycle Assessment, the analysis shows that material recovery can yield environmental benefits by reducing primary energy demand and related greenhouse gas emissions during operation. This is mainly due to operational savings in energy, chemicals or sludge amount which come in association with material recovery. Product quality assessment for potential contamination showed no unacceptable risks for human health or ecosystems during the application and use of recovered materials.

The overall aim of the "Clear Waters from Pharmaceuticals" (CWPharma) project is to provide guidance on how to reduce the load of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) entering the aquatic environment and especially the Baltic Sea. Even though different methods for reducing the amount of APIs entering the wastewater exist and, thus, "end-of-pipe" measures are also necessary. API usage cannot be completely avoided. Municipal wastewater treatment plants (WWTPs) are relevant point sources of APIs as they treat the wastewater from public households, hospitals, and industry of the connected catchment area. However, conventional "state-of-the-art" WWTPs can only remove APIs that are either easily biodegradable and/or absorbable to activated sludge, whereas others can pass the treatment process with no or only minor reductions. Therefore, reduction of a broad range of APIs can only be achieved by using targeted advanced wastewater treatment (AWT) techniques, such as ozonation or application of powdered and granular activated carbon. All of these technologies for API removal are already used at full-scale WWTPs and have proven their practical and economical suitability. This guideline is meant to provide an overview on how to plan, start, and operate AWT technologies for API elimination. The recommendations are based on the experiences and results from the CWPharma project, but also on the available knowledge from Germany and Switzerland, which is collected and distributed by competence centres such as the German Micropollutants Competence Centre Baden-Württemberg (KomS) Verfahrenstechnik Mikroverunreiniungen and the Swiss Plattform as well as by expert groups from the related water associations. Membrane separation via dense membrane such as nanofiltration (NF) or reverse osmosis (RO) was not considered in this guideline, as both technologies produce a brine with high API concentrations. At coastal WWTPs, this brine might be discharged directly to the sea in order to protect fresh water ecosystems, but this would not reduce the API load to the Baltic Sea. Thus, the brine also requires treatment, which makes this approach less economical in comparison to the other established API removal technologies.

The Implementation Plan (D2.1) is a document, which outlines how and where different digital solutions for water infrastructures will be demonstrated and assessed in the scope of WP2 of the DWC project. It is the first of three deliverables and followed by demonstration and assessment of performance and return of investment by means of key performance indicators (KPI) also defined in this deliverable. ; Version (v0.1.0) submitted to EC.

Proper marketing of the SMARTechs and related products or services from the EU innovation action is crucial to enable a successful commercial exploitation of the project outputs. To help the project partners and product owners with this task, the project consortium decided to develop marketing support material for each technology, service or product developed and demonstrated in the action. This report contains 13 informative flyers for marketing purposes, which support the targeted communication towards key stakeholders in this sector. The two-page flyers include information on the challenge and goal of the process, service or product together with a graphical representation, a list of unique selling points and contact information of the respective partners. The uniform design generates a high memorability and a close association to the SMART-PLANT innovation action and provides professional marketing material for the targeted end-users such as wastewater treatment plant operators and managers or other professionals in this field.

The types and objectives to apply managed aquifer recharge (MAR) are manifold and so are the risks that can arise during the planning, implementation and operation of a MAR facility. In general, operational, regulatory, business, human health, and environmental risks can occur and should be identified already during the planning and implementation stage to apply preventive measures and secure the safe and realibale operation of a MAR facility. This report represents risk assessment based on recommendations of international guidelines (AlcaldeSanz and Gawlik, 2017; NRMMC-EPHC-NHMRC, 2008; WHO, 2009, 2011) at six MAR sites which are at different stages of development. Three case studies are at the feasibility or pilot stage: two ASR systems in João Pessoa and Recife, Brazil and one induced bank filtration site at the Beberibe River in Brazil, and three case studies at the operational stage: one SAT system in the Ezousa catchment in Cyprus, and two infiltration basin systems in Hyères, France (Aquarenova site) and Berlin-Spandau, Germany. The entrylevel assessment according to the Australian guidelines (NRMMC-EPHC-NHMRC, 2009) has been conducted for the feasibility or pilot scale schemes For fully operational MAR schemes, in addition to the entry-level assessment, the degree of difficulty assessment and the maximal risk assessment were carried out. At all stages of site development, risk assessment helps to identify and characterize potential hazards that may cause risks to human health and the environment. This report may be used to assist in clarifying which actions or further investigations are required to identify and reduce the uncertainty of risks and to implement remediation measures if necessary. In addition, this report intends to show how sitespecific hazards have been assessed to varying degrees depending upon the level of risk assessed at each project development stage.

Zum Forschungsdatenmanagement zählen alle Aktivitäten, die mit der Aufbereitung, Speicherung, Archivierung und Veröffentlichung von Forschungsdaten verbunden sind. Die Bedeutung des Forschungsdatenmanagements ist in den vergangenen Jahren immens gestiegen. Grund dafür sind die großen Datenmengen, die im Zuge der Digitalisierung und Automatisierung von Prozessen anfallen und neue Herausforderungen an deren Verwaltung und Verarbeitung stellen, die mit den bisherigen Werkzeugen schwer bewältigt werden können. Dies gilt auch für Daten in der Wasserforschung. Der nachhaltige Zugang zu Forschungsdaten und die Erstellung von Datenmanagementplänen werden zunehmend von Forschungsförderern verlangt. Am Kompetenzzentrum Wasser Berlin gGmbH (KWB) werden im Rahmen von Forschungsprojekten eine Vielzahl von Daten verarbeitet, die entweder selbst erhoben oder von Projektpartnern zur Verfügung gestellt werden. Dazu zählen Messdaten, Metadaten, Fotos/Videos, Bestands- und Zustandsdaten und verarbeitete Daten (z.B. Zeitreihen, aggregierte Werte, Ergebnisse aus Computersimulationen). Um solche Daten nachhaltig nutzbar zu machen, zu verwalten und zu verarbeiten, sind standardisierte Prozesse, Werkzeuge und Methoden zu entwickeln, die eine projektübergreifende Reproduzierbarkeit der Ergebnisse gewährleisten. Ziel des Projektes FAKIN (Forschungsdatenmanagement an kleinen Instituten) war es, ein solches Forschungsdatenmanagement (FDM) für das KWB in Zusammenarbeit mit den Projektwissenschaftlern zu erarbeiten und unternehmensweit zu etablieren. Damit sollte das Vorhaben als übertragbares Fallbeispiel für das FDM an kleinen, aber stark vernetzten außeruniversitären Forschungsinstituten dienen.

NextGen aims to boost sustainability and bring new market dynamics throughout the water cycle at the 10 demo cases and beyond. Main objective of WP1 of the project is to provide evidence to demonstrate the feasibility of innovative technological solutions supporting a circular economy transition in the water sector. Through activities to close the water, energy and materials cycles in 10 demo cases, Work package 1 (WP1) will provide the necessary data to assess the benefits and drawbacks of the technologies (WP2), but also to provide evidence to convince stakeholders on their implementation (WP3), while overcoming the social and governance barriers and creating new business models to promote the implementation of those solutions (WP5 & WP6). This report describes the baseline conditions of each of the sites involved in the project considering water, energy and material cycles. The baseline of the 10 sites (Altenrhein, Athens, Braunschweig, Bucharest, Costa Brava, Filton Airfield, Gotland, La Trappe, Spernal and Westland region) will be used at the end of the project so to define the improvement and/or drawbacks and benefits associated to the implementation of the NextGen solutions. This report corresponds to the first deliverable of the WP1, envisaged for June 2019, and complements the information collected for milestone MS3 on Methodology and specific objectives defined for each case study. All the information of this report has been collected by the Cross-cutting Technology Group (CTG) Leaders since July 2018 through regular discussions with the different case study representatives and through different templates that have been prepared and compiled. Baseline of each case study has been defined for each of the nexus of NextGen project using key performance indicators (KPIs) linked to water, energy and materials. Potential interlinkages between case studies are also described in this document, aiming at increasing the uptake and impact of the NextGen solutions.

In this report, the treatment efficacy of four demonstration sites combining constructed wetlands with engineered pre- or post-treatment processes for wastewater treatment is evaluated focusing on the achievement of effluent quality suitable for water reuse. Special focus is given on the performance of disinfection processes and their combination with constructed wetlands targeting water reuse applications for treatment of primary effluent and polishing of secondary effluent. Monitoring results of the demonstration sites are compared to five existing legally binding national water reuse regulations of European countries, highlighting similarities and differences between these regulations. Results are furthermore compared to the EU-level water reuse standards proposed by the European Commission in May 2018: “Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on minimum requirements for water reuse” (COM337, 2018). The first part of this report focuses on the comparison of the application of water reuse in the EU and the different national regulations in Cyprus, France, Greece, Italy and Spain – countries, which incorporated water reuse standards into their national laws. Water reuse legislations vary significantly among the EU member states. Different reclaimed water uses associated with different water quality classes and varying levels of detail in definitions are considered in each regulation. The number of classes defined in the regulations varies from 1 class including 3 categories of reuse purposes in Italy to 12 classes including 24 categories of reuse purposes in Spain. The allocation of a reuse purpose to the relevant class in the different regulations may change when looking at the level of definition of the regarded reuse purpose. For example, differences in individual definitions for use types of agricultural products, such as irrigation of a “crop consumed processed” and a “vegetable consumed cooked”, may lead to the inclusion or exclusion of the same reuse purpose into different classes in some of the regulations. The same is true for restrictions of irrigation types, which can differ regarding temporal or spatial restrictions. The number of water quality parameters which are restricted by each national regulation also differs considerably, ranging from six parameters regulated by the French water reuse legislation to 55 parameters regulated in Italy. In certain cases, the number of restricted parameters can increase up to 80 (Greek reuse regulation for WWTP > 100,000 p.e.) or even 90 in Spain (when requested by regional government depending on external regulations concerning the protection of the receiving environment). Apart from defined water reuse classes, regulated parameters and relevant limit values, the national reuse regulations also differ with regard to compliance requirements, which further complicates evaluations. While some regulations specify a percentile of samples required to comply with the set limit values (e.g. 80% of annual samples need to meet the limit), others require the annual mean to comply with the limits. In addition, sometimes maximum allowed deviation limits for samples exceeding the limit values are defined. As these specifications may not only vary among different regulations but also for different parameters in the same regulation, as well as among different quality classes for the same parameter in the same regulation, an evaluation of monitoring results of the different demonstration sites in regard to the national water reuse regulations is challenging and might become confusing. The proposal of the European Commission for an EU-level regulation on water reuse includes 4 water quality classes and 4 restricted quality parameters (with two additional for certain reuse purposes). However, water reuse in this proposal is only limited to agricultural irrigation. In contrast to national regulations, the EC proposal includes performance criteria for unrestricted irrigation on top of effluent quality limits. The variability of standards and definitions for water reuse across European countries poses a barrier for the wide application of reclaimed water, resulting in an underdevelopment of the water reuse sector in Europe. The second part of the report provides a comparison of the monitoring results of four AquaNES constructed wetlands (CW) demonstration sites in Greece and Germany with European water reuse regulations. Because of the regulatory heterogeneity described above, a direct comparison of the different European water reuse regulations with monitoring data of the demonstration sites is only possible for well-defined cases, as the allocation to the relevant class in the different regulations may change when looking at the level of definition of the regarded reuse purpose. Therefore, three specific reuse cases have been defined (for details see 3.1): - restricted irrigation (irrigation of beans using drip irrigation), - unrestricted irrigation (irrigation of tomatoes using any irrigation methods) and - urban irrigation (irrigation of a public park). For both Greek sites, monitoring results were evaluated regarding respective water reuse classes of these use cases for all national legislations, while for both German sites, evaluation was only done in respect to the standards proposed by the European Commission. The two Greek sites, Antiparos and Thirasia wastewater treatment plants (WWTP), are both located on the Cyclades island group of the Aegean Sea, and are full-scale WWTPs subjected to significant season fluctuations in the hydraulic and pollution loads between summer and winter periods. The combination of a two-stage CW with chlorination-disinfection realized at Antiparos WWTP results in water quality suitable for “restricted irrigation” according to the French and Greek regulation as well as to the EU-level proposed regulation (COM337, 2018). TSS and electrical conductivity (E.C.) have been identified as the two main parameters limiting possible reuse options. Before implementation of reconstruction measures in clogged wetland beds and pond, and managerial changes for optimization of plant performance (restriction of sewage trucks per day during peak season) some limits for “restricted irrigation” were exceeded. This was mainly due to elevated TSS concentrations and temporarily due to elevated concentrations of E. coli resulting from insufficient chlorination at peak flows that exceeded the design capacity of the plant. Different constructional and managerial improvements in this plant were found to improve and equalize the performance of the plant under peak and low flow conditions in summer and winter periods. However, high values for E.C. in WWTP effluent would prevent application in countries with reuse legislations that include this parameter (i.e. Cyprus, Italy, Spain). The Thirasia WWTP combines primary treatment and photocatalysis before horizontal subsurface flow (HSSF) CWs with subsequent ultrafiltration and chlorination. The quality of treated effluent meets the requirements for the defined case of “restricted irrigation” only according to the French regulation and the EU-level proposal. Parameters limiting the effluent’s suitability for reuse are more variable among the three defined reuse purposes and among the different reuse regulations compared to the Antiparos WWTP. The only parameter exceeding the Greek limits for “restricted irrigation” is total nitrogen. Performance of the HSSF CW regarding total nitrogen (TN) removal is not optimal, thus, the average concentration of total nitrogen in WWTP effluent (50 mg/L, n=24) exceeds the limit of class 3 of the Greek reuse regulation (45 mg/L). However, values since August 2018 show an improved removal of TN that always meets the limit (mean: 34 mg/L, n=11). Further analyses are suggested to ensure the sufficient removal of TN to reliably meet the Greek limit for water reuse. Testing different dosages of titanium dioxide (TiO2) in the photocatalysis stage led to the conclusion that adding the catalyst does not considerably improve the removal of relevant parameters, and therefore is economically unfeasible. Similar and relevant removal for BOD5 and COD (~60%). and TN (~30%) were found regardless of TiO2 dosage, even without addition of the catalyst and associated chemicals. Thus, it is recommended to run this stage as aeration stage with sedimentation. In the two German sites (Schönerlinde and Erftverband), polishing stages were tested at pilot scale after full-size WWTPs. Effluent quality was evaluated for compliance with the proposed EU-level water reuse quality standards. In Schönerlinde, the combination of ozonation with two CWs differing in substrate composition (sand or lava gravel with biochar) was demonstrated. Regarding E. coli, most of the removal was accomplished during ozonation (>2 log units), which also achieved removal of various micropollutants (see D3.2). The subsequent removal in both wetland types was similar, reaching a further reduction of E. coli by about 0.5 log units and resulting in effluent quality that meets class B limits according to the proposed limits of COM337. When ozonation was not in operation, the conventional wetland (with sand as substrate) still achieved a similar effluent concentration for E. coli (2.7 logreduction), demonstrating the robustness of this combination for water reuse purposes. TSS and turbidity were well removed by CWs reaching the best class A limit for these parameters. Overall, the combination of ozonation with CWs for polishing of WWTP effluent is a good option to achieve a very good effluent quality suitable for water reuse, with the potential to reach class A quality suitable for irrigation of crop that is consumed raw with further reduction of E. coli by about 0.5-1 log units. At Erftverband, a full-scale system is built at WWTP Rheinbach for flexible treatment of combined sewer overflow (CSO) during storm events, and polishing of WWTP effluent during dry weather. Three pilot-scale retention soil filters (RSF, specific form of vertical flow CWs for the treatment of rain water and/or wastewater) were tested for >3 years with one system containing an additional layer of activated carbon, and one RSF being subjected to simulated CSO events. Regarding E. coli, only class C limit is achieved (mean log removal in wetlands about 1.5). During CSO events with high peaks of E. coli in the influent of the RSF, effluent quality does not meet the requirements for any reuse purpose defined in the EC proposal, even though a log removal of about 2.5 is achieved. A temporary disinfection during heavy rain events would be necessary in order to provide effluent suitable for water reuse. BOD5 and TSS do not limit water reuse according to the EC proposal, thus, a sufficient disinfection would allow water reuse even for class A reuse purposes. Overall, systems, which include a combination of CWs with some sort of technical system with disinfection capabilities, achieved class B effluent quality according to the proposed EU-level standards. The Erftverband site containing a natural treatment stage without an additional disinfection achieved class C quality when not subjected to CSO events. Thus, effluents of all sites would be suitable for the following reuse purposes defined in the EC proposal: (a) food crops consumed raw, where the edible portion is produced above ground and is not in direct contact with reclaimed water; (b) processed food crops and (3) non-food crops including crops to feed milk- or meat-producing animals. Whereas in class B the irrigation method is unrestricted, in class C only drip irrigation is allowed. The combination of CWs with disinfection treatment processes for wastewater treatment in small communities is a promising option for the wider application of water reuse, at least for restricted irrigation purposes.