Masons Water Yearbook 2004 - 2005

Copyright © Masons Solicitors 2004 Published by Masons Solicitors Masons 30 Aylesbury Street London EC1R 0ER Telephone: 020 7490 4000 Facsimile: 020 7490 2545 e-mail: website: info@masons.com www.masons.com

ISBN 0-9537076-7-9 ISSN 1468-3954 Masons Water Yearbook 2003 – 2004 Masons Water Yearbook 2002 – 2003 Masons Water Yearbook 2001 – 2002 Masons Water Yearbook 2000 – 2001 Masons Water Yearbook 1999 – 2000 ISBN 0 9537076-5-2 ISBN 0 9537076 4 4 ISBN 0 9537076 2 8 ISBN 0 9537076 1 X ISBN 0 9537076 0 1

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. Whilst every effort has been made to check the accuracy of the information given in this book, readers should always make their own checks. Neither the author nor the publisher accepts any responsibility for misstatements made in it or for misunderstandings arising from it. The main text of this work reflects the information obtained by the author as at 15 October 2004.

Masons supports WaterAid WaterAid is a Registered Charity: Number 288701

Masons Water Yearbook 2004 - 2005

PREFACE

The old order changeth
Of all the obstacles that routinely afflict business, none is less amenable to smooth economic management than structural change within a sector. Structural change resonates only with the law of the jungle and while perhaps not quite red in tooth and claw, savages commercial prospects we thought otherwise might be there, plays havoc with the most meticulous budgeting and precipitates flight from the sector by companies long-established in it. Change can thus erode the diversity of the supply base and jeopardise the interests of the customer. The UK market Although currently and foreseeably enjoying levels of infrastructure investment at home without parallel anywhere in the world, the UK water and wastewater industry has, paradoxically, been enduring protracted change and uncertainty for several years now in fact, since before the previous Periodic Review of Prices. This has manifested itself in boom-andbust cycles that perversely starved companies in times of plenty. In the run-up to AMP 3 patterns of work within the industry were already undergoing change as the deadlines associated with a number of European Directives came to pass (most notably, the UWWTD) and the water companies began to move towards new forms of contractual arrangement with their long-term suppliers. “Partnering” and “framework agreements” were the new buzz-words of the age, pointing in some cases to a drastic collapse in the numbers of suppliers used directly by individual water companies. The impact universally has been very significant though mainly for suppliers. By way of example - and not untypical - one water company slashed its approved contractor list from more than 200 companies to fewer than 10. Although such measures can always be justified on the grounds of business efficiency and economics, it’s questionable whether they can be counted as sound supply base management. Multiplied across the industry, they have had a marked impact throughout AMP 3. Water companies, however, differ widely in their working arrangements, but consistency is essential for sustainable supply base capability. And while companies are increasingly looking overseas to compensate for bouts of “famine” at home, a strong and stable home market provides track record for the international market and a pool of resources, skills and expertise to draw upon. Almost simultaneously with all these shifts in working patterns was the need to re-visit designs and re-engineer schemes in order to deliver increased efficiencies. As a result, there was a sharp downturn in the opening phase of AMP 3, followed by a surge in demand before the industry settled down to more stable conditions. However, although the water companies are now somewhat better organised than at previous AMP transitions, the outlook for early AMP 4 is distinctly uncertain, with little optimism among suppliers for a transition any smoother than previous ones. Despite OFWAT’s best endeavours to facilitate the transition with the “Early-Start” programme as foreshadowed in the prior announcement of AMP 4’s first year determination the size of the programme is disappointingly low at around £1bn and few suppliers see any evidence that it has begun to see the first light of day. Significant investment is still in the offing £15.7bn up to 2010. However, with this figure (allowed for in the Draft Determination of Prices announced in July) some 25% below that asked for by the water companies, and with the Regulator setting tougher-than expected efficiency targets, margins are again under pressure and further changes in ways of working are again in train as some companies are moving towards longer-term framework agreements up to seven or even 10 years.

Masons Water Yearbook 2004 - 2005
i

PREFACE

The international market Worryingly, these patterns of change in the UK market have been accompanied by a marked slowdown (the doom-sayers would claim the prospects have dissipated!) in the international marketplace. Here the outlook for private sector participation in public water and wastewater services has shrunk on account of complex internal factors. Earlier buoyant forecasts have simply failed to live up to expectations of observers and players alike. While opportunities remain (they are potentially enormous, as the following pages attest to), they are in “dead slow” mode at present, having run up against the f rmidable combination of the traditional innate ultrao conservatism of municipal authorities everywhere and institutional weakness. The need, however, remains acute, particularly in the water-stressed regions of the developing world. It also exists nearer home, especially in the newly-emerging economies of central and eastern Europe, where it goes hand-in-hand with widespread environmental degradation that that remains a long-term threat to the environment generally, and water in particular. Indeed, even in the developed world there is continuing need, all too often neglected, to rehabilitate and upgrade existing water and wastewater infrastructure and on our own doorstep several countries in the EU are still a long way from implementing the Union's own environmental directives. Investment in water infrastructure, in fact, is currently running at less than half of what is needed, and a poor start is being made to the attainment of the Millennium Goal of halving by 2015 the proportion of the world’s population without access to basic sanitation. Nearly two-thirds of the required investment, moreover, will have to come from the private sector, but progress has run up against bureaucratic inertia everywhere, political indecisiveness and a much more cautious approach to investment. At the present time, institutional strengthening is simply not taking place at a pace consistent with expanding private sector participation and Millennium Goal objectives, hence, revised market expectations. The scale of need and commercial opportunity are measured out in great detail in this, the sixth edition of Masons Water Yearbook, which is now the primary source-book on the sector. It makes encouraging reading, on the one hand, for the opportunities presented on the scale of global need, while simultaneously engendering a certain air of pessimism over need frustrated for want of better political cohesion. The UK water and wastewater industry, backed by government and regulators, is one of the best equipped to facilitate this process, as outlined in the UK’s International Strategy for the Water Sector, launched in June, 2004. The Yearbook is a joint enterprise between Masons, the London-based international law firm specialising in infrastructure projects and information technology, and Dr David Lloyd Owen of Envisager, the specialist consultancy in environmental services for the water, wastewater and waste management sector. As usual it is a highly fruitful and welcome contribution to the development of the market and they are to be congratulated on its comprehensive coverage.

David Neil-Gallagher, Chief Executive, British Water September 2004

Masons Water Yearbook 2004 - 2005
ii

AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY AND MASONS WATER SECTOR GROUP

Dr David Lloyd Owen
David Lloyd Owen is the Managing Director of Envisager Limited, a company that advises companies, financiers and governments about water and waste management markets, strategies and environmental regulations. He was an equity analyst at UBS (Savory Milln) and BNP Paribas and founded Ecofin Limited in 1991 and has followed the water and waste management sectors since 1989. In addition to writing six editions of the Masons Water Yearbook, he has written three books on the sector in Europe and papers for peer reviewed journals. He is a member of the Pictet Funds Water Fund’s advisory board and Glâs Cymru Cyf. His publications include: 2002 1999 1998 1998 The European Water Industry: Market Drivers and Responses. CWC Publishing, London Making Waves Overseas, West LB, London The European Water Industry: A country-by-country analysis Financial Times Energy, London European Water Company Profiles Financial Times Energy, London

David Owen has been retained by Masons as a consultant in the water and wastewater sector.

Masons Water Sector Group
Masons is an international law firm specialising in infrastructure projects and information and technology law. * The firm’s Water Sector Group has extensive experience on a world-wide basis of water, wastewater, desalination and industrial water outsourcing projects, many of them procured on a BOT basis or on a Public/Privat e Partnership basis. Masons Water Sector Group also has significant experience in the field of regulatory law relating to water. Examples of recent projects include the following: • • • • • • advising a UK water utility on its procurement programme relating to AMP 4; advising a bidder in connection with its proposed bid for a desalination plant in Taiwan; advising a bidder in connection with the $200 million Taweelah desalination project in Abu Dhabi; advising a bidder on its bid for Project Aquatrine, the UK Ministry of Defence project to outsource its water and wastewater functions under the Private Finance Initiative; advising on a major industrial water outsourcing project in the UK; advising a UK Utility Group, part of the preferred bidder consortium, on the Engineering Procurement Construction contract issues (Package 1), in connection with the design, build and operation of a water treatment plant in Beijing. Beijing No. 10 is the fourth formal BOT project in China; advising a member of a bidding consortium in connection with the Disi-Amman water conveyor BOT project in Jordan; advising part of a consortium bidding for the Dublin Bay Ringsend Treatment Works wastewater project in Dublin;
Masons Water Yearbook 2004 - 2005
iii

• •

AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY AND MASONS WATER SECTOR GROUP • • •

acting for the Government of Sri Lanka on the Greater Negombo Water PSP project; advising the South African Department of Water Affairs and Forestry on the form of model contracts to regulate water services for the benefit of South African municipalities; acting for the preferred bidder in connection with the Levenmouth Wastewater Treatment project in Scotland. This is a bond financed project procured under the UK Government’s Private Finance Initiative.

For further details of Masons’ capabilities and experience in the water and wastewater sectors, contact Mark Lane at: Masons 30 Aylesbury Street London EC1R 0ER Tel: DDI: Fax: Email: Web: 020 7490 4000 020 7490 6214 020 7490 2545 mark.lane@masons.com www.masons.com
th

* As of the 6 December 2004, Masons' merger with Pinsents will result in the new merged firm of Pinsent Masons.

Masons Water Yearbook 2004 - 2005
iv

CONTENTS

CONTENTS
PREFACE ........................................................................................................................i

DR DAVID OWEN BIOGRAPHY ...................................................................................... iii

MASONS WATER SECTOR GROUP .............................................................................. iii

CONTENTS .................................................................................................................... v

INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... xiii

HOW TO USE THIS BOOK ............................................................................................ xv

OPERATING AND PARENT COMPANIES......................................................................xvi

MAJOR CHANGES SINCE 2003-04 ......................................................................................................... xvi

PART 1: 2004-2005 OVERVIEW ......................................................................................1
INDUSTRIAL WATER OUTSOURCING..................................................................................................2 DESALINATION ...........................................................................................................................................4 COMPANIES ACTIVE IN, ENTERING AND LEAVING THE SECTOR ..............................................8 NUMBER OF PEOPLE SERVED BY COUNTRY AND COMPANY................................................. 10 HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE SERVED BY THE PRIVATE SECTOR? ............................................. 11 COUNTRY MARKET DEVELOPMENT, PROSPECTS AND PROGNOSIS ................................... 16 NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL PLAYERS AND STRATEGIES COMPARED ....................... 20

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS .................................................................................... 24
ALBANIA................................................................................................................................................................ 25 ALGERIA............................................................................................................................................................... 26 ARGENTINA......................................................................................................................................................... 27 ARMENIA.............................................................................................................................................................. 29 AUSTRALIA.......................................................................................................................................................... 30 AUSTRIA............................................................................................................................................................... 34 BAHRAIN ............................................................................................................................................................... 36 BANGLADESH ..................................................................................................................................................... 37 BELGIUM............................................................................................................................................................... 39 BELIZE................................................................................................................................................................... 42 BOLIVIA................................................................................................................................................................. 43 BRAZIL ................................................................................................................................................................... 45 BULGARIA............................................................................................................................................................ 49 CAMEROON ......................................................................................................................................................... 52 CANADA................................................................................................................................................................ 54 CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC ...................................................................................................................... 57
Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005
v

CONTENTS
CHAD ..................................................................................................................................................................... 58 CHILE..................................................................................................................................................................... 60 CHINA.................................................................................................................................................................... 63 COLOMBIA............................................................................................................................................................ 71 CONGO.................................................................................................................................................................. 73 COSTA RICA ........................................................................................................................................................ 74 CÔTE D’IVOIRE ................................................................................................................................................... 75 CROATIA............................................................................................................................................................... 77 CUBA...................................................................................................................................................................... 79 CZECH REPUBLIC.............................................................................................................................................. 80 DENMARK............................................................................................................................................................. 83 ECUADOR............................................................................................................................................................. 84 EGYPT................................................................................................................................................................... 86 ESTONIA............................................................................................................................................................... 89 ETHIOPIA.............................................................................................................................................................. 91 FINLAND................................................................................................................................................................ 92 FRANCE ............................................................................................................................................................. 93 GABON ............................................................................................................................................................. 97

GERMANY............................................................................................................................................................ 99 GREECE ...........................................................................................................................................................103 GUINEA ...........................................................................................................................................................105

GUINEA-BISSAU ...............................................................................................................................................107 HONG KONG & MACAU ..................................................................................................................................108 HUNGARY...........................................................................................................................................................109 INDIA ...........................................................................................................................................................111

INDONESIA.........................................................................................................................................................117 IRAN IRAQ ...........................................................................................................................................................121 ...........................................................................................................................................................122

IRELAND ...........................................................................................................................................................123 ISRAEL – PALESTINE ......................................................................................................................................125 ITALY JAPAN ...........................................................................................................................................................129 ...........................................................................................................................................................133

JORDAN ..............................................................................................................................................................136 KAZAKHSTAN REPUBLIC ...............................................................................................................................138 KENYA.................................................................................................................................................................140 KUWAIT...............................................................................................................................................................142 LATVIA.................................................................................................................................................................144 THE LEBANON ..................................................................................................................................................145 LESOTHO............................................................................................................................................................146 LITHUANIA..........................................................................................................................................................148 MALAWI ...............................................................................................................................................................150 MALAYSIA...........................................................................................................................................................151 MALI .....................................................................................................................................................................155 MEXICO...............................................................................................................................................................156 MONGOLIA.........................................................................................................................................................160

Masons Water Yearbook 2004 - 2005
vi

CONTENTS
MOROCCO .........................................................................................................................................................161 MOZAMBIQUE ...................................................................................................................................................163 NAMIBIA..............................................................................................................................................................166 NEPAL..................................................................................................................................................................167 THE NETHERLANDS........................................................................................................................................168 NEW ZEALAND..................................................................................................................................................170 NIGER..................................................................................................................................................................172 NIGERIA ..............................................................................................................................................................173 NORWAY.............................................................................................................................................................176 OMAN ...................................................................................................................................................................178 PAKISTAN ...........................................................................................................................................................179 REPUBLIC OF PANAMA..................................................................................................................................181 PARAGUAY ........................................................................................................................................................182 PERU....................................................................................................................................................................183 PHILIPPINES......................................................................................................................................................185 POLAND ..............................................................................................................................................................188 PORTUGAL .........................................................................................................................................................191 QATAR .................................................................................................................................................................194 ROMANIA............................................................................................................................................................195 THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION .........................................................................................................................197 SAUDI ARABIA...................................................................................................................................................200 SENEGAL ............................................................................................................................................................203 SINGAPORE.......................................................................................................................................................205 SLOVAKIA...........................................................................................................................................................206 REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA...............................................................................................................................207 SOUTH AFRICA.................................................................................................................................................209 SOUTH KOREA..................................................................................................................................................212 SPAIN ...................................................................................................................................................................214 SRI LANKA..........................................................................................................................................................217 SWEDEN.............................................................................................................................................................218 SWITZERLAND ..................................................................................................................................................220 TAIWAN ...............................................................................................................................................................221 TANZANIA...........................................................................................................................................................224 THAILAND...........................................................................................................................................................226 TRINIDAD & TOBAGO......................................................................................................................................229 TUNISIA...............................................................................................................................................................230 TURKEY ..............................................................................................................................................................231 UGANDA..............................................................................................................................................................233 UKRAINE.............................................................................................................................................................236 UNITED ARAB EMIRATES ..............................................................................................................................238 UNITED KINGDOM............................................................................................................................................239 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.....................................................................................................................244 URUGUAY...........................................................................................................................................................250 UZBEKISTAN......................................................................................................................................................251 VENEZUELA.......................................................................................................................................................253

Masons Water Yearbook 2004 - 2005
vii

CONTENTS
VIETNAM.............................................................................................................................................................255 YEMEN ................................................................................................................................................................257 ZAMBIA................................................................................................................................................................258

PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS .................................................................................. 259
ARGENTINA LATIN AGUAS .......................................................................................................................................260 AUSTRALIA UNITIED GROUP LIMITED.................................................................................................................261 AUSTRIA AQUAPLUS............................................................................................................................................262 EVN .........................................................................................................................................................263 BELGIUM AQUAFIN NV.........................................................................................................................................265 BRAZIL SABESP .................................................................................................................................................267 CANADA AQUATECH WATER MANAGEMENT SERVICES INC ................................................................269 CHILE AGUAS ANDINAS ................................................................................................................................270 ANTOFAGASTA PLC...........................................................................................................................272 CONSORTIO FINANCIERO SA.........................................................................................................273 SACI FALABELLA................................................................................................................................274 CHINA ANHUI GUOZEN GROUP...................................................................................................................275 BEIJING CAPITAL GROUP ................................................................................................................276 BEIJING SOUND ENVIRONMENTAL INDUSTRY GROUP .........................................................277 CATHAY INTERNATIONAL GROUP ................................................................................................278 CHEUNG KONG INFRASTRUCTURE .............................................................................................279 CITIC PACIFIC LTD .............................................................................................................................280 GLOBAL GREEN TECH GROUP ......................................................................................................281 GUANGDONG INVESTMENT LTD ...................................................................................................282 JIANGXI HONGCHENG WATERWORKS CO ................................................................................283 NANHAI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LIMITED.............................................................................284 NWS HOLDINGS..................................................................................................................................285 SHANGHAI INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS..............................................................................................286 SHANGHAI MUNICIPAL RAW WATER CO LTD ............................................................................287 SUZHOU NEW DISTRICT HI-TECH INDUSTRIAL CO LTD ........................................................288 WUHAN SANZHENG INDUSTRY HOLDING..................................................................................289 FRANCE BOUYGUES...........................................................................................................................................290 SUEZ SA ................................................................................................................................................294 VEOLIA ENVIRONNEMENT SA........................................................................................................308 GERMANY E.ON........................................................................................................................................................324

Masons Water Yearbook 2004 - 2005
viii

..................................349 AMGA SPA .........................................................................................................................................................................................360 PPB GROUP BERHAD ..368 PHILIPPINES AYALA CORPORATION....................................................367 THE NETHERLANDS NUON NV..........................................................................................................................................................................325 MVV AG...........................................................................348 ACQUE POTABILI SPA..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................372 BENPRES HOLDINGS CORPORATION ................365 YTL CORPORATION BHD.........................................................374 SINGAPORE ASIA ENVIRONMENT HOLDINGS LTD .....359 PBA HOLDINGS BHD....................................................................................................376 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 ..............................340 INDIA BHEL (BHARAT HEAVY ELECTRICALS LIMITED)................................................328 RWE AG .................................................................................346 ACQUEDOTTO DE FERRARI GALLIERA SPA...............................................................................................................................353 ENI SPA......................358 KUMPULAN PERANGSANG SELANGOR BERHAD...................................................................................................................................................................................................363 SALCON ENGINEERING BERHAD ..........................................................................................................................................................339 THESSALONIKI WATER AND SEWERAGE ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................361 PUNCAK NIAGA BERHAD ..........................373 SAUDI ARABIA SUADI ARABIAN AMIANTIT COMPANY...........................................................................................................................................................................341 IVRCL CONSTRUCTIONS AND PROJECTS LTD ................364 TALIWORKS CORPORATION ......................................................................342 ITALY ACEA SPA.............................................................................................................................CONTENTS GELSENWASSER AG .......................................................................................343 ACEGAS .............................................362 RANHILL UTILITIES BHD ....................................................................354 HERA SPA............................347 ACQUEDOTTO NICOLAY SPA .....................................................357 INTAN UTILITIES BERHAD ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................366 MEXICO AQUASOL .........350 ASM BRESCIA SPA...................329 GREECE ATHENS WATER SUPPLY AND SEWERAGE COMPANY SA...............371 BENGUET CORPORATION ..........................APS .....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................352 ENEL SPA..356 MALAYSIA ECO WATER .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................345 ACSM COMO .........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................2005 ix ...................................................................................................................................355 META SPA.............................................................

........................................................................................................................................380 SEMBCORP INDUSTRIES LTD ..................................................................435 CONNECTICUT WATER SERVICE CO................................................................................................................... 392 THAILAND EASTERN WATER RESOURCES ....................................................402 DEE VALLEY GROUP PLC ........................................................................................................................................ 386 FCC (FOMENTO DE CONSTRCCIONES Y CONTR ATAS SA) .......................430 BIW LTD ...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................381 SPAIN AGUAS DE BARCELONA SA...... 393 UNITED KINGDOM AWG PLC......................................................................................................395 BIWATER PLC/CASCAL NV.................................................................................................................................................408 NATURE TECHNOLOGY SOLUTIONS....................................................................................................................................2005 x ...........................................................................................................................................................................................................................419 SWAN GROUP PLC.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................401 BRISTOL WATER HOLDINGS PLC................................................................................411 PENNON GROUP PLC (SOUTH WEST WATER PLC).........................................................................................433 CH2M HILL ................................434 CONSOLIDATED WATER ..........398 BOC GROUP PLC........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................405 GLAS CYMRU (DWR CYMRU WELSH WATER).................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................403 EAST SURREY HOLDINGS PLC .................................................................................................................................................428 ARTESIAN RESOURCES.....................................................413 SEVERN TRENT PLC.......................................................................... 382 AGUAS DE VALENCIA SA...............................................406 KELDA GROUP PLC (YORKSHIRE WATER PLC).................................... 390 OHL....... 389 IBERDROLA SA........................417 SOUTH EAST WATER PLC ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................418 SOUTH STAFFORDSHIRE GROUP PLC...........................................................................................................436 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 ..............................................................................................................................................................................CONTENTS BOUSTEAD SINGAPORE LTD .........................................................................................431 CADIZ INC ..................................................................................................................379 HYFLUX LTD ..................................................377 DARCO WATER TECHNOLOGIES PTE.......................................432 CALIFORNIA WATER SERVICE CO....................................................................................................................378 DAYEN ENVIRONMENTAL LIMITED ...................................................................................................426 AMERICAN STATES WATER ....................................................................................................... 387 GRUPO ACS (ACTIVADADES ES CONSTRUCCION Y SERVICOS SA) ............................................................................................................................................410 NORTHUMBRIAN WATER PLC ..........420 UNITED UTILITIES PLC.................................421 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ALLIANCE WATER RESOURCES.........................................................................404 FIRST AQUA (SOUTHERN WATER PLC).................................................427 AQUA AMERICA INC.................................................................. 391 TECNICAS VALENCIANAS DEL AGUA (TECVASA) ..414 SOUTH DOWNS LTD ................................................................................

...........................................................................448 YORK WATER ............................................................... ...............................................................................................441 SJW CORP ................ ............................................................................. ............................................................ 450 APPENDIX 2: PRIVATE SECTOR PARTICIPATION.............................................................................445 WESTERN WATER................................................................................................................................CONTENTS COVANTA ENERGY CORP ........................... .........................................................437 MIDDLESEX WATER COMPANY........................ 456 APPENDIX 3: THE PRIVATE SECTOR AND THE MILLENNIUM DEVELOPMENT GOALS ....................440 PURE CYCLE CORP................................................................................................................................................2005 xi ...................................................................................................................... 471 APPENDIX 5: REFERENCES AND FURTHER READING .............................................................................................................................................449 APPENDICES: APPENDIX 1: THE WATER CYCLE AND WATER SERVICES.........................................................................................439 PICO HOLDINGS INC......................................................................................................................................................438 PENNICHUCK CORPORATION . 467 APPENDIX 4: GLOSSARY OF WATER AND FINANCE TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ..........................................................................................442 SOUTHWEST WATER COMPANY...443 TYCO INTERNATIONAL .............................................. 480 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 .

it currently looks like being the weakest year since 1995. and we hope that it will prove more user-friendly. Much has been written about the need to reconstruct Iraq’s water and wastewater services. In September 2000. by 2015. 189 United Nations Member States adopted the Millennium Development Goals. Malaysia and the UK and clearly has its charms when seeking to offer a broad range of industrial services to major clients but the subtle differences between the two services were often not fully appreciated before projects failed to perform to expectations. while the first section concentrates on more current issues. The power-water multi utility approach.2005 xiii . This is due to new flows of information as well as new companies entering the sector. Avoiding a decade of inaction The World Water Vision for 2025 was launched at the Second World Water Forum at The Hague in 2000. Goodbye America.’ The Second Earth Summit in Johannesburg (2002) ratified the MDG targets and as with The Hague’s World Water Vision.Developed countries . After contracts covering eight million people were handed back. Moldova. somewhat less on how it got into its current state. 2004: Learning to live in testing times The current year is set to be the weakest year since 1998 or 1966 for contract gains and in net terms. Nicaragua and Serbia are set to appear in the next edition and Eastern Europe and Central Asia continue to be of interest as markets expand beyond the newly enlarged European Union and the increasingly active role being played by the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. so that background information on topics such as the water cycle. almost all of these have come from countries outside the OECD. which was in the vogue in the USA and Spain. The makeup of these new entries shows a dramatic shift towards locally based companies entering the sector in developing economies. It continues to have its adherents in France. hello the world With the notable exception of Tyco’s Earth Tech. the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation. While the ‘Big Three’ remain the clear market leaders.INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION This is the sixth edition of the Mason’s Water Yearbook and thanks to the onward march of new companies across the world the tome continues to grow in substance. The Decade for Action is designed to highlight the disparity between progress to date and Masons Water Yearbook 2004 . including to ‘Halve. Country changes The solitary new entry this year is more in hope than expectation. emphasised the role of the private sector in providing financial and management resources. where PSP looked to be unfeasible a few years ago. Company changes Five companies have left the sector over the past twelve months. The Yearbook has evolved as well. The front section has been broken up. but it does reflect upon some rather hasty expansion strategies and the problems companies face as environmental and public health standards are rolled back by the current administration. The current instability in this country. Montenegro. there is a stream of project development taking place and much of this is in countries such as the Russian Federation and Northern Ireland. but twenty more joined and as with last year. Edition Number of countries . It was designed to represent a multilateral and multinational consensus for gaining universal access to water and sanitation by 2025. The United Nations International Decade for Action “Water for Life” 2005 – 2015 will be launched at World Water Day on 22 March 2005.Developing countries Number of companies 1999/00 13 59 11 70 2000/01 15 69 12 81 2001/02 16 70 12 82 2002/03 15 68 16 84 2003/04 18 73 29 102 2004/05 23 72 45 117 The entire nature of the market has changed over the past three years. has almost been wholly unbundled. Even so. there was a net gain of ten million for new contracts. definitions about the private sector and privatisation and details about the Millennium Development Goals form part of the Appendices. The insularity of the world’s largest market is perplexing. allied with the tactic of targeting expatriate workers means that just doing the work that needs to be done is hard enough before it was announced that much of the funding promised for network rehabilitation being diverted towards military spending. their perceived global domination is rapidly becoming a memory. the withdrawal of US companies from the international water and wastewater services market is effectively complete.

Outside the USA. the failure of the 2003 Kyoto World Water Summit to build upon the momentum of the previous summits. The next few years are set to see a significant expansion in desalination plant. Even international contracts are increasingly being financed locally. the role of the private sector in financing and operating these facilities increases.2005 xiv . Desalination gains a taste for independence As the cost of desalination falls to the point where it is becoming commercially viable for a significant number of markets. Issues about funding flows remain One of the key points about PSP was that it would mobilise new sources of funding. Indeed. To date. Given the capital bias in a water and power project that remains a valid approach. Interestingly. Each edition gets closer to its goal of providing a true and fair view about the markets and companies that serve them.7% of the population currently being served in some manner by the private sector. we have concentrated only on those facilities such as in Singapore and Israel which are solely devoted to water production.INTRODUCTION the work needed to attain the water and sanitation MDGs as highlighted by UNICIEF & the WHO’s review of progress since 2000 published this year. That a privately run facility is being considered for Chennai is testament to how markets and technologies can move on. progress has been patchy due to the lowered emphasis on environmental compliance and companies reacting to some over-enthusiastic bidding in previous years. Using membrane technologies also make single purpose water facilities more attractive. and this funding is distinctly finite when compared with the amount of water and sewerage infrastructure finance needed over the next decade. Industrial water outsourcing thrives The market for outsourcing industrial water and effluent services has enjoyed another good year. Players such as GE and Ionics hover in the background getting to know the market through buying specialist players or by moving from manufacturing to services. While the UN explicitly recognises the contribution needed from the private sector to attain these goals. the market continues to grow at 15-20% per annum with outsourced revenues in the region of US$ 3 billion out of a US$ 80-100 billion market. especially from the richer countries to those who were starved of funds as well as water. the flow of project funding to clients outside the OECD countries has eased to an unsteady drip. with 8. due to be held in Mexico in March 2006. He is thus grateful for any feedback and suggestions so that future editions can rectify them and more closely reflect the needs of its readers. especially relating to foreign exchange risks. Dr David Lloyd Owen October 2004 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 . This reflects the fact that the problems facing global water management simply will not go away because some politicians seek to fight old battles on new fronts. is set to be a crucial engagement between the private sector and various stakeholders for the implementation of effective management strategies. Local or expatriate funding obviates exchange rate risk but plays a limited role in mobilising new sources of funding needed to attain the Millennium Development Goals. A slightly more cautious set of forecasts We have changed our forecast for PSP coverage from 17% of the world’s population by 2015 to 16%. but India has emerged with a new political will to address water problems with a significant amount of private funding and management. Taking the Yearbook forward The task of assembling each edition of this Yearbook provides a mass of new insights into the market and its modus operandi. Since 2001-02. The Fourth World Water Forum. other forecasts remain either stable or have been marginally increased. while our forecast for North America has been severely lowered. although in the USA. Some of this shift reflects the problems being encountered by international players. The author is responsible for any errors and omissions that may occur in this Yearbook. even one serving Thames Water. not only has China been a powerhouse during the year.

Company entries The country entries provide a description of how each company became involved in the sector and its overall strategies. entering rivers. The Appendices make up the final part and provide background data about the sector. In addition.HOW TO USE THIS BOOK HOW TO USE THIS BOOK The Masons Water Yearbook is divided into four parts. Generally. we have kept with the most commonly accepted definitions and those that are most likely to be of relevance to potential readers. As with definitions of contract types. economic and regulatory contexts. social. environmental. the turnover in senior management seen in the sector means that names can often change as the year goes by. streams and lakes wither through rainfall or rivers in neighbouring countries. Where reference is made to specific data. The two tables that immediately follow these remarks are designed to provide access to company entries where different names are used for the same company or company circumstances have changed or are about to change. Part 3 consists of entries of companies providing these services that are wholly or partly in the private sector. Otherwise. main switchboard. while the latter highlights affordability issues and spending priorities. While the company contact details are as up to date as possible. The Glossary at the back of the Yearbook provides an explanation of those examples that are to be found in this book. wherever possible. a Profit & Loss account is provided along with contact data (company address. For surface water. along with how much is currently being taken out. Details about these can be found in the References section in the Appendices. xv Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . when known. a range of global and regional overviews have been used for compiling the common data entries. The surface water and ground water data boxes outline how much water is available in each country on an annual basis. Greater shortages indicate that remedial action will be needed in the medium term. Web sites are not included in this section due to their transient nature. and web site. The former outlines the size of the potential market. a Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations used in the Yearbook and a listing of the main references used. water availability relates to the annual natural recharge of water into water bearing rocks. the references are divided into thematic sections to provide a selection of the more pertinent publications about water and wastewater services and their political. Part 1. Country entries Population and economic data is given in order to provide an indication of demographic trends and the current state of economic development. it is mentioned in the country entry. For groundwater. In this book. The World of Water takes a look at trends noted in water and wastewater services worldwide over the past 12 months and considers how these are set to evolve. along with senior management) and details about water and wastewater services in their home and international markets. Part 2 covers countries of interest to those involved in providing water and wastewater services. [3] contract type and duration and [4] population served and service provided. References As well as outlining the major studies that have provided the basis for the country data entries. any country that takes more than 25% of these renewable resources is likely to be facing at least regional water shortages. Wherever possible. international contracts are tabulated to show [1] year of contract award. definitions of certain terms can vary. this refers to water that is in an abstractable form. [2] city/region. Glossary The water and wastewater sectors are not immune to jargon and acronyms.

OPERATING AND PARENT COMPANIES OPERATING COMPANIES AND PARENT COMPANIES Operating Company American Water Works (USA) -Cascal EMC (USA) Ondeo/Lyonnaise des Eaux SAUR Thames Water (UK) Veolia Water/Generale des Eaux Parent Company(s) RWE (Germany) Biwater (UK)/Nuon (Netherlands) BOC (UK) Suez (France) Bouygues (France) RWE (Germany) Veolia Environnement (France) MAJOR CHANGES SINCE 2003-04 New Names ACS (Spain) Aqua America (USA) South Staffordshire PLC New Entries Antofagasta (Chile) Aquaplus (Austria) Aquasol (Mexico) Aquatech (Canada) Asia Environmental Holdings (Singapore) Beijing Capital Corporation (China) Benpres Group (Philippines) BHEL (India) Boustead Singapore (Singapore) Cheung Kong Infrastructure (China) Citic Pacific (China) Consorcio Financiero (Chile) Falabella (Chile) OHL (Spain) Jiangxi Hongcheng Waterworks (China) Latin Aguas (Argentina) NWS Holdings (China) Penta Finance (Czech Republic) Pure Cycle (USA) Saudi Arabian Amiantit (Saudi Arabia) Shanghai Industrial Holdings (China) United Group (Australia) Companies Removed Allete (USA) DQE / Aqua Source (USA) Bechtel (USA) Ferrovial (Spain) Union Fenosa (Spain) Anticipated forthcoming changes Acquedotto Ferrari Galliera (Italy) Acquedotto Nicolay (Italy) Bouygues (France) Covanta (USA) ENEL (Italy) ENI (Italy) To be integrated into Amga/ACEA (Italy) To be integrated into Amga/ACEA (Italy) Considering selling SAUR Agreed bid by Danielson Holding Seeking to divest its water activities Seeking to divest its water activities Water activities sold to Aqua America and municipalities Water activities sold to Aqua America Sold its water activities. mainly to United Utilities Sold its water activities to Aguas de Barcelona Sold Cambridge Water to Cheung Kong Infrastructure Gained one concession in 2003 BOT contracts in Austria BOT contracts gained in 2003 & 2004 Bought SAUR’s Canadian activities IPO in 2003 Entered sector and divisional IPO planned Concessions in the Philippines Gained one O&M contract in 2003 BOT in Indonesia gained in 2004 Acquired two water companies in 2004 Joint ventures in China Gained two Concessions in 2003 Gained three Concessions in 2004 BOT contracts in Spain & Mexico IPO in 2004 Concessions in Argentina Suez’s Chinese joint venture partner Acquired SMVAK in 2004 Water rights activities in 2003 Acquired Aquamundo during 2003-04 Entered water sector in 2003 Acquired operations from RWE Thames in 2004 ACS acquires Dragados Philadelphia Suburban Water’s new national name Demerger from South Staffordshire Group xvi Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .

PART 1: 2004-2005 OVERVIEW 1 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .

It is a relatively small market at present. A number of multi service contracts have been awarded both for an individual site or all of a corporate customer’s facilities. there is considerable scope for a third party either to install an in-house treatment facility or to operate the facility as part of an environmental compliance package. Frost & Sullivan. Market estimates Unlike municipal customers. which showed little growth. The latter is in part due to the weak economy and deteriorating environmental standards. As water utilities are made to operate on a commercial basis they are increasingly looking to charge industrial users for water abstraction.2 0. Industrial and energy generation cooling systems need water of a given purity so as to ensure that systems are not affected by scale and particulate build up.1-1. and [3] Companies needing process water to a stated quality. with the exception of the USA in 2003. as it is not recognised as a distinct market in many countries. the main cost driver for municipal water and wastewater is in getting the liquids to and from the treatment facility along with customer services such as billing and leakage reduction. The US market was initially driven by standards enforced by the US Environmental Protection Agency. In contrast. Advanced industries such as sem iconductors and pharmaceuticals require ultra pure water for a number of applications. Environmental legislation. along with Japan. The market is currently found in three main key areas: [1] OECD member states where it is driven by effluent treatment standards. Ionics & Suez 2 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . in certain countries there has been a tradition that industrial customers are treated somewhat generously when considering the practicalities of the polluters’ pays system. not price driven market. Ultra pure water is regarded as an essential commodity by its users and they are ready to pay a commercial price for its provision. Industrial development requires constantly higher levels of water purity at a time when water resources are being degraded by effluent discharges and over-abstraction of groundwater resources. where the treatment facility and the client are typically in close proximity. The USA and Europe dominate the global market. the balance in spending shifts towards operating these assets and upgrading them as new standards come into force.8 0. although in practice. These needs call for water treatment and filtration systems that are either installed or operated by manufacturers on a contract basis. Indicative estimates of the size of the market. In the longer term. driven by public health and environmental concerns are resulting in a wide range of industries in developed and developing economies being forced to treat their effluent discharges to a prescribed degree. [2] Multi nationals applying ‘headquarters’ standards in other countries. Sources: Veolia.PART 1: 2004-2005 OVERVIEW INDUSTRIAL WATER OUTSOURCING Industrial water outsourcing is concerned with the provision of services relating to the delivery of process water for specific industrial applications and the treatment of industrial effluents by specialist players rather than using municipal (incumbent) services or dealing with these matters in-house. It is thus a quality. with water and wastewater accounting for US$80–105 billion of this. tankered to an industrial waste treatment centre (where these exist) or through paying the sewerage utility a suitable fee for effluent to be treated at a sewage treatment works.8-2. and also due to companies needing to reconsider their approaches after bidding too aggressively for contracts in the 1998-2000 period.3-0. energy provision and management and office management. Again. there is a notable consensus across the spectrum of political opinion that industrial customers ought to pay for their services.4-0. waste avoidance and minimisation will create new opportunities for service development. waste management.4 The outsourced market has been growing at 15-20% pa since 2001. 2004: US$ billion North America Europe Rest of the World Global total Industrial Services 115-135 130-155 80-110 425-500 Water & Wastewater 25-30 30-40 15-25 80-105 W & WW Outsourced 1. This market is also part of a larger market for industrial services: waste and wastewater management. This is either carried out at the facility. The global industrial services market is worth in the region of US$425–500 billion per annum. There is also a move towards utility and environmental service outsourcing as an integrated package by companies in the USA and Europe and other countries.4 1. As an industry’s wastewater treatment infrastructure is developed. Industrial water and wastewater costs are driven by the need for extensive treatment to set standards.

Cascal (Biwater / Nuon) CH2M Hill (OMI) Darco Dayen Eco Water EMC (BOC) Enviro-Logic (Pennon) Gelsenwasser Global Utilities Alliance Hyflux Nature Technology Solutions Northumbrian Water OIS (Suez) RWE Salcon Sembcorp STES (Severn Trent) Tyco (Earth Tech) United Group UUIS (UU) Veolia Water (VE) Recent developments The market is developing strongly in both Europe and South East Asia. Malaysia Water & wastewater. although for separate reasons. USA. Dayen has a joint venture for water and o wastewater services to an industrial park in Beijing. OIS won a €120 million 20 year contract for supplying process water to BP's Grangemouth oil refinery. In both cases. This is becoming one of Earth Tech’s fortes. Australia & Venezuela Water. Venezuela and Australia. Chile & Mexico Water & wastewater. In Singapore. Indeed. the need for reliable sources of water of a given quality and price cannot be underestimated. Veolia Water Industrial Outsourcing (VWIO) already has two €900 million contracts in South East Asia. In addition to the Peugeot contract.500m 3 per day facility will serve petrochemical and chemical customers from the f urth quarter of 2004. UK Water & wastewater. USA Water & wastewater. Singapore & China Wastewater. the only area where growth is slowing down is the USA. as it has been supported by €18 million of EBRD finance. USA Water & wastewater. where US Filter recorded revenues of US$318 million from industrial clients in 2002. Already. its revenue grew from €139. with an organic growth of 19. South East Asia Water. Germany Water. Tyco’s Earth Tech has a €50 million project for developing and upgrading effluent treatment services at MOL’s oil and gas facilities in Hungary. The WFD also calls for cost recovery in all water provision from 2010. In Europe. PSA Peugeot Citroen has awarded Veolia a €1 billion 10 year contract for outsourcing of industrial services for its eastern European car manufacturing activities. Meanwhile.0 million. the idea is to provide services for clients as they develop their activities. quasi global Water & wastewater. the EU’s Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (‘IPPC’) Directive. USA Water. quasi global 3 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Singapore Water & wastewater. companies have been developing activities in China. Australia Effluent treatment.PART 1: 2004-2005 OVERVIEW Companies active in the sector Twenty companies have been identified to date. a provider of multi utility services to some 30 industrial clients in Singapore has a 55% stake in an effluent treatment facility serving the Nanjing Chemical Industrial Park in Jiangsu Province. In January 2004. This contract is of particular interest. UK All services. China Wastewater. USA Water & wastewater. along with the EU accession process spurring activity amongst companies operating in the ten accession states. Wastewater. Their revenues in 2003 ranged from €1 million (Nature Tech) to approximately €500 million (Veolia Environnement and Suez Ondeo). Gibraltar & Norway Water & wastewater. 2004 has seen one of the largest such outsourcing contract awards. In both the EU and South East Asia. Ondeo’s Ondeo Industrial Services (OIS) gained 90 contracts worth €500 million in total revenues during 2002.1%. Thailand Water & wastewater.8 million to €168. as it already operates similar contracts in the USA. Hungary. its first full year of operation and during 2003. Sembcorp Utilities. The 12. UK & Australia All services. along with the Water Framework (WFD) and Urban Wastewater Treatment Directives are forcing demand for custom ‘compliance packages’ from industrial clients. South East Asia Water & wastewater. Meanwhile.

along with the recovery efficiency of the system and getting the cost of financing the capital expenditure down.7 0. Asia and Europe as well as in its traditional territory of the Middle East and North Africa. Costs depend on what you put in The purer the feed water.58 – 1. Technologies are now being developed that can bring the cost of desalination down to US$0. but it has limited potential in terms of offering the suitable feed stock close to a demand base.4 1. Processes have become cheaper over time… The table below compares prices for the two most popular processes. desalinated water is mainly used for municipal and high value commercial markets.8 5. Three current projects are at the lower end of this range: Veolia (Ashkelon). For example. Most business consists of plants that use seawater and that will continue to be the case for some time.8 6.6 …and is now a viable water management option Since 2000. Reclaiming municipal wastewater is an increasingly important approach of ‘closing’ the water cycle by minimising water wastage and minimising the environmental impact of sewage. US$0. US$0.07 0. It is traditionally seen as a costly and energy intensive form of obtaining potable water. Because of the costs of production. multiple stage flash distillation (MSF) and reverse osmosis (RO). Desalination capacity – by input water: Sea water Brackish water River water Waste water Pure water Other 58% 23% 8% 5% 5% 1% Macro drivers are compelling Climate change is making increasing demands on scarce water resources and increasing the costs of conventional means of bulk water abstraction. the Spanish Government has scrapped plans for a North-South water diversion project in favour of increasing desalination capacity. the cost of water production fell from US$3.0 RO NA 2. Operating and financing cost by process: US$ per m3 (1995 prices) 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 MSF 8. it has become a viable option in developing tourist resorts in otherwise arid areas and is increasingly being used for industrial water. 4 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . During the 1990s.73 – 1. The emphasis on attaining further savings lies in optimising the energy required to push water through the membrane system.45 per m³. Membrane based desalination is often associated with power projects so as to minimise the costs of pumping saline water through the filtration units.PART 1: 2004-2005 OVERVIEW DESALINATION Desalination is becoming increasingly important in arid parts of North America.0 per cubic metre to US$1.1 1.2 1. Feed water Seawater Municipal wastewater Brackish surface water US$/m 3 0.47-0.6 1.8 2.0 per m 3.0 0.68 Brackish water (groundwater that has saline contamination or water from tidal rivers) is the cheapest resource.29 – 0. larger RO projects are delivering water at a range of US$0.3 1.6 2.46 per m³. US$0. which becomes economically viable due to endemic water shortages in certain areas.80 per m³.9 0. As the cost of desalination falls. in 2004.8 1.17 0.25-0.5-5. Deteriorating ground and river water quality is also a factor in developing economies where major cities are close to sea and brackish water sources and population growth is being spurred by urbanisation.45-0.2-2. and Tampa Bay (Ownership currently under change). treatment and distribution.2 1. Hyflux (Singapore).0 3. the less work needs to be carried out and the cheaper the process is.52 per m³.35 per m³.

6 billion pa in spending is anticipated between 2002 and 2030. US$2. Installed capacity. capacity has jumped ahead Desalination capacity. 60% of installed capacity was thermal. 2001: Europe Middle East Africa Asia Australia North America Central America South America 13.5 In operation 1.8 % 16.1 % 3. In 1990. the Middle East is the leading market. RO accounted for 75% of the 4. but it is potable. It is likely that the proportion of spending on membrane technology will rise as cost differences are appreciated.2 % 0.1 % 11.5 5. Thermal (MSF) Very good (<25 ppm TDS) Proven. by 2001 53% was membrane based.3 % 49.0 2.0 15. In 2002-03. …although thermal process dominate the ME markets In the Middle East.000 ppm TDS) Improving 30-60% Low Electricity Medium Water quality Reliability Water recovery Energy needs Energy source Capex & Opex There are two areas of concern regarding RO: the water can need further polishing for certain applications. and.000 plants with a capacity in excess of 100m 3 per day. with the expectation of approximately 90% of this spending being on thermal and 10% on membrane technology. reliability of membranes has been a problem in the past.000 plants worldwide are in operation at 12.5 8.5 29.0 21.1 % 5. 1970-2003: Million m 3 per day 1970 1980 1990 2000 2003 Contracted 1. This trend is accelerating as new plant is developed globally and even the Gulf states start appreciating the cost advantages of RO. Some 17.5 Many of the facilities built in the 1960s have been scrapped as they have fallen into disrepair or have become economically unviable. Some leading markets Globally.0 2. m m 3/day 6.5 27.PART 1: 2004-2005 OVERVIEW With lower costs. Most of the water is produced by 3.8million m3 per day in new capacity.2 5.0 37. but the track record of membranes is understood to have improved appreciably in the past decade and the current generation of membranes can be expected to last for 5-12 years.8 % The USA’s current capacity is almost all for brackish water desalination. good 10-20% High Oil High Membrane (RO) Good (350-1. reverse osmosis using membrane technology is set to dominate the market.0 14. Future capacity is set to concentrate on sea water desalination.1 Process MSF RO MSF RO MSF/RO Saudi Arabia United States of America United Arab Emirates Spain Kuwait 5 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .500 sites.5 % 0. The table below compares the two technologies. Reverse osmosis is becoming the norm outside the Middle East… Outside the Middle East.5 8.

PART 1: 2004-2005 OVERVIEW Spending takes place in cycles… Spending on desalination is not just linked to demand.8 billion US$4.5 billion pa from 2005-06.000m 3 per day in new capacity by 2015. fuel costs and the willingness of governments and companies to commit themselves to long term projects. especially at the country level. Saudi Arabia Shuqaiq. especially in the Middle East. In the UK. with most growth taking place in the MENA region. IWPPs are now emerging across the USA. A new capacity of 31million m 3 per day is anticipated between 2005 and 2015.0 billion US$1. Some illustrative projects: Location Taweelah B. Saudi Arabia Taweelah RO. Indicative annual spending ranges on desalination plant (US$ million): 1995-99 230 75 450 110 300 30 100 300 1. This is the equivalent to market growth of 7% overall and 15% in the MENA region. Various projections point to the global market growing to US$3. …with a long term increase in demand set to take place Saudi Arabia has spent US$19 billion on 30 plants to date and is planning to spend up to US$40 billion on increasing its capacity over the next 20 years. VE and Government data To date. The size and scope of projects is growing Not only is the market set to grow. Algeria Ashkelon.0– 3. UAE Shouabia. UAE Sohar. Israel Singapore Capacity (000 m3/day) 454 800 800 340 100 200 150 200 274 136 Start Date 2008+ 2007+ 2007+ 2007+ 2007+ 2007 2007 2006 2005 2005 6 Project Type BOOT BOOT BOOT BOOT BOOT BOOT BOOT BOOT BOOT BOOT Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . The Independent Water and Power Project market (IWPP) has emerged over the past decade as a way of financing new power and water capacity. it depends on the availability of finance. Europe and Asia. Oman Algiers. who plan on installing 650. with a total of US$95 billion in new spending: Systems Capex Opex Opex Annual spending US$3.595 2000-03 420 70 500 70 550 50 100 210 1. but the size of facilities is increasing as is the tendency to involve private sector funding and operation.970 Southern Europe Northern Europe Asia North Africa Gulf States Rest of ME USA & Caribbean Saudi Arabia Global total Source: Compiled from various Frost & Sullivan surveys. The Indian Government is committed to a series of BOT projects for Southern India and in China this is seen as a method of alleviating shortages in water (both for quality and quantity) on the eastern seaboard. including in countries that otherwise have no other private sector involvement in their water services. according to VE. Current spending is in the region of US$2 billion pa. 2004 Other new markets include China and India. Saudi Arabia Jubail. Saudi Arabia Ras al-Zour. The size of the leading projects means that the actual spending on new plant is variable from year to year. Southern Water (First Aqua) and Thames Water (RWE) are examining proposals for brackish water facilities.7 billion New capacity New capacity Current capacity Source: Media Analytics. some US$35 billion has been spent globally on desalination plant. Desalination capacity in the MENA region is expected to increase from 12million m3 per day in 2000 to 30million m3 by 2010 of which 4million m3 was contracted for in 2000 and 10million m 3 is in the award process.

PART 1: 2004-2005 OVERVIEW Location Tampa Bay. such as by Consolidated Water of the USA. 7 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . there are many opportunities: building and operating as part of a IWPP consortium (VE. UAE Capacity (000 m3/day) 95 365 454 325 200 Start Date 2003 2003 2001 2000 1999 Project Type DBOT BOOT BOOT BOOT BOOT For private sector players. for providing specialist engineering and allied services Hyflux of ( Singapore and Ionics of the USA) or for operating dedicated facilities. USA Umm Al Nar. UAE Shuweihat S1. UAE Taweelah A2. UAE Taweelah A1. Suez and Bouygues for example).

eight companies have been identified as gaining contracts during the past year. China’s Citic Pacific NWS Holdings. which acquired Aquamundo and United Group (Australia). Boustead (Singapore) has signed an agreement that is set to lead to the largest concession award in Indonesia since Jakarta in 1997. but with a London Listing). This year’s IPOs were Asia Environmental Holdings (Singapore). and India’s BHEL gained one O&M contract. Nobody had told the tribes -people that they did not exist prior to that moment! Still. The editors and correspondents of ‘Global Water Report’ and ‘Global Water Intelligence’ continue to play a crucial role in this respect. TS Eliot. Pure Cycle is an exception in the water rights market in the USA that it has a firm contract entering into operation this year. By acquiring Cambridge Water in the UK and Australia’s Water Tower. In terms of corporate activity. BOT contracts in Spain & Mexico) and. Beijing Capital Corporation (China. as the concession’s equity and debt structure is currently under fundamental re-appraisal. BOT contracts in Austria). There were two IPOs in 2004. are a financial company which probably regards SMVAK as an investment rather than a core asset. a privately held engineering com pany and Jiangxi Hongcheng Waterworks (China). This year’s ‘discoveries’ are: Aquaplus (Austria. due to the work being carried out this year by those who both understand the business and its local vernacular. Three were in the USA (Allete and DQE/Aqua Source sold their activities to Aqua America and municipalities and Bechtel sold its International Water stakes. concessions in Argentina). bought SAUR’s Canadian activities). Latin Aguas (Argentina. 8 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . as a more rounded picture continues to emerge. This in turn reflects the fact that these later ATOs are often appreciably smaller than the likes of ACEA and Hera. Little Gidding from the Four Quartets (Faber & Faber). Indeed. compared with 14 between 2000 and 2003. Ferrovial sold its activities to Aguas de Barcelona and Union Fenosa sold Cambridge Water to Cheung Kong Infrastructure. Citic has taken a majority stake in one concession. OHL (Spain. China’s Shanghai Industrial Holdings entered the water sector in late 2003 and is seeking to become a substantial player in its home market. CKI is in effect reversing the flow of capital in water investment. a municipal water company. Aquatech (Canada. In contrast. Penta Finance (Czech Republic). Another discovery takes place through a change in perception. Consorcio Financiero and Falabella) and Consorcio Financiero acquiring AWG’s interests in Chile. JV with Suez for Manila). mainly to United Utilities) and two were from Spain. This in part reflects a shift away from floating ATOs in Italy at their privatisation to combining them with ATOs that have previously been floated. Finally. amongst others. Saudi Arabian Amiantit (Saudi Arabia). …something new… Some of the new entries this year are ‘new’ in the sense that they have come to the author’s attention for the first time. This is somewhat akin to tribes being ‘discovered’ by explorers. In Chile. a notable shift in the privatisation process took place with all five concession awards going to three local companies (Antofagasta (Chilean based. In contrast. Local partners in joint ventures are seen to be taking increasingly active roles. The four major acquisitions noted this year are fascinating for their diversity. Cheung Kong Infrastructure (China) builds upon YTL of Malaysia’s example by investing in water assets in developed economies. JV partners for Veolia and Suez respectively have seen their relationships placed firmly on an equal footing. concessions in China and an IPO planned). which acquired operations in Australia and South East Asia from RWE Thames are both seeking to use these activities as a base for future expansion. who acquired SMVAK in 2004. In contrast.PART 1: 2004 . Something old… The five companies that left the sector over the past year are all variations of examples where the power and water multi utility approach did not deliver the expected returns. ENTERING AND LEAVING THE SECTOR We shall not cease from exploration And the end of all our exploring Will be to arrive where we started And know the place for the first time. it is good to be able to include these companies.2005 OVERVIEW COMPANIES ACTIVE IN. For Benpres Group (Philippines. The privately held Aquasol gained two BOT in Mexico. this has been the most remarkable year since the Yearbook began. this entry may be a brief one. It is likely that more companies will be ‘found’ in China and Russia in the coming year.

This process may take some time. either through entering the public domain or from entering the sector either through privatisation or contracts gains. with a number of specialists entering the market. Also at some time in the future. it remains likely that both Acquedotto Ferrari Galliera and Acquedotto Nicolay will be fully integrated into Amga and ACEA’s activities serving the city of Genova. Indeed. the recent theme of increasing complexity and local specialisation looks set to be maintained for some time. which acquired EMC in 2003 to gain operational experience. 9 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . It is most likely that there will be more entries for smaller companies in India and Brazil. who acquired Germany’s Wedeco and Praxair.PART 1: 2004 . following the example of BOC. while GE (USA) acquired Osmonics to get engineering experience.2005 OVERVIEW …something borrowed… Who lives on borrowed time? Not for the first time is Bouygues announcing that it seeks to sell SAUR. That will mark the effective end of the multi-utility approach in the USA. Ionics (USA) is seeking to expand from engineering to services. or even to partially float the company. It looks unlikely that there will be fewer players active in the market in a year’s time. ITT. Covanta will finally complete the ending of its water and power business model. This may be a complex process as Bouygues may wish to optimise the company’s assets before selling them off. …and something blue As noted above. Interest in industrial water services outsourcing continues to grow. along with Calgon (Waterlink) and Pentair (Everpur) are also considering opportunities. where new data was coming to light as this edition went to press. new entrants are constantly emerging. Both ENEL and ENI are seeking to divest their water activities in Italy and internationally within the next year and after its agreed bid by Danielson Holding.

000) Water & WW (581.000) Water (NA) Water (300. That change appears to have steadied.000) Water (500. so there has been a change in the operating climate.000) Water (850.80million people) this was due to a law passed in 2002 outlawing fixed rates o return for foreign owned contracts.000) Wastewater (100.20million people have been identified during 2004.000) Wastewater (480.73million in 2003.000) WW BOT (1.000) Water (300.000) Water & WW (380. with contracts being handed back and a cooler corporate attitude towards seeking contracts in developing economies. Germany Germany Germany India India Indonesia Italy Location Cranbourne ESMAG ESSAR ESSAT Hohhot Tianjin Qingdao Weinan Zun Yi Beijing Dao Bing Ma'anshan Nanchang Nanjing Nantong Linqu & Weifang Linyi Sanya Tanggu Xiamen E Moravia Cottbus Dresden Kiel Chennai Visakhapatnam Yogyakarta Agea Company Tyco Falabella Falabella Falabella VE Suez/NWI Suez/NWI VE VE VE Dayen Interchina Holdings Jiangxi Hongcheng SIH AEH Salcon Salcon Suez/NWI Suez/NWI SIH VE Suez Gelsenwasser MVV BHEL Larsen & Toubro Boustead Hera Contract (population) Wastewater (50.000) Water (450.5million) Water (850.500.500.000) Bulk water BOT (1.000) Water & WW (147.000) Water (1million) Water & WW (160. Year 2003 2003 2003 2003 2004 2004 2004 2004 Country Canada USA USA Vietnam China China Colombia Puerto Rico Location Halifax Atlanta Florida Thu Duc Xian Shanghai Bogota Puerto Rico Contract WW O&M (380.000) Water (750. 2004 has been a case of more of the same.000) Wastewater (300.000) Bulk water BOT (1.000) Water (2.45million) Wastewater (1. Suez handed back the Puerto Rico contract (which has f previously been handed back by VE) after being unable to renegotiate its terms and the Bogota wastewater treatment works contract was pulled in circumstances that still remain unclear. This is due to the remarkable strength of the market in China keeping many companies fully occupied. January 2003 to October 2004 Major contract losses covering 8.000) Water O&M (2.000) 10 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .000) ATO. locally based companies.000) Wastewater (600. Major PSP contract gains.000) Water BOT (3. Major PSP contract losses. albeit in a more phlegmatic climate.000) Company(s) Suez Ondeo Suez Ondeo Allete Suez Ondeo Berlinwasser RWE Thames Suez Ondeo Suez Ondeo Prior to 2003.900.000) Water asset owning (350. contract losses were less than 2million.000) Water & WW (409. January to October 2004 Country Australia Chile Chile Chile China China China China China China China China China China China China China China China China Czech Rep.000) Bulk water BOT (1.5million) Water (400.2005 OVERVIEW NUMBER OF PEOPLE SERVED BY COUNTRY AND COMPAN Y Developments during 2003-04 After the dramatic setbacks noted in 2003. Water (100.000) Water & WW (147.000.PART 1: 2004 .000.000) Water (1. against 3.000) Wastewater (NA) Wastewater (125.000) Water (500.300. along with the emergence of new. In the case of China (two contracts covering 2. although the future of the Suez/Benpres concession for Manila remains uncertain.

000) Wastewater (1million) Water (150. all contracts that have subsequently been ended whether at the end of the contract life or prematurely.000) ATO.000) Water & WW (25.4million. Service extension and population growth: Water and sewerage services are extended to people who have previously relied on water vending or informal water supplies. • • Negative drivers: • Condemnations and re-nationalisations: The USA can be a surprisingly hostile place for the private sector.6million people have been identified. as a consequence of various externalities have been excluded from the ongoing picture. In addition.000) Water (1million) During the year to date.000) Wastewater (200. Municipalities can ‘condemn’ a regulated operator and seek to buy its assets from the owner as recently seen at Pennichuck. For the sake of simplicity. There are three quantifiable sets of data available: [1] Contract information at the time of the award [2] Published data on service extension and demand growth subsequent to the contract award [3] Data about the current status of markets with a long-established private sector presence In addition. Tuscany ATO. Tortona Kumdam Mexacali Pachuca San Luis Potosi Thames -Coromandel Moscow Company Amga Amga VE Tyco Aquasol Suez VE Suez Contract (population) ATO. Water & WW (350. populations grow within contract areas as a result of urban migration and indigenous population growth. population growth figures have been kept to a minimum. contracts serving a total of more than 18.PART 1: 2004 . These figures are extremely difficult to quantify where urbanisation involves people moving into informal settlements as the likelihood of any connection to a formal water service (let alone sanitation) is minimal unless a specific initiative (such as at Las Paz in Bolivia by Suez) has been developed by a concession holder. bringing them to the public’s attention. As a result. the acquisition of municipal service companies by private companies (ESSAR by Chile’s Falabella) or stock market flotations (the IPO of Jiangxi Hongcheng in China in 2004).5. 11 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . How (and why) numbers served change Positive drivers: • Privatisations and IPOs: Contract awards (the Hohhot concession award in China to VE in 2004). This is particularly notable in the USA. privately held companies (Asia Environmental Holdings in Singapore in 2004) can be floated. as these have become a material factor over the past two years. HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE SERVED BY THE PRIVAT E SECTOR? To gain a reasonable picture of the status of private sector participation in water and wastewater services requires a suitable set of operational assum ptions that are robust enough to deal with the vagaries of the data that is currently available.000 people and having a very low profile. This means that there has been a net gain in contract terms of at least 10.2005 OVERVIEW Country Italy Italy Korea Mexico Mexico Mexico New Zealand Russia Location Livorno. Aguas Argentinas is an example of both. Acquisitions: The acquisition of small.000) Wastewater (400. Aqua America and RWE’s AWW both pursue an aggressive tuck-in acquisition strategy. The major contract exits since 2003 have been included in a separate table. New developments within a concession area are connected to the networks. (43. where there are many privately held companies serving 150 . privately held companies by larger entities. Water & WW. In France concessions were nationalised as the political climate changed between 1918 and 1939 and Suez has lost two significant contracts since 2001. This can be regarded as a contract’s organic growth.

39 1.39 20. Spain (with two exceptions) and the USA due to the contract award details in these countries not being typically available and individually of a small and non-specific nature.84 326. Population decrease: This will affect a number of concessions and companies in Europe in the longer term. Companies can also be sold to municipalities when a parent company changes direction as seen with Allete’s Florida water activities. Market flotations since 2000 Company EYDAP Veolia Environnement Nanhai Development Acegas EYATH Nature Tech ASM Brescia Darco Water Tech Ranhill Utilities PBA Holdings Northumbrian Water Hera Meta Modena Salcon Jiangxi Hongcheng Asia Env Holdings Country Greece France China Italy Greece UK Italy Singapore Malaysia Malaysia UK Italy Italy Singapore China Singapore Vendor Government Vivendi Municipality Municipality Government Private Municipality Private Ranhill Bhd Government Suez Municipality Municipality Private Municipality Private IPO 2000 2000 2000 2001 2001 2002 2002 2002 2002 2002 2003 2003 2003 2003 2004 2004 Current status Further sale considered in 2003 Veolia now non-consolidated N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Post IPO refinancing in 2004 Acquiring other ATOs N/A N/A N/A N/A 12 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .54 40. The average contract award in France for example covers 2. • [1] People served by contract awards.41 6.27 4.000 people.66 Number 1 1 13 2 2 3 15 14 18 19 26 25 49 58 54 29 42 44 410 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total (million people) Not all water privatisations are fated to be subsumed within other companies.60 19.88 0.10 1. 1987-2004 These databases exclude France.98 21.47 16.00 52.90 7.30 0. Water 6.13 28.16 7. In general.24 Net 6. market listings to date have come about through government or municipal privatisations.73 51.25 39.80 9.64 376.49 18.07 18.43 15.PART 1: 2004 .10 10.36 Wastewater 1.47 4.13 51.03 22.2005 OVERVIEW • Divestment: Concessions being handed back as a company changes strategy (Suez in Puerto Rico). even though this sometimes appears to be the fate of the British water sector.86 3.74 13.48 26.47 2.36 23.20 19.45 17.60 0.70 20.48 2.94 197.29 8.50 0.06 22.54 40.16 41.50 1.35 7.78 41.72 20.25 1.15 31. or judges that a contract has become inoperable (International Water in Bolivia).90 0.90 0.87 13.83 52.88 0.

Germany (Gelsenwasser and some local companies holding approximately 8% of the market through long term contracts) and.6 To count as private sector participation. England & Wales (there were 29 Statutory Water Companies serving 14million people in 1987). the increase is due to identifying other contracts and companies. contracts have to be of at least five years in duration and either a formally established O&M contract. France (the private sector share has advanced from 72% in 1987 to 79% by 2004). EMOS (water extension to marginal areas).0 In 2003. these contracts also cover at least 10.4million. Contracts for industrial water services or for developing industrial zones are excluded. [3] The long established markets There were six markets with an extensive private sector presence it the start of 1987: the USA (mainly regulated activities. The projects currently under development. a revised estimate of the coverage in the ‘traditional’ markets and more extensive information about contract service extension. Aguas Argentinas (water and sewerage extension).2 6.PART 1: 2004 . Number of contracts awarded Water 0 1 3 1 1 Wastewater 0 0 0 1 0 Combined 1 0 10 0 1 Contracts 1 1 13 2 2 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 13 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Malaysia and so on. 2004 looks set to be the weakest year since 1998 or 1966 and in net terms. Apart from the net gain of 10. rather than the non-regulated O&M outsourcing contracts that have become a feature of the past decade). Country England & Wales USA USA Germany Italy Spain France Total Comments SWCs in operation in 1987 Non-regulated activities Regulated activities PSP since 1887 Mainly pre ATO contracts PSP since 1867 PSP since 1853 Million people 13.6 545.5 5.5 19.0 151.000 people. In this context.7 8. it currently looks like being the weakest year since 1995. Trends identified In terms of contracts awarded.8 35. a concessional contract or an outright asset privatisation. from Nepal to Northern Ireland and indeed.0 49. national private water service companies are defined as legal entities that have signed a formal contract with the relevant municipal or state authorities for the provision of water or wastewater services. Spain (the private sector share has advanced from 35% in 1987 to 46% by 2004). Italy (11% of the market served by the private sector and semi-private companies in 1987). from Project Alpha to Project Omega suggest that this level of activity will at least be maintained in the next two to three years and may well increase.2005 OVERVIEW [2] Published data on service extension subsequent to the contract award Examples of service extension identified include Metro Manila (water service extension by both concessions). Aquafin (extending sewerage in the Flanders region of Belgium) and various contracts in Brazil.6 22. we identified 485million people being served by PSP. compared with the current year estimate of 545million. A global figure Contract type Contract awards Contract service extension Population growth & urbanisation Incumbent markets Global total Million people 376.2 151. Yet the figures do not point to a collapse in the privatisation process. In many cases the service extension seen to date is a partial picture. In order to distinguish between such contracts and formal or quasi legal contracts drawn up with small local entities.5 8.

60 1990-94 1.14 1995-99 17.48 1. underlining the development of local.35 50.27 12.34 0.60 0. small scale contract awards.35 1.81 136. Distribution of contract awards – by region Water Europe Americas Asia ME & Africa Total 1985-99 39. Millions of people served per contract Water 6.05 0.53 1.33 1.90 0.44 1.93 0.42 0.23 1. more localised contracts and fewer of the major privatisations such as Buenos Aries.00 0.49 7.61 0.42 0.30 0.55 0.96 0. Wastewater only contracts continue to be scarcer. The average contract size has eased since 2000.67 0.41 34.62 109.11 2.69 Wastewater Europe Americas Asia ME & Africa Total 1985-99 55.03 0.48 1.00 13.86 0.75 0.60 0.40 1.69 72.54 9.50 56.90 0.57 20. especially for water.PART 1: 2004 .82 Net 6.37 0.98 5.94 0.94 0.2005 OVERVIEW 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total Water 1 8 5 7 12 12 12 15 26 17 11 18 20 170 Wastewater 1 3 3 1 2 4 5 6 16 18 10 8 10 88 Combined 1 4 6 10 5 10 8 28 16 19 8 16 9 152 Contracts 3 15 14 18 19 26 25 49 58 54 29 42 39 410 The volume of contracts remains high.28 33.05 2000-04 24.72 0.90 0.54 3.98 0.16 0.09 3.11 30.58 0. reflecting their lower perceived priority.45 0.11 2.19 53.00 5.01 Wastewater 1.30 0.95 1.85 0.25 48.78 0. reflecting a trend towards smaller.00 1.66 13.96 57.57 1995-99 18.50 0.45 0.73 0.73 9.50 0.33 0.42 0.77 22.81 0.92 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Average Wastewater contracts tend to be smaller.00 1.54 3.56 1.53 1990-94 3. due to a number of major bulk water contracts as well as sewerage services being less extensive than water provision services at the start of a typical privatisation.04 2.94 2000-04 23.64 0.26 0.80 0.64 48.67 0.70 14.05 14 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Manila and Jakarta.34 0.98 0.53 0.68 0.

60 0.00 1.69 Wastewater Local – Developed Local – Developing Expatriate Chinese Multinational Total 1985-99 55.00 11.05 It appears that a shift away from contracts being awarded to multinational companies to local and expatriate companies is taking place.14 1995-99 4. it also demonstrates that local capacity building is starting to have an effect.57 1995-99 4.00 36.86 0.53 1990-94 1. In China. This legislation does not apply to projects funded and operated by domestic companies and companies such as Beijing Capital and Shanghai Industrial Holdings operate contracts on a fixed rate of return basis.00 28.00 4.99 96.50 56.29 26.48 72.30 0.60 1990-94 0. legislation was passed in 2002 outlawing fixed returns on investment for water or wastewater projects by held and operated by international entities.04 5.96 2.00 8.03 0.PART 1: 2004 .66 0. 15 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .63 37.35 62.00 0.14 48.56 17.56 33. the privatisation of the water and sewage companies of England & Wales in 1989 and gradual impact of the Galli Law in Italy from 1999. While contract activity has decreased materially in the Americas since 2000.20 8.22 109. While these changes are in part due to the problems encountered by multinational companies since the mid 1990s. This is not necessarily a good thing as while local or expatriate funding obviates exchange rate risk. Distribution of contract awards – by awardee Water Local – Developed Local – Developing Expatriate Chinese Multinational Total 1985-99 39. it has remained at least steady in Asia due to the expansion of the market in China and the emergence of the market in India and has materially increased in Africa and the Middle East. This shift is even more dramatic when you consider reflects at Brazil’s SABESP (partly privatised in 1996) served 24million people.94 2000-04 12.20 0.08 26.97 18.05 2000-04 16.28 57. it plays a limited role in mobilising new sources of funding needed to attain the Millennium Development Goals as expatriate funding has only been identified being used in China to date.2005 OVERVIEW Europe’s figures are marked by two especial trends.14 136. As a result Berlinwasser and RWE Thames sold back their holdings in two projects back to state held entities. especially regarding political and foreign exchange risk.61 13.88 0.

but it does allow for current political. regulatory and market trends to be translated into realistic market developments. PROSPECTS AND PROGNOSIS The addressable population is the percentage of the population (2003 figures) that the author believes have a better than even chance of being served with privatised water and/or sewerage provision by 2015. Served by private sector in 2004 Water Sewerage Western Europe Austria Belgium Denmark Finland France Germany Greece Ireland Italy Netherlands Norway Portugal Spain Sweden Switzerland United Kingdom 1% 3% 1% 1% 79% 16% 41% 1% 35% 0% 1% 12% 46% 1% 0% 87% 0% 41% 0% 0% 56% 14% 41% 36% 27% 10% 5% 5% 54% 0% 0% 92% Potentially privatised by 2015 Water Sewerage 10% 5% 1% 2% 85% 25% 45% 25% 55% 0% 5% 45% 65% 5% 0% 98% 15% 55% 0% 0% 75% 35% 45% 45% 45% 15% 10% 55% 70% 5% 0% 96% Served by private sector in 2004 Water Sewerage Central & Eastern Europe Albania Armenia Bulgaria Croatia Czech Republic Estonia Hungary Latvia Lithuania Poland Romania Russia Slovakia Slovenia Ukraine 16% 29% 15% 0% 59% 29% 27% 0% 0% 2% 11% 1% 3% 0% 0% 16% 0% 15% 17% 56% 29% 26% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 3% 8% 0% Potentially privatised by 2015 Water Sewerage 25% 30% 50% 20% 90% 35% 35% 25% 20% 10% 25% 10% 30% 25% 5% 30% 30% 65% 30% 90% 35% 45% 25% 0% 15% 20% 10% 30% 25% 5% 16 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . along with forecasts for the potential extent of private sector penetration by 2015. The table below consists of a set of estimates for the current extent of private sector participation in water and sewerage services for the main markets. The year 2015 may appear a long way off.2005 OVERVIEW COUNTRY MARKET DEVELOPMENT.PART 1: 2004 . while allowing for five years of contract award and implementation slippage for political and economic changes.

2005 OVERVIEW Served by private sector in 2004 Water Sewerage Americas Argentina Belize Bolivia Brazil Canada Chile Colombia Cuba Dominican Republic Ecuador Honduras Mexico Panama Peru Trinidad & Tobago Uruguay USA Venezuela 45% 58% 16% 17% 4% 97% 7% 16% 36% 20% 4% 16% 12% 3% 0% 11% 14% 16% 38% 31% 9% 12% 3% 94% 5% 0% 0% 20% 4% 9% 0% 0% 0% 11% 6% 0% Potentially privatised by 2015 Water Sewerage 65% 60% 30% 30% 10% 98% 20% 20% 40% 35% 15% 20% 50% 30% 100% 50% 35% 25% 60% 45% 25% 25% 10% 98% 20% 10% 25% 35% 15% 25% 50% 25% 100% 45% 20% 10% Served by private sector in 2004 Water Sewerage Middle East & North Africa Bahrain Egypt Iran Israel & Palestine Jordan Kuwait Lebanon Morocco Oman Qatar Saudi Arabia Tunisia Turkey UAE 0% 1% 0% 10% 38% 0% 0% 19% 0% 0% 0% 0% 2% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% 0% 79% 0% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 1% 14% Potentially privatised by 2015 Water Sewerage 100% 8% 0% 15% 45% 100% 30% 35% 25% 30% 25% 15% 10% 15% 100% 10% 0% 10% 25% 100% 35% 30% 50% 45% 30% 10% 10% 35% 17 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .PART 1: 2004 .

For example. 5% of the world’s population was served to some extent by the private sector. even on a 25 or a 50 year view. this had increased to 9% of 6. In 1999. By late 2004.2005 OVERVIEW Served by private sector in 2004 Water Sewerage Sub Saharan Africa Burkina Faso Cameroon Central African Rep Chad Congo Côte d’Ivoire Gabon Ghana Guinea Guinea-Bissau Kenya Lesotho Mali Mozambique Namibia Niger Nigeria Senegal South Africa Tanzania Uganda 9% 33% 25% 0% 2% 31% 38% 0% 15% 0% 0% 0% 1% 13% 0% 5% 0% 38% 2% 8% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 18% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7% 0% 0% 0% 1% 0% 0% Potentially privatised by 2015 Water Sewerage 20% 45% 40% 45% 20% 40% 45% 50% 20% 0% 20% 0% 25% 30% 0% 10% 20% 50% 8% 25% 25% 10% 20% 35% 30% 15% 30% 30% 40% 20% 0% 10% 0% 15% 15% 10% 5% 15% 20% 5% 20% 15% Served by private sector in 2004 Water Sewerage South East Asia & Australasia Australia China Hong Kong Indonesia Japan Macao Malaysia New Zealand Philippines Singapore South Korea Taiwan Thailand Vietnam Potentially privatised by 2015 Water Sewerage 14% 4% 74% 3% 0% 100% 58% 1% 10% 17% 0% 0% 2% 0% 6% 2% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 10% 2% 0% 7% 14% 0% 0% 35% 15% 90% 15% 5% 100% 85% 5% 40% 25% 10% 15% 65% 5% 30% 20% 40% 5% 15% 100% 65% 15% 30% 0% 25% 30% 50% 5% Served by private sector in 2004 Water Sewerage South & Central Asia Bangladesh India Kazakhstan Mongolia Nepal Pakistan Sri Lanka 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% Potentially privatised by 2015 Water Sewerage 12% 5% 20% 10% 15% 10% 25% 5% 5% 10% 20% 15% 5% 15% The potential for private sector participation Not all markets are suitable for privatisation. 18 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .PART 1: 2004 .270million people (2003 population data). with the exception of the most liberalised and economically developed markets. only people living in urban areas are likely to benefit from private sector service provision under current circumstances.

19 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .125 2015 53% 18% 10% 3% 5% 16% 29% 36% 35% 16% Our revised forecast for the extent of PSP in 2015 has a fall of 35million from the previous forecast of 1. private sector service provision is already becoming commonplace. characterised by blocked initiatives and mothballed plans. The figures for privatisation to date demonstrate the variable progress that the private sector has made.PART 1: 2004 . India was beyond most boundaries.2005 OVERVIEW Current and forecast extent of private sector participation Million people Western Europe C&E Europe ME & Africa South Asia Central Asia South East Asia Oceania North America Latin America World total 2004 175 18 44 2 0 130 4 62 110 545 45% 5% 4% 0% 0% 6% 10% 19% 21% 9% 205 60 120 45 10 345 10 120 210 1. and only being partially offset by a 10million increase in Western Europe. The Russian Federation was seen as ‘unsuitable before perhaps 2050’ as recently as three years ago. Now a market is emerging. Now not only have a number of contracts been awarded since 2002.160million people (17% of the 2015 population). The forecasts for most other regions with the exception of the Americas are on the cautious side for the time being. In Western Europe. What is notable is the gap between the estimation of the addressable populations in the Americas and the extent of privatisation to date. This is due to the North America forecast falling by 60million. which can be related to the global domination of international markets by a number of companies from this region. What has been consistently evident over the past years is that nothing can be taken for granted when it comes to assessing market developments and prospects. 5million for Central & Eastern Europe and 10million for South Asia. especially in Moscow and St. Petersburg. but also the new Congress Government has made it clear that PSP is to be highlighted as a method for mobilising new resources.

Where companies have minority shareholdings in contracts managed by other water companies. Chile and Saudi Arabia and developing countries cover other economies such as Malaysia and Brazil. 1999/00 70 13 59 1 10 2000/01 81 15 69 1 11 2001/02 82 16 70 1 11 2002/03 84 15 68 1 15 2003/04 102 18 73 5 24 2004/05 117 23 72 12 33 Number of companies Number of countries .OECD countries . Size. there appears to be a shift away from the global market leaders to more diverse and local management and financing solutions. Other players are emerging across Latin America and in the Philippines and even India.Developing When looking at the company entries and contract awards to date. Advanced developing countries are chiefly Singapore. These entries highlight the notable development of activities in the sector by companies based in China.NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL PLAYERS AND STRATEGIES COMPARED Taking a look at the corporate development of the sector through the number of companies identified by the author over the past five editions of the Yearbook is. OECD countries are those of the EU and North America. thus compounding a trend away from European and Western company experience and finance operating globally towards more local applications. these have been ignored. as of necessity. Malaysia and Singapore. an impressionistic exercise. These also exclude companies which only serve industrial water customers or where no reliable customer data is available.Advanced developing . home and abroad The table below needs to be approached with some circumspection. It is nevertheless a useful one as it reflects those companies which are in the public domain. 20 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Company entries by country 1999/00 0 0 1 1 0 1 4 1 3 5 0 0 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 18 20 2000/01 0 0 1 1 0 1 6 1 3 5 1 0 9 3 0 1 0 0 0 8 1 16 24 2001/02 0 1 1 1 0 1 7 1 3 5 2 0 8 2 0 1 0 0 0 8 1 15 25 2002/03 0 1 1 1 0 1 7 0 3 4 2 0 8 6 0 1 0 0 0 8 1 17 23 2003/04 0 1 1 1 0 1 9 0 3 4 2 1 12 10 0 1 2 0 4 8 1 18 23 2004/05 1 2 1 1 1 4 16 1 3 4 2 2 12 10 1 1 3 1 6 7 1 17 20 Argentina Austria Belgium Brazil Canada Chile China Czech Republic France Germany Greece India Italy Malaysia Mexico Netherlands Philippines Saudi Arabia Singapore Spain Thailand United Kingdom USA Synthesis of the results For our purposes. ‘international’ contracts (here defined as being outside the country of the company’s registration) may well involve relatively small stakes. While numbers served in ‘home’ contracts typically refer to contracts where the company has a majority holding of a concession.

000 0 4.000.000 575.800.051.510.000.153.000.000 1.837.000 768.000 600.000 800.000 13.00 950.027.000 4.100.000 1.515.000 1.000 250.Numbers served by companies in their home and international markets Company Argentina Latin Aguas Austria Aquaplus EVN Belgium Aquafin Brazil SABESP Chile Aquaplus Chile Aguas Andinas [1] Antofagasta Consorcio Financiero Flabella China Anhui Guozhen Beijing Capital Beijing Sound Cathay International water Cheung Kong Infrastructure Golden Green Tech Group Guangdong Investment Interchina Holdings Jiangxi Hongcheng Waterworks Nanhai Development Ltd Shanghai Industrial Holdings Suzhou New District Czech Republic Penta Finance France Bouygues Suez VE Germany Gelsenwasser MVV RWE Greece Athens Water Thessaloniki Water India BHEL IVRCL Italy ACEA Acegas ASCM Como ASM Brescia ADF A Nicolay A Potabili Amga Enel ENI Hera Meta Modena Malaysia Intan Utilities K P Selangor PBA Holdings PPB Puncak Niaga Home 1.000 200.000 1.000 5.000 1.137.000 100.000 5.000 100.000.750.940.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 348.000 0 Total 1.000 467.000 3.000 600.000 324.525.340.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 45.000 % Home 100% 5% 24% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 18% 14% 24% 95% 100% 39% 100% 100% 100% 100% 50% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 97% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 83% 0% 100% Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .800.525.027.000 4.000 1.000.000 5.000 1.000 5.000 82.000 1.000 5.000.000 1.367.100.340.367.912.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 27.730.000 500.000.000 5.000.000 0 42.000 768.000 1.770.000 348.000 0 0 0 0 0 250.000.800.100.000 5.000 1.000 324.000 454.750.000 6.000 17.000 1.137.000 950.000 850.000 0 0 0 0 6.100.000 513.000.000 1.000 255.000 69.000 6.100.050.000 850.000 321.153.000 1.000 1.000 4.000 110.050.850.396.605.000 6.000 26.000 1.000 5.000 1.912.000 25.000 2.000 21 International 0 190.000 5.000 25.100.000 250.000 100.800.000 110.000 513.550.745.510.000 0 800.510.260.300.000 1.441.000 1.000 3.494.000 350.000 500.000 10.000 117.000 1.961.000 33.000 4.000 2.000 5.000 5.000 100.000 250.000 454.790.000 4.000 26.000 255.790.000 250.550.000 1.000 100.000 108.000 1.000.000 1.837.000 1.000 350.000 100.000 100.300.455.000 575.940.

000 560.000.000 5.300.000 37.000 14.000 153.000 258.000 1.043.805.250.000.000 750.963.233.000 265.399.000 2.000 385.500. VE has concentrated on divesting its engineering activities rather than closing down its international activities. [2] Included in Suez as well.000 15.000 37.144.000 2.000 46.000 6.000 302.000 5.397.000 27.467.000 647.000 27.099.000 6.500.000 650.525.000 563.000 760.066.000 647.000 0 0 0 700.000 990.000 1.500.000 10.043.000 153.190.000 1. [4] Included in VE as well.300.049.000 4.Company Ranhill Utilities Salcon Taliworks YTL Holdings Philippines Ayala Benguet Benpres Saudi Arabia Amiantit Singapore Asia Environment Darco Hyflux Spain Agbar [2] Agval [3] FCC [4] Ferrovial Gruppo ACS Iberdrola OHL Tecasva UK AWG Biwater Bristol Water South Downs Dee Valley Glas Cymru East Surrey Kelda Group Northumbrian Water Pennon Group First Aqua Severn Trent South East Water South Staffordshire Swan Group United Utilities USA Alliance American States Aqua America Artesian BIW California WS CH2M Hill Connecticut Consolidated Water Covanta Middlesex Pennichuck SJW Southwest Tyco York [1] Included in Agbar and Suez as well.792.000 229.000 4.516.000 1.463.470.066.700.280.000 6.216.000 1.000 1.100.000 5.000 0 8.400.040.216.750.000 0 0 6.000 0 46.000 0 Total 2.000 8.000 450.000 1.000 138.000 3.000 % Home 89% 29% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100% 0% 0% 0% 100% 43% 93% 62% 100% 51% 0% 100% 0% 50% 19% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 89% 63% 100% 100% 58% 100% 100% 100% 47% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 95% 100% 0% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 23% 100% RWE has stated that it is considering the future of all of its activities outside Europe and the Americas.000 1.000 500.000 500.227.170.000 0 0 0 0 0 4. [3] Included in Bouygues as well.000 0 2.000 3.000 138.000 11.000 500.000 10.000 400.525.000 5.000 9.000 400.599.227.300.000 2.000 258.000 1.000 2.000 302.233. This may 22 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .000 246.000 400.000 2.000 500.000 563.470.323.000 0 400.000 1.000 700.400.000 0 5.000 0 0 0 0 0 677.000 385.000 560.128.397.000 4.007.000 1.000 1. Apart from some contracts in the USA and Puerto Rico in 2003 and the sale of its stake in FCC in 2004.000 1.000 15.000 0 3.000 0 2.000 0 20.500.000 760.000 2.000 2.300.000 1.000 150.000 450.000 35.700.000 650.790.000 3.000 4.000 International 250.225.000 229.899.000 1.200.250.000 990.516.000 0 0 0 0 0 0 250.000 0 0 0 11.000 2.000 0 0 0 1.582.000 0 750.000 265. Home 2.000 2.000 22.329.000 1.000 8.300.000 4.296.000 4.225.000 2.000.170.750.

United Utilities. Earth Tech. there is a dramatic fall-off in the number of people served outside home markets. Suez. AWG is slowly selling off its international activities. 23 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . VE and RWE have succeeded in developing a significant global presence both in terms of numbers served and countries addressed. Severn Trent and Tecasva. Agbar. The other major international companies are Bouygues. Despite the changes and challenges of the past few years. ACEA is not seeking further concessions in Latin America.reflect the frustration the company felt when it divested its minority stakes in UK companies in 2001-02 to prepare for the acquisition of Southern Water only to have the entire process thwarted by political interference. In each case. Beyond these companies. Cascal (Biwater/Nuon). this has been built upon a major presence in their home market. but is holding on to those it has already gained.

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS 24 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .

Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. Aquamundo also operates the drinking water and wastewater disposal services in the town of Kavaja. Amiantit of Saudi Arabia) gained a five year €4m contract to take over management of water supply and wastewater disposal in the Albanian towns of Durres. Lezhe and Saranda.0km 3 8. In 2003. a number of moves are developing for a concession serving Tirana and other PSP projects. A total of €46 million was invested in Albania that year. Groundwater Annual availability (2002) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1989) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) 6. as well as wastewater treatment plants and drinking water supply for Saranda. they gained a €10. all sewage effluents are untreated and leakage from sewerage systems is known to be affecting drinking water supplies. In 2001.300 US$3. Berlinwasser has a 30 year water and wastewater concession for the town of Elbasan. VE and RWE) and Aquamundo (40%. Fier. an Italian consortium formed to take advantage of bilateral agreements between Italy and Albania.860 53% 26% 21% 3.000 inhabitants.ALBANIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS ALBANIA After some years of consulting work and management alliances. Untreated effluents are also used for irrigation. At present. Berlinwasser International (60%. 2015 Privatisation plans In 1999. affecting the soil quality. serving 650.000 people. the World Bank approved a US$15 million Municipal Water and Wastewater Project to support the government's efforts to implement institutional and financial reforms in the water supply and sanitation sector.4 43% 52% 0% Amga and ACEA both hold 32% of Tirana Acque. and leading to health problems.2k3 2. with 77.248m 3 0.4km 3 29% 0% 71% US$1. the EU’s PHARE programme supported the design and construction of a wastewater treatment plant for the cities of Vlora and Pogradec. serving 450. Territory Adjustment and Tourism and the Committee of Environmental Protection and the National Water Committee. 40% of households do not have basic sanitation while less than 50% of urban or rural water supplies are considered to be satisfactory. Additional resources will be required to rehabilitate water supply systems in areas other than Tirana and Durres. and to improve sewerage systems throughout the country.6km 3 48% 0% 52% 25 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .1 3.646m 3 1. Legislation transferring responsibility for water supplies to communes and municipalities and allowing PSP was enacted in July 2000. Their long-term aim is to be involved in the privatisation of the Greater Tirana Water Supply and Sewerage Enterprise. Freshwater Annual availability (2000) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1994) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) 23. Water quality related epidemics such as cholera and poliomyelitis have occurred in recent years.000 people. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Water and sewerage infrastructure Water and sewerage services are managed by the Ministry of Public Works. Management contracts In 2003.5 million four year management contract for the city.

from management contracts towards full concessions as the regulatory climate evolves to be able to manage these contracts. and in the longer term to develop water treatment systems for rural communities. and entered service in 2000. Finance is currently provided by the state.2million PE were constructed. The Algerian Energy Company is seeking bids for a DBFO contract to build the 200. and Cobra-Abensur-Codesa with Sadyt.1million people living in the 75 secondary towns and cities by 2025 will cost a further US$2 billion for water and US$4 billion for sewerage and sewage treatment. Three groups have been shortlisted: Ionics (USA) and Mitsui (Japan). Currently. interest is focussing on the Arzew independent water and power project. Algeria's Ministry of Water Resources is to restructure water rates for industrial consumers from 2004. 26 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .7million. Urban water distribution losses were estimated at 40% in 2003. The facility will be operated with AEC and Algerienne des Eaux.000m 3 per day Hamma desalination plant in an Algiers suburb. Extending sewage treatment to the rest of the population living in the 13 major cities will cost an estimated US$450 million by 2020. In 2003. 83% of the urban population receives piped water and the country has 49 wastewater treatment works. Privatisation prospects The Algerian government’s Agence Nationale de l’Eau Potable et Industrielle et de l’Assainissement is seeking to open the water industry to private sector finance and management. The government hopes that higher oil prices will allow the government to implement postponed infrastructure projects including the construction of dams.ALGERIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS ALGERIA Service expansion plans All water and sewerage services . where provided on an organised basis. African Development Bank and the EIB providing project funding. By reforming the sector it hopes to attract both domestic and foreign capital to finance improved water supply. reservoirs and water distribution systems. Barna Invst (Spain) and Pridesa (RWE). 70% of the cost of water was subsidized by the government. the first IPP in the country. Algerienne des Eaux (ADE) is owed DZD 25 billion (€293 million) because of irregular payments by customers and illegal connections. Extending water and sewerage services to the 1. with a total PE of 3. Suez had talks with the government about developing a series of BOT concession propos als and VE put forward proposals for two management and systems contracts for Algiers and Constantine. are provided by the state.000 water meters and that it’s longterm plans included handing over management to private companies. but it appears unlikely that these are being actively pursued by the companies. The Government seeks to introduce privatisation in stages. along with World Bank. wastewater collection. ADE announced in July 2003 that it would install 190. A further ten facilities with a capacity of 1.

the Basic Drinking Water and Sanitation Programme (PASPAyS) is concentrating on public health concerns. some 16.0km 3 19.063 projects to extend water and sewage services to 6. handing over the concession to the operational company. The Programme for Drinking Water and Sanitation (Préstamo BID 857-OC/AR) covers communities with a population of 500-15. involving 1.2million of the people living in urban areas of Argentina (33million people) are being served by the private sector. while 58% are without improved sanitation. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1985) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1975) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) 87% 53% 5% 694. the continuing economic crisis has resulted in severe losses for international contracts.212m 3 28.8million people). Argentina plans to spend US$325 million on expanding water and sewage services. 22% of Argentina’s population lack drinking water services. Rehabilitación y Ampliación de Servicios de Agua Potable y Alcantarillado Claocal (PRONAPAC). 27 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . While in performance terms.000.7km 3 11% 9% 72% In February 2002. Azurix cancelled its contract with the Buenos Aires province.543m 3 4.0km 3 3. For smaller communities.ARGENTINA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS ARGENTINA The 1993 privatisation of Buenos Aires’ water and sewerage services marked the real beginning of the current global wave of international privatisations in terms of publicity and value. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations.0 43.797 US$10.4 90% 92% 35% Universal coverage remains a longer term aim Currently. the various concession contracts have held their own. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Private sector participation Privatisation has been placed at the heart of the government’s plans for universal water and sewerage coverage in urban areas. This does not include the Tucuman cancelled concession (0. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Regulation and management Communities with a population of more than 15. 2015 US$2. This programme seeks to provide universal water provision and sewerage services on a financially self-supporting basis through the encouragement of private sector participation and is being supported by the World Bank. During 2004 and 2005.880 5% 28% 67% 38. In 2004. South Water of Argentina bought out the Azurix stakes in the SAUR led consortia.8million people in rural and urban areas.000 are covered by the Programa Nacional de Optimización. It seeks to develop a suitable level of service to be provided by the municipalities.6km 3 16% 9% 75% 128.

800. water & sewerage Aguas de Salta Corrientes Concession.700.000 28 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 1.000 1. It is not the only Suez led concession so affected: Aguas Provinciales de Santa Fe is being obliged to draw up future investment targets having fallen behind on service expansion work since 2000. It supplies water to 1.707.000 880. operating three concessions in northern Argentina.000 1.000 45.707.000 675.000 2.000 1.000 1.000 Aguas Cordobesa Suez (France)/Agbar (Spain) 1.016.000 473.000 Conurbano AGB (Spain)/Sideco (Argentina) 1.000 1.000 792.613.0000 Aguas de Salta Latin Aguas (Argentina) 1.000 148.3million people as a settlement to allow for tariff increases.000 1.000 1.7 million to expand its water network to cover 98% of the city’s1.300.000 7.000 45.125. water & sewerage Aguas de Corrientes Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company Population served (country) Water Sewerage Urbaser Dragados (Spain) 2.8million people and wastewater services to 1. then cancelled Aguas de Santa Fe and Cordobesas and the Peso Crisis The Aguas Argentinas concession is discussed in the Suez entry. Latin Aguas has become a major regional player.032.000 5.000 1.700.000 Status Aguas Argentinas privatised in 1993 Water and sewerage concession in 1997 Privatisation under consideration Water provision BOT awarded in 1998 Water provision BOT awarded.200.000 A Laprida & Balacarse Camuzzi (Italy) 45.000 OS de Mendoza SAUR (France) 1.000 Proactiva FCC (Spain)/VE (France) 200.100. Argentina and to spend US$1.300. Aguas Cordobesas is paying 20million pesos (US$6.100.279.800.ARGENTINA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Another local company.000 A P de Santa Fe Suez (France)/Agbar (Spain) 1.000 Total 2.100.165.000 Aguas Argentarias Suez (France)/Agbar (Spain) 7.000 0 AgVal Aguas de Valencia (Spain) 150.000 Aguas de Corrientes Latin Aguas (Argentina) 148.000 150.000 200.000 1.000 1. MAJOR CITIES City Buenos Aires Cordoba Rosario Mendoza Tucumán 2000 12.000 1.2million in 15 cities.185.000 1.000 29.000 934. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Missiones 30 year water and sewerage concession Urbaser Aguas del GBA 30 year water and sewerage concession Urbaser consortium La Planta 30 year water and sewerage concession South Water Bahia Blanca 30 year water and sewerage concession South Water Conurbano 30 year water and sewerage concession Aguas de Gran Bilbao Mendoza 95 year water provision BOT Obras Sanitarias de Mendoza Escobar Water provision concession Aguas de Valencia Cordoba 30 year water and sewerage concession Suez/Agbar Santa Fe 30 year water and sewerage concession Suez/Agbar Buenos Aries 30 year water and sewerage concession Aguas Argentarias Catamarca 30 year water concession Proactiva Medio Ambiente Laprida Concession.300.000 1.368.523. water & sewerage Aguas de Balacarse Rioia Concession.000 190.700.200.000 0 Aguas de La Rioia Latin Aguas (Argentina) 190.024. water & sewerage Aguas de Laprida Balacarse Concession. water & sewerage Aguas de La Rioia Salta Concession.000 2015 13.016.7 million) in concession fees owed to the government of Cordoba.800. including Santa Fe and Rosario.

About 76% of the population were served by public sewer systems in 1991. Individual projects are prepared to turn the systems into gravitation supply. Due to the current energy crisis the operation of the pumps is essentially inadequate. the city suffers from water shortages as the absence of charges has led to widespread wastage. Average spending on water services by the government and industry between 1996 and 2001 has been estimated by the OECD at €5 million per annum. ACEA and Lotti and Associati e WRc gained an operations and management contract for Yerevan. The contract will serve 0. 29 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Private sector entities In December 1999. The 46 district branches of the Armenia Water and Sewerage Company (AWSC) will be transformed into legally independent entities that can jointly or alone contract out with the private sector under different forms of private sector participation. In 2001 the German Government contributed €29.1 million and the World Bank US$20 million. A US$88 million (€101 million) World Bank-supported Municipal Water and Wastewater Project was launched in 2003.ARMENIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS ARMENIA Municipalities are responsible for the water supply and wastewater treatment of communities. due to improper operation of the plants.0018) per m 3 of water and effectively no revenue has been collected from consumers for decades. and operation and maintenance costs. Public waterworks served some 75% of the population in 1991. distribution losses are currently at 60-70%. thus currently 20% of all wastewater is subject to secondary treatment. Almost 50% is subject to secondary treatment. The Armenian Ministry for Nature and Environment Protection aims to implement a 10 year water resources programme that seeks to attract US$200 million (€229 million) during the first five years to modernise the water supply network. especially in poorer areas.500L of drinking water per capita is supplied every year. While Yerevan’s water company Ervodocanal CJSC supplied twice the required volume of water (250L per capita per day) in 2001. covered by the users in compliance with the Water Code. A revised Water Code on water sector reform was adopted in October 2003. The wastewater treatment in urban areas consists mainly of biological treatment.5million pa. The municipal wastewater and water supply investment costs are financed mainly by municipalities themselves. The World Bank made a US$30 million loan to Yerevan in 1998 for improving water services. Industry generated close to 800million m3 of wastewater in 1994. Water supply systems are operated mainly by pumps. including capital costs. together with the implementation of economic incentives to conserve water. In addition. but. but the supply facilities are well below a basic level. An average of 2. wastewaters are mainly treated at the primary level.9million people for water management and will generate a turnover of US$4. Ervodocanal charges AMD1 (€0. allied with power shortages. There are no water meters and water consumption is not properly monitored.

treated industrial discharges and household laundry and bathroom wastewater. The idea would be to create a self-sufficient water management scheme for Australia that would be developed through optimising water resources and reuse while minimising losses.5 21. In the Perth region. groundwater constitutes about two-thirds of total water use and about 30% of the water supplied by the Western Australian Water Corporation. User-pays pricing and demand management is delivering benefits in improving the efficiency of water use in urban communities. In addition. verges.AUSTRALIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS AUSTRALIA While water resources are scarce and the integrity of the water cycle is under threat in many areas. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. water use in Darwin is about 700. and 15% of supplies come from groundwater resources. Australia is also notable for the innovative manner in which the Adelaide privatisation has been used so as to create a regional hub for further private sector contract awards. or 3. 2015 US$20. ovals and other horticultural uses. The water grid would have annual running costs of around A$6 billion. for cooling water. the least amount of water in rivers and the smallest area of permanent wetlands in the world. The Great Artesian Basin is of critical importance over a large area of eastern Australia. There is a clear link between the concentration of phosphorus in these waters and the amount of chlorophyll (or algae) present. Australia’s storage capacity in major reservoirs totals some 81. Water use Total water use of Australia's major cities remained static between 1991 and 1998 despite a 12% increase in the total number of properties supplied. Australia is wasting 92% of its city runoff water and 86% of its effluent water. the country has the most variable rainfall and stream flow in the world. 20% are fully utilised.000L pa for flats without gardens. chlorophyll levels are regarded as excessive.7 times the developed resource. the 10 largest reservoirs contain 90% of that State’s storage volume.000GL.7 92% 95% 55% 30 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Lost water resources are valued at around A$100 million each in some local supply catchments.260 3% 25% 72% 19. treated sewage effluent. together with leakage. Between 1998 and 2002. with 30–55% spent mostly watering lawns and gardens. due to A$300 million (US$163 million) investment around the country.000L pa for Sydney to 700. Unaccounted for water in A ustralian urban water networks is relatively low at 16% of total deliveries. because of the variable rainfall. along with increasing urbanisation and population growth. In much of inland Australia. If the effects of the drought in 1998 were accounted for. Australia’s 10 largest reservoirs hold about 50% of national capacity. heavy urban water usage remains a problem.000L pa for Darwin. The Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) believes that storm water. In 75% of lakes and reservoirs. As for renewable resources. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Water resources Australia has the lowest percentage of rainfall as run-off. the re-use of effluent has doubled to 14%. In New South Wales. Savings of A$1-5 for every 10 kilolitres of water recycled are achievable. The bulk of water storage is concentrated in a few very large reservoirs. Australia has the highest per capita water storage of all countries . An A$300 billion national water grid linking the wet northern regions of Australia with the dry south was unveiled by private sector groups in 2004. Water is mainly used outdoors. Australia's National Dryland Salinity Program estimates that over 20% of surface water resources in South Australia are too saline for human consumption.000Lpa for detached houses but 323. along with a number of industrial processes. the overall water usage would have declined. The country is characterised by a dependence on groundwater resources and the over-development of its main river basins. the lowest amount of run-off. groundwater is often the only practical water supply for the pastoral and mining industries and their associated communities. Other costs attributed to salinity are A$130 million per year in lost agricultural production and A$100 million pa in damage to infrastructure. with inland waterways characterised by high turbidity (sediment loading) and salinity. and for toilet flushing.8 people ranges from 263. could be used for irrigation of city parks. Unaccounted for water includes unmetered supplies such as street flushing and fire fighting. For example.822 US$28. Water usage in an average household of 2.

State and territory governments have prime responsibility for water resource management and implementation of the reforms. The A$1. water entitlements and trading.7 billion. which seeks to achieve a nationally consistent approach to water quality management. the Senate environmental committee announced the recommendation of the creation of a national policy. as is management of stormwater and wastewater resources. This would set targets for regulating and improving supplies. prepare management guidelines and coordinate monitoring and funding arrangements.64 per m3 (US$0. Most water agencies are adopting a full ‘user pays’ system. the wholesale company for the city of Melbourne is currently to stay in state hands. water resources are managed by three separate entities. while allowing flexibility to respond to differing regional circumstances. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1985) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) 343. set efficiency standards. Good progress has been made in implementing the reforms in the short time since they were agreed.596m 3 15.0km 3 18. since it seeks to avoid too much contracting out. Environmental costs are based on a set of national principles on water for ecosystems and measures to promote integrated catchment management approaches. The State of Queensland has restricted privatisation to one contract (Noosa) to date and Brisbane Water remains a council entity. Issues relating to groundwater management are also being examined through a national framework. water rights can also be bought or reserved to protect the environment. including one from Sydney Water. State governments have undertaken activities to promote water trading and initiated action to progress interstate water trading.1km 3 65% 2% 33% 100% 450 98% 31 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . the State is seeking to privatise its water services in the medium term. materially below the level charged in Japan. the UK and most of northern Europe. covering both rural and urban areas and include measures in relation to water pricing. In New South Wales. Melbourne Water. Suitable pricing levels need to be set to encourage conservation. Perth is expected to need additional sources of potable water by 2005. since 1993. Irrigation accounts for 70% of diverted river waters . United Water’s (UW) A$1. with much of the remainder used for domestic consumption. whereby all water consumed must be paid for. South Australia is seeking a BOOT approach. in the interest of promoting national outcomes. Currently. with a wide range of approaches and attitudes . In Victoria. environmental requirements. Western Australia is developing a partnership basis. Major water and sewerage projects currently under consideration number 12 and have a combined capital expenditure of A$2. Canberra is expected to privatise its water provision services in the medium term.AUSTRALIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Management A national strategic framework for water reform was agreed through the Council of Australian Governments in February 1994. The National River Health Program (NRHP) is developing the first national biological monitoring system for Australia's rivers. Water property rights systems are being addressed by the state governments under a framework of national principles. Privatisation is being carried out on a state by state basis. for the assessment of river health and related management action and State of the Environment reporting. and various bids have been received. Urban Data Served by piped water Water usage (L/day) Access to sewerage Privatisation plans According to the Australian Council for Infras tructure Development in 2003. Brisbane and Melbourne by 2015 and Canberra by about 2017. In a system of transferable entitlements. more than US$1. Sydney Water has been corporatised and bulk water provision is carried out by the private sector (see city study below). The Federal Government has a complementary role in the reform process in providing leadership and facilitating implementation.93). the average price for domestic water is A$1. The reforms were implemented over the period to 2001. Transferable water entitlements are being developed so that they can be traded like any other commodity. given that UW’s contract calls for a 20% fall in operating costs. This created a structured programme of reform measures to achieve more efficient and sustainable water resource use. While Australia is the world’s driest continent. This state is seen as the leader in market development terms. Water quality is being addressed through the National Water Quality Management Strategy (NWQMS). The Labor Party seeks to demonstrate that assets are returned to public ownership after a given time. so that the municipalities hold on to their intellectual knowledge. and research. In 2003.200 million sewerage scheme is open to tender. charging for water at close to its true supply cost. institutional reform. In this context.100 million of public-private partnership contracts have been signed in the water industry. public consultation and education.500 million 15 year BOOT for Adelaide is non-contentious. while the 2003 Constitution (Water Authorities Bill) and the Water Legislation Bill are currently being debated to see if the private sector ought to be excluded from asset ownership.

Sydney’s Waterplan 21.000 350.000 United Water RWE (Germany)/VE (France) 1.467. or 188 Ml/day.000 Brisbane 1.000 Perth 1. About 7. especially in the Murray-Darling River Basin in Victoria.000 Adelaide 1. The entity has suffered from years of project delays.064. Sydney Water was corporatised and renamed State Water.000 1. RWE (Germany) 110.000 1.329.000 1.7% as of in February 2004.035.000.7 billion (€966 million) between 2004 and 2014.8 megalitres of water each day. citing inadequate demand and funding cutbacks. United Group acquired the Maffra contract from RWE in 2004 and seeks to develop its BOT activities.000 3. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Noosa Sewerage BOT Australian Water Services Sydney Water treatment BOT Australian Water Services Brisbane Sewage treatment DBO AWG Sydney Water treatment BOT North West Transfield Melbourne Water treatment BOT North West Transfield Adelaide Rural water treatment BOO International Water Noosa Water provision BOT CGE Australia Adelaide Water and sewerage concession United Water Ballarat Water treatment BOOT Thames Water Ballarat Sewage treatment BOT Black & Veatch Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage AWS Northumbrian/Suez (France) 1.000 1.027.000km of secondary pipes linking mains to households.000 0 Water trading in the Murray River Basin Water trading has been used to encourage the optimal use of water for agricultural purposes in Australia.000 0 International Water United Utilities (UK) 150. saving an estimated 38.907. Australia's first multi utility entity.000 35. It will have an independent regulator and has been ordered to attain cost savings of A$1. with about 4. Actew retains ownership of A ustralia Capital Territory's (ACT's) water and sewerage assets.200. Groundwater Annual withdrawal (1983) Domestic (1983) Industrial (1983) Agriculture (1983) MAJOR CITIES City 2000 Sydney 3. Veolia.000km repaired each year. the latter is used to meet seasonal shortfalls.232.200. Around 200 leaks a day spring from the 21.000 0 CGE Australia VE (France) 35. RWE and UU a number of local players have been identified. the former giving the bidder the right to use the water in perpetuity.000 Melbourne 3. with the JV being responsible for service provision.173. private bulk water provision Water BOT. along with pipe inspections costing a further A$36 million (€21.000 150.000 32 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . The pipeline was to have taken effluent from upgraded treatment plants in the satellite cities of Liverpool and Glenfield. the government had aimed to recycle 83 million L.605. the development blueprint for achieving sustainable water consumption by 2021 has been scaled back due to the abandoning of proposals for industrial water recycling. a publicly held utility and the private Australian Gaslight Company have formed a JV Actew AGL. Actew.000km of mains are inspected annually.000 Status Corporatised.605.000 35.000 110.0km 3 0% 23% 77% 2015 4.16 million) pa. especially related to management problems.000 0 NW Transfield United Utilities (UK) 350.000 2.000 Thames Water Intl. but this target is now expected to be lowered. Permanent and spot rights are traded on an exchange.200.622. By 2010. but no privatisation Privatisation not under consideration Privatisation not under consideration Privatised Sydney Water becomes State Water In July 2004. By June 2005. this saving is expected to rise to 60 megalitres.AUSTRALIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Companies noted Along with Suez. Total 1.9 million). Sydney Water is increasing spending on its pipe network by 35% to A $38 million (€23. while the overall rate of leakage was 10.000 2.

A Suitable Case for Private Treatment? Viewpoint 80. but the price paid is higher. In wet years with full dams. price is affected by the availability of water rights on the market.com. World Bank Group. Sydney. due to the nature of permanent water transfer and is much less affected by the seasonal allocations within authorities. Sydney’s Water . (2000). These water licence values have risen from A$180 per Ml in 1994 to more than A$2.AUSTRALIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS The Spot Allocations market. CSIRO/Kangaroo Press. But in dry years. Likewise. Victoria 2000-03 A$per MI Lower Murray Mid Murray Murrumbidgee 2000 Low High 24 36 20 33 13 40 2001 Low 5 5 5 High 41 35 43 2002 Low High 30 181 30 340 30 172 2003 Low High 110 225 92 220 90 190 Source: Historic weekly prices quoted on waterexchange. Running Down: Water in a Changing Land. April 1999. which also varies from year to year.au Permanent water trade by volume is considerably less in volume than temporary trade. Sources: R Chapman & S Cuthbertson (1996. 33 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . revised 1999). governments can reduce allocations. Prices are related to seasonal supply and demand. White M. irrigators gain a 100% allocation and utilise all the water covered by the licence.000 per Ml.

0% 0.356 US$29.0% 5. It is known that a number of other water entities are keen to be allowed to develop their activities. while 7% had tertiary treatment.1% 0.0% 60.0% 1990 7. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Water and sewerage services Officially. The cost for the maintenance.2% 0. The proportion of the population connected to sewerage services increased from 38% in 1980 to 72% in 1987. The NUP is currently undergoing a revision and assessment programme prior to its formal implementation. 60% secondary treatment and 5% primary treatment.0% 2001 99.0% 14. along with a comprehensive water resources management plan. 28% of the population had no sewage treatment. The Austrian Waters Act of 1959 is regarded as a sound piece of law. Most industrial plant has secondary treatment for effluents.1 67% 67% 26% 2001 6% 28% 53% 12% 1% 0% 0% 100% 95% c99% 34 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . especially in order to address opportunities in central and eastern Europe. Austria met its 2010 sewerage objectives in 2001 along with effective compliance with the EU UWWTD in 2002. modernisation and expansion of existing sewage collection and treatment systems.0% 10.AUSTRIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS AUSTRIA EVN has taken a lead in opening up the Austrian market.0% 28. which results in a 95% reduction of loads from these sources.0% US$25.7% 0. but has been let down in the past by the lack of effective implementation. with full coverage. 2015 Inland water quality Class 1988 1 9% 1-2 18% 2 39% 2-3 21% 3 10% 3-4 2% 4+ 1% Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Development of sewage treatment Sewerage and sewage treatment Tertiary Secondary Primary Sewerage only Not connected Compliance work and longer term plans The Austrian Government has been using EU legislation since the early 1990s and spending on sewerage and wastewater treatment infrastructure between 1998 and 2003 was at an average of US$655 million per annum. Vienna Wasser has developed a joint venture towards this end. with a 20 to 25 year period for implementation.0% 27.1 8. The National Environmental Plan (NUP) was launched in 1997.0% 25. 1980 3.220 2% 29% 69% 8. is expected to be €10 billion between 2001 and 2012. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations.0% 35. More than 85% of effluent in terms of its chemical oxygen demand is subject to sewage treatment. The sewerage service coverage has remained at this level. all urban and rural households have access to safe water provision and sewerage services. In 1990.

EVN acquired WTE from Berlinwasser (see RWE company entry). OECD.000 35 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . design and construction of water and wastewater treatment plants in Germany and Central and Eastern Europe. Groundwater Annual availability (2000) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1989) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) Privatisation gently emerges 22. A degree of agglomeration is taking place.000 125.000 285.000 0 Ariwa Aquaplus (Austria) 0 10. while Energie AG has made investments in the Czech republic. Vienna Wasser set up the Aquaplus private sector joint venture for contracts in Austria and eastern Europe. MAJOR CITIES City Vienna 2000 2.000 Source: OECD Environmental Performance Reviews: A ustria.2km 3 31% 60% 9% People served 1.000 460. rather than outright privatisation in the medium term.000 230.000 91. and water is seen as being cheap when compared to German water.000 49. 2003 Total 467. The government’s Water Management Fund is used for the financing of water and sewerage infrastructure.069.540. Wasserwerke Wien has been seen bidding for water and sewerage concessions in central and eastern Europe.000 33.000 2015 2. acquiring some of AWG stakes there. WTE specialises in services for the planning.000 143.000 Comments Corporatisation of Vienna Water In 2003.6km 3 52% 43% 5% 90% of water is directly provided from municipal utilities.000 119. Paris.AUSTRIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Freshwater Annual availability (2000) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1995) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) Municipal entity Wasserwerke Wein Nösiwag Stadtbetriebe Linz Grazer Stadtwerke Salzberger Stadwerke Innsbrucker Kommunalbetriebe Wasserwerke Eisenstadt Stadtwerke Klagenfurt Wasserwerke St Pölten Wasserwerke Bregenz 55.065. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Lower Austria Operation of water services Nösiwag Waidhofen WWTW BOT Ariwa Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Population served Company Parent company (country) Water Sewerage Nösiwag EVN (Austria) 467.0km 3 6.716m 3 0. EVN is seeking to develop WTE into a water and wastewater service provision entity.3km 3 2. and Stewag. the Styrian electricity utility.699m 3 2. is working with Suez on projects and was part of the Maribor consortium in Slovenia. and there are reasonable expectations of private-public partnerships evolving.000 Source: EVN. analysts’ presentation 2001.000 10. In 2003.

000 800.000). no recent progress has been identified.11million m3 of water per day. an Electricity & Water Sector Privatisation Committee was set up.18million m 3 pa through three plants.27million m 3 per day in the winter.45million m 3 per day by 2005. 30% of these to tertiary standard. Agriculture has already been impacted by groundwater degradation. Currently. there were 140. it is hoped to recover 200. Currently the government provides some BD24 million (US$65 million) in subsidies for water that costs 270fils per m 3 to produce and 60fils per m 3 to sell.34million m 3 per day in the summer and 0.000 in 2002.75 101.000 The Government has budgeted US$400 million for water and power contracts in 2002-04.000m 3 of water pa by 2010.32-0. US$37 million is to be spent on 3million gallons per day of new capacity at the Abu Jarjoor reverse osmosis plant. Water usage has been rising at 6% pa since 1986.000 650.62 26.BAHRAIN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS BAHRAIN Groundwater depletion is the current concern The Gulf state of Bahrain had a population of 700. with the recovered water contributing to 4% of water needs. Bahrain had a desalination capacity of 0.70 66. In 2000. The leading cities are Manama (140.000 490. In 2003. Bahrain selected Ernst & Young to lead a group of companies to restructure the water and electricity sectors as part of its utilities privatization programme as part of a 15 year water and power plan. In 1995. it will take 1400 years to recharge the country’s groundwater sources. This is part of the US$300 million phase three of the Hidd water and power project. By expanding tertiary treatment to cover all effluents. 82% of water is taken from groundwater sources.000 customer accounts in 2001. In addition. Year 1970 1980 1990 1994 1998 2005 Demand (mg/d) 12.00 Population 220.00 126.000 340. while Abu Jajour is to be extended to handle 0. with 60% of these waters going to agriculture. Privatisation to take place by 2004? The government has been developing a timetable for the privatisation of water and electricity by 2004. Although groundwater abstraction is being replaced by desalination. compared with a current water demand that peaks at 0. 90% of whom are in urban areas. According to the Ministry of Electricity and Water. Currently US$342 million is being spent on the second phase. or some 20% of the total demand. At the same time. Bahrain has reduced its levels of unaccounted-for-water (UFW) from 35% in 1993 to 10% by 2002.000 people) and Muharraq (74.70 61. including tripling the water production capacity at Hidd to 90million gallons a day.000 560. Recycling of other used water resources has been developed. 36 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . However. Indigenous water sources (all using artesian aquifers) generate 0. Two of these plants (Sitra and Al-Dur) are due to be renovated. 40% of municipal and industrial effluents were treated.

4 181. US$351 US$1. Short term effects include skin problems and gangrene. Some 262. started in 1983. low cost filtration techniques have been developed. Unsafe water and human excreta cause 40 out of the most common 50 diseases in the country. Examination have been carried out on 30.700 25% 24% 51% 143. While much time and money has been spent on surveys. concentrating on installing lavatories with septic tanks that are serviced on a routine basis. New Scientist. about 20% of them using home-made pit-latrines. silt and sand in the alluvial Ganges aquifers . against he drinking water standard for t Bangladesh of 50µg/L and WHO guideline level of 10µg/L. Health problems are exacerbated by the sewage being flushed out into floodwaters during the monsoon period. The arsenic is naturally occurring and leaches into well water from clay. J. It is believed that bacteria are responsible for the release of arsenic into water from the surrounding earth. 2015 Water provision In 1998. This was regarded as a source of national pride until concentrations of arsenic were found in water taken from these wells in 1993. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Crisis Study: Arsenic in drinking water The rural tubewell project of the 1970s and 1980s ensured that 80% of Bangladesh’s rural population had access to water via 4. This still leaves the country with a legacy of ill health and the need to rebuild confidence in its water resources. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Management The National Water Plan. Sanitation remains less developed. A typical example being developed serving 150 people from one well for 20 years costs US$0. Despite this approach and the country’s exposure to monsoons. the WHO declared the incident the greatest poisoning in history. In response. Skin cancers occur at a later stage.000 children under the age of five die of diarrhoea-related diseases every year.BANGLADESH PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS BANGLADESH The current Dhaka Water Supply and Sanitation Project is both one of the most ambitious urban service provision projects in South Asia and one of the first to take into account the need to develop these resources over a period of decades. This has been exacerbated by overabstraction of groundwater and the disturbance of the Holocene sediments that contain the arsenic. Sanitation projects are typically being developed on a local basis. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation by 2001 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. with 19% having arsenic levels above acceptable limits. designed to turn the arsenic into insoluble compounds. 87% of people in Bangladesh were within 150m of a tubewell and 97% of the population had access to safe water for drinking. practical responses have remained piecemeal.5million wells. conferences and research. Arsenic affects people with low protein and low vitamin diets more severely. the arsenic would remain in an insoluble form. along with enlarged livers. the government found that it had failed to address large scale water management issues. In 2000.000 tube wells to date. Without such bacterial activity. The United Nations Children's Fund says that around 25million Bangladeshis are at risk of disability or death from arsenic poisoning. Concentrations of 300 to 4000µg/L have been recorded. leading to a National Water Policy and National Water Management Plan being adopted in 1997. and thus be unable to contaminate the water. An integrated water management policy was developed in 1995. These took into account municipal water supply and sewerage issues for the first time. Sanitary latrines are available at home to 40% of people.15 per person per annum (Beard. In 1997 it was found that arsenic contamination affected 46 out of 64 districts in Bangladesh. 28 th March 1998). concentrated on flood control. rather than via a series of short term projects and targets.4 34% 39% 18% 47% 71% 5% 37 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .

000 Khulna 1. The 2.0km 3 274m 3 3. but only 50. it was found that arsenic poisoning of groundwater is still increasing in Bangladesh.H.467. 9. Conference in Dhaka. 78. Electrical problems mean 40% of the city's 370 wells do not work.000 Sources: International Workshop on the Arsenic Problem and Water Resource Management in Bangladesh. In 1991.0km 3 10. surface water after treatment. By 2002.442. The World Bank water treatment loan of US$80 million has run into difficulties because of currency problems.26bn L.. E. this had fallen to 30% due to population expansion. Some 25 to 35million people are now dependent on arsenic-affected tubewells for drinking water. 14th 15th December 1998. Under the 1998 master plan. rainwater harvesting) and the treatment of arsenic-contaminated water. M. Since 2000.000 Status N/A N/A N/A N/A 38 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .003. while 600km oaf water pipes out of 2.766.651.000 2.40 per m3.000km need to be replaced.000m 3 reaches the plant because the main sewer pipe is broken.O. Bulletin of the World Health Organisation.200 communal taps.35bn L a day and an actual production of 1. Dhaka's population is growing 6% a year. This is to be achieved through developing alternative sources of drinking water (dug-well water. A. due to the World Bank supporting a secondary sewerage expansion project. 27/03/2002. with 10% of effluents being treated. Lingas. ‘Water of strife’. costing US$0.940m 3 11.519. The Guardian. (1093-1103).000 Rajshahi 1. MAJOR CITIES City 2000 Dacca 12.357.035. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic (1979) Industrial (1979) Agriculture (1979) 1. rising to 44% by 1991.000m 3 a day. of which 40% end up in the slums. The Fourth Dhaka Water Supply and Sanitation Project includes a US$3.BANGLADESH PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Work carried out in 2002 suggests that developing the supply of arsenic-free water to the entire population might cost from BDT5 billion to BDT30 billion ( €105-632 million) depending on the option adopted.159 million scheme to improve Dhaka's sewerage network by 2020. 2015 22. Contamination of drinking-water by arsenic in Bangladesh: a public health emergency. with the percentage of safe water supply coverage coming down from 98% in the late 1990s to an estimated 74% by 2004.000 6. John Vidal. 20% were connected to sewerage in 1984. In 2004. deep tubewell water. and Rahman.4km 3 13% 1% 86% City Study: The Dhaka Water and Sewerage Authority Dhaka needs a minimum of 1. Dhaka's effluent treatment capacity is 120.000 Chittagong 3. 59% of the population received piped water from 90.000 2. (2000). Of the city's population.000 household connections and 1. G2. so bilateral loans are being sought. Smith.6bn L of water a day against a theoretical capacity of 1.360. the government has deployed the army to stop the theft of water supplies in the capital.5million people living in slums are not connected to the water system as they are not registered as landowners. Average water consumption is 119l per capita per day.2km 3 12% 2% 86% 34. US$500 million in investments have been identified for the period to 2013.

General Water Treatment Programmes (AWP) are being designed especially for surface water. In Flanders water and sewage is integrated into a series of Five Year Environment Policy Plans (MINA). 56 places above Belgium. The Yser Basin (Flanders) is mainly grade III/IV. Every two years. Additional legislation concerning integrated permits for the release of wastewater and the taxation of wastewater were passed in 1992 and 1996 respectively. In East Flanders. the majority of Flanders and 22% of Walloon) are all grade III/IV except for the River Dyle in Walloon which is grade II. million) Total (2015. The next EU country was Germany. although it is an important source for drinking water abstraction. In consequence. Inland water quality I-Good II-Fair III-Poor IV-Bad 1980 56% 17% 16% 11% 1990 17% 31% 15% 37% 10.3 10. Belgium has the highest concentration of Class IV inland waters in the EU. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Regulation and legislation US$23749 US$27. a State of the Environment Report (MIRA) is produced. a series of levies have been developed for domestic.BELGIUM PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS BELGIUM Since 1991. industrial and agricultural users. and the 1990 decree for the protection and use of groundwater and drinking water. The Brussels region is covered by the 1971 law for the protection of groundwater against pollution. fluorides and phosphates. An Environment Programme is issued each year. Both ground and surface waters are polluted by nitrates. As a result. Aquafin has demonstrated that a semi private entity has a strong role to play in managing a systematic sewerage and sewage treatment compliance programme on a regional basis while ensuring that debt is not passed on to the government. Population Total (2002. The survey examined river water quality as well as drinking water.570 1% 25% 74% Water policy in Walloon is based on the 1967 law on non-navigable water resources. The Escaut Basin (the entire Brussels Region.5 97% 98% 11% The quality of Belgium’s rivers appears to have deteriorated notably between 1980 and 1990. Since 1996. Drinking water is generally considered to be of good quality. Delays over granting contracts for constructing new sewage treatment works for Brussels mean that the EU wastewater treatment deadlines for 2005 will be missed. the 1985 decree for the protection of surface water (modified by the decrees of 1993 and 1996). Nationally. cost recovery for sewerage is about 70%. except the Sambre River. In the Meuse Basin (73% of Walloon) water quality is generally grade II and better. the water table has fallen by up to 100 metres because of the over-abstraction of water resources. the 1983 law concerning water quality objectives and the 1993 regional prescription on environmental permits. the regional government is now charging a BF 25 per m 3 levy for the abstraction of groundwater from private sources. Urban Services % Water % Sewerage % Sewage treated 98% 71% 45% 39 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . The most important aquifers used for drinking water production are to be found in Walloon. half of which is grade III/IV. This reflects the cumulative legacy of the country’s outdated sewage treatment system and a belated acknowledgement as to the challenges the country has to face so as to comply with the UWWTD. The river Meuse is polluted by industrial effluents including chlorides. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Water quality According to a UNESCO survey published in March 2003. although it is only 30% in Brussels. Belgium has the world’s worst water.

In Flanders.2% 22. Development of sewage treatment Sewerage and sewage treatment Tertiary Secondary Primary Sewerage only Not connected Sewerage and sewage treatment in 1994 Sewerage Walloon 60% Flanders 82% Sewerage and sewage treatment in 2001 Sewerage Walloon 60% Flanders 85% 1995 N/A 28.1% 22. water management is 40 8.2% 18. 8 intermunicipal consortiums and 22 municipal or urban organisations.0% 0.4% 17. the limited extent of the sewerage network is currently constraining the effectiveness of the sewage treatment infrastructure.8million for a population of 3.3% 1999 16.4 822 9. The Walloon Region is facing difficulties in reaching its targets set for 2005. Service coverage plans for 2005 Water Walloon 98% Flanders 98% The costs of compliance Regional water budgets 2000 (€million) Region Area Period Brussels Water opex & capex 10 years Flanders Drinking water Annual Flanders Sewerage Annual Walloon Wastewater 2000-04 Sewerage 80% 98% Cost 618 620 248 790 Charges in the Brussels region cover 30% of costs against 70% in Flanders and Wallonia. Freshwater Total (1998. although they sometimes also produce for other regions or buy the water from regional producers. 40-45% of Belgium’s sewage was subject to some degree of treatment. Sewerage is run by Aquafin.3million people. km 3) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Private sector participation With the exception of Aquafin and some local water provision contracts.9% N/A 52.6% 1998 16.0% N/A N/A Treatment 21% 35% Treatment 46% 52% Walloon’s installed water treatment capacity amounts to 1. the stormwater and domestic sewerage systems need to be separated. km 3) Per capita (1998. For Flanders. the main challenge faced by the Flanders Region is maintaining its investment plans in the face of planning delays.5% 0. This figure is expected to be raised to at least 60% by 2000.0% 44. The cost implications are driving the need for private sector involvement for the city’s third sewage treatment plant.BELGIUM PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Developing the sewerage network There were 292 sewage treatment works in 1988. As noted in the company entry for Aquafin (sewerage and sewage services for Flanders). the sector remains in public hands. The distributors are usually responsible for the production of the water. 2. water is operated through the VMW. In the Brussels region.000. of which 13 serve cities with a population in excess of 100. the treatment capacity at the end of 1998 was for 5. This rose to 23% by 1980.2million inhabitants. In the Walloon Region. although in practical terms. Some 4% of the population of Belgium had their sewage treated in 1970.87million of the region’s 5.8million people (54%) were served. It is estimated that as of the end of 1998. m 3) Withdrawals (1980.0 11% 85% 4% Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . According to the government. In the Brussels Region. water is operated through Compagnie Intercommunale Bruxelloise des Eaux (CIBE). Water distribution and sewerage are organised in regional groupings.

km 3) For domestic use (1980) For industry (1980) For agriculture (1980) 0. Bouygues and BSUB (Seeghers. 16 private concessionaires (Régies) and 110 municipal organisations. It is to be operated by Brussels’ CIBE.000 Status Brussels North STW privatised Private Sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Brussels North Sewage treatment BOT Aquiris West Flanders Water management for IWOV Aquinter Flemish Brabant Water management for IWVB Aquinter Flanders Sewerage and sewage treatment for VMW Aquafin Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Aquinter Tractabel (Suez.000 and costing £125 million. Besix. MAJOR CITIES Population 2000 Brussels 1.000 0 Aquiris VE (France) 0 1.000 2015 1.000 Total 300.000 1. with completion officially due by 2006. km 3) Per capita (1998. Revenues of €49.135.0 68% 27% 5% Privatising sewage treatment in Brussels In Brussels.050. the private sector operation of new sewage treatment works is currently being developed by corporatising each new facility before putting the operation out to tender.000 Aquafin Severn Trent (UK) 0 3.135. The facility will cost €290 million and construction started in 2002. France) 300. The O&M contract for the first facility in Brussels was in fact won by the municipal water company and thus remains in the public sector. 22 intermunicipal consortiums. Groundwater Total recharge (1998.6 million pa will be generated over the BOT’s 20 year life.050. UU and Bechtel) and was awarded to VE.000 3. serving a PE of 360.BELGIUM PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS organised through the SWDE.9 84 1.100. Planning and construction of the Brussels South sewage treatment works started in 1992 and entered service in 2000. The BOT for the Brussels North sewage treatment works was bid for by VE.100.000 41 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . m 3) Withdrawals (1980. Suez.

Three of the nine urban districts have sewerage (Belize City.075. 7.000 in 2002.000 7.20 per gallon for the first 1. the typical rate is BZ$0. In San Pedro. There is typically a 20% higher cost for regions where sewerage services are provided.000 0 Total 125. 59% of the urban population had access to sanitation in 1994. Outside these areas. Water in the island of San Pedro is provided through a desalination system provided by Consolidated Water. BWS remains actively involved in these areas in a support capacity. Private Sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Belize Urban water & sewage services.BELIZE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS BELIZE The state held Water and Sewage Authority (WASA) was privatised in 2001. 10% of the shares in Belize Water Services Ltd (BWS) WASA’s successor company were acquired by the Belize Social Security Board.3% by the public and the remaining 83% was acquired by Cascal. Belmopan and San Pedro). In 1995.000 42 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .10. including all urban dwellers. In Belize City the fee is BZ$0. The San Pedro rate is subsidised by the government. BWS is responsible for urban and adjacent areas in Belize. accounting for in excess of 50% of the country's population. 48% living in urban areas. WASA handed over its involvement in rural areas to the ministry of rural development. Belize had a population of 236.000gallons per month. Distribution losses have been cut from 50% by WASA in 1999 to 43% in 2000 with the long term aim of achieving 10-15%. Potable water is formally provided to 90% of the country. privatisation Cascal San Pedro Water provision Consolidated Water Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Cascal Biwater (UK)/Nuon (Netherlands) 125. Metering and billing is carried out on a monthly rate nation-wide.000 70.000 Consolidated Consolidated Water (USA) 7. The Water Law of 1970 gave WASA the right to manage all water services in Belize. water costs BZ$0.

The city has a population of 516.460 18% 18% 64% La Paz Santa Cruz Cochabamba Oruro La Paz Santa Cruz Cochabamba Oruro In December 2002. As Suez has demonstrated. Since 2000. with water rationing taking place. plus US$77 million in capacity building and technical assistance. Bolivia launched a five-year. Aguas del Turani. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. Semapa.3million people (US$265 million). In April 2000. In December 2003. 2015 8. with 32% having indoor taps. Piped water 97% 83% 82% 96% Sanitation 68% 95% 81% 45% Indoors 44% 25% 59% 25% Flush 65% 20% 61% 37% US$886 US$2. pro-active approaches can defuse such concerns. whether dealing with privatisation contracts or water rights relating to a military defeat more than 120 years ago. The aim is to have 95% water service coverage for the city through US$270 million in capital spending.000. It has been alleged that the protests were co-ordinated by "people and organisations having an interest in the parallel water market" operated by water vendors. US$496 million drinking water and sanitation project. which is projected to rise by 2million by 2037. Water and sewerage reaches 57% of the city’s population. US$25 million for its lost investment and the US$25 million concession fee. Water provision on the city level was fairly consistent in 1998. are somewhat volatile. 89% of the urban population had access to piped water. International Water (IWL) in December 1999. In 1998. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in agriculture GDP in industry GDP in services Water and sewerage services In 1988. investment in water infrastructure has been frozen. In January 2000 Aguas del Tunari increased prices by 20% as stipulated by the government. including 42% with flush lavatories. Aguas de Illimani will invest US$30 million in the plan.8 63% 69% 20% Business interests cause Cochabamba to be abandoned A 40 year concession for water and sewerage services for Cochabamba was awarded to the only bidder. IWL’s consortium. 70% had access to sanitation. It is understood that Bechtel is seeking US$50 million.BOLIVIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS BOLIVIA Bolivia’s international relations. aimed to improve water supplies by developing a tunnel to divert water from a new source. but there were appreciable differences in sanitation and sewerage coverage. due to the refusal of the protestors to allow charges for water. Both IWL and the government claimed the protests were financed by the cocaine drugs Mafia. there was a week of rioting that left one dead and 175 injured after violent protests against the privatisation.1million people (US$154 million) and sewer infrastructure to about 2. These highlight how important "emotions" can be when dealing with water issues. IWL withdrew from the project as a result. the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes agreed to arbitrate the dispute. Part of this increase was imposed by the government to recoup previous project costs. IWL is suing the government. aiming to extend drinking water to some 2. Rumours were circulated about ‘real’ price increases of 35-200%. Urban data Served by piped water Access to sewerage 87% 72% 43 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .6 10. the city’s water utility supplied 57% of the city with water and sewerage services.

allied with micro credit for internal plumbing.000 new water and 38.000 1. Bolivia’s Ductec paid US$46 million for the concession to distribute water from the Silala River/Springs. School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS). University of London (Occasional Paper No 37. (2001) ‘Private sector finance for water sector infrastructure: what does Cochabamba tell us about using this instrument?’ Water Issues Study Group. the cost of connecting poor areas has been reduced. Ductec is threatening to build a dam which would divert the water away from Chile unless it is paid. with US$58-68 against US$194-200 for sewerage. when Bolivia lost its Pacific seaboard to Chile.400.000 new sewerage connections via US$68 million in loans to Aguas de Illimani by the IADB.BOLIVIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Law 2066 passed in 2000 after the Cochabamba crisis restricts the scope of the private sector to operate in Bolivia's water and wastewater sector. The law has yet to be implemented and in 2003 the government has sought to encourage a degree of private sector participation through Plan Bolivia. In 2004.062.34million people was awarded to Aguas de Illimani. Suez’s contract in La Paz was specifically designed to pre-empt affordability concerns.g. Similar projects will only take place where at least 60% of the community supports them. The Chilean companies claim that this water is from Chile and refuse to pay the US$4 million pa that Ductec seeks.0km 3 38. By using labour provided by customers. La Paz is to have 70. Over 95% of La Paz and 80% of El Alto are connected to the mains and reached 100% by 2002.625m 3 1.098. While at least 65% of La Paz is connected to sewerage the connection rate is only 25% in El Alto. this is a reverberation of the 1879 War of the Pacific. Connection costs are repaid by the community over five years via an interest free loan. is thus used as a tool in international diplomacy.000 by the start of 2000 and are expected to be nearly 100% by the end of 2000. which also aims to delegate management authority to water entities to encourage more investment and operational efficiency. In essence.4km 3 22% 20% 48% 2000 1.000 to 107. For water the average cost was US$41-47 per connection against US$133-159 for a conventional connection. This has been suspended due to further protests and a degree of antagonism towards foreign companies.400. Chile would be willing to negotiate rates . 2001). Distribution losses are 24% and are to be reduced.460. In 2004.000 Source: Total NA 1. The sewerage connection rate is to rise to 95% by the end of the concession. The consortium is led by Suez (53%). albeit usually for the smaller entities. Low cost approaches in La Paz In 1997 a 30 year water and sewerage concession for La Paz and El Alto. Community involvement (e.000 Comments Water and sewerage privatised N/A Another area of dispute In April 2000. 44 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 850. Connections in El Alto have increased from 72.000 1.676. Water as ever. choice in siting pipes) was paramount. The company has been seeking to charge Chilean companies for using the water downstream where it flows into Chile.000 2015 2.000 Dalton G. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Silala Springs Water rights and provision concession Ductec La Paz and El Alto Water and sewerage concession Aguas de Illimati Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details ) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Ductec Ductec (Chile) NA 0 A de Illimani Suez (France) 1. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (date) Domestic Industrial Agriculture MAJOR CITIES City La Paz Santa Cruz 300. 24 of Bolivia's 165 water operators in 117 municipalities operate as concessions. along with local and Argentinean investors. serving 1. Chile’s president Ricardo Lagos said that if technical and geological studies prove that the source is in Bolivia and thus not an international water. along with gaining community support from the outset.

the bill will require projects to have an environmental license and guarantees on the part of the private sector in the form of bid and performance bonds. 2015 Infrastructure development The table below outlines the regional development of water. which would manage public-private partnership projects. with the discussion on the best management practices with local users. One of the main strategies of the National Sanitation Policy is to improve the level of efficiency of service providers and co-ordination of public and private efforts in order to optimise the upgrading and expansion of service cost without incurring excessive costs. A law on pricing provisions has been adopted in 14 states and in the Federal District.593 US$7. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. In June 2004. In Brazil. This will encourage water basin regions to start charging for river water. More Brazilians had telephone lines. Political and legal delays remain an imponderable factor. At the river basin level. with the aim of full cost recovery through billing. In March 2004.BRAZIL PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS BRAZIL The continued problems of water provision and pollution in m ost of Brazil’s cities and the progress being made by Sao Paulo’s SABESP since it was partially floated have ensured that the flotation process that was stalled in 1998 will be resumed sooner rather than later.3 202. Each of the 26 states and the Federal District manage water under state jurisdiction.0 82% 88% 34% 45 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Companhia Paulista de Parcerias. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Regulation and legislation According to the Ministry of Cities in 2003.823 municipalities (69% of the total). a law (10.881/2004) was passed regulating contracts for river water use between companies and municipal water works and the National Water Agency (ANA). The next privatisation is likely to be Bahia’s EMBASA. The column for treated sewage refers to the percentage of sewage collected that is subject to treatment. In 2000 the Brazilian Government passed a law to establish the Agência Nacional de Águas (ANA). However. and will be linked to the Ministry of the Environment. The Water Law of 1977 established the principle of decentralised and participatory management. refrigerators and television sets in 2002 than access to a proper sewage system. % North N East S East South West Total Water 82% 87% 93% 96% 87% 91% Sewerage 4% 16% 57% 18% 35% 35% Treated 24% 72% 32% 33% 40% 38% US$2. 45m illion Brazilians who live in urban and rural areas do not have access to water supplies. 39 of these at state level and 4 in basins of rivers under Federal jurisdiction. The agency will have financial and administrative autonomy. sewerage and sewage treatment in Brazil in 1991. 43 Basin Committees have been established to date. Brazil needs to invest around US$62 billion in sanitation and water supply programs by 2020 to meet urban service needs. during 2000. If fully enacted. only one of the five state concerns earmarked for sale was actually privatised. a new federal regulatory agency responsible for the implementation of the National Water Resources Policy and for coordinating the National System of Water Resources Management. The Sao Paulo state government is understood to be planning to create a state controlled company. Brazil’s lower house approved a bill aimed at promoting public-private partnerships in water and wastewater. Water basin committees will receive authority to set up water companies or choose a company to manage the water in their area. Around 50% are found in the south east.770 9% 31% 61% 176. a government study showed. there are 27 state water and sewage companies serving 89million people (72% of the urban population) in 3.

In some cases. the latter is provided with assistance from the Ministry of Health via the National Health Foundation. of which 32 have been privatised to date. all of whom serve more than 100. the state development bank.753 2.544 686 583 185 Total Concessions Direct mgt Assisted by MFH There are 27 concession companies (County Water and Sewerage Service companies).6% of urban sewage effluents were treated. Studies in 2000 by the Ministry of Health and BNDS. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) Financing service extension The estimated cost for investments necessary to develop an urban water supply.BRAZIL PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS The National Sanitation Policy seeks to develop universal access to water and sewerage services in urban areas.0km 3 31.350 water and sewerage entities in Brazil.8% of water produced and distributed through the domestic supply network was treated. Brazil will invest BRL1.327 4. According to the Ministry of Cities in 2003. sewerage and sewage treatment service network is R$50 billion (US$20 billion) by 2017.6million people in 332 municipalities. In total.250 people die each year as a result of inadequate basic sanitation. found that 18. 45million Brazilians who live in urban and rural areas do not have access to water supplies. In 1995. Water supply 1970 61% 3% 1980 79% 5% 1997 91% 20% Urban Rural Sewerage Urban – network Urban – septic tanks Rural – network Rural – septic tanks 1970 22% 25% 1% 3% 1980 37% 23% 2% 7% 1995 48% 23% 3% 11% In 1995. extending services to 7. 92.742 billion (US$613 million) in water and sewerage services in 2004.024 625 Sewerage 1. with at least 80% of effluents subject to treatment by the year 2010. refrigerators and television sets in 2002 than access to a proper sewage system. a government study showed.424m 3 54. They can either be granted through concessions to state sewerage companies for 25 to 50 years or by direct management through autonomous departments. Contracting out to the private sector as opposed to commercialisation and the partial flotation of municipal concession holders remains at an early stage. 15.000 people and supply water to 78% of the urban population and sewerage services to 64%. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment 67% 32% 10% Market structure and the private sector Water and sewerage services to urban areas are provided through two contract types.190. there are some 1. More Brazilians had telephone lines. Brazil needs to invest around US$62 billion in sanitation and water supply programs by 2020 to meet urban service needs. 5. with 65% of all infant admissions to hospital as a result of infections related to solid or liquid waste. Water 7.9km 3 21% 18% 61% 46 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .

Plans in three states show how these may evolve: Espirito Santo state has drawn up a US$62 million water and sewerage programme. regular. Copasa.000 5. The resort holds 600.000 people in the holiday season.000 1. Potential plays are listed below: Company CEDAE CESAN COMPESE EMBASA Municipal Campo Grande Cuiaba Itu Novo Hamburgo Vareza Grande State Rio de Janeiro Esprito Santo Pernembuco Bahia Mato Grosso do Sul Mato Grosso Sao Paulo Rio Grande do Sul Mato Grosso Population served 9.692 34. The state water utility. the private sector has a limited role in financing various nationally organised water and sewerage projects. the PSP process needs to ensure that it can continue to support water and sewerage services in the rest of the State. Cosama.274 192. aiming for 10-15million people or 15% of what it regards as the country’s addressable market. 1970-98 Needed.000 1.112 105. As Aguas de Petrolina is profitable.0 5. with a capex of US$181 million. VE is active in the waste management sector. Suez announced that it seeks to invest US$800 million in Brazil from 1999 to 2003. Copasa aims to use a series of small scale private water and WWTW projects from 2005 in line with its aim of 100% water coverage and 95% sewerage coverage by 2006.000 607. Preussag and RWE’s RRE of Germany were originally involved. Japan and Germany have been noted as being involved in smaller projects.979 1. Hochtief. Finally the law prohibits any operation that interferes with the state`s control of Caern.4 Total 17.000 6.000 192. Brazil’s Rio Grande do Norte state has passed a law to govern the state’s water and sanitation policy on the basis that water and sewage services should be universal. increasing coverage from 21% to 60%.BRAZIL PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS US$billion Invested.000 1.347m 3 The World Bank’s IFC is currently examining COMPESE to see if its sewerage services in the city of Petrolina could be privatised. to provide universal statewide sanitation coverage. Sewerage coverage will be increased to 70% by 2014 and to 100% by 2019.6 Sewage 6. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Private sector players As well as the major players.0 Currently. up to 2006. This is expected to change as and when the current round of mooted privatisations gets underway. In 1999. 1999-10 Water 11. and in 1999 RWE formed a JV with Electricidade de Portugal to seek contracts in the country. Earth Tech's Brazilian subsidiary Multiserve gained a 25 year DBO contract for water supply and sewerage to Nova Friburgo in Rio de Janeiro. as part of a BRL2. Aguas de Petrolina has 100% water coverage. of which US$ 30m of which will come from the World Bank. there was a lull in market activity. The law also calls for the creation of a state waterworks fund (Funesan). Water and sewerage for the resort of Dos Lagos was privatised with a 25 year concession being awarded in 1998. with 16-22% of the shares to be offered to the public in Brazil and on the NYSE in 2002.700. with the expansion of the treated water supply system reaching 1.000 people are served. to obtain the necessary financing for the expansion work.5million with sewage services. 170. Copasa serves some 10million of Minas Gerais’ 16.2million residents. but withdrew from the consortium in April 1999. Universal water metering is planned by 2005. 47 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .100.700. AWG is involved in a deep well sewage treatment project. A full privatisation of Sabesp (88% held by Sao Paulo at present) is under development. with 10% metered. ProLagos (PEM Enghenaria and Monteiro Aranha Participacoes of Brazil) will now hold the concession. companies from the USA.800.000.210 36.0 25.874. 80-85% sewerage coverage and 55% of effluents are treated. along with improving sewage treatment and billing rates. the Minas Gerais state water utility has awarded eight consultancy contracts for the water and sewerage sector.0km 3 11.5million residents with drinking water and 4.000 353.500.404 44. Cesan aims to connect 350. The government aims to use the law to increase drinking water coverage to 100% of the population and sewerage to 40% by 2009. After the planned sell off of Rio’s Cedae in 1998.600.0 31. reliable and efficient.000 residents to the sewerage network. The law also states that water and sewage policy must be revised every four years.299 539. serving the City of Manaus in Amazonas was sold to Suez in 2000.883 112.3bn ($782m) investment plan.217 Water connections 1.000 146.

757.359.000 968.000 1. but the political climate has moved since 2000.328.838.000 Interagua Agbar (Spain) 650.000 650.436.300. water and sewerage Multiservice-engenharia Jau 25 year DBFO.000 2.000 1.000 300.346.962.147.270. but politics meant only US$9 million was spent.400.400.750. (2000).000 1.000 300.000 1.000 4. This was the first water privatisation in Brazil.158.000 3.000 600.300.000 650. 97% of the population is satisfied with ADL’s service.506.BRAZIL PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS MAJOR CITIES City Sao Paulo Rio de Janeiro Belo Horizonte Porto Alegre Recife Salvador Fortazela Curitiba Brasilia Belem Campinas Manaus Santos Goiânia Sao Jose de Campos Sao Luis Campo Grande Maceió Teresina Natal 2000 17.562.000 1.000 2.000 3.310. wastewater Multiservice-engenharia Sabesp Sale of 10% of Sao Paulo’s stake in 1994 Sao Paulo Sanepar Sale of 30% of Sanepar by Parana Parana State Manuas Water & sewerage concession Suez Brusque Deep shaft STW BOT Cejen Anglian Campo Grande Water and sewerage concession Interagua Privatisation study: Aguas de Limeira Suez’s Aguas de Limeira was set up in June 1995 as a 30 year concession.328.457.000 256.229.000 11.000 2015 21.000 1.000 1.000 4.000 200.652.000 15.200. 48 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 848.986.000 2.000 972.000 2.000 Sanepar VE (France) 7. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total SABESP San Paolo municipality 19.000 2.000 1. London.895.066.000 Manuas Saneamento Suez (France) 1. there were problems due to the election of an antiprivatisation Mayor in 1997.000 1.000 821. 80% rating it as good to very good.000 217.560.000 Aguas de Limeira Suez (France) 256. Case study: the Brazilian water and sewerage sector. The aim at the outset was for US$45 million of investment by 2000.000 Cejen-Anglian AWG (UK) 0 200. serving 250.000 3.000 people.000 2.000 ProLagos Aguas de Portugal (Portugal) 600.752.658. with a further US$35 million in 2005-10.000 Multiservice-engenharia Earth Tech/Tyco (USA) 180.667.000 4.338.000 1. At the outset.000 Source: Perona.000 1.000 1.900. Financing of Water & Sewerage Projects. US$16 million will be spent in 2001-02 and US$22 million in 2003-04.467. Presentation to IBC.500.224. V.409.000 19.000 1.000 5. After five years.900.000 4.000 1.543.000 886.000 10.000 806.000 3.000 3.395.459.000 2. Progress over the first five years has been material: 1995 80% 45% 20% 250 39% 6300 2000 100% 24% <1% 730 68% <10 (pcm) Water and wastewater Losses 1 year + non payment Connections/ staff Staff satisfaction Water shortage complaints ADL has a turnover of US$10 million.000 7.016. IMB.000 600.000 1.437.000 3.117.000 Status SAPESP partially floated CEDAE flotation postponed N/A N/A N/A EMBASA privatisation under way N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Manuas Saneamento sold to Suez in 2000 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Dos Lagos 25 year water and sewerage concession ProLagos Nova Friburgo 25 year concession.

Under these plans. than due to industrial water treatment projects. The government believes that 100% of the country’s groundwater is contaminated with nitrates and in the most intensive farming areas the level exceeds by at least a factor of two the limit of 50mg/l. Many of the new municipal wastewater treatment plants are currently incomplete because 49 95% 71% 40% Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . while 0.8% of urban sewerage waters were treated. million) Total (2015. periodically receive sub-standard water. The OECD has also noted a gradual improvement in river water quality between 1990 and 1994. 66% of the population was connected to the sewerage network in 1996. The exclusion of Azurix on the grounds that the company did not have enough experience proved to be expedient while UU has inherited an infrastructure in an appreciably poorer state than anticipated. The National Program for Municipal Wastewater Treatment addressed some local shortfalls in sewage treatment between 1994 and 1997. but has been a useful lesson. In regions with mining and heavy engineering industries. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Inland water quality Ia-II Very Good/Fair III-IV Poor/Bad US$1. In 1996. Bacterial contamination has increased in recent years. with a medium term plan to increase this to 90%.BULGARIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS BULGARIA The privatisation of Sofia’s water services was not without controversy.6% drink water with excessively high lead and arsenic levels. Population Total (2002. especially in tourist areas. Of these people. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Legislation and management The Ministry of Environment and Waters is responsible for co-ordinating water resource management and development. UU has in turn demonstrated that a difficult market can be made to work. the government is to develop and implement a permit system for effluent discharges using a phased approach with interim limits and enforceable compliance schedules. manganese and zinc levels. Integrated water resource managem ent is currently being developed through the strategy for unified management of waters and the strategy for development of the use of water resources and water preservation. the drinking water also contains metals and arsenic. the capacity of sewage treatment works was 723. 99. along with the implementation of a water effluent charge. Approximately 55% of the population in these regions (482. The funding of the completion of unfinished sewage treatment plants is being given priority in areas where maximum benefits will occur.4% drink water with high iron. while no tertiary treatment facilities are currently in operation.554million m³. In addition.983 people). resulting in an improvement in their quality. 95% of drinking water supplied comes from localised sources serving one hundred to several thousand consumers.130 15% 23% 62% 8. Urban services % Water % Sewerage % Sewage treated Infrastructure development 98% of the population (in 238 towns and 4.2 69% 74% 16% 1993 35% 65% The period after 1989 has seen a significant reduction of discharges into surface water and ground water bodies. It is understood that most of the sewage treatment capacity is to the primary standard. The Law on Waters was passed in 1998. the cost recovery of services is to be improved through focusing on water metering and collection practices. Approximately 5% of sewage effluents subject to treatment were recycled and 39. exceeding EU and WHO standards in 5% of all samples.944 US$7.0 7.278 villages) are covered by the mains water supply. Co-ordinating bodies are being developed at the river basin level. This improvement is probably due more to the restrictions imposed on industrial effluent discharges and the closing down of certain industrial enterprises.

75 20 . The Ministry plans to construct sewerage systems in cities of more than 30.4 billion ( 1. BGL3.8% 35. Between 1997 and 1998. Water and sewerage infrastructure spending. Otherwise there has been minimal foreign investment in Bulgaria to date. Freshwater Total (1998. Structural funding worth €2. These loans will be allocated to projects that are operated on at least a quasi-private basis.000 1.8 billion).0 2. operation and management contracts.656 27 Major water projects Small water projects Sewage treatment projects Number of STW projects The government’s current estimated costs for the achieving of universal water supply and sanitation coverage are rather broad in scope. the state controlled water companies were restructured into corporatised entities with 49% of their equity transferred from the state to the municipalities. Currently the main objective is to develop methods of financing investment into infrastructure.4% 33. The government has identified the construction of a series of tertiary treatment facilities as one of its main current priorities.9 3% 76% 22% 50 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . governmental allocations (Leva million) (1.3% Bulgaria plans to join the EU in 2007 and needs BGL6.6 billion) to modernize its water supply and sewerage systems to comply with European Union standards. The EU’s ISPA has provided grants worth €238 million for 16 projects with a total value of €330 million.4% 0.0% 33. The remainder would come from grants and loans from the EU ISPA programme and the European Investment Bank (EIB). The government believes that it will take some decades to address the country’s water infrastructure shortfalls. 18.000 2. and JVs.146 13.8 billion (€3.850 5 . the World Bank made a loan of US$57 million to be added to a Bulgarian Government facility worth £21 million for municipal water and sewerage projects.000 Leva = US$1): 1996 340 800 406 30 1997 4.7% 31. km 3) Per capita (1998. Implementation of the improvements will be the task of an executive agency for water supply and sewerage to be established by the Ministry for Regional Development and Public Works. Leva per m 3 70 .9% 30. with the principle that the water bills will be raised so as to make each operation profitable. according to the Ministry for Regional Development and Public Works in 2003.5% 1998 0.Danube Delta Environmental Management Programme) for the Sofia Municipality and a number of other towns for developing initiatives for the financing of non-sovereign projects for water provision and effluent treatment. m 3) Withdrawals (1988. In 1995.0% 0.77 billion) is needed for the rehabilitation of the water supply network and reduction of water losses. while the pace of privatisation has been notably slow.BULGARIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS of the problems in obtaining suitable funding.0% 34. km 3) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Privatisation and investment The EBRD is carrying out a number of projects concerned with its Danube River Basin plan (DDEMP .300 million will be made available between 2007 and 2009 as part of the EU Accession process. The € government hopes to raise at least 40% of the required funds through private investment in the form of concessions.37 billion (€1.505 Water supply Sewerage network Sewage treatment Development of sewage treatment Sewerage and sewage treatment Tertiary Secondary Primary Sewerage only Not connected 1993 0.000 people and to build wastewater treatment plants for BGL3.

BULGARIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Groundwater Total recharge (1998. km 3) Per capita (1998.598 5. with the aim of 30% losses by 2004. Cascal (Biwater/Nuon). m 3) Withdrawals (1988.000 Total 1.187. VE. Water shortages in Sofia led to rationing in 1995. Five companies have pre-qualified: Suez.000 Status Water & sewerage services privatised Privatisation of Sofia’s water services ViK (Vodosnabdjavane I Kalanizatsia) was founded in 1884 and is responsible for Sofia’s water and sewerage services. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Sofia 25 year water and sewerage concession UUI Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage UUI United Utilities (UK) 1. Improved billing and price rises mean that turnover is set to rise from US$30 million in 2002 to US$40 million in 2004. UU. where it is connected to sewage treatment works. Distribution losses in Sofia fell from 64% in 1996 to 52% in 1997. The city’s 1.200.000 people) concessions involve capex of US$74 million and US$51 million respectively. The Varna (470.200. km 3) 13.000 2015 1.700km sewerage system is in a poor condition. 51% of ViK’s equity was sold to International Water and United Utilities in 2000. after a privatisation programme was developed with the EBRD in 1996.000 people) and Shumen (200.187.000 1.000 51 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . VE and RWE (Thames).0 Two 25 year concessions covering 0. The contract involves US$152 million of investment for the first 15 years of the concession’s 25 year life. MAJOR CITIES Population Sofia 2000 1.200. having originally been set to be privatised in 2002. US$60 million having been spent by 2003.4 1. The proportion of bills collected has increased from 75% to 90%. and mainly offering primary treatment.67million people in northern Bulgaria may be awarded in 2004.

0km 3 18. water was rationed in Yaounde because of problems at a treatment plant. This involves €300 million capex on network rehabilitation and extension and the fitting of water meters.000 2.7 18. A similar level of service is found in Douala. Implementing privatisation has been slow. there were 500 cases of cholera and 13 fatalities in Douala due to people drinking from unprotected wells.607. Urban data Served by piped water Access to sewerage Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic Industrial Agriculture 78% 64% 268.000 39% 23% 28% Water provision Currently 30% of the total population is served with piped water.000 2015 2. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services US$575 US$2. SNEC had a €24 million turnover in 1998 and supplies water to over 100 towns and cities including Douala & Yaounde. In 2004. Yaounde has been divided into three sectors. 85% of the population of Yaounde had access to potable water.642. the second city.CAMEROON PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS CAMEROON The urban water provision and sewerage systems in Cameroon have fallen into disrepair. along with 3% having sewerage. In 2001. Suez announced that this concessions was being revoked. As a result.4km 3 46% 19% 35% Privatisation of SNEC…for a while Suez was awarded the 20 year water supply concession for Société National des Eaux de Cameroon (SNEC) in May 2000. each receiving water only three times a week due to a leaking pipeline at a WTW 50km south of Yaounde. 2015 15. MAJOR CITIES City Douala Yaounde 2000 1. Water Resource Minister Yves Mbelle Ndoe said that 50% of the rural population and 40% of the urban population still lack potable water. Water deliveries for domestic usage are running at 200million m 3 per annum. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. In 1999. The concession award to Suez is an example of a private sector company being invited to address a country’s water problems within a single contract.9 51% 60% 27% Services in Yaounde In 1993.281. with the aim of increasing this to 300million m 3 per annum by 2010 and 400million m 3 per annum by 2020. In 2004.000 1. the government is planning to decentralise the daily management of water from SNEC to local governments.000 Comments SNEC privatised 2000-04 SNEC privatised 2000-04 52 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .737m 3 0. which SNEC does not have the capacity to repair.420.

000 53 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .CAMEROON PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Urban areas Water distribution concession SNEC Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage SNEC Suez (France) 5.300.000 0 Total 5.300.

0% 23. The territorial or municipal governments set water fees for water use in communities. given recent criticism of the state of the country’s sewage treatment infrastructure.777 US$29. Sewer rates will have an annual 3% increase over the same time frame. Development of sewage treatment. renovation.3 34. with 85% served by sewerage and some 80% of collected sewage effluents treated to at least the secondary level. no sewerage contracts have b een awarded.0% 25.CANADA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS CANADA Private sector participation is developing in a low key manner. it was found that water leakage in Montreal was 37% against the national average of water system losses of 13%. According to PriceWaterhouseCooper. In May 2001.5 billion will be needed to upgrade the water infrastructure over the next 10 years. This includes the cost of upgrading.0% 1991 N/A 32. the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (1996). typically through the accretion of a number of small contracts.1 81% 84% 38% Sewerage service penetration reached 75% in 1994.0% 18. rising from CAN$0.0% 18.0% 25. while 90% of the Canadian population lives in the South. Other federal legislation includes the Canada Water Act (1970). In 2003. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations.5% of the world’s population. The Federal Water Policy (1987) encourages full-cost pricing of all water use.0% 13.68 per m 3 in 2012. which may be of interest in the medium term.54 per m 3 in 2004 to CAN$0.0% 1986 N/A 27. expansion. To date. the Federation of Canadian Municipalities es timated that over CAN$16. where pollution and escalating demand are increasing pressure on freshwater resources. while accounting for 0. increasing the rate from CAN$0.0% 24. 1981-1996 None Primary Secondary Tertiary 1981 N/A 25. 2015 US$22. contracts are being awarded along linguistic lines. The cost of upgrading water and wastewater systems in the Niagara region was estimated CAN$590 million. with all the French companies actively developing their presence in the country. Water rates are projected to rise by 10% pa until 2009 before settling down to 3% by 2012. the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (1988) and the Navigable Waters Protection Act (1993). and associated operating costs. In 1998. compared with 85% in 1991.40 per m 3 to CAN$0. strengthens licensing and restricts interbasin diversion. with a further CAN$193 million in work needed to the water systems in the area municipalities.0% The target is to provide 100% of the population with potable water and with 100% sanitation coverage.0% 1996 N/A 33. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Regulation Canada has 9% of the world's renewable water resources and 20% of the world’s freshwater when its glaciers are included. updating the system will cost the city CAN$4 billion over 20 years.5% of drinking water receives some form of treatment. The estimated value for the municipal water utility systems is about CAN$110 billion. providing a complete water supply services plus secondary waste treatment in all municipalities is estimated to cost from CAN$50 to CAN$75 billion. the International River Improvements Act (1955). Provincial legislation such as the 1996 Alberta Water Act promotes water conservation. 60% of Canada's freshwater drains North. the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act (1911). For the municipal sector.71 per m 3.0% 14. The Canadian Water and Wastewater Association has estimated CAN$90 billion will be needed for water and wastewater infrastructure over the next 15 years.480 3% 31% 66% 31. Before usage approximately 81. To some extent. 90% of the population had access to potable drinking water. with 93% of the effluents collected by the sewerage network receiving treatment. 54 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .

373m 3 45. In 1994. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1991) Domestic Industrial Agriculture Prospects for the private sector While the private sector is typically regarded as having a minimal role in Canada’s water and sewerage services.CANADA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Urban Data Served by piped water Litres per capita per day Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Water usage 99% 331 98% 82% Between 1991 and 1994.60km 3 12. probably because of the recession and a reduction in economic activity. Ontario’s Liberal government indicated that private-sector participation may be considered in the wake of rising capital spending needs and some fatal service shortcomings. Municipal water use.8million people. The proposed Safe Drinking Water Act will require mandatory licensing of all water testing laboratories and owners of municipal water systems and tighten standards for drinking water treatment and distribution. Canadian households paying for water by volume used 263L per person per day.3% in per-capita terms and fell overall despite a 2% increase in municipal population receiving water services. A proposed Sustainable Water and Sewage Systems Act will require municipalities to recover the full cost of water and sewer services from consumers.849km 3 94. a number of national and regional plans have been carried out. mainly operating at the O&M level. daily municipal water use fell by 3. This decrease is a result of declines in commercial and industrial uses. which used 430L per person per day. It was evident that the municipality has run down its water testing and network maintenance operations to cut costs. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic Industrial Agriculture 369. Aquatech has been in operation since 1981 and has 50 water and wastewater contracts covering 0. On a per person basis. The percentage of Canada’s municipal population with water meters increased from 52. The company believes that it controls 60% of the private sector market share in Canada. In the wake of the Walkerton tragedy. a decrease of just under 1%. in which polluted water killed seven people in Ontario in 2000.5% 2. over the same period. by sector (1994) Domestic Industrial Commercial Distribution losses 52% 17% 18% 13% Total daily residential water use increased slightly and continued to account for more than half of all municipal water use in 1994.3% 14.3% between 1991 and 1994.2% 42. daily residential water use fell from 334L per person in 1991 to 331L per person in 1994.4% to 54.241m 3 1km 3 43. 39% less water than households paying a flat rate. There are three smaller operations in Canada. In 2004. the reality is that of a steadily increasing presence.10km 3 11% 80% 9% 55 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .

480.101. based on the International Boundary Waters Treaty Act that was passed in 1911.000 1.000 Aquatech Aquatech WMS (Canada) 88. The IJC recommended an immediate moratorium on bulk water removal from the Great Lakes. implementing the Canada-U.000 2. preventing a national approach towards these proposals. Indeed. the mechanisms to protect such a resource may need to be developed retrospectively. In retrospect.000 944.000 2. The nature of water and its transmission imposes limits on the devolution of water regulation within a water basin.000 Status N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Resource study: Bulk water transport from the Great Lakes? During 1997-98.049. a number of Provinces were able to take unilateral action to prevent the shipment of bulk water from their areas of jurisdiction. a number of unsolicited proposals sought to develop schemes for the shipping of fresh water from the Great Lakes to Asian markets where the cost of water provision would make the shipping fees viable. political sensitivities meant that water legislation had been heavily devolved to the Provinces.000 768.000 3. Until a resource is regarded as being threatened. such as part of the St. John rivers and Lake of the Woods. passed in December 2001. The International Joint Commission (IJC) published a report on the Protection of the Waters of the Great Lakes in February 1999.000 1. it can be overlooked.679.231. Croix and Upper St. Lawrence River in Ontario.572.228. a Canada-wide accord prohibiting bulk removal of water is being developed with the provinces and territories to ensure protection of Canadian waters. They were protected by treaties between Canada and the USA.S.CANADA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS MAJOR CITIES City Toronto Montréal Vancouver Ottawa Edmonton Calgary 2000 4. At the same time. This approach was in danger of being undermined by one Province adopting a contrary stance. and treaties embracing the North American Free Trade Area (NAFTA) as a whole.000 953. Additionally.513.000 Azurix NA RWE (Germany) 420. it is difficult to decide whether these schemes were red herrings or had been fully considered. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company York Water strategy development US Water Moncton 20 year water provision PPP Greater Moncton Water Lake Huron 10 year water O&M Azurix NA Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total Greater Moncton Water US Filter/VE (France) 50.000 0 420.000 2015 5.000 1. no value had been placed on the waters of the Great Lakes.000 800. Bill C-6. but they were taken most seriously by a broad swathe of Canadian opinion and served to focus attention towards the integrity and value of Canada’s fresh water resources. Until these proposals were made.000 1.000 0 600. the St.000 US Water RWE (Germany) 600.000 0 50.081. In this case. calling upon the assistance of international bodies so as to ensure its legitimacy.000 3.000 56 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .754. Boundary Waters Treaty signed in 1909. thus amended the 1911 IBWTA and will apply principally to the Great Lakes and other boundary waters.

815 households in 1994-95 found that 96% did not have running water and 98% lacked internal lavatories. SODECA was allowed to increase the water rates for the first time since 1984. SNE and SODECA fix tariffs and modify them according to an agreed formula. with a negative equity equivalent to 50% of sales.CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC The Central African Republic (CAR) had a population of 3. In the Central African Republic. At the same time. At the beginning of 1989. 59% of people living in urban areas are regarded as having reasonable access to safe drinking water and 83% for sewerage. SODECA was capitalised in December 1991 as a limited liability company in which the State holds a 25% minority stake. with the creation of Société de Distribution d'Eau de Centrafrique (SODECA) as an operating company and Société Nationale des Eaux de Centrafrique as an asset-owning company. Overall. the company had moved from near-bankruptcy in 1988 into a viable entity that was providing funds to the Central Government. 21% of staff left in the first year due to voluntary redundancies and natural wastage. A survey of 5. Making water provision viable In 1988. The new private operating company was given two objectives: to cut water rates and to restore the sector's financial balance securely. SAUR-Afrique was granted a 15 year concession to operate SNE’s assets. The next phase is bringing services from the street level to the household. In fact. the CAR’s Société Nationale des Eaux de Centrafrique (SNE) was virtually bankrupt. and for large consumers there was a rise of 65%. The capital Bangui had a 13% water connection rate and a 1% sewerage rate in 1993 with no sewage treatment facilities. to CFAF2. 42% living in urban areas. As a result. with no access to safe drinking water for the region. 57 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . in 1992.5billion in 1995. This rise was due both to the 1992 tariff increase and to sub-contracted engineering work on behalf of the assetowning company. while for hydrants it was increased by 16%.8million in 2002.5 billion in 1992. In 1991. Bouygues’ SAUR-Afrique was invited to develop a management plan and a related performance contract. Under the authority of the ministry responsible for water. the privatisation of water took place in 1991. SNE continues to exist as an asset-holding company. The rate for the first segment of consumption was doubled. network expansion and upgrading has taken place along agreed lines. turnover from water sales increased from CFAF1. The 2002-03 rebellion in the north of the country severely affected drinking water supplies. By 1996. affecting 9% of the CAR’s population. but staff numbers have subsequently stabilised. The former figure is for 1996 and compares with an estimate of 19% by the FAO in 1990.

904m 3 0. Following the adoption of the Law on Electricity and the Water Code in 1999. 2015 Regulatory background In March 2000.000km² in the 1960s.1 million for the privatisation of STEE.CHAD PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS CHAD After years of wars and concerns about the falling water levels of Lake Chad. In addition. the lake is rapidly disappearing because of irrigation and heavy usage.3 million stormwater drainage project in the eastern districts of the town of N'djamena. 10. Lake Chad has dwindled from 350. a feasibility study started in 2002 on water tariffs.0km 3 5.3 12.1 25% 31% 18% 31% 81% 58 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .2km 3 16% 2% 82% US$240 US$1. which ill be adopted by the end of 2002. being a freshwater body of water with no outlet to the sea. The regulatory bodies will be allowed to adjust tariffs annually. Surrounded by a large wetland. and the carrying out of a feasibility study of the most urgent cross-border environmental activities concerning Lake Chad. particularly the incorporation of environmental aspects into the planning and programming processes used by the Ministries of Finance and Planning. to about 25. Other supplementary actions are envisaged in the short term. the government launched the preparation of a National Environmental Action Plan (PNAE). VE is taking on a daunting task in seeking to revive the country’s water infrastructure. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Lake Chad Lake Chad is the only permanent fresh water source in Chad.000km². which includes the government’s take-over of the long-term debts and the transfer to a separate debt-recovery structure of STEE’s short-term domestic liabilities. In addition to €10 million financing from the World Bank. the AFD is also providing €5. Now it is only about 2. The Agence Française de Developpement (AFD) is funding a €8. Such are the problems facing the country that privatisation is being seen in a more positive light than it would be under other circumstances. In a severe drought.000km² several hundred years ago. 76% of the population have no access to water. it is possible to walk across the lake. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. beginning with the formulation of the 2001 budget. the government will continue to strengthen Société Tchadienne d'Electricité et de l'Eau’s (STEE) regulatory and institutional framework. The implementing legislation and the water and electricity regulatory bodies were put into place in September 2000. 79% lack access to proper sanitation and most people die at about 47 years of age. such as in 1984. What remains of the lake is now threatened by proposed mining and drilling in the area. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1992) Domestic Industrial Agriculture Privatising STEE A concession agreement for the private management of STEE was signed on January 28 2001. It is the only lake in the Sahel Region. Urban data Served by piped water Access to sewerage Water shortages are endemic In Chad.020 36% 15% 49% 8.

043. USA. (2000). B C. IMF. VE will then become the majority shareholder in STEE.5km 3 1. B C. The Chad Government will initially hold 100% of STEE. USA. water STEE Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total STEE VE (France) Up to 7million 0 Up to 7million Sources: Daoussa. Washington DC. 12th November 1999. MAJOR CITIES City Ndjamena 2000 1. 6th July 2000. IMF. Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies for 1999-2000.000 2015 1.935.000 Status STEE phased privatisation Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Urban areas O&M/majority ownership. Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies for 1999-2000. 59 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . VE started a two year management contract involving F20 million investment including F10 million of share capital in a venture with a turnover by the end of the period of F180 million.669m 3 0. (1999). Daoussa.CHAD PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic Industrial Agriculture VE acquires STEE 11.1km 3 30% 0% 70% STEE is to be responsible for water and electricity for 7million people. Washington DC.

While water and sewerage coverage increased. As a result. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Development of regulation Urban water provision and sewerage services have been in continuous development over the past 150 years. During the 1980s. while still offering prospects for growth through service extension. in 1989 a set of laws and regulations were passed and a regulatory body.4 75. which serves Santiago. EMOS and ESVAL were transformed into corporatised entities and their shares entrusted to CORFO. a large number of public services delivered drinking water or collected wastewater in the main cities of Chile.0 0. falling steadily to US$200 million in 1976-80. rehabilitation and replacement of old systems. A regulatory body.0 0. demonstrates that some of these companies have been most efficiently run in the past. The remaining government shareholding in Aguas Andinas is 35%. especially with regard to sewage treatment. As sewerage tariffs were notably low.115 US$9. The state holding company managing the minority stakes from privatizations already completed has estimated the government could reap $500 million from them. The first sewage treatment works were built at the beginning of the 1990s. a government body. along with 11 regional services.4 98. easing to US$325 million in 1986-90 before reaching US$839 million in 1991-95. By the end of the 1970s. 2015 Development of services Capital spending in 1995 US dollar terms has only recently picked up.1 43.5 67. whose urban population then was 8. Services were provided by the municipality.8 89.CHILE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS CHILE Chile has more or less completed a systematic privatisation of its urban water and sewerage service entities. although their annual budget has to be approved by the Finance Ministry. in Esval 33% and in Essal around 49%. the low level of tariffs did not allow these services to grow in terms of maintenance of the new systems and in terms of maintenance.5 77. urban water and sewerage coverage reached the highest levels of Latin America.5 66.4 31. started in 1998. Two semi-autonomous utilities were created.0 US$4. Sewerage was seen as under-developed and there were no sewage treatment works.9 billion to date. The reform also included laws that allowed the selling of EMOS and ESVAL to the private sector.4 95. EMOS in the metropolitan region and ESVAL. From 1990 to 1995. along with a number of private companies delivering drinking water and providing sewerage services in the upper part of the city. was created. the first in Santiago being built in 1992.0 0. In 1960-65. % 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 Water 53.4 91. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. reporting to the Ministry for Public Works was also established.2 97. the government has concentrated on encouraging the privatisation of major water and sewerage entities through a series of share sales.5million.0 14.2 Treatment 0. During this period. Chile’s water sector privatization programme. water and sewerage activities were integrated on a regional basis.0 0. The companies follow regulations applied to private companies.0 87% 90% 37% 60 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . The high price paid for EMOS. US$400 million was spent. There has been a recent shift away from asset sales to the concessional model.6 Sewerage 25. any extension of sewerage coverage was entirely dependent on government funding. SENDOS. their tariffs rose by 70% so as to eliminate central government subsidies and to enable capital spending to be enhanced. Since 1995. has raised US$1. In 1981-85 it recovered to US$325 million.0 8. EMOS started to contract out some maintenance activities.820 8% 34% 57% 15.6 18.1 81. In 1977. totally separated from operational activities.

Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita 140.000 2015 6. The government seeks to sell off stakes in three municipal entities.79 0. with US$690 million required in Santiago. EMOS forecasts that it will need US$2 billion over 20 years so as to ensure the development of its sewerage network and its sewage treatment system.4 billion). Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Privatisation and players To date.61 1.88 1.26 0.13 0.09 0. thereby more than covered by the urban water entities MAJOR CITIES City Santiago 2000 5.92 1. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1985) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) Current PSP developments To date.CHILE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Chile needs US$2. buyers for the two smallest regions have not been identified.56 6.444m 3 468. wastewaster treatment (US$400 million) and sewerage (US$700 million). Three sewage treatment works are to be constructed in the medium term.4km 3 5% 11% 84% 92% 77% 16% Regions privatised or due for privatisation Region I II III IV V Metropolitan VI VII VIII IX X XI XII Company ESSAT ESSAN EMSSAT ESSCO ESVAL EMOS ESSEL ESSAM ESSBIO ESSAR ESSAL EMSSA ESMAG Population (million.43 0.000 Status EMOS privatised in 1999 Private Sector Contracts Awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Antofagasta 30 year sewage treatment concession Bayesa Santiago Stake sale of EMOS Agbar/Suez 61 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .495.08 0. as described below.5 billion in capex in the medium term for water treatment and distribution (US$1. the privatisation process has been completed and indeed a secondary market has developed.000 people. during 2002-03 effectively covering all significant urban areas. Chile will need to spend US$5-6 billion in order to develop a universal sewerage and sewage treatment service in the longer term.0km 3 31. Capital spending needs for storm sewerage are in the region of US$1.7 billion. concessions and stake sales covering some 80% of Chile’s urban population have been awarded.0km 3 9. Otherwise. 2003) 0. Broadly speaking.467.50 0. Emssat and Emsa serve a total of 350. Chile has been a popular market for a wide range of water companies. The government approved a bill in 2004 which will permit the granting of concessions for storm sewerage systems.15 Date 06-2003 12-2003 2004+ 11-2003 12-1998 06-1999 03-2000 11-2001 10-2000 06-2003 07-1999 2004+ 06-2003 Comments Sold by AWG in May 2004 Acquired Aguas Cordillera Population figures are for the total population.570m 3 21. so as to link in with the city’s sewerage network.88 0.

000 475.000 1.500.000 120.350.000 400.000 150.100.000 Aguas Decima Agbar (Spain) 120.100.000 150.000 ESSAR SACI Falabella (Chile) 580.CHILE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Private Sector Contracts Awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Valparaiso Stake sale of ESVAL Consorcio Financiero Valdiva Water and sewerage concession Aguas Decima Santiago Water and sewerage Aguas Cordillera Santiago Water and sewerage Biwater Concepcion Stake sale of ESSBIO Thames Water (RWE) Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage ANSM/ESSAM RWE (Germany) 400.000 400.000.000 5.000 1.000 295.000 ESSEL RWE (Germany) 600.000 150.000 520.000 ESVAL Consorcio Financiero (Chile) 1.000 1.000 300.000 ESSCO Consorcio Financiero (Chile) 500.000 5.000 ESMAG SACI Falabella (Chile) 150.000 1.000 90.000 315.000 Total 400.000 10.000 62 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .400.500.000 ESSAL Iberdrola (Spain) 400.000 400.000 Aguas Cordillera EMOS (Chile) 315.000 Biwater Biwater (UK)/Nuon (Ned) 10.000 400.000 ESSBIO RWE (Germany) 1.000 600.000 Aguas Quinta Agbar (Spain) 200.000 10.500.000 Bayesa Biwater (UK)/Nuon (Ned) 0 300.000 EMOS Agbar (Spain)/Suez (France) 5.000 200.000 600.000 ESSAT SACI Falabella (Chile) 410.000 580.000 200.400.000 500.

CHINA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS CHINA Since 2000. 11% more than in 1999. At the time. along with those based in Hong Kong. 35% of projects had yet to start and 75% of facilities continue to discharge effluents at their pre-plan levels.294. a tributary of the Yangtze. 34 primary and 53 secondary. with distribution losses estimated at 25% for urban water provision and higher for industrial water. with water being pumped uphill for hundreds of kilometres . Water and sewerage development Piped water (billion m 3/pa) Domestic (billion m 3/pa) Access to piped water Sewage removal (m t/pa) Sewer pipes (km/1000) 1980 8. all people in rural China will have access to potable water by the end of 2004.402. along with a framework water law in 1985. The 2001 Chinese Guidelines on Drinking Water Quality cover drinking water standards and groundwater resource protection.3 38% 50% 17% 63 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . 1.4billion tons of sewage and industrial waste were dumped into the Yangtze River basin.02 12. the country had 600.9 1.000km of urban water pipes. will trap pollution dumped by cities upstream. The project. but they only have 15% of water resources. Main elements are: The Water Act (1988). there were 66.329km of sewerage mains. and to divert water from the so-called "western line" at the headwaters of the Yangtze and possibly the upper Mekong and Irrawaddy rivers. Sewage treatment and industrial outsourcing contracts are also becoming prominent. According to the Government. the State Environm ental Protection Administration (SEPA) assessed its Three Gorges Anti-Water Pollution Plan.4% 16. There are three options under consideration: to transport water from the lower Yangtze River. The US$24 billion Three Gorges Dam project being constructed along the Yangtze River demonstrates the potential pitfalls of such a project. along with a total of 87 sewage treatment works.68 0. typically based in Malaysia and Singapore. The Management Stipulation of Urban Water Conservation (1989) and The Water Consumption Quota Measure (1989). The 660km reservoir system started holding water in 2004. BOT and concession-type contracts are now regularly awarded to international companies and in specific cases. and without suitable measures.24 1993 45. 23. China has been the driver for global demand for private sector contracts.45 US$989 US$4. 93% of industries have yet to achieve zero emissions or emission recycling. Indeed. A further 24million are to be connected during 2004. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services A diversion? China is planning to build a pipeline and canal network to divert 48-50billion m 3 of water pa from southern parts of the country to the north. Supplies were secured for 24million people during 2002 and 15. In 2000.43 0.83 3. The US$64 billion cost of the project and technical problems have kept it on hold for 40 years. to use canals and pipelines to move water from the Han River. first proposed by Mao Zedong in 1952 – was due to start after 2002 and be completed by 2010 but currently remains on hold. In 2004. compared with 54% of China’s population and 35% of arable land whereas 44% of the population live to the north of the valley. Population Total (2002million) Total (2015million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Legal framework The Government has passed 13 water conservation laws since 1989. The market has also been marked by the emergence of local companies and expatriate Chinese companies. The driver is the disparity between population and water resources: 80% of water resources are in the Yangtze River Valley.83 93. along with the vesting of operational control. against an aim of reducing industrial pollution in the Three Gorges Reservoir by 30% by 2005. To date.39 81.580 18% 49% 33% In 1993.6million more gained access to potable water at the end of 2003.1% 31. One cautionary element has been the enaction of a law outlawing fixed returns by foreign held entities.

In 2001-2005 (10th Five Year Plan). The country's rural areas have seen 674. at a critical moment of water shortage. China discharged 43-50billion m3 of wastewater in 2000-2001 (various estimates).5 5% 18% 77% Estimates of Chinese urban sewerage treatment capacity and technology/equipment market: Treatment rate (%) Treatment capacity (M tons/day) Current capacity (M tons/day) 10.00 2. with a total treatment capacity of 14. Water shortages in cities cause a loss of an estimated US$11. either for farming or drinking. with 106million having improved sanitation facilities. compared with 75-80% in developed economies. Shanghai. Prices usually cover 10-25% of real costs. acting under the authority of the State Council.20 50 60. All cities are meant to charge a sewage treatment levy by the end of 2003. there were 452 WWTWs in operation. It is up to the municipality or Province to pay for services. m 3) Withdrawals (1980.91million wells. WHO estimates for 2000 point to 66% and 27% coverage respectively. In total. In 2000. However.000 are meant to develop appropriate sewage treatment facilities for 60% of effluents by the end of the 10th Five Year Plan (2001-2005). Since 2001. That will rise to 40% by 2010.231 525. taking the incidence of such toilets in rural areas to 44. km 3) Per capita (1998. 34. including 282 to secondary standard. via internal treasury bonds. all 699 cities and urban areas with a population of more than 500.2l. Treatment capacity is to exceed 30million m 3 per day by the end of the 10th Five Year Plan in 2005. In June 2003.6 billion will be spent cleaning up Beijing’s water system. have issued rules aimed at rationalising water tariffs to encourage efficiency. rural people in some arid areas also have to endure acute water shortage.6 billion was spent on building 317 municipal Wastewater Treatment Works (‘WWTWs’) in 1998-2002. US$36 billion is to be spent between 2000 and 2010 on WWTWs. the national capital and a major port city in the north.70 22. China seeks to develop its urban water supply to meet World Health Organization (WHO) standards by 2010.44 35 38. By the end of 2000.4million m3 pa in 1999. with a capacity of 31million m3 per day. Beijing would not authorise any moves to improve cost recovery. but mainly as a result of artificially low water fees.44 64 22 22.7% of China's urban population lived on urban water supply systems with daily water usage per capita amounting to 220. Meanwhile.20 10.CHINA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Billing has a low priority. had improved water services. Freshwater Total (1998. This is in part due to outdated plant and management techniques. China recycled 40% of its urban wastewater.9 billion (RMB41. equivalent to abiotic) on China's five-tiered water-quality scale. 375 WWTWs are to be built. At the end of 2002. Of urban water sources. In 1997. including 20billion m3 of industrial wastewater. 34.5 billion. over 400 out of the leading 600 Chinese cities are short of water. while the impact of water pollution on human health has been valued at US$3. The M inistry of Construction and the Beijing municipality. 880million Chinese rural residents.3% of urban sewage was treated in 2000. China spent 1% of its national budget on environmental protection.8 10. By the end of 2000.8%.75million m3 per day. US$3.73 billion). In addition.3% of urban sewage was treated. 90% are also polluted.4% of the country's rural population. and this will remain the case in the foreseeable future. Urban Services Safe drinking water L per capita per day Access to sewerage Sewage treated Water quality and quantity In 2004 the Ministry of W ater Resources estimated that China's economy is 85% below the global efficiency average in water consumption. and with constant inflationary pressures.70 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . km 3) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) 97% 220 58% 34% 2. with 106million rural dwellers having modern toilets. US$2.000 waterworks built along with 48. Jiangsu and Zhejiang and the other main industrialised cities will have 50% of facilities at a cost of US$9 billion.800. with Beijing and Tianjin.2 billion (RMB120 billion) in industrial output. Currently. 500million people have access to tap water. with an investment of US$14. At the end of 2000 (9th Five Year Plan) there were 427 WWTWs in China. or 92. treating 22million m 3 of effluent per day. In rural areas. the State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA) announced that China's treatment capacity will double from 25million m 3 pa to 58million m 3 pa by 2005.25 38. 63% of rivers tested in 1998 were at or below class four (bad to very bad. 96. The annual increase in effluent discharge estimated at 2.

Secondly.9 6. water and sewerage privatisation has moved forward at a dramatic rate. This applies both to piped water and water provided by vendors. To date six examples of the third approach have been identified. water accounts for 0. The Ministry of Construction (MOC) approves STW construction and operation projects inside cities. China aims for a sewage treatment ratio reaching 60% percent nationwide by 2005 and 100% percent in all big cities by 2010. including water services. Chinese and expatriate companies served 11million people against 15million being served by international players.5% of average household expenditure). More recently. domestic water use in urban China is at an appreciably higher level than is currently sustainable. it is much less powerful than the MOC. Restrictions on returns by foreign owned and controlled entities have meant that stakes in ventures such as Thames Water’s Shanghai have been sold back. In consequence.11 21.50 19. and therefore the MWR is not seen as important when seeking international BOT proposals. on the basis of cost recovery. Groundwater Total recharge (1998. Since 2000. m 3) Withdrawals (1985.05-14. which are essential partners for sewerage and sewage treatment BOT projects. while ensuring that water services are both of a higher quality and affordable (up to 1. The Suzhou 65 870.93-11. The State Development Planning Commission (SDPC) has announced that urban residents and enterprises will pay higher prices for excess water consumption by the end of 2005.55 25. The Chinese Government formally opened the national urban utility market to domestic and overseas investors in 2003. At the end of 1999. During the Tenth Five-Year Plan (2006-10). which is held by RWE (49%). concentrating on the development of tourist facilities for Shenzen. The development of this market outside Hong Kong has taken place since 2000.5% of household expenditure. China plans to devote RMB700 billion to environmental protection. The largest market in terms of recent developments is that of nationally based Chinese companies.0 54% Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Joint ventures Sino-French Holdings (Suez and New World).81-9.33-5. The NEPA works with provincial EPAs.1-17. To date this has mainly come from ‘expatriates’ in Hong Kong and from Malaysia and Singapore. These can either work on their own or in partnership with international companies. contracts serving further 21million people have been awarded to international companies.46 9. The State Planning Commission (SPC) approves BOT projects.28 4.04-14. and sewage processing fees will be charged throughout the country by the end of 2003. The State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA. Shenzen Overseas Chinese Town Co is indirectly concerned with the sector.8-24.7 5.57-2. The supply of water has deteriorated both in terms of availability and the quality of the water provided because of the lack of funding. all such projects have in fact remained in state hands.6 3.3 9. formed in 1998) looks after STWs and industrial effluent treatment projects. and deepen the price reform of water supply.CHINA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Construction required (M tons/day) Investment for construction (billion Rmb) Yearly operation cost (billion Rmb) Technology/equipment market size (billion Rmb) 9. There have been a number of developments at the municipal level designed to eliminate subsidies. Privatisation and politics Water provision is subsidised in order to ensure its universal availability in urban areas. international companies working with joint ventures or through specialist funds. km 3) For agriculture (1985) Chinese private sector players Three broad approaches are being used by the private sector in China. a major expatriate Chinese market has developed.94-7. so as to establish a price system adapted to the market economy.55 Source: China Environmental Protection Industry Association 2001. The Ministry of Water Resources (MWR) is responsible for non-urban areas. On average. with recycled water priced much lower than tap water to encourage its use.0 1. Domestic and foreign investors would be allowed to invest alone or cooperate with local authorities or enterprises. among which RMB210 billion will be invested in water treatment. whilst mobilising finance from international multilateral agencies.8-32. and the leading dedicated fund is the China Water Company. while contracts serving 36million people have been awarded to Chinese and expatriate companies.92 16. km 3) Per capita (1998. While the MWR is still responsible for major infrastructure projects. International companies seeking to enter this market need official support from at least one of the main Beijing government bodies.00 693 75. The ministry would further promote charges for sewage and refuse treatment in 2003. Temasek Holdings (Singapore Government) and Hong Kong Land (Jardine) or the setting up of Chinese owned private sector companies. To date. Firstly.76 14. Water fees will vary according to the season and local conditions. having been involved with the private sector since 1993 with the water and sewerage sectors.5 - 11. One.

000 1.397.000 1.319.000 1.000 1.313.000 907.000 2.000 1.246.435. By the end of July 2004.000 928.612.323.000 942.324.319.000 3.000 1.643.000 7.592.024.388.000 1.000 3.000 1.153.000 3.194.000 1.210.000 1.250.000 1. Shanghai Municipal Raw Water and Wuhan Sanzheng Industry Co Ltd) are primarily concerned with water provision projects and services.000 1. at the end of 1999.000 66 Status N/A N/A N/A Water treatment BOT N/A N/A N/A N/A VE has a water treatment & provision BOT N/A N/A Bulk water and wastewater BOT Water treatment BOT Water treatment BOT N/A Bulk water concession N/A N/A N/A Private sector involvement under consideration Various water and WW contracts N/A N/A N/A Water treatment BOT N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Two water and one WWTW BOT Seven water BOTs N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .202.839.932.093. road.000 1. international players have moved more modestly ahead with 21million people.440.568.730.000 1.137.000 1.000 910.000 1.000 4.223.775.000 4.025.533.000 1.000 2.000 1.996.000 1.165.000 2.000 949.000 1.775. However.000 1.000 785.000 1.242.554.000 1.962.000 1.048.CHINA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS New District Hi-Tech Industrial Co Ltd carried out the development and operation of water.000 4.135.928. In all cases.418.453.000 791.000 874. Three others (Shanghai Lingqiao Tap Water Co.000 1. along with 16million through expatriate Chinese companies.000 2.000 1.000 1.000 3.000 2.000 1.000 957.000 1.000 5.354.780.294.000 2015 1.550. Shenyang Public Utility is responsible for most of Shenyang’s water provision. contracts covering 31million people have been awarded to Chinese companies.000 1.944.047.000 1.030.311.019.040. a majority of the company’s shares continue to be directly or indirectly in state or municipal hands. gas and power services for the city’s Hi-Tech Industrial Development Zone.000 978.628.000 1.000 3.312.000 814.065.000 2.406.076.000 1.000 1.000 1. These companies have been active in the market since the 1970s and effectively pioneered the return of western engineering concerns to the country.821. Chinese and expatriate companies served 11million against 15million being served by international players.701.965.000 769.000 2. International companies serve 36million. in all cases through joint ventures.000 1.000 1.000 12.712.000 1.318.000 1.000 2.000 1.000 2.000 2.077.674.275.000 1.893.504.481. Companies noted Water treatment facilities constructed by Degremont (Suez) and Purac (AWG) in China serve 100million and 40million people respectively. Thus while Chinese and expatriate companies have privatised services affecting 36million more people since 2000.519.000 1.774.413.000 886.445.000 772.000 1.087.000 3.374. MAJOR CITIES Population Anshan Anshun Baotou Beijing Benxi Changchun Chengde Changsha Chengdu Changzhou Chifeng Chongqing Dailan Daqing Datong Dongguan Fushun Fuxin Fuyu Fuzhou Guangzhou Guiyang Handan Hangzhou Harbin Hefei Heze Huaian Huaibei Huaianan Huhehaote Hunjiang Huzhou Jiamusi Jiaxing Jilin Jinagmen Jinan Jining Jinzhou Jinxi Jinzhou Jixi Kaifeng Kunming Lanzhou Leshan 2000 1.600.565.000 789.235.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 10.000 1.232.671.000 1.000 2.000 834.791.000 1.

000 1.037.722.000 1.169.000 1.269.000 995.183.000 950.000 1. wastewater BOT N/A N/A N/A N/A Water BOT N/A A wide range of contracts & companies N/A Shenyang Public Utility floated in 1999 Bulk water partially privatised UNDP commercialisation project under way N/A N/A Local company for industrial development zone N/A N/A N/A N/A VE & SFH in bulk water JVs N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Water treatment BOT Wuhan Sanzheng Industry Holding N/A N/A Water treatment BOT N/A N/A WTW BOT N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Water treatment BOT N/A PSP currently under consideration N/A N/A N/A N/A PSP WWTW project being tendered for N/A N/A N/A N/A Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 67 .000 1.714.501.236.000 1.000 2.204.447.094.132.000 3.000 871.411.156.000 1.124.461.000 1.012.446.435.000 1.000 Status N/A Strategic partnership agreement for water supply N/A N/A Two wastewater treatment plants N/A N/A N/A Wastewater BOT One bulk water BOT Industrial water BOT.000 823.000 1.000 4.076.000 1.313.497.779.000 1.502.614.000 2.283.000 1.000 994.CHINA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS MAJOR CITIES Population Linqing Linyi Liuan Liupanshui Liuzhou Louyang Mianyang Mudanjiang Nanchang Nanchong Nanjing Nanning Neijiang Ningbo Pingxiang Qingdao Qiqihar Shanghai Shantou Shenyang Shenzhen Shijiazhuang Suining Suqian Suzhou Taian Taichung Taiyuan Tangshan Tianjin Tianmen Tianshui Tongliao Wanxian Weifang Wenzhou Wuhan Wulumqi Wuxi Xian Xiangxiang Xiantao Xianyang Xiaoshan Xinghua Xintai Xinyu Xuanzhou Xuanzhou Xuzhou Yangchen Yantai Yichun (H’ang) Yichun (Jiangxi) Yixing Yiyang Yonzhou Yueyang Yulin Yuyao Yuzhou Zaoyang Zaozhuang Zhangilakou Zhangjiangang 2000 891.000 1.182.000 1.000 3.562.000 2.000 1.000 939.123.080.000 2.126.023.000 4.131.000 1.000 2.325.000 1.000 1.108.000 1.951.000 1.000 2.173.000 1.000 2.887.603.000 1.000 1.000 3.344.498.000 1.105.000 928.319.435.000 2.749.097.000 1.788.017.000 1.833.582.391.000 1.813.000 2.048.000 5.904.000 1.000 1.061.415.286.000 1.000 908.636.000 1.665.661.000 13.413.000 1.000 968.428.415.000 2.000 1.000 1.000 2.000 801.000 1.924.000 2.000 2.000 880.000 12.507.121.766.671.470.000 1.601.000 1.000 1.940.127.556.216.218.076.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.818.000 1.000 1.311.871.000 2.000 1.000 1.189.000 2.000 2015 1.451.000 823.074.000 1.740.000 1.000 1.287.000 2.176.639.558.000 9.187.000 1.000 904.000 1.343.000 1.000 1.000 1.055.000 1.000 1.000 2.000 2.000 886.000 1.316.065.000 1.759.586.000 1.000 848.000 1.173.598.000 10.259.997.000 1.000 785.000 1.828.503.000 1.000 1.000 1.558.653.000 2.783.614.000 1.000 1.801.000 1.000 4.000 1.213.000 973.000 1.491.393.000 1.000 1.000 7.000 1.371.000 1.460.450.000 1.000 2.000 5.000 896.000 1.

300 connections. In September 2003. Shanghai also aims to become an 'oriental water metropolis' with the municipal government promising a US$50 million investment by 2008. the State Council issued a note requiring all fixed return water contracts held by foreign entities to be restructured. Officially.95 1996 2. This is due to better data as well as major cities such as Shenyang fragmenting into several autonomous entities. Greater Shanghai saw the construction of 31 WWTWs between 1980 and 2002 at a cost of RMB10 billion. the city plans to build water rings linking the Dianpuhe river to Suzhouhe river and Huangpujiang river via Xinjing Port and West River. 60% of the city was served was served by sewers in 1993. generating 0.87 billion is to be invested in the project. abstracts water from the Yangtze and Huangpu rivers for treatment at the Shanghai municipality’s water treatment stations. water prices were increased from 0.499.368.000 2.62million m 3 per day. including 14 between 2001 and 2006.711. partly because of the contamination of the groundwater resources that supply 69% of current needs. In 2002.675. distributes water to the Pudong district of the city of Shanghai. 2 WWTWs handle 1.000 2015 2. Shanghai has two semi-private water companies.30 2.30Y/m³ for domestic customers. The Beijing Gaobeidian Sewage Treatment Plant will be the largest in China. with no price adjustment made for the volume used.153. 1.600 has 1.00 3. tourism and shopping.70million m3 per day is being constructed and operated (20 years) by Youlian Enterprise Development Company and two other private players.148. Shanghai’s main challenges are developing its infrastructure for continued growth. The Bailonggang Wastewater Treatment Plant will handle 1.070.000 for industrial and commercial customers.072. Water quality is regarded as poor. 68 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .12Y/m³ to 0.CHINA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS MAJOR CITIES Population Zhanjiang Zhaodong Zhengzhou Zibo Zigong 2000 1.000 1.008.295.000 for domestic customers and 14. along with two other private companies.6% of the city’s sewage was treated in 1991.40million m3 of effluents generated each day.000 2.50 2000 3.5% in 1992. with the aim of 87% of effluents being treated by the start of the 2008 Olympiad.000 3. will invest CNY870 million (€107 million).000 998. or 2.13 per m 3. The Shanghai Municipal Raw Water Co Ltd. a consortium led by Thames Water and Bovis (P&O) was awarded a 20 year.25Y per m³ to 0. YEDC.000 water meters.920 connections. canals and reservoirs necessary for the bulk water provision to the city.5% although in reality they are approximately 28%. The company builds and operates the pumping stations.496. BOT contract to build and manage a water treatment plant at Da Chang. with the quality of water generally being regarded as low although water treatment works nominally account for 104% of water demand. 85% of the total treated. The Shanghai Lingqiao Tap Water Co. Water costs US$0. 175. with the other 40% served by night soil carriers. industrialisation and water pollution. The contract is for the operation of the Shanghai Zhuyuan No 1 Sewage Treatment Factory. developing them as new scenic spots combining sightseeing.10 In Beijing.500 people are supplied with piped water via 1. The average water consumption is 149l per capita per day.45Y per m³ for industrial and commercial customers and from 0. with 95% of the population receiving piped water.90 1.000 851. with two major works in construction: The Zhuyuan W astewater Treatment Plant.000 2. Year Capacity (million m³ per day) Demand (million m³ per day) 1993 1. and the Beijing Water Resources Bureau operate water and sewerage services. Distribution losses are officially estimated at 7.16million m 3 per day. 3. There are a total of 194.2million m 3 per day at a cost of RMB060 billion. In 1995.000 1. In 1991. RMB0. raising its capacity to 1.4m m 3 of potable water per day. All of the urban area’s 7.6million m 3 per day. A second water treatment plant is currently being upgraded by Degrémont. The city’s population of 5.000 Status One water BOT N/A Bulk water BOT N/A N/A The 109 cities forecast in 2003 to have a population in excess of 1million by 2015 is a significant increase on the number in the 1996 UN urbanisation assessment. Both were expected to be in service by the end of 2003.7million tonnes per day during the contract period. six WWTWs currently handle 50% of the city’s effluents. according to the director. One further WWTW is planned to be built. treating 44% of the 5. on a stand-alone basis. This year. City Study: Beijing (Peking) The Beijing Municipal Water Works Co. All connections are metered. There are plans for 27 more.769. using an average of 193l of water per day. It is also of interest to note that there has been some scaling back of the 2015 population forecasts since the 2001 edition of the Masons Water Year Book? City Study: Shanghai The Shanghai Water Resources Bureau operates the city’s water and sewerage services. Thames Water subsequently sold its stake in the venture back to the municipality. which increased to 18. In addition. There is no surcharge for sewerage services. bids will be invited for five new local WWTWs with a combined capacity of 0. which started in 2002. In 1991.

The municipality is playing off various sources of funding for this project. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Changtu 30 year O&M. there was effectively no sewage treatment in the city. World Bank funding is being sought for upgrading the Gao Bei Dian Treatment facility. water provision Sino French Holdings Wanzhou 30 year O&M. In June 2001 a RMB22 billion (US$2. there is little scope for increasing the use of the Miyun and Guanting rivers.447million m³ pa) and it is estimated that groundwater over-abstraction is currently running at 2. with treatment capacity rising from 1. wastewater treatment Aquamundo Liuzhou 25 year BOT. This includes an increase in sewage treatment from 45% in 2000 to 90% by 2007. industrial water JV Sino French Holdings Sanya 35 year concession. covering 15% of the city by the time it enters service. water treatment China Water Company Hexian 20 year jv operation AWI Changli 30 year water and sewerage contract Earth Tech Guangzhou 20 year DBFO.564million m³ pa in 1992. and is forecast to rise to 3. which flow in the region. water provision Sino French Holdings Zhengzhou 30 year O&M.CHINA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS In the Greater Beijing area.26million tonnes per day to 2. the total abstraction was 3. It involves 20 projects for water resource development. water provision Sino French Holdings Gaozhou 30 year O&M. Prior to the construction of four facilities in the past few years. sewage treatment Earth Tech Shanghai 50 year O&M. in November 1992. sewage treatment Sound Group 4 cities 25 year BOT. In total. Groundwater is heavily used for agriculture (1. water provision VE/Marubeni Zunyi 35 year concession. water provision Shenyang Public Utility 11 cities 25 year BOT. water treatment AWG Tiazhou 18 year BOT. Beijing anticipates spending US$12 billion in the run up to the 2008 Olympics to improve its environmental performance. water provision Sino French Holdings Baoding 20 year O&M. wastewater treatment Global Green Tech Deqing 15 year BOT. The current emphasis is to boost water supplies via upgrading and expanding the Number 9 Water Treatment Plant. In addition. Because water is scarce across Northern China. awarded to Awg is to cost US$300 million. water provision Shanghai Fengxian Saur Water Beijing 23 year BOT. water provision Sino French Holdings Sanya 30 year O&M.6billion) plan was started to ease water shortages in the capital city within five years. The Beijing No 10 treatment plant. water provision Sino French Holdings Tanzhou 30 year O&M. water provision Sino French Holdings Nanchang 28 year O&M. wastewater treatment Aquamundo Chongqing 25 year BOT. Water demand is to outstrip supply by 70% during 1991-2000. water provision Sino French Holdings Chongqing 30 year build & manage. water provision VE Tianjin 20 year ‘concession’. water provision Sino French Holdings Guangzhou 30 year O&M.140million m³ by 2020. pollution protection. water provision Sino French Holdings Zhongstan 22 year O&M.000–2. water services VE Chengdu 18 year BOT. The total water availability is currently at 400m³ per capita pa. bulk water provision AWG Harbin O&M.700million m³ pa. water provision Sino French Holdings Lianjing 30 year O&M.800million m³ pa in 2000 and 5. water provision Sino French Holdings Shanghai Pudong. water treatment plant Bouygues Foshan 25 year BOT. fees for water supply were fixed to usage. As a consequence.62million tonnes per day through US$870 million being spent on seven large plants. along with quotas for water usage. water provision Sino French Holdings Shenyang 30 year O&M. water treatment Globe Environment Nanjing Industrial wastewater treatment BOT Nanjjng Sembcorp Suiyu Dao Bin Shan 23 year water treatment BOT Shenfei Dayen Shenyang Water and wastewater treatment BOT Shenfei Dayen Beijing Industrial water & wastewater treatment Shenfei Dayen Beijing 20 year sewage treatment BOT Kerry Utilities Jiangmen Wastewater treatment BOT AGEPSG Nanchong Water treatment concession Berlinwasser International Xian Water treatment BOT Berlinwasser International Shanghai 20 year wastewater treatment BOT Youlian Beiging Wastewater treatment BOT Beijing Capital Four cities Water treatment plant BOTs Cathay International Water Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 69 . and US$750 million on 15 smaller facilities. water provision Sino French Holdings Qingdao 25 year BOT. water treatment CGE Zunyi Water Shanghai 20 year ‘concession’. building of water-saving and ecological agricultural developments around the reservoir areas and water quality monitoring. rain and flood water utilisation. water provision Sino French Holdings Tianjin 35 year concession.

000 N/A 3.750.000 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 750.100.000 4.000 0 Nanhai Development Nanhai Development Co 1.000 1. or 15% of the current total discharge. S.000 Berlinwasser International RWE/VE 3.000 4.550.000 0 Pinang Water PBA (Malaysia) 500.760.000. SOAS.000 4.000 Source: Lee.000 1. but there is no indication of how these funds are used.100.200.500.000 5.000 3.500. A 7% ‘Environment Tax’ is levied in hotels.000 0 Beijing Capital Group Beijing Capital (China) 1.000 0 Interchina IH (HK) 900.750.800.914.000.750.200.000 CGE Zunyi Water VE (France) / Citic 500.000 Jiangxi Hongcheng Waterworks J H Waterworks 1.000 0 Sound Group Sound Group (PRC) 0 5.000 500.900. In consequence.4million m3 of wastewater per day.000 250.000 0 Shanghai Lingqiao Tap Water Shanghai municipality N/A 0 Shanghai Municipal Raw Water Shanghai municipality N/A 0 Shenyang Public Utility Shenyang municipality 5.600.900. (2003) The Transformation of the Shanghai Water Sector in the Reform Area: Social Actors and Institutional Change.CHINA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Shenzen Bulk water concession GDI Donnguan Bulk water concession GDI Nanhai Water supply Nanhai Development Nanjing Wastewater treatment BOT SIHL Zhanjiang Bulk water treatment BOT SIHL Xiamen Water & wastewater concession SIHL Hanzhong Water BOT Interchina Qinhuangdao Wastewater BOT Interchina Xianyang Water BOT Interchina Ma’anshan Wastewater BOT Interchina Nanchang Water supply Jiangxi Hongcheng Waterworks Nanchang Wastewater BOT BWB (VE) Shandong Water operations Salcon Water Yichun 30 year water BOT PBA Holdings Zun Yi 35 year wastewater BOT VE City Study: Guangzhou (Canton) The Guangzhou Water Resources Bureau serves 92% of the central area’s 2. Of the city’s sewage was treated in 1998. 2.600.550.500. London University 70 Total 125.000 Nanjing Sembcorp Suiyu Sembcorp (Singapore) 0 0 AGEPSG Anhui Guozhen (China) 0 255.000.000.000 0 Wuhan Sanzheng Industry Wuhan municipality N/A 0 AWI Awg (UK) 3. In 2002.000 0 Earth Tech Tyco International (USA) 150.250.000.800.500.000 0 255.000 0 Suzhou New District Suzhou municipality 100. against an official target of 25%.000 2.250. PhD Thesis.000 12.000 3.000 0 Salcon Water Salcon Eng (Malaysia) 1.000.000 1.300 people through 728.000 N/A N/A 5.000 8.000 Cheung Kong Infrastructure Privately held (PRC) N/A N/A Global Green Tech Global Green Tech (HK) N/A 800. All water connections are metered.000 100.7million tonnes of untreated effluent only 10% are discharged into the Pearl River daily and the local authority regards the river as biologically dead.000 Bovis Thames (Shanghai) RWE (Germany) 2.000 500.000 900.000 0 PBA Holdings PBA Holdings (Malaysia) 250.000 0 Sino French Holdings Suez (France) 12.000 600.000 Globe Environment Darco (Singapore) 450.000.500.760.000 0 China Water Company RWE (Germany) 3.575 connections.000.000 0 Cathay International Water Cathay International (HK) 4.000 2.000. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company Population served (country) Water Sewerage Shenfei Dayen Dayen (Singapore) 0 125.000.800.000 1.000 5.000 GDI GDI (HK) 1.000 Aquamundo Amiantit (Saudi) N/A 400.000 0 Vivendi Water VE (France) 8.000 1.000 400. Holdings 1.000 450.000 Shanghai Fengxian Saur Water Bouygues (France) 3. Earth Tech was awarded a US$120 million DBO contract that over two phases will treat 0.000 500.000 750.500.500.000 Kerry Utilities PPB (Malaysia) 0 1.000 5.000 0 SIHL Shanghai Ind.000 0 Zun Yi VE (France) 0 600.000 5.000 N/A 800.

000 have been identified as potentially suitable for private sector management and investment.COLUMBIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS COLOMBIA Privatisation has been advancing steadily since 1994. the first option to purchase the entity.5 52. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1987) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) Prospects Colombia retains a notably low profile for a country of its size and economic development. Agbar and FCC. service coverage is good. starting with Law Number 142 of 1994. the Instituto de Hidrología. The three largest cities in Colombia. which are to be administered by the Ministry of the Environment.000 people. The project covers 750. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage Concession awards to date According to the International Labour Organisation (ILO). In general. but there is plenty of scope for improving service delivery. The World Bank is loaning US$85 million for water supply and sewerage service extension work in Cartagena and the bay area. but the Colombian market offers plenty of prospects and is perhaps overlooked when compared with some South American economies. Meteorología y Estudios Ambientales .393m 3 8. The Law on Environmental Principles (Law Number 99 of 1993) lays out various environmental and public health service objectives.370 13% 26% 61% 43. Norte de Santander and on the Atlantic coast. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. The main international players seen to date have been Acea. as well as other employee-owned cooperatives. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Privatisation plans Privatisation has been supported since 1994. Bogotá. Huila. This is being linked to the concession being managed by Agbar for services to the city.850 US$6. The Suez WWTW concession ended in 2004 after a dispute with the government. 2015 Legal framework and service delivery Municipal water and sewerage entities serving a population in excess of 8. 1.070km 3 28. One third of the city’s inhabitants are not connected to piped water or sewerage. This established the basic rules for approval of each programme. In reality. Boyaca. sewerage and sewage treatment services. warns that 70% of Colombia's population may face water shortages within the next 15 years if water resources are not properly managed. efficiency and sewage treatment. by 1998 there had been two privatisations prior to the 1994 law and a further 10 since then. officially have a service coverage of around 94% for piped water and 87% for sewerage.2 76% 81% 35% 76% 88% 71 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . unions and organisations. Drought has already caused water shortages in 7 cities in Valle del Cauca. This Law gives the company’s employees and retirees.9km 3 59% 4% 37% US$1. Medellín and Cali. A report by IDEAM. This Law provides incentives for private firms to join local and regional authorities in the task of upgrading water. privatisation remained the exception until the passing of Law Number 226 of 1995.

overhaul and maintain the water supply system.000 0 383. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Bogota Water O&M Aguazul Bogota Santo Dominigo Water O&M Aguazul Bogota Santa Marta 20 year water and sewerage concession Tecvasa Barranquilla 17 year urban services concession Tecvasa Cartagena 25 year water and sewerage concession Agbar Monteria 20 year water provision concession Proactiva Tunja 10 year water provision concession Proactiva Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total Agbar Agbar (Spain) 726.000 residents in Sahagun. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita MAJOR CITIES City Bogota Cali Medellin Barranquilla Bucaramanga Cartagena Cucuta 510.000 772. San Carlos and Cienaga de Oro. Cucuta’s EIS has a planned 30 year water concession. the would-be concessionaire was expected to invest US$22.0km 3 13.5 million over 30 year in expanding the water supply and sewerage networks and providing a new water source after 20 years of operation.000 inhabitants) was to restructure a concession removing state subsidies before relaunching an auction expected in early 2000.000 1. Palmira.770. EAAB.000 In addition. the municipal utility will address efficiency and service quality issues through cost reductions and support greater private sector participation in its operations.872.000 Tecvasa Tecvasa (Spain) 1. In Maicao. These may be privatised at a later date. which provides water.000 845. After Emcali’s offices were occupied in.900.000 2.683.866. In 2003 EMCALI was taken over by the Government.770. These are open for reconsideration if suitable funding and management packages can be developed.000 Status Sewage treatment BOT rescinded Privatisation plans potentially revived N/A Privatisation under development N/A N/A Privatisation under development A number of planned privatisations were postponed during 2000 due to political and regulatory challenges. of which US$9.8 million would go to expand. Proposals for the cities of Riohacha and Neiva did not reach fruition.233. sewerage. the municipal services company of Cali.080.302.000 1.000 1.000 726. The concessionaire was expected to invest US$21. Cerete. Aguas Capital.000 1. EAAB appointed three companies to undertake service operations in five areas of the capital.323.000 3. Expected investment in the water and sewerage networks was of around US$220 million. along with a price freeze and an enquiry into corruption by the company’s management. San Andres and Buenaventura.262.770. Agua Azul and EPM Bogota Aguas will cover the five zones.533m 3 2000 6.158.000 Proactiva FCC (Spain)/VE (France) 383.771. electricity and telecomms to the city.000 937. particularly for residents in low-income areas.000 726. the World Bank has approved a US$16 million loan supporting the Bogota Urban Services Project. ERAS (Empresa Regional de Aguas de Sinu) currently provides water services to about 25.000 2015 8.000 3.000 Aguazul Bogota ACEA (Italy) 3. Quibdo (139. The agreements will run for five years and are worth an estimated US$127 million in total.000 0 3.000 1.9 million over 30 years.970.900.000 2. the proposals were abandoned. At the same time. 72 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .COLUMBIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Privatisation schemes are currently being developed in Barranquilla. which aims to improve water and sewerage services. a 20 year US$30 million water and sewerage management contract for Cordoba is expected to be awarded.000 2. In December 2001 the government announced that it would privatise Emcali. Emcali’s PTAR wastewater plant has been a source of problems after construction costs rose from US$50 million to US$160 million. In 2003.000 1.

CONGO

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

CONGO
Since 1997, the International Red Cross has built or repaired 280 water points in the country’s rural areas, along with similar work in the cities of Pointe-Noire, Djiri, Djoué, Owando, Djambala, Dolisie, Nkayi, Madingou and Brazzaville. In total, this has improved access to drinking water for some 250,000 villagers and 1,650,000 people living in towns. Financial problems curtail service provision In the Congo, the Société Nationale des Eaux (SNDE) is having problems finding the finance needed for even the purchase of treatment products for maintaining potable water quality. Indeed, the cumulative effects of payment arrears have prevented the company from paying wages regularly. The SNDE was set up for the provision of services for urban areas, principally Brazzaville, the capital. It is regulated by the Ministry of Energy and Water, which was set up in 1984 to co-ordinate water provision policy. The government is currently seeking to find a suitable way of privatising SNDE. The wage arrears have had the effect of taking the edge off union hostility to privatisation. 50% of the urban population had direct access to safe drinking water in 1990. 63% of the population of Brazzaville has piped drinking water, but there is no sewerage network or sewage treatment for the city. In 2000, 67% of the urban population had access to safe drinking water against 72% in 1993, while the percentage had declined in rural areas from 24% to 17%. This reflects the impact of population growth even at a time when the networks were being expanded. At least 50% of urban households are still using pit latrines, while at least 30% were using septic systems. 15-20% of urban dwellers have no access to proper infrastructure, while some 70% of people living in rural areas have no sanitation whatsoever. Privatisation of SNDE Despite active interest from the three French water companies (VE, Suez, and SAUR/Bouygues), the management contract to operate SNDE was awarded to Cascal in November 2002. The contract is for the finance, refurbishment and extension of existing water treatment plants, storage facilities and distribution networks for the residents of Brazzaville, Pointe Noire, Dolisie and Oyo. It is anticipated that this will evolve into a 25 year concession contract.

Source: Mott MacDonald (1992). Evaluation of the hydrology of Sub-Saharan Africa. Report on the Congo. Report prepared for the World Bank and the ADB.

73

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

COSTA RICA

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

COSTA RICA
Costa Rica had a population of 4.2million in 2002, 60% living in urban areas. The Instituto Costarricense de Acueductos y Alcantarillados (AyA) is the state water authority. AyA provides potable water to 90% of the country's population. In the metropolitan area, 69% of the population with potable water also have adequate sewer systems. On a national level, 45% of the population with potable water also have adequate sewer systems. In 2003, a project sponsored in 2002 by the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) to upgrade and manage wastewater service infrastructure in San José was cancelled. The project is now expected to be relaunched by the World Bank. It sought to scheme to expand and rehabilitate the sewerage system in a metropolitan area of San José. Under the concession approach, the project would have required an estimated US$280 million to upgrade the infrastructure and build a major WWTW with the financing provided by a mix of international institutions and commercial banks. Following a change of government in 2002, there was a change in the management of AyA, which have opponents the opportunity to derail the project. The current proposals are understood to focus on a DBO project, rather than an outright concession. Finance would come from a World Bank loan.

74

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

COTE D'IVOIRE

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

CÔTE D’IVOIRE
The development of urban water and sewerage services in Côte d'Ivoire is seen as a particular success for West Africa, especially since SAUR was allowed to gain full management control of the contract. Indeed, SODECI has moved from being a financial liability to a net contributor to the nation’s economy. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Service provision Côte d'Ivoire is regarded as offering the best water and sanitation services for urban areas in Sub-Saharan Africa. Overall, 46% of the urban population receives piped water and 32% are connected to the sewerage services. However, 62% of the population of Abidjan had access to piped water in 1993, with 45% connected to sewerage services. 58% of sewage effluents collected were treated. 0.07km 3 of water was treated in 1994, with approximately 35% of all water provided for domestic and commercial use. Overall water usage rose from 0.7km 3 in 1987 to 1,26km 3 in 1994. In 1998, the government estimated that it will cost CFAF266 billion to provide universal water and sewerage services for all people living in settlements of more than 3,000. Between 1996 and 1998, CFAF21 billion was spent on such projects. Population Total (2002, million) Total (2015, million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) SODECI Bouygues’ SAUR was awarded a lease contract to manage water provision services in Abidjan in 1959. After independence in 1960, the lease was handed over to Société de Distribution d'Eau de la Côte d'Ivoire (SODECI). SAUR in turn became SODECI’s major shareholder as it is today. In 1961, the contract was extended to five other municipalities. Shares in the company have been traded on the Bourse Regionale des Valuers Mobilieres (BRVM) in Abidjan since 1978. SAUR holds 47% of the company’s equity, with 8% being held by the government and staff, and 45% being held by private investors. The lease contract evolved to cover sewerage services. In 1987, the lease contract was converted into a full concession with an operating life of 20 years. Urban Services Safe drinking water Average water usage (L/day) Access to sewerage % Sewage treated From lease to concession The lease contract appears to have ensured a basic level of service, but has performed poorly in that it did not give SAUR sufficient leverage to manage the company on commercial lines. Thus the first three decades of SODECI’s life were marked by the need for government subsidies. In consequence, the World Bank supported the refinancing of SODECI on the basis that the lease contract was upgraded into a full concession so as to optimise SAUR’s management control. This was carried out as an additional part of the World Bank’s structural adjustment programme for the country. Throughout the life of the lease and concession contracts, SODECI’s scope and customer base has continued to expand. By 1973, SODECI served 40,071 customers in 38 population centres. This has expanded to 345,000 customers in 409 centres by 1997. Freshwater Total (1998, km 3) Per capita (1998, m 3) Withdrawals (1987, km 3) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987)

US$707 US$1,520 26% 26% 48%

16.4 19.8 44% 51% 26%

59% 111 32% 15%

76.7 5,265 0.7 22% 11% 67%

75

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

COTE D'IVOIRE

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

A profitable concession The assets are held by EECI, a government-held entity, with SODECI being responsible for the management of these assets. While the concession was granted in 1987, the managerial changes needed did not take place until 1990-91. In 1993, SODECI distributed 103million m 3 of water and billed 300,000 clients for 89million m 3. SODECI serves approximately 70% of the country’s urban population in 370 localities and the number of connections has grown by 5-6% pa during the 1990s. The company recorded a turnover of approximately US$40 million in 1996. SODECI receives no operating subsidies from the state and self-finances all agreed capital expenditure. The company is now regarded as SAUR’s main operating entity in Africa. Since 1980, unaccounted for water has been kept below 15-17% and payment of bills has exceeded 97% for private customers. However, collecting money from government departments remains problematic. While the company’s equity remains fairly tightly held by a group of corporate, governmental and institutional interests, the company’s bonds are some of the most heavily traded instruments on the Bourse. SODECI has enjoyed a consistent reputation for paying dividends due on its financial instruments and contributing to the national budget through these dividend payments and taxation. Groundwater Total recharge (1998, km 3) Per capita (1998, m 3) MAJOR CITIES Population Abidjan

37.7 2,588

2000 3,790,000

2015 6,076,000

Status Privatised

By 2000, SODECI managed more than 300 piped water supply systems across the country, with the number of individual connections increasing by 5 to 6% a year. The company served 70% of the nation's 7million urban residents including 2million in Abidjan, and the rest in settlements ranging from 5,000 to 400,000 people. In order to provide services for poor people, SODECI foregoes direct hook-up charges on three out of four of its domestic connections, a policy that pays the company direct benefits, as it has a 98% percent or better collection rate from its private customers. The cost of SODECI water to consumers is no higher than in neighbouring countries with similar economic conditions, where rates rarely cover costs and service lags far behind. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Abidjan SODECI concession SAUR Afrique (Bouygues) Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company Population served (country) Water Sewerage SODECI SAUR/Bouygues 5,200,000 3,000,000

Total 5,200,000

Sources: Haarmeyer D. & Mody A. (1998). Worldwide Water Privatisation, Financial Times Energy, London. World Bank (1994). World Development Report 1994, Infrastructure for Development. World Bank, OUP, Oxford 1994. FAO (1996). Country database on water resources.

76

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

CROATIA

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

CROATIA
The relative importance of tourism to the Croatian economy and its speedy recovery since independence from Serbia was attained has meant that Croatia has displayed a unique emphasis on developing and privatising its sewerage and sewage treatment facilities. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Management Hrvatske Vode (Croatian Waters) is the principal central government agency in charge of water resource management. Municipal entities operate on a city level, for example the Split Water and Sewerage Company (SWSC). The Law on Waters and the Law on Water Management Financing were passed in 1995. Croatia aims to bring its environmental standards into line with EU standards with the long term aim of meeting EU accession requirements. At the same time, effluent discharges to bathing waters are being treated as part of reviving the Dalmatian Coast’s tourist industry. The government seeks to raise the public water supply connection rate from 62% in 1991 and 73% by 2000 to 90% by 2005. Distribution losses were 46% in 1998 and 43% in 1999. During the 1991-92 war, 15-20% of the water system was destroyed. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation (2002) Urbanisation (2015) In urban agglomerations, 2015 Implementation From 1995, the complete regulation of water resources and water managem ent in Croatia is based on the Water Act, which includes a number of sub legal acts envisaged by the Act. Under the legislative framework, administration and inspection is carried out by the State Water Directorate. The Croatian Waters company is responsible for carrying out water management activities as defined by the Water Act, in collaboration with local enterprises in various catchment areas. Croatian Waters also co-ordinate and finance realisation of the surface water quality monitoring programme which is carried out by the authorised laboratories. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage

US$5,025 US$10,240 9% 32% 59%

4.4 4.3 59% 65% 26%

90% 72%

Water quality and environmental spending Surface waters (rivers, lakes and artificial lakes), groundwaters and coastal sea areas are classified into four classes, depending on their utilisation and quality. Corresponding new environmental quality standards (of maximum allowable concentrations) are now under preparation. There are no emission standards or guidelines at the national level. The Directorate for Environment estimated that US$152 million was spent on environmental protection in 1995. It can also be assumed that non-environmental expenditures are included in this figure. Freshwater Annual availability (2000) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1996) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) 37.7km 3 8,429m 3 0.8km 3 50% 50%

A sewage treatment works for Rijeka (260,000 people, including eight adjacent municipalities) was built in 1999 for €13 million, 50% coming from the EBRD. RWE is involved in the DM400 million Zagreb sewage treatment project serving 1.5million people. The financing of this work has involved mobilising DM150 million of project finance and DM250 million from multilateral loans and sponsor finance. Construction started at the end of 1999. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita 11km 3 2,459m 3

77

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

CROATIA

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

In 1998, funding was arranged for treating effluent outflows into Kastela and Trogir Bays. The work consists of constructing two sewage treatment works and two submarine outfalls, along with a water supply rehabilitation and replacement scheme for the mains and pumping stations, along with the construction of a new main pipeline. The total project cost is estimated at DM260 million (US$145 million), with the IBRD providing DM65 million (25% of the total project cost), and the EBRD providing DM74 million, along with local financing of about DM121 million. The latter is being provided by the four participating municipalities (Split, Solin, Kastela and Trogir) and SWSC (DM21 million) along with grants from the central government worth DM100 million. MAJOR CITIES City Zagreb

2000 1,067,000

2015 1,183,000

Comments Sewage treatment facility project started

KfW, on behalf of the German Government, is to support a project with Aquamundo for upgrading wastewater discharges into the Adriatic Sea. This is designed to help restore tourism. The coast has 150,000 permanent inhabitants and some 250,000 summer visitors. KfW made a grant of €37.5 million for this project in 2003. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Zagreb BOT sewage treatment ZOV Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage ZOV RWE (Germany)/EVN (Austria) 0 750,000

Total 750,000

78

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

CUBA

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

CUBA
Aguas de Barcelona has progressively developed its involvement with Cuba to the point where it is set to play an important role in finding the basis for a long-term revival of the island’s economy. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations , 2015 Water and sewerage services In 1996, piped water was provided to 97.9% of the urban population and 75% of the rural population. The 2000 target was for 99.9% coverage for urban areas and 100% coverage for rural areas. Sewerage covered 94.6% of the urban population and 78.2% of the rural population in 1996. Coverage targets for 2000 are 99.9% and 98.9% respectively. 22% of urban sewage effluents are treated at five secondary sewage treatment works. Urban data Served by piped water Access to sewerage Capital spending plans In 1996, the government announced that it was aiming for the treatment of all urban sewage effluents over the next ten years at a total cost of US$643 million for rehabilitating the extant sewerage system and sewage treatment works, plus a further US$747 million for service extension. Total capex needs for water provision are estimated at US$1.5 billion. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic Industrial Agriculture MAJOR CITIES City Havana 34.5km 3 3,120m 3 5.2km 3 49% 0% 51%

11.3 11.5 76% 78% 20%

96% 71%

2000 2,256,000

2015 2,365,000

Status Agbar

Urban water and sewerage 1981 Havana Santiago de Cuba Camaguey Holguin Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1975) Piped water 100% 96% 88% 64% Indoors 90% 76% 63% 40% 8.0km 3 720m 3 3.8km 3 Sanitation 98% 97% 97% 92% Flush 97% 62% 57% 37%

Agbar and privatising Havana’s services Agbar’s Interagua formed a JV with the Cuban Government in 1999 for two water management contracts serving 525,000 people. Aguas de La Havana will be 50% owned by Cuba's INRH. The contracts serve Havana, the capital, and the resorts of Cayo Coco and Varadero. The project has a 25 year contract life and is being supported by a US$24.7 million loan by Agbar. The contract was expanded in 2000 to cover 1.3million people in Havana via a 25 year management contract. In total, 1.8million people will be served by these contracts.

79

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

CZECH REPUBLIC

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

CZECH REPUBLIC
Privatisation has been carried out in a systematic manner in the Czech Republic. When Prague Water was privatised earlier this year, effectively all urban water and sewerage services became nominally under private sector management. The fact that a significant proportion of the shares of these private sector entities remain in municipal hands underlines the point that a full range of institutional and international investors are needed as well as companies for sale. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Sewerage development Connection to the sewage network has increased from 38% to 48% between 1980 and 1992. The number of operational wastewater treatment plants rose from 620 in 1989 to 960 by 1999. 75% of the population was connected to the sewerage network in 2000, with the aim of increasing this to 80% by 2005. Before 1990, sewerage technology in the then Czechoslovakia was well regarded, when given the money to operate to its intended standards. In 1990 a Kc3.75 billion sewage treatment works was completed, one of Europe's largest at the time. Here, the effluent discharges were found to be cleaner than the river water. Sewerage and treatment Tertiary treatment Secondary treatment Primary treatment Sewerage only Not connected 1991 0% 46% 2% 24% 28% 1999 N/A 65% N/A 10% 25%

US$6,808 US$15,780 4% 43% 53%

In addition, 60% of industrial effluents are inadequately treated. The total amount of effluents discharged in the period 1992-95 decreased by more than 13%, with the amount of treatment taking place increasing by 8%. This in part reflects investments in new and upgraded sewage treatment plants during 1993-1995. The total amount of BOD discharged into rivers decreased by 40% between 1990 and 1996. Population Total (2002, million) Total (2015, million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Water quality In 1990-92, the majority of rivers were understood to be of III/IV class. Across the country, at least 50% of all rivers are in a 'bad' or 'very bad' condition. These rivers can be regarded as biologically dead and a significant proportion of these waters cannot be used for industrial processes even after treatment. On average, there are 60 cases per annum of groundwater pollution from oil and petrol storage leaks, and 50 per annum from agricultural effluents. The aquifers along the Rivers Elbe and Moravia have had increasing levels of nitrate contamination from agriculture. Since 1993, an improvement in groundwater quality has been noticed. Nevertheless, some 60% of surface and ground waters were identified as unfit for human use in 1995. The quality of drinking water withdrawn from the surface waters has remained poor. As a result, bottled water consumption is widespread, although costly. The quality of drinking water is assessed in accordance with the WHO Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality. According to US trade officials in 1995, only 18% of the population’s drinking water meets the WHO criteria. Distribution losses of up to 40% have been identified in major towns and cities. Connection rates in urban areas have increased from 82% in 1999 to 87% by 2002. Water lost through leakage accounted for 23.8% of distributed water in 2002, compared to 25.1% in 2001. The Prague water and sewage company cut leakage rates from 44% of distributed water in 1989 to 30% in 2003 and seeks to cut leakage to 19% by the year 2013. Urban Services Safe drinking water Access to sewerage % Sewage treated

10.2 10.1 74% 76% 12%

87% 70% 60%

80

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

CZECH REPUBLIC

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

The economics of water and sewerage The Czech Government has been strongly in favour of privatisation since 1993, and with the sale of Prague Water in 2001, the initial privatisation of water and sewerage services is complete. Since the end of communism in 1989, water consumption has been cut by nearly half, primarily as a result of a 40-fold price rise. Consumption is also down because of the decline of the country’s heavy industry. In 1989, average consumption was 300Lper person per day, declining to 163L in 2002. The cost of a cubic metre of drinking water was kc19.5 (€0.62) in 2002, while the collection of a cubic metre of sewage cost kc15.9. EU compliance related work on the sewerage network and industrial effluent treatment was estimated at €2.47 billion in 2004, with 600 WWTWs needing to be built or upgraded, so as to provide EU compliant sewage treatment for all cities and towns with more than 2,000 inhabitants by 2100. Freshwater Total (1998, km 3) Per capita (1998, m 3) Withdrawals (1991, km 3) For domestic use (1991) For industry (1991) For agriculture (1991)

58.21 5,692 2.74 41% 57% 2%

Privatising water and sewerage services Since 1993, 57 water and sewerage companies have been set up, subdivided from the original eight regional entities and Prague Water. With the exception of the latter, shares were offered for alI of these entities, although in a number of cases, effective control of the operating companies has remained in municipal hands through the acquisition of shareholdings. With the exception of North Moravia’s SMVAK, the asset owning company is held by the relevant municipalities and the government, which rents the infrastructure and approves water charges to the privatised operating company via a contract, which includes the agreed price formula. Nine of these companies, serving more than 3.85million people have been fully privatised, with foreign investors involved. The agriculture ministry is seeking to advise municipalities on utility sales, amid concerns that water and sewage works could be sold too cheaply or too quickly. It also intends to use its so-called golden shares in the water utilities yet to be privatised in order to block what it sees as unsuitable sales. The plan is that the commission would monitor the situation and then would oversee sales until the year 2010. Around 40 concerns remaining in local authority hands. The ministry has already used their golden share to so far block the sale of Vodovody and Kanalizace Zlin in south Moravia to foreign investors, while a similar scenario is set to follow for Vodarny KladnoMelnik in central Bohemia. MAJOR CITIES Population Prague

2000 1,203,000

2015 1,203,000

Status Prague Water privatised

Privatisation of Prague Water The concession for Prague's water supply companies (Prazske Vodarny) and sewerage service companies (Prazsje Kanalizace a Vodni Toky) was awarded to AWG and VE in early 2001 after the two companies joined forces (a 66% share sale for Kc 6.1 billion (US$163 million), with a 15 year operating contract, with the balance of the shares being held by the city.) The contract supplies 1.16million people in Prague and a further 0.2million in central and eastern Bohemia via the sale of bulk water supplies. Revenues in 2003 were €132 million, with improved domestic consumption, price increases and reduced system losses accounting for a 7% increase in revenues over 2002. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Prague Water & sewerage concession PVK South Bohemia Water & sewerage BOT VAK Jizny Cechy North Moravia Water & sewerage concession Severomoravske VAK (SMVAK) Pilsen Water & sewerage concession VAK Pilzen South Moravia Water & sewerage concession Suez Ceske Water & sewerage concession 1.JVS Beroun Water & sewerage concession S Berounske Vodovy Olomouc Water services CTSE Brno Water & sewerage concession Brnenske VAK Ostrava Water & sewerage concession Ostravske VAK Karlovy Vary Water & sewerage concession VAK Karlovy Vary Sokolov Water & sewerage concession VAK Sokolov (CTSE) Northern Bohemia Water & sewerage concession Severomoravske VAK Ostrava
81

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

CZECH REPUBLIC

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Nymburk Water & sewerage concession VAK Nymburk Prerov Water & sewerage concession VAK Prerov Vsetin Water & sewerage concession VAK Vsetin Chrudim Water & sewerage concession VAK Chrudim Cheb Water & sewerage concession Chevak Cheb Hradec Kralove Water & sewerage concession VAK Hradec Kralove Havlickuv Brod Water & sewerage concession VAK Havlickuv Brod Chocen Water & sewerage concession VAK Jablonne and Orlici Breclav Water & sewerage concession VAK Breclav Kromeriz Water & sewerage concession VAK Kromeriz Uherske Hradiste Water & sewerage concession Slovacke VAK Hodonin Water & sewerage concession VAK Hodonin Zlin Water & sewerage concession VAK Zlin Vyskov Water & sewerage concession VAK Vyskov Sumperk Water & sewerage concession SPVS 23 corporate entities have been identified. AWG, Suez and VE as outlined below operate 16 of these companies. It is understood that in most of the other cases, the municipalities have retained at least a strategic stake in the operating companies, with the national privatisation fund also being a major investor. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company Population served (country) Water Sewerage PVK VE (France) 1,200,000 1,200,000 VAK Jizni Cechy Elektrim (Austria) 330,000 330,000 S Berounske Vodovy Elektrim (Austria) 100,000 100,000 SMVAK Penta Finance (Czech) 750,000 750,000 Ostravske VAK Suez (France) 330,000 330,000 Brenske VAK Suez (France) 420,000 420,000 VAK Karlovy Vary Suez (France) 120,000 120,000 South Moravia Suez (France) 350,000 350,000 Horny Slovak Suez (France) 9,000 9,000 SVAK Ostrava VE (France) 1,070,000 875,000 1.JVS VE (France) 180,000 180,000 CTSE VE (France) 130,000 0 VAK Zlin VE (France) 160,000 160,000 VAK Pilsen CTSE (VE, France) 252,000 252,000 VAK Sokolov CTSE (VE, France) 130,000 130,000 Vodosopol Klatovy CTSE (VE, France) 50,000 50,000 Aqua Pibram CTSE (VE, France) 75,000 75,000 Susice, Stary & Stod CTSE (VE, France) 26,000 26,000 SVPS Suez (France) 120,000 120,000 Benesov Suez (France) 38,000 38,000 Dalve Suez (France) 37,000 37,000 Chevak Cheb Gelsenwasser (Germany) 96,800 96,800

Total 1,200,000 330,000 100,000 750,000 330,000 420,000 120,000 350,000 9,000 1,070,000 180,000 130,000 160,000 252,000 130,000 50,000 75,000 26,000 120,000 38,000 37,000 96,800

82

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

DENMARK

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

DENMARK
Water policy and provision Water policy is framed by the Water Supply Act of 1978 (amended 1997) and the Environmental Protection Act (amended 1997). Water pricing policy is designed to ensure that the total revenue from water charges does not exceed total costs, including appropriation for future investments. Almost all costs are recovered through water charges. In 1994, an environment tax on drinking water for household use was introduced in order to encourage conservation. A tax on wastewater for discharges of nitrogen, phosphorous and organic substances entered into force in 1997. All urban and rural households have access to safe water provision and sewerage services, with 90% of the population connected to piped water services. 99% of the Danish drinking water is extracted from underground supplies. National policy emphasises the maintenance of the quality of water resources rather than post priori water treatment. Water is obtained via 30 year water extraction permits. There are 540 municipalities, served by 120 water provision entities. 90% of water works are run privately, while the remainder are run by the municipalities. The public water works supply two-thirds of the population. The local private water provision service companies cover 25% of the population, with a further 10% of the population being effectively self served, although they are usually connected to the municipal sewerage network. Notwithstanding the exception below, there appears to be no particular desire to see the privatisation of larger water and sewerage networks in the foreseeable future. Water supplies cost €382 million in 2000, along wih €680 million for sewerage and sewage treatment. Sewerage and sewage treatment A survey in 1995 identified a spend of Dkr100 billion (£11.6 billion) on water provision and sewerage compliance work for 1995-2020. Many of the targets implied by the survey would appear to seek to use EU criteria as bare minima. Domestic sewage treatment 1985 4.2% 58.3% 16.1% 9.5% 11.9% 1990 29.1% 42.1% 14.2% 1.6% 13.0% 1998 84.0% 3.4% 1.6% 0.1% 10.9%

Tertiary treatment Secondary treatment Primary treatment Sewerage only Not connected

The proportion of the population connected to sewerage services increased from 91% in 1980 to 98% in 1990, with the proportion of sewage being treated rising from 53% to 98% during this period, while primary treatment fell from 32% to 8%. There were 1,805 sewage treatment works in 1988, of which 18 serve cities with a population in excess of 100,000. The total capacity for treating and recycling waste water is 8.3million PE, with 100% of urban sewage treated. The current emphasis is to upgrade extant facilities to tertiary treatment standard wherever it is seen as appropriate. Inland water quality (1989-91) I Good II Fair III Poor IV Bad

4% 49% 35% 12%

In 1990, the municipality of Farum undertook a sale and lease-back of its wastewater treatment plant. No further PSP has been identified.

Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total Krüger VE (France) 0 60,000 60,000

83

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

ECUADOR

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

ECUADOR
Attention has focussed on the relative lack of developments in Quito, Ecuador. Consequently the Guayaquil concession award came as a bit of a surprise. This is the country’s main industrial city and international finance has supported the process. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services International support In 1999, the Municipal Water and Wastewater Company of Quito started a US$170 million service provision upgrade project to provide improved water and sewerage for 600,000 people. The work is being supported by a loan from the IADB. The IADB is also providing US$41 million out of US$51 million being spent on water and sewerage rehabilitation work in Guayaquil by Ecapag. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations, 2015

US$1,897 US$3,580 12% 37% 51%

12.8 15.2 61% 67% 24%

A tradition of municipalities operating as autonomous entities has in turn held back the regulation required to drive forward investment. Attempts since 1996 to create a national water regulator have been thwarted. Water losses are 40-50% and in one case 70% or even higher, including illegal connections. Due to local political pressure municipal utilities are unwilling to increase rates to replace pipes. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1985) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) The Guayaquil concession A 30 year concession for water and sewerage services for the city of Guayaquil (1.72million people in 1995) was gained by International Water, against Thames Water (RWE) and Suez. Water provision by Empresa Cantonal de Agua Potable y Alcantrillado de Guayaquil (Ecapag) will rise from 70% to 90% by 2020, with sewerage coverage increasing from 50% to 90%. Although the privatisation of Quito’s services (1.24million people in 1995) has been considered on an informal basis in recent years, political constraints remain an obstacle. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Service provision in the main cities Piped water 85% 61% 96% 63% Indoors 70% 41% 86% 42% Sanitation 97% 95% 95% 92% Flush 93% 42% 93% 76% 134km 3 10,596m 3

81% 70% 442km 3 34,950m 3 15km 3 12% 6% 70%

Quito Guayaquil Cuenca Machala MAJOR CITIES City Guayaquil Quito

2000 2,118,000 1,616,000

2015 3,397,000 2,228,000

Comments Water & wastewater privatised PSP under consideration
Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

84

ECUADOR

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

Overall, 68% of the urban population in 1999 was considered to have access to safe drinking water and 48% to have adequate sanitation. It is of interest to note that the connection to indoors taps and lavatories in many medium sized towns is higher than in Quito or Guayaquil. Some 5% of Quito’s sewage effluents are subject to treatment. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Samborondón Water & sewerage services Tecvasa Guayaquil Water & wastewater concession ECAPAG Empresa Metropolitana de Alcantarillado y Agua Potable (Emaap), Qito's water utility intends to award a US$600 million 20 year water and power BOT, to supply the city with water and power via a 109km water channel from the Valle Vicoso river to its Bellavista water treatment plant. The population of Qito is forecast to double by 2020. The Inter-American Development Bank approved a US$40 million loan to Emaap in September 2002 to support the first phase of a US$110 million programme to expand water and sanitation services and reduce flooding and landslides. This will enable Emaap to extend water and sewerage service to low-income sectors of the population. Manta (Manabi Province) is seeking to privatise Eapam, its water utility, which serves 200,000 people. Guayas and Pinchincha Provinces are also examining PSP options.

Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Tecvasa Tecvasa 100,000 100,000 ECAPAG UU (UK) 2,500,000 2,500,000

Total 100,000 2,500,000

85

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

EGYPT

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

EGYPT
Egypt retains an unhealthy dependence on the Nile River, even though both the quality of this resource has been degraded and upstream users are becoming increasingly thirsty. In recent years, the emphasis has shifted from irrigation projects to improving irrigation efficiency and water re-use. Having been traditionally dependent on international support for projects, the private sector is now being encouraged to participate. A lower then expected growth in the demand for industrial water is slowing this process down. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Water scarcity is endemic Egypt is characterised by limited land and water resources. Less than 3% of its area is cultivated because of water shortage. The Nile is already fully utilised, mainly for agricultural and human use. Water quality problems are mainly salinisation and waterlogging as a result of the over-exploitation of the Nile. These problems affect the productivity of cultivated land, while aquifers have rising salt levels and pollution ingress. WHO statistics point to about 90,000 annual recorded deaths linked to water-borne diseases. Quantities of direct or indirect liquid wastes, from industrial sources into the River Nile are estimated at 2.4 million m3 per day. The share of Greater Cairo and Alexandria’s pollution load is about 17% and 11% respectively. While Egypt’s theoretical sewage and effluent treatment capacity is 7.18million m 3 per day, 1.73million m 3 of effluents per day are discharged to the Mediterranean and Lake Manzala from Alexandria, Damietta and Port Said. There is a plan to reuse water from Alexandria’s wastewater treatment facility (capacity of 1.54million m 3 per day) to reclaim the strip of northern coast. Population 2003 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations, 2015 Infrastructure development costs Since 1983, £30 billion has been invested in service improvement. Potable water reached 90% of the population in 2002. During this time, 1900 water treatment works were built, handling 18million m 3 per day and wastewater treatment capacity was expanded from 1.0million m 3 per day to 8.2million m 3 per day through the construction of 220 WWTWs. Revenues only cover 40% of costs because of subsidies, inefficiency, high levels of leakage, and non-paying state customers. The Ministry of Public Works and the Ministry of Housing and Public Utilities have allocated £3.5 billion (along with an €90 million loan from the EIB) for the Greater Cairo Wastewater programme. This involves an extension of the sewerage network, 20 new water and wastewater treatment works and remedial work to alleviate water source pollution. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Aid related funding has been the norm USAID has been the largest single donor in Egypt for urban water pollution treatment equipment projects in Cairo, Alexandria and other medium -sized cities. Since 1975, USAID has invested over US$2 billion in urban water and wastewater infrastructure serving about 22million people. More than US$900 million of this money has been focussed on sewerage and sewage treatment in Cairo. Projects seek to treat raw sewage and improve water and wastewater systems of several cities. Recent projects have included connecting 700,000 residents in poor Cairo and Embaba to the sewerage network, along with more than 500,000 residents in Suez. In Cairo, three potable water reservoirs serving the city at Darassa entered service providing water to 3million people. This funding programme continues, with US$45m in aid to improve sewage treatment in the southern city of Luxor being announced in March 1999.

US$1,354 US$3,810 17% 32% 51%

70.5 90.0 42% 45% 24%

82% 20% 10%

86

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

EGYPT

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1993) Domestic (1993) Industrial (1993) Agriculture (1993) Environmental legislation

2.80km 3 43m 3 55.1km 3 6% 8% 86%

Egypt appointed a council for environmental protection with the legal power to assess fines for violators of pollution laws in 1996. This reflects the government's focus on water protection since the passing of an environmental protection law in January 1994. The law requires that existing industrial concerns equip their facilities with water pollution treatment equipment and all new tourist and industrial developments have to order suitable water and effluent treatment plant as part of the planning process. Measures implementing the regulations of the new environmental law went into effect in February of 1995. A National Water Policy has set out targets for 2017. These concentrate on improving the efficiency of the irrigation systems and increasing the amount of treated wastewater used for irrigation. Private sector participation encouraged Egypt authorised the creation of financially autonomous utilities in 1995. The legislation allows commercial approaches to delivering public water and wastewater services, giving utilities the ability to levy and retain tariffs and generate revenue on a cost recovery basis. Tariff collection rates have increased in Cairo and Alexandria and separate bank accounts were established which give these utilities a degree of flexibility in planning their operations. Utilities in both Cairo and Alexandria are being encouraged to make more progress in increasing the level of tariffs towards cost recovery. In smaller urban areas, tariff reform is well advanced. In 2000, a law on the ‘grant of concessions for establishment, management and utilisation of water/wastewater utilities’ was passed. This allows for the granting of concessions for up to 99 years to private sector companies. An intermunicipal policy co-ordinating committee was established to act as a regulator for the water and wastewater sector, with the specific aim of encouraging management efficiency, cost recovery and private sector participation. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1985) Privatisation prospects The first major private sector operated facility was to be for developing industrial water provision in the Suez Special Economic Zone (SEZ). In 2001, a US$180 million 33 year water treatment BOT contract was awarded to Canada’s SNC Lavalin. In 2002, the contract was suspended. The BOT plans for water provision for the resort city of Sharm El Sheikh have also been postponed. Bechtel has been asked to develop a series of proposals for Independent Water and Power Projects (IWPPs) in the Sinai. A private sector managed system supplies water to most of the hotels in the city's Naama Bay area, and a private wastewater treatment facility is being built that will also supply treated water for reuse. In Nuweiba, private companies maintain the city's water and wastewater system. In the longer term, pressures for new investment through PPP are likely to return. Along with Suez, the Port Said industrial zone is the most likely candidate for a BOT, along with the tourist resorts. MAJOR CITIES City Alexandria Cairo Shubra El Khema 1.3km 3 20m 3 3.0km 3

2000 3,506,000 9,462,000 937,000

2015 4,330,000 11,531,000 1,234,000

Status N/A N/A N/A

Conflict Study: The Nile River Basin The 10 countries within the Nile basin contain 40% of Africa's population and make up 10% percent of its land mass. These countries are: Egypt, Sudan, Burundi, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda. More than 85% of the Nile's water comes from the Blue Nile, which originates in Ethiopia. However, most of the river's flow of 85billion m 3 pa is used by Egypt, the last nation on the Nile's path to the Mediterranean Sea. In 1959, a pact was drawn up dividing most of the Nile’s waters between Egypt and Sudan. Earlier agreements include those drawn up on behalf of Nile Basin countries between various European Empires.

87

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

EGYPT

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

The Nile effectively provides Egypt with its fresh water. In recent years, the upstream nations have started to harness the Nile's waters in response to economic development and population growth. In Ethiopia, more than 200 irrigation dams have been built during the 1990s, that will use nearly 500million m3 of the Nile's flow annually, while further dams are being planned for hydropower. If Ethiopia sought to develop half of its irrigation potential, this would reduce the river's flow to Egypt by 15%. The basin does not produce enough fresh water to satisfy the irrigation plans of both Ethiopia and Egypt. Egypt’s New Valley irrigation project is based on relocating seven million people who will be supplied with 5billion m3 pa of water from the Lake Nasser reservoir. Sudan plans to build its own dam on the Nile north of Khartoum, where the Blue Nile and the White Nile converge. After threats by Egypt to go to war over its water resources, diplomacy has been replacing rhetoric. All ten countries have signed the UN’s 1997 transboundary waters convention. The U.S. State Department and Environmental Protection Agency have opened field offices to help developing nations negotiate transboundary solutions to regional environmental problems including freshwater scarcity. The Eastern Africa hub, which specialises in Nile Basin water resource issues, opened in Addis Ababa in 1998. With the region’s population rising from 140million in 1980 to 340million by 2025, longer term resolutions depend on population stabilisation. In May 1999, water ministers from the ten Nile Basin states agreed to co-operate on the equitable use of the Nile water resources and to strengthen the Nile secretariat head office in Entebbe, Uganda. At a meeting in Khartoum in August 2000, officials agreed to plans for the redistribution of the Nile waters, including power sharing cooperatives, river regulation and water resources management. Egypt is said to have agreed to cancel its monopoly of the waters under the 1959 treaty and has agreed to improve relations with Ethiopia and Sudan. Even so, Kenya’s notice of intent to withdraw from the treaty in 2003 has been described by Egypt as “an act of war”. In June 2001, the first meeting of the International Consortium for Cooperation on the Nile (ICCON) took place, when the donor community pledged US$140 million to support various programmes.

Source: GWI (2002). Egypt gripped by wave of pessimism. Global Water Intelligence, Volume 3, Number 9, p 5.

88

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

ESTONIA

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

ESTONIA
The Tallinn privatisation process has attracted attention due to concerns about where the actual control of the concession lies. This depends upon how you interpret the potential development of the company’s share structure. UU has taken the optimistic view; which Suez did not share, despite Suez being responsible for the original EBRD funded work. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Drinking water Distribution losses are mainly in the region of 30-35%, rising to up to 60% in Northeast Estonia. There are 23 water treatment plants in Estonia, most of which are regarded as outdated and are being upgraded. The Tallinn and Kuressaare water treatment works have been reconstructed since 1991 and are regarded as performing satisfactorily. 20.2% of drinking water samples failed on chemical criteria and 7.4% on bacterial levels in 2000. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation (2002) Urbanisation (2015) In urban agglomerations, 2015 Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Sewerage services There are some 620 secondary treatment plants, 240 of them requiring extensive overhaul. In addition, there are 10 tertiary sewage treatment works. In the late 1980s, there were 1,080 treatment plants, but many fell into disuse with the break up of communal farming and a population shift towards urban areas. There are 130 direct outlets of wastewater into the sea, 30 into lakes, 1013 into rivers, and seven into groundwater. In 1996, 1% (1.6million m3 pa) of primary treated wastewater (total 138million m³ pa) was poorly treated. This is mainly drainage water from the mining industry. 4% (3.4million m 3 pa) of water subject to secondary treatment (85million m³ pa in total) was just treated by settlement in sewage lagoons, while 27% was regarded as being poorly treated. Freshwater Annual availability (2000) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1985) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) Municipal wastewater 1999 282 70% 1% 1% 32% 69% 12.7km 3 9,105m 3 0.2km 3 56% 39% 5%

US$4,792 US$12,260 6% 26% 68%

1.3 1.2 69% 71% 0%

95% 93% c75%

Total discharge (million M³) Connected to sewerage No treatment Primary Secondary Tertiary Groundwater Annual availability (2000) Per capita

4.0km 3 2,865m 3

89

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

ESTONIA

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

Investments Between 1990 and 1995, investment was concentrated on wastewater treatment plants situated close to the coast of the Baltic Sea. In the investment programmes for 1996, the emphasis was moved to saving the use of water through efficiency gains and leakage reduction, while concentrating on inland sewage treatment plants. KR235 million was invested in water protection in 1996 from the Estonian Environmental Fund and other sources, which covered more than 50 projects. The government is using water pricing as a policy to encourage efficient use by domestic and industrial users. This work was supported with a €10 million loan from the EBRD. The Ministry of the Environment believes that compliance with the EU’s urban wastewater treatment directive will cost €350 million by 2008, involving 90 individual projects for towns with a PE in excess of 10,000. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Tallinn 30 year water & wastewater concession AS Tallina Vesi Privatisation The municipality of Tallinn sold a 50.4% holding in Tallinna Vesi (Tallinn Water) via 28million shares currently held and 30million new shares (for a minimum) to UU and Bechtel in October 2000. Suez, VE and International Water have pre-qualified for bidding. International Water and United Utilities bought the stake in Tallinna Vesi for KR 1.3 billion (US$78.22 million). In 1994, the EBRD provided €23 million out of a €48 million loan package for the construction of a sewage treatment works in Tallinn, which was constructed by Degrémont (Suez). Under the sales agreement, tariffs at Tallinna Vesi will be frozen until a 15% increase in 2004-2005. The EBRD and DEPFA Investment Bank Ltd syndicated an €80 million loan to Tallinna Vesi to a group of western European banks in March 2003. The loan will help Tallinna Vesi meet EU standards for water and wastewater services. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage AS Tallina Vesi UU (UK) 405,000 405,000

Total 405,000

90

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

Some 629 safe drinking water schemes and 110 town sewerage systems will be constructed. Between 1997 and 2001. A contract to modernise revenue collection and computerize billing became operational in 2001.6 billion. supply 92% of homes with water. linking the water conservation and the importance of paying bills has assisted this process. the regional council sought to provide access to piped water for another 331. In 2001. The authority’s initial aim is to develop a billing system based upon cost recovery and affordability. Actual progress was significantly below this figure. The educational programme. extensions of the water and power networks. It was the first time that the authority had attempted any form of PR. The existing tariffs and collection rates were too low to finance operations. irrigation schemes construction and capacity building. the bi-monthly billing cycle was replaced by a monthly system. Access to safe drinking water was 24%. 91 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .5% of the urban population had access to safe drinking water in 1998. 11% and piped networks with private taps. By 2002. the contract had paid for itself. piped networks with standpipes & public taps. who have developed a tariff structure that is being progressively implemented over the next five years. Full cost recovery will be introduced for water and sewerage services from 2006. in 1998 against 19% in 1990. while a new tariff structure is being phased in over a five-year period. Funding is to be secured from the government a donor organisations and the programme will focus on hydropower generation. 3%. the World Bank approved a US$100 million loan to encourage the reform and extension of urban and rural water supply projects. This will mobilize 5. Sources of safe drinking water were: protected wells. 10%. In 2004. safe drinking nd water provisions.000 residents. This is being implemented by CS Holdings of South Africa. originally established during the Italian Occupation.500 local projects designed to bring potable water supplies to 3million people. To rationalize billing. access to safe water in rural areas was 11% against 80% in urban areas. In Addis Ababa. the Addis Ababa Water and Sewerage Authority (AAWSA) came into operation. 83. In 1990.ETHIOPIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS ETHIOPIA In 2002. the Ethiopian Water Resources Ministry announced that the country will undertake a 15-year water sector development programme with a total investment of some US$8.

0% 0.000 92 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .FINLAND PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS FINLAND Management of water resources The Finnish Ministry of the Environment is currently preparing long-term goals for the protection of Finnish waters for the year 2005. with 600 municipal and 150 industrial wastewater treatment plants in 2002. These will be based on the Water Act (1961. owned by the Helsinki municipality) gained a 12 year concession to operate the second largest wastewater treatment plant in northern Finland. Annual withdrawals of ground and surface waters as a percentage of available water were 2.0% Officially. Industry generated 900million m³ of wastewater.0% 20. and operation and maintenance costs including capital costs are mainly covered by the users in compliance with the polluter pays principle. revised in 1996).9% 1999 80.0% 23. the Act on Environmental Administration (1995).79million people. there is still need to improve biological and chemical treatment with regards to phosphorus removal from effluents. Domestic sewage treatment Tertiary treatment Secondary treatment Primary treatment None 1990 76.1% 0. The current investment costs of public water and sanitation services are about mk1.000 60. there were 794 public water supply plants serving 3. Kemwater Services (51% Kemira OY and 49% YIT Environmental Services. Domestic consumption of water was 257l per capita per day in 1995.8 billion per year (US$340 million pa). Water supplies 86% of the Finnish population was served by public waterworks in 1994 and approximately 80% was connected to public sewerage systems in 1999. 99% of urban and 90% of rural households have access to safe water provision and all households have safe sewerage services. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Haapavesi Contract Wastewater treatment concession Company Kemwater In 2002. Most industrial plants are served by their own water supplies. Financing water and sewerage services The municipal wastewater and water supply investment costs are financed mainly by municipalities themselves. Effluent treatment coverage was 93% in 1995.3% in 1994. The quality of Finnish wastewater treatment is regarded as being good. In 1983. However. Finnish industry spent mk336 million on water and wastewater projects in 1997. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Kemwater Parent company (country) Kemira (Finland) Water 0 Population served Sewerage Total 60. with an annual operating cost of €200 million. 79% of the wastewater of pulp and paper industries are subject secondary treatment. and the Act on Public Water and Sewage Plants (1977. €2 million will be spent in upgrading the facility.0% 0. revised 1994). along with O&M costs of mk874 million. with 11% receiving tertiary treatment and the remaining 12% being treated at primary level. of which 700million m 3 were generated in the pulp and paper industry in 1994.0% 0.

and had stabilised by 1990.920 3% 28% 69% Households pay 84% of water fees.FRANCE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS FRANCE The French water sector remains a fine example of a Cartesian duality. million Urban areas (2002) Urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations 2015 Water quality River water quality in 1985 I-Good/Very Good II-Fair/Good III-Poor/Fair IV-Bad/Poor Sewerage and sewage treatment Year Tertiary Secondary Primary Sewerage only Not connected 1993-1995 5% 44% 5% 14% 32% 2000 13% 61% 13% 6% 7% 59. 10% of water samples were over the current lead standard. let alone the standard being proposed by the WHO and the EU. Since 1994. companies are now being expected to deliver in terms of performance and helping France to modernise its water and sewerage services and local competitors are emerging. The percentage of the population having their sewage effluents treated has increased from 19% in 1970 to 41% in 1980 and 87. until recently. Urban services % Water L per capita per day % Sewerage % Sewage treated 99% 156 95% 80% 93 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . According to 2004 report of the Institut Français de l’Environnement. Lead piping was banned in 1995 and lead solder in 1996. million Total 2015.5% by 2000. Lead pipes were still being installed in Paris as late as 1992. privatisation has advanced at a stately pace. 14.8 76% 79% 20% 8% 26% 60% 6% The connection rate for sewerage services has increased from 55% in 1970 to 61% in 1980 and 93% by 2000. mainly in Côte d’Azur and the Ile de France. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services US$24. Since 1991. water bills are calculated according to the volume of water used. while metering has been compulsory since the 1930s. Suez and Bouygues are pioneers and leaders in the development of private sector participation. inheriting a somewhat primitive infrastructure by European standards and existing in a cosy and. compared with 1% by farmers and 15% by industry. A survey carried out in 1999 found that in France. In consequence.8 62. Water usage and availability Demand for water has risen by 4-5% pa since 1950. non-competitive environment. Population Total 2002. Veolia. Across the world. replacement of up to 70% of piping in some areas will cost a total of F120 billion. While the French market is unlikely ever to open to international competition.42million people live in areas with a water shortfall. domestic water consumption has been decreasing by 1% per annum.061 US$26. Yet at home. The shift towards demand led pricing has been a key factor in constraining domestic water use. 21% of groundwater and 45% of surface water has excessive pesticide levels and 30% of inland water is of poor or bad quality.

many of them under the wings of VE and Suez. they have been steadily increasing their fees to domestic customers (up 22.m 3) Withdrawals (1990.1 Delegated 1998 2001 16. it was the exception.7% pa on average between 1988 and 1994) to make up for this shortfall.1 42. with an average population served of 565 people per contract.0 23. there were eight major private sector players in France. By 1933. Privatisation has been taking place alongside the evolution and expansion of water and wastewater services. 44% in 1968 and 69% by 1986.6 9.6 10.9 30. Freshwater Total (1998. compliance with the proposed Drinking Water Directive will cost France F100-120billion.5 11.1 32. along with a number of smaller regional concerns serving 17% of the population.5 10. The Paris region plans spending US$6 . there were 50 private sector companies.3 26.0 60. privatisation has generally expanded by 1% per annum. there were only three major private sector players left. There are three leading private sector companies with 13. mainly in rural areas. followed by Eaux de Banlieue in 1867 and Lyonnaise des Eaux (Suez) in 1880. five significant private sector entities remained.0 41.000 contracts. As a result. traditionally managed on a regional basis. Population served by management regime Million Drinking water supply Single municipality Group of municipalities Overal Waste water treatment Single municipality Group of municipalities Overall Municipally run 1998 2001 8. The Agences des Basins are failing to levy appropriate charges to agriculture and industry. In 1980. km 3) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Privatisation Private sector involvement started in 1853 with the founding of Cie. which addresses some 23.600 people per contract.5 25. including the great majority of the urban population with an average population served of 3. with affected households paying F10-50.1 56.4 27. agriculture generated a BOD load of 254million PE while financing 2% of sewerage expenditure and accounted for 80% of water demand while paying 1% of the national supply bill. Water billings in 2001 were €10 billion: Local authority collection 46% Private sector collection 25% Water agencies 12% Government 7% Sewerage infrastructure development Year Sewerage 2o/3 o treatment 1992 65% 50% 2000 75% 70% 2005 (forecast) 85% 80% One of the problems is that the ‘polluter pays’ principle applies more to domestic customers than to other categories. One new competitor (Ruas) has recently emerged.3 14.FRANCE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Compliance costs According to Suez. Market structure Companies have a portfolio of local contracts. Since the late 1930s.000 to replace their lead piping.2 36.0 17.8 7. With the acquisition of SDEI by Suez in 1991 and CISE by Bouygues (SAUR’s parent company) in 1997.7 16% 69% 15% 1998 25.8 16.0 37.4 180.0 35.4 19. Generale des Eaux (VE). The private sector accounts for 78% of the population. km 3) Per capita (1998.9 94 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .8 18.3 Overall 2001 23.6 10.1 60.7 billion on wastewater treatment from 1997 to 2015.0 18.000 municipal contracts. serving some 78% of the population.1 15. The company stopped using lead piping for connecting households with the mains in 1981 and even then. The public sector serves the remaining 22% of the population. By 1990.6 25.3 30.065 37.0 20.6 11. but this remains a local company. PSP rose to 31% in 1954. and the public sector.0 3. In 1998.9 55.

VE has 2.71 2.65 1995 .000 1. while Suez provided water for 14million and sewerage services for 6million in 1994.000 contracts. which will create an unprecedented degree of transparency in the market.56 1999 1. until 1997.70 2.667). 2004.300 contracts in France.630. km 3) For domestic us e (<1990) For industry (<1990) For agriculture (<1990) MAJOR CITIES Population Paris Lyon Marseilles Lille Toulouse 100.04 0. while Dijon gained a 10% cut from Suez. who had serviced the town since 1864. Suez had a contract retention rate of 84% in 2001 and VE retained 80% in 2003. 80% of contract reviews resulted in upward price revisions. Jean de Gard 95 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .78 0. For example.83 0. Castres cancelled its contract with Suez after a dispute about proposed spending and price rises.5% 23.0 1.2 53% 30% 17% 2000 9. Suez has 3. privatisation of sewerage services has grown appreciably faster than for water since new sewerage schemes are usually only initiated when the contract is given to the private sector. There has been a significant move towards a centralised and activist regulatory regime as pioneered by Ofwat in England and Wales.68 2.51 1998 1.300 water and sewerage contracts Generale des Eaux National 3.000 1.80 0. m 3) Withdrawals (1990. Since 1990. Private sector market share is being gained more rapidly for sewerage contracts than for water.353.01 0.08 0.000 1. in collaboration with the statisticians of the Service Centrale des Enquetes et Etudes Statistiques.0 0 10.29 1996 1.10 0.78 0.9% Water Sanitation Taxes Total While revising prices during the life of a contract remains common practice. VE served 19. which is best demonstrated by the fact that until the Nantes sewerage concession award to VE in 1997.000 Status Private sector Private sector Private sector Private sector Private sector Regulatory study: Reforming France’s water services The chief domestic challenge facing both VE and Suez is the perceived lack of a competitive market.48 1997 1. km 3) Per capita (1998. In a typical year. In 2002 Nice negotiated a 15% cut in bills with Veolia.036.000 water and sewerage contracts SAUR Gard & Herault 3 water contracts Ruas de St. This may in result in genuine competition for water and sewerage contracts. while jointly operating some of the largest contracts. VE and Suez regard the French market as being the most competitive in Europe despite controlling 85% of the private sector between them.9million for sewerage in 1980.000 water and sewerage contracts Lyonnaise des Eaux National 6. which have taken place in recent years. with an average population served of 11.66 2. Water prices now need to be renegotiated every five years as opposed to the previous limit of once every 15 years.858. The 1995 Loi Barnier also obliges local water authorities and municipalities to publish an annual report on water prices and quality.62 2000 1. VE and Suez have never gained a contract from each other.703 6.000 761. Average water prices in France (€per M³) 1995 1. The piecemeal nature of contracts in France has constrained the scope for economies of scale.FRANCE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Source: Institut Francais de l’Environnement.000 991.083 people.07 0. In 2004. The city of Avignon negotiated a similar reduction earlier in the year. 12-15% of contracts in France are renewed. There has been a subsequent shift from increas es to cost cutting exercises.446.71 0.000 (average 4.11 0.000 871. Since 1997. The government has threatened to take-over water contracts or their awarding process so as to penalise these companies. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company National 2.2% 15. Indeed. the traditional reason for such revisions has been to facilitate price rises.66 2.304.000 2015 9. Groundwater Total recharge (1998.000 1. each serving on average 1.82 0.8million people for water and 6.000 1.290.358. the private sector has been providing the local authorities and national and regional audit offices with externally audited annual reports and results statements. There has also been concern about the effect of a number of corruption scandals over contract awards. while SAUR has 6.6% 17.57 2.

The first noted contract gain was in 1996.000 Lyonnaise des Eaux Suez (France) 17. La Société de Travaux Gestion et Services (STGS) provides water to 85 communes.000 SAUR Bouygues (France) 6.000PE.457 communes in the Rhone – Mediterranean – Corsica region. approximately 10% of the private sector share was accounted for by joint ventures.000 80.000 Ternois Epuration Ternois Developpement (France) 0 80. Since competition effectively started in 1995-96. waste management and water equipment and services based in Avranches in North West France.000 people and wastewater services for 120.000 STGS STURNO (France) 75. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total Generale des Eaux VE (France) 25.000.000.000 0 50. • 96 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . These arrangements are increasingly seen as being anti-competitive and by 2003.000 people in four départements.000 people in a number of municipalities across France.000 17.000 25. Ternois provides wastewater treatment for 150. Lille & Versailles) so the country numbers include a significant element of double counting.000 A number of contracts are held jointly (e. SOGEDO (Société de Gérance de Distribution d’Eau) is based in Bordeaux and serves 66 of the 1. STURNO has a total turnover of €45 million.000 0 75. The company was founded in 1989 and is part of STURNO.000. 1-2% of the market has been gained by perhaps 10-12 independent companies.000 9.000. a French company involved in telephone.FRANCE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Competition remains at an early stage The Syndicat Professionnel des Exploitants Indépendants des Réseaux d'Eau et d'Assainissement (SPEIREA) was founded as a grouping of water and wastewater service companies outside the three major companies. Revenues are approximately €9 million pa.000 120.500.000 people in 100 communes in the South of France. 12 between VE and Suez and 2 between Suez and SAUR. In 2000. or approximately 80.000.000 Sogedo Sogedo (France) 50.g. 5 of the VE/Suez joint ventures had been broken up.000. • • • RUAS provides water to 130.500. Ternois Epuration was founded by Ternois Developpement France’s fourth largest manufacturer of wastewater treatment works founded in 1970.000 130. Paris.000 6.000 Ruas Ruas (France) 130.000 19. totalling 75. Revenues in 2002 were €7 million.000 6.000. Marseille. In the region of 350 municipalities are served by the four companies identified below.

991 0. due to some hostility towards further privatisation by the workforce. Freshwater Total (1998. million In urban areas 2002 In urban areas 2015 In urban agglomerations 2015 Sewerage services Sewerage services are being developed under a delegated management contract with SOCAGI.590 8% 41% 51% 1. sewerage development SOCAGI 97 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . VE gained a 20 year concession to operate SEEG’s services. however. Nationally.1 72% 22% 6% 62. Urban Services Safe drinking water Per capita consumption (L/day) Sewerage % Sewage treated Privatising SEEG The Société des Eaux et de l'Electricité du Gabon (SEEG) has been earmarked for privatisation since 1993. 90% of the urban population is regarded as having access to safe water.3 1. km3) Per capita (1998. VE initially acquired 100% of SEEG’s equity. m 3) Withdrawals (1987. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Water provision 40% of the population of Libreville has access to piped water but there are no sewerage or sewage treatment facilities serving the city. Port-Gentil and Franceville. in return for a concession. In March 1997.6 83% 89% 0% 90% 66 55% 0% 164. although the scope for cost-cutting is difficult. even though it has recognised that the private operator would contribute a significant amount of capital to the company. 49% of which was in turn sold in a public tender with the equity being listed on the Libreville stock exchange. reluctant to proceed. million Total 2015. Population Total 2002. km 3) For domestic use (1989) US$3. km3) Per capita (1998. m 3) Withdrawals (1989. SOCAGI was virtually bankrupt in 1994. a group comprising Suez (43%). having made a loss of CFAF14 billion in that year. SEEG generated revenues of F500 million from its electricity services and F200 million from water provision in 1996. The concession serves Gabon’s three principal cities: Libreville. The government was. The company is understood to be at least breaking even.0 52. km 3) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Groundwater Total recharge (1998.171 0. Hydro Quebec (34%) and EDF (23%).780 US$6.GABON PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS GABON Gabon is an example of a relatively small and undeveloped economy that has nevertheless developed a series of private sector water and sewerage contracts over the past decade.0 100% Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Main urban areas 20 year water provision concession SEEG Urban areas Lease contract.0 140.

000 N/A 450.GABON PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company Population served (country) Water Sewerage Total SEEG VE (France) 450.000 SOCAGI Suez (France) 0 N/A N/A 98 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .

5% 38.9% 1999 83. to subsidise innovative techniques or to protect catchment areas. the Elbe.1% 3. secondary treatment 27. Overall. There are rising nitrate and phosphate levels.7% 10. e.1% respectively. Urban Services. Nature Protection and Nuclear Safety is responsible for the enaction of the Federal Water Act. The revenue is used to support special environmental measures like the economical use of water. Western Länder only % Water 100% % Sewerage 100% % Sewage treated 99% Inland water quality Western Länder La – Very Good Lb – Good II – fair III – Poor IV-bad 1985 6.3% 12. utilities are seeking to merge or attract private sector support to see how they can control their rising bills. Population Total (2002.GERMANY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS GERMANY Water and sewerage services in Germany are being affected by a consumer backlash against what is being seen as an increasingly target driven approach towards service standards.4% of the population receiving treatment compared with 91. Wesser and Main are Class III/IV in their lower reaches. most of the Länder have regulations on the payment of a water abstraction charge of up to DM0.100 1% 28% 71% Regulations and charging mechanisms The Federal Ministry for the Environment. In addition. In consequence.6% and tertiary treatment reaches 10.8% 4. Agriculture and Forestry deals with water resources management projects in the rural economy.0% 1.0% 64. 99 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . One SE unit is the equivalent discharge of a human per year. The charges started at DM12 per SE in 1981 and were last revised at DM70 per SE in 1994. the Wastewater Charges Act.051 US$27.5 88% 90% 43% Tertiary Secondary Primary Untreated Unconnected The sewerage network is basic in the former GDR.g. with 62.9% 49.6 per m3.7% and 1. 98 out of the former GDR’s 243 sewage treatment works comply with COD/BOD standards. Effluents are charged for under the Wastewater Charges Act of 1976 (amended 1990). or unit harm.1% 6.4% respectively.8% 5. Economics (2001) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services US$24. The Federal Ministry of Food.5% 7.5% The rivers Ruhr and Rhine are considered problem areas. the Washing and Cleansing Agents Act and the Federal Nature Conservation Act. The Federal Ministry of Health is responsible for drinking water supply and quality.1% 4. million) Total (2015. million) Urban areas (2002) Urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Development of sewerage infrastructure 1975 5.0% 14.4% 1995 72.8% 10.0% 40. In addition.2% N/A N/A 1990 29.2% 4. The Rhine Action Plan (1987) sought to improve the Rhine to Class I or II quality by 2000.1% and 5.9% 3.4 82. The systematic examination of groundwater quality started in 1984.3% 1. These charges are based on Schadeinheit (SE).3% in Western Germany.7% 82. Primary treatment accounts for 24. The municipalities also have to pay this tax. by payments to farmers for changing land use patterns. Germany is a lynchpin for the central and eastern European water and sewerage markets and will play a major role in the accession process of those economies.6% and 37.

77 per m³. the State of Hess lowered water fees charged by Sudheissische Gas und Water AG. in Brandenburg. km3) Per capita (1998. 34% of rivers have water quality of I-II. In 1999.18 2001 4. This is in contrast to figures of €150-300 billion for sewerage and wastewater alone that have been the accepted norm since the 1990s.29 2002 2. For example. Bavaria and Baden-Wurttenburg. This perhaps reflects the work carried out to date as well as the savings that can be made when examining costs more closely. km 3) For domestic use (1991) For industry (1991) For agriculture (1991) Compliance and upgrading forecasts In 2003. the German association of towns and parishes. some DM90 less than in 1998. Groundwater Total recharge (1998. with an average water fee of €1. m 3) Withdrawals (1991. 45% of II/III and 18% of III/IV.00 8. Freshwater Total (1998. there have been legal moves to force water charges down in North Rhine-Westphalia.70 2000 2.0 49% 48% 44% 100 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .18 per m³ in 2000. VpA found that conversion work for extant facilities can be carried out for DM250 per capita against previous assumptions of DM450-600 per capita. They have studied 200 projects across Germany and concluded that costs for developing facilities could fall by 15-40% when submitted to private tender.28 NA NA 2003 2.56 96. km 3) Per capita (1998.20 2001 2. Investment in infrastructure €billion Water Wastewater Total The cost for the customer Water production has fallen by 28% 1990-2002.36 6.44 6. Systematic data on the eastern Länder is currently being collected.56 6. the DStGB stated that it believed the upgrading of Germany’s water and wastewater system will require investment of about €75 billion over the next 10 years. because of the current high cost of water provision and sewerage services. In 2003. The average household will pay DM745 as a result. It is fair to say that water quality and infrastructure are appreciably below those in the Western Länder.985 1.84 9. km 3) For domestic use (1975) For industry (1975) For agriculture (1975) 45.85 9.165 47. The VpA was established in 1992 as an association of private sewerage operating companies. wastewater charges were €2. the municipally held water provider. The water in the former GDR is of a poor quality as only 20% of surface water can be used for drinking water abstraction within reasonable efforts of purification. m 3) Withdrawals (1990.7 555 8.3 11 70 20 Source: Ministerium für Verbraucherschutz In Western Germany. It has been found that private sector operators can significantly undercut assumed costs. Watger utilisation was 130L per day in 2003.28 per m 3 against 2.785 1. There is considerable resistance to further EU laws.0 1.GERMANY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS while a number of sources have been closed as a result of excess PAH concentrations. Water sales (million m 3) Price per m³ 1990 5.

089. They are separate in the west.000 2. DS treats 130.000 Stuttgart 2.621.000 Rhein-Rhur South 3.554.000 Rhein-Rhur Middle 3.000 Status N/A BWB privatised in 1999 N/A Sewerage privatised N/A N/A N/A Privatisation under consideration HWW corporatised N/A N/A MVV part privatised in 1998 N/A N/A N/A N/A Principal cities in the five regional agglomerations: Rhein-Main Rhein-Neckar Rhein-Rhur Middle Rhein-Rhur North Rhein-Rhur South Darmstadt and Frankfurt am Main Mannheim Düsseldorf and Mönchengladbach Duisburg and Essen Bonn and Cologne The municipalities and the private sector Water provision in 2002 Entity Gelsenwasser-Group Berlinwasser Gelsenwasser-AG Lake Constance Water Hamburg Water Westphalian Water Munich Water Stuttgart Water Hildersheim Water Eastern Harz Water Rhenish-Westphalian Water Essen Water Status Private Private Private Municipal Municipal (considering PPP) PPP Municipal Municipal Municipal Municipal Municipal Public-Private Million m 3 pa 364 217 140 133 128 117 116 89 80 76 70 70 The market remains broadly in the hands of municipalities and by quasi-private companies directly owned and controlled by municipalities.000 Hamburg 2.000 inhabitants.000 Bielefeld 1.ON’s Avacon (49%) and Vienenburg (51%) have formed a JV.000 3.291.673.703.000 3.319. Legal complications remain a problem.605. a water and wastewater company named WAGV Wasser-und Abwassergesellschaft Vienenburg.718. including €900 million for water provision and sewerage.335.000 Nuremberg 1.294. Gelsenwasser and EAMWasserversorgung (E.183 million of loans disbursed 1998-2002.000 Munich 2.100 industrial customers.000 892. The best opportunities for private sector investment continue to be seen in the eastern Länder.320.000 Hannover 1. the German Bank for Reconstruction has made a number of major loans.000 Karlsruhe 977. Gelsenwasser is also taking over Emmerich in North Rhine Westfalia’s Abwasser Emmerich.000 Saarland 891. The desire to privatise sewerage in the Eastern Länder is stronger.000 3.300 million in funding for water and environmental projects in the Eastern Lander between 2000 and 2006.683.531.000 886. The city of Dresden in Saxony has sold a 49% stake in Dresdner Stadtentwässerung to Gelsenwasser in 2004.000 Rhein-Main 3. with €3.060. In addition.000 1. The EIB has been a major investor with municipal water projects in Germany.283.291.429 water supply companies and some 6.317. with formal structures put into place by the privatisation agency to encourage the setting up of JVs and the award of concessions.000 water and sewerage entities in total. The EU is providing €1. The Western Länder has 1. with the Rostock contract having been held back for two years because of these.000 1. 101 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .233.189.000 1.054.681.000 6.000 988.310.070.204.000 2015 1. water and sewerage are integrated at the municipal level. there has been was an increase in the pace and scope of privatisation proposals. E. Abwasser Emmerich provides wastewater disposal services for the town's 30.000 1.000 2.664.000 Bremen 880.GERMANY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS MAJOR URBAN AGGLOMERATIONS Population 2000 Aachen 1.000 Rhein-Neckar 1.000 households and 1.000 3.000 Berlin 3.000m³ of waste and surface water daily for 475.000 2.000 Rhein-Rhur North 6. In the east.ON) has signed a 25 year contract with Bad Karlshafen to take over operational management of the town’s water and wastewater activities. Since 2002.

52million m³. which supply 22.000 Politics and the private sector Bad Schwalbach in Hesse has let its contract with Süwag Wasser (RWE) expire at the end of 2002.000 S’werke Göttingen Gelsenwasser (Germany) 50.650. EVO traditionally supplies the towns of Offenbach and Dietzenbach with drinking water and operates their wastewater services.000 1.050.900.000 Berlin Wasser VE/RWE (France/Germany) 3. Hamburg is also considering a partial privatisation of Hamburger Wasserwerke (HWW).000 80. Baden-Württemberg’s Emmingen-Liptingen will set up a new water supply company from its public works water department.080.050. Operational management has been taken over by Wasser-Abwasser-Gesellschaft Schwerin. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage AWS Gelsenwasser (Germany) 20.000 55.14 1999-02 6. The Abwasserzweckverband Wipper-Ohne and Wasserzweckverband Eichsfelder Kessel are setting up the jointly-owned Wasser-und Abwasserzweckverband Eichsfelder Kessel.000 600. HGW (Schwerin). The state of Saxony Anhalt is seeking to sell its water supply company Fernwasser Sachsen-Anhalt (FSA). Energieversorgung Offenbach (EVO) has a 25-year co-operation contract to operate water and wastewater operations for the parish of Mainhausen.000 Stadwerke Görlitz VE (France) 80. E.73 4.730.000 165.20 -0.20 0.000 RWE Aqua RWE (Germany) 2. the state of Thüringia is encouraging water associations to merge. after becoming coalition partners in the local government.000 3. The commune of Schwerin has become the first commune in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern to enter into a wastewater PPP.000 400.000 45. This is despite Süwag’s good record in the four years since it took over these services in 1999.ON has consolidated its northern German operations.400.62 5.000 81.000 Eurawasser Suez (France) 550.000 Oewa VE (France)/VKR (Germany) 730.000 Gelsenwasser Gelsenwasser (Germany) 4.000 50.000 5.000 730.000 Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Altenburg 20 year sewerage BOOT WTE Berlin 30 year water and sewerage concession VE/RWE Bremen Sewerage and sewage treatment Hansewasser Döbeln/Oschatz 4 year water and sewerage management Oewa Gelsenkirschen 30 year water concession Gelsenwasser Gera O&M.900.000 550.000 0 WTE EVN (Austria) 21. These are Schleswag (Rendsburg).000 Hansewasser Gelsenwasser (Germany) 0 550.100.93 Total 55.GERMANY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS From 2003. Likewise.000 710.300.000 MVV Mannheim Municipality 1. €million Investment Profits Price per m 3 1996-98 2. Annual water sales in Vienenburg are about 0. Consolidation in the public and private sectors continues.000 0 Severn Trent Severn Trent (UK) 0 45.000 3.000 customers with water. water provision Stadwerke Gera Görlitz Municipal services Stadwerke Görlitz Goslar 25 year sewerage concession Eurawasser Göttingen Municipal services Stadwerke Göttingen Kiel Water and sewerage concession MVV Leipzig 25 year water and sewerage concession Oewa M-Pomerania Two 25 year concessions Eurawasser Nohra 10 year sewage treatment management Severn Trent Rostock 25 year sewerage concession Eurawasser Saxony Two 25 year water concessions Eurawasser Saxony Anhalt Water and sewerage contracts Owea Windeck 25 year water and sewerage BOOT WTE 102 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 6. the town of Fränkisch-Crumbach is considering PSP. owned 51% by the municipal utility Stadtwerke Schwerin and 49% by Eurawasser.000 Stadwerke Gera VE (France) 165.900.000 600.000 4. to start operations at the beginning of January 2004 and in Hesse.000 1.000 80.000 81. Hein Gas (Hamburg) and the Hein Gas’ eastern German subsidiary. Avacon will also take over commercial operations and billing.

0km 3 16% 3% 81% 1994 0% 9% 1% 48% 42% 1997 9. 4. (2002) Urbanisation. especially at Patras.720 21% 36% 43% 11.141million people in central Greece face regular water shortages. A slight decrease in consumption since 1992 has not been enough to alleviate the continual water shortages being encountered.5million inhabitants).0 10. Groundwater depletion is also taking place in Thessaloniki (1million inhabitants). There were 26 sewage treatment works in 1988. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Water resources and management There has been a substantial increase in water usage since the 1970s.8% 18. A post-Olympic lull appears likely.2km 3 6.2% US$12.7% 32. Urban data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Development of sewage treatment 1993 3.000.2% 31. Water consumption varies from 150 L/day in small cities to 250-350 L/day in larger cities. (2015) In urban agglomerations.6 32.2% 32.GREECE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS GREECE The partial flotation of EYDAP and EYATH demonstrates that there is a desire to invest in entities that have been restructured so that they report to international accounting standards.5% 45.75 billion of water and sewerage upgrading work between 1994 and 1999.8% 12.5% in 1980 to 10% in 1990 and to 58% by 1994. Other municipalities carry out chlorination only. There was EU funding (70%) and government funding (30%) of €3.4 11.9 61% 65% 41% 86% 60% 30% Tertiary Secondary Primary Sewerage only Not connected Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic Industrial Agriculture Water issues Groundwater depletion and salination is widespread. 2015 Water services The only water treatment takes place in Athens. Athens is fed by canals and tunnels from a network of rivers and dams (3.494 US$18. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation. Alexanpolis and Preveza.562m 3 7. The proportion of the population served by sewage treatment has remained constant at 11% in recent years. of which 2 serve cities with a population in excess of 100. The proportion of the population connected to sewerage services increased from 0.6% 14. 103 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Iraklia.

000 EYATH Thessalonki Municipality 850. 28% of EYDAP was listed on the Athens Stock Exchange in a nine times oversubscribed issue. MAJOR CITIES City Athens Thessalonki 2. the Finance Minister announced the sale of up to 20. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage EYDAP Athens Municipality 4. This was followed in 2001 by the flotation of a similar stake in Thessalonki’s EYATH. In July 2003. so as to encourage EU and private sector funding. The easing of EU funding from 2000 forced a reconsideration of the country’s policies.138. estimate) Ia-Very Good Ib-Good II-Fair III-Poor IV-Bad 20% 40% 20% 15% 5% In 1993.000. The government will retain control of its water production facilities in the medium term and will be responsible for its investment programme until 2008.000.116.000 2015 3. In 2003. I is likely that private partners will be encouraged to enter the sector in the short to t medium term. in municipal ownership. while keeping all water and sewerage services. This sale has yet to take place.GREECE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Inland water quality (1986. Greece received €1.000 850.000 850. These are either self standing entities for large cities or municipally run entities.000 3.9km 3 13% 3% 85% 2000 3.300. The issue raised €233 million for the company and allowed its activities to be run on a commercial basis. Between 1993 and 2002.3% of Athens Water by the end of 2003. These corporations are now being grouped. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1980) Domestic Industrial Agriculture Joining the EU fold Until recently Greece remained quite dependent on EU Cohesion and Structural Funding for all environmental compliance projects.000 104 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . The law No 1665/80 of 1980 established state funded water and sewerage corporations.5km 3 237m 3 1. and local government authorities formed a partnership in order to manage the Dodecanese island group’s water resources.95 billion in Cohesion Funding for environmental projects.000 Comments EYDAP partially floated in 2000 EYATH partially floated in 2001 Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Athens 20 year water and sewerage concession EYDAP Thessalonki 25 year water and sewerage concession EYATH Flotation of EYDAP and EYATH In April 2000.000 789. Greece’s largest construction company. the government started moves to restrict water usage.000 825. Hellenic Technodomiki.000 Total 4. where they occurred. The first 60m 3 pa per household is charged at a basic rate. Any water used above 400m 3 pa per household is charged at 20 times that rate.

4 11. The Guinean authorities therefore decided upon a six-year transition period during which the rate actually paid by the consumer would be lower than the full rate. Lastly. the World Bank recommended that radical institutional reform be carried out. which has the task of supplying water in Conakry and a number of smaller cities for a period of 10 years.100 24% 37% 39% 8. with the government maintaining a 49% stake in the entity. with financial support from the IDA. SONEG was responsible for implementing and managing water supply. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Accountability and affordability All of SEEG’s activities are defined in its terms and conditions and in a three-year performance contract. Indeed. In 1986 the Guinean authorities decided to liberalise the water management regime and in 1987 established Société d’Exploitation des Eaux de Guinee (SONEG) as an independent water services provision company wholly owned by the state. the urban water supply system in Guinea was one of the least developed in West Africa. The utility had no management autonomy from the ministry and was not able to finance maintenance work. The contract can be renewed at the end of this period. At the outset. thanks to subsidies from the state and from external sources. SONEG derives its income from a fee paid by SEEG. and 16 other towns. For the private sector. The Minister of Natural Resources and Energy remains responsible for approving and monitoring any capital investment. although the challenge of ensuring that water payments are both on a sustainable basis and are seen by customers to be fair has only partly been met to date. 2015 Commercialising water provision In 1987. The latter. It also carries out maintenance of the facilities and replaces smaller items of equipment. From 1976 to 1985. operates the water supply facilities. but also for servicing the debt by levying a fee on the managing entity. the newly created Société Nationale des Eaux de Guinée (SONEG). US$415 US$2. the results of which were extremely disappointing in spite of extensive technical assistance from abroad. This was to ensure that the sudden increase in price did not appear to be excessive for the users.2 34% 44% 32% 61% 54% 0% 105 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . These have met with some success in recent years. the World Bank provided a restructuring loan. was to be responsible for conserving and enhancing the public assets. for its part. tariff reforms would have created problems because water had never been regarded as an economic good. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services From DEG to SONEG The Enterprise Nationale de Distribution des Eaux de Guinee (DEG) was responsible for all technical and commercial operations up to the end of the 1980s. SEEG was then privatised. by 1985. transferring management and risk to the private sector. the capital.GUINEA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS GUINEA Water and sewerage services in Guinea have been subject to various funding and restructuring programmes since 1976. One. SONEG in turn awarded a ten year leasing contract for operations to SEEG (Société d'Exploitation des Eaux de Guinée). Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. The World Bank paid a subsidy for the six years (having required the introduction of a realistic price) which gradually decreased after the first four years. operating under a lease contract has perhaps been a constraint in recent years. acting as owner of the facilities to serve Conakry. The legal separation between assetmanagement activities (SONEG) and operating activities (SEEG) took place in 1989 with the two companies formally established. it takes care of all aspects of consumer relations.

(1997). Meanwhile. along with the relationship between SONEG and SEEG.0km 3 29. how to avoid wasting water and why water had to be paid for.25/m 3 at the start of the contract and progressively to US$0. Haarmeyer. The term of the lease contract is currently expiring and the system is now capable of attracting a concession contract. For example. Worldwide Water Privatisation. Private Sector Participation in Water and Sanitation Services. while SEEG is seeking to have a greater degree of operational freedom.90/m 3.000 Status Privatised (SEEG) Private sector contract awards (Please refer to company entry for details) Location Contract type Company Conakry & urban areas Water and sewerage lease SAUR/VE Sources: Cowen. 3.GUINEA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1987) Domestic Industrial Agriculture Operations and actualities 226.952m 3 2015 2. This perceived need for further operational flexibility is to be one of the main elements of the current contract renewal negotiations .454m 3 0. which accounts for most of the country’s urban area and economic activity and accounted for 75% of consumers and 88% of water supplied in 1995. (1998). D. (1996). one third of the accounts have been suspended because of the cost of water. the cost of water rose first from US$0. along with some cultural difficulties. covering distribution costs and for operations and investments carried out on behalf of the facilities owner (SONEG). WEDC. The current challenge for the contract is to see how the customers’ willingness and their capacity to pay in a period of economic difficulties will be affected by the ending of all subsidies. However.12/m 3 to US$0. affordability needs to be addressed. London.000 in 1989 and to 30. The bill collection ratio improved from below 50% in the years 1986-88 to 75% in 1995.000 38. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita The scope for conflict The Guinean Government’s 49% per cent share gives it some control over management decisions and it has the right to approve all changes of a legal nature.74km 3 10% 3% 87% Fees collected by SEEG go towards paying service providers. 106 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . water connections increased from 8.232. R. The company remains biased towards operations in Conakry. Loughborough University. Franceys. The World Bank. which is that there is no independent regulator. and customers had to be educated about the qualities of drinking water. 15% of urban dwellers had access to piped water. A.500 in 1975 to 12. Between 1989 and 1995. The performance of the contract to date has been mixed. & Mody. In 1989. It is understood that some tensions exist between SONEG and SEEG with regard to the operational interpretation of the contract. Water Resources Occasional Paper No.073. SONEG sticks to the contract rigidly. Financial Times Energy. Metering also increased from about 5% to 85% of all connections.0km 3 4. For the latter to succeed. B.500 by 1995. The Guinea Water Lease – Five Years On. P. MAJOR CITIES City 2000 Conakry 1. SEEG began operations against a backdrop of severe water shortage and a network in a poor state of repair. The balance of stakeholder concerns may be affected in the future by the government seeking (or seen as seeking) to optimise the return on its shareholding at the expense of customer concerns. a profit-oriented company needed to be developed. This had increased to 52% by 1996. UK. There is one potential problem with this relationship.

000 by 2000. with the remaining 25% being performance-linked. In the longer term. 24% of the urban population had access to adequate sanitation in 1996. This contract is based on Suez receiving 75% of its income on a fixed fee basis. One of the problems evident in a contract such as the one with Suez is the size of the market in relation to the costs required to fully reform the cost recovery process. Guinea-Bissau suffers from poor water availability and catchment degradation where water sources occur. 107 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . In a contract of this size.GUINEA-BISSAU PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS GUINEA-BISSAU In Guinea-Bissau. The country is forecast to have an urban population of 280. The lack of a clear management role and the inability to take action over identifiable areas of under-performance has meant that this has been a difficult compromise for both the state and the private sector. Nationally. Suez has provided management support for water services since 1991 in order to improve the technical and financial performance of EAGB. it may well be cheaper for a company such as Suez to let matters rest rather than to address any underlying problems. 32% of the urban population had access to potable water in 1996. compared with 19% in 1991. while funds earmarked for investments in the network’s infrastructure have not emerged. The state has continued to fail to make its payments to Suez on time. At the same time. countries such as Guinea-Bissau are likely to demonstrate the limits of private sector involvement. some 20% of the national total. the public water and electricity utility. tariffs have not been revised so as to allow billings to meet operating costs.

along with sewerage for 90% of urban households.5million m 3 of industrial and domestic sewage effluents were generated per day. P-L. distribution losses in Macau have fallen from 40% to 11% while rising from 27% to 37% in Hong Kong. The contract may be awarded as a BOOT and may be allied with a distribution and customer services contract. The Sha Tin WTW is meant to treat 1. the effluent will be discharged to the Western Harbour through a 1. These projects were completed before China took over Macau in 1999. there is a possibility of this being financed by a private sector BOT award. The contract serves some 600. This was awarded to Sino-French Holdings (Suez and New World Infrastructure) which holds 85% of SAAM’s equity. December 2003.HONG KONG and MACAU PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS HONG KONG AND MACAU Water provision and management The Water Supplies Department is respons ible for the SEZ. Stage 1 of the SSDS was completed in June 1997.23million m 3 of water per day or 40% of current demand.6km long 5m diameter submarine outfall. directly to Victoria Harbour. the former Portuguese colony of Macau (Macao) privatised its water and sewerage services between 1983 and 1993. for a further 25 years. The O&M cost for the Stage 1 scheme is HK$300 million per year (US$38. 108 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Asian Water. The total cost for Stage 1 was HK$5. Upgrading the facility will cost HK$6. 20% of the territory’s sewage effluent was subjected to primary treatment while 1. In 1996.5million people by 2021. While water prices as charged in Hong Kong and Macau are level pegging at HK$4. Privatisation and the private sector With the exception of bulk water provision from China. A comparative study of water utilities in Hong Kong and Macau. before Hong Kong was taken over by China. The Strategic Sewage Disposal Scheme (SSDS) is designed to serve Kowloon Peninsula.7 billion (US$850 million) and work is due to start in 2006. Sewerage and the Strategic Sewage Disposal Scheme In 1988. and Victoria Harbour. 98% of households are connected to piped water. The capital cost was borne by the Hong Kong Government. Stages 2-4 have been completed at a cost of HK$7 billion.1 billion for the sewage treatment works.5million per year). In 1993. Source: Lam.000 customer connections.52 billion) at 1995 prices. Treated water usage by households is relatively low at 111L per day because salt water is used for all flushing. Guangdong Investment Ltd supplies 75% of HK’s drinking water. A site at Mount Davis on the west tip of Hong Kong Island is reserved to accommodate a secondary treatment plant if the future monitoring of water quality at the outfall reveals that such a plant is necessary. The CEPT plant is designed to remove 85% of suspended solids and 50% of BOD. This water is mainly provided by GDI. with or without passing through preliminary treatment plants. Imports of water from China ria the New Terrirotires total 810million m 3 pa. pp 19-22.67 billion).2 per m 3 since 1997. but the 1964 plant needs to be rebuilt as it is performing poorly. This included HK$2.0 per m 3 resulting in Hong Hong’s services making a loss com pared with Macau Water’s 28% return on equity. the actual cost of water services ain Hong Kong are HK$11. The additional cost of a secondary treatment plant will be in the order of HK$4 billion (US$0. Since 1982. the colony renewed the 1988 water provision concession for SAAM. The Water Pollution Control (Sewerage) Regulation of 1994 requires all properties to be connected to the sewerage mains. recovered by a sewage charge collected from citizens/residents of Hong Kong.000 people via 140. After treatment. Effluents collected from the Kowloon Peninsula and the northern part of Hong Kong Island were discharged. The STW is designed to handle effluents for 3.2 billion (US$0. Macau In contrast to Hong Kong. the northern part of Hong Kong Island. all water and sewerage activities are held by the municipality. If the secondary treatment works project goes ahead. NWWI (United Utilities) was awarded two 4 year BOT sewage treatment works contracts in partnership with Toboia Duarte SA and Soares de Costa.

60% of groundwater needs treatment prior to use. Present legislation prevents private companies from gaining a majority stake in water and wastewater utilities.75 billion was spent on sewerage work between 1990 and 1995. million) Total (2015.8 billion on sewerage service extension work between 1996 and 2010. In 1995. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Water pollution concerns Industrial pollution of surface and groundwater is a major problem. 35% of groundwater resources are regarded as failing acceptable standards.481 US$13. with water supply obligatory.7% 57% 1996 8% 25% N/A 48% 10% 2000 31% NA 15% 5% 49% US$6. even to non payers. Some US$0. there are extensive seasonal water shortages. Connection to mains water and sewerage %Water 75% 92% 94% 95% 96% 96% % Sewerage 40% 52% 54% 55% 56% 58% 1980 1990 1992 1993 1994 1995 Urban Services % Water % Sewerage % Sewage treated Privatisation 98% 85% 70% There are now more than 400 different water or wastewater service providers in Hungary.400 6% 34% 60% 9. with nitrate levels being a particular problem. In 2004. In total. Municipalities regard water provision and sewerage as being a non-profit activity. In the south and central areas. (2002) Urban areas. A further US$1.3 65% 70% 19% The proportion of population with sewerage services increased from 19% in 1980 to 49% in 2000. 109 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Waters from the Danube are regarded as an unreliable source to depend upon.HUNGARY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS HUNGARY With the EU accession compliance programme in full swing. The country plans to spend US$4. the Hungarian National Water Directorate is expected to submit a draft law to parliament regulating private sector involvement in the water and wastewater sector. attention is once again turning from Budapest towards challenges and their solutions across the rest of the country.9% 11% 4.9 9.5 billion is to be spent on water provision during this period. (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Development of sewerage infrastructure Population served Tertiary Secondary Primary Preliminary None 1970 0% 4% 2% 19% 75% 1980 0% 12% 7% 62% 19% 1990 0% 22% 9% 59% 10% 1992 0. although 80% of the market is accounted for by the 25 largest firms. Prices have to be confirmed with the municipality concerned before the concession is formally granted. million) Urban areas. Population Total (2002.4% 26. This is directly related to the need to raise funds for the EU accession programme and is likely to be used to encourage concession contracts. 96% of the population was connected to mains water supplies. because of the pollution load. Groundwater quality is decreasing.

The Veszprem Sewerage Project in Budapest is a US$77 million JV between CH2M Hill and Bovis for sewers and a wastewater treatment facility.819. After the two STW upgrades. The concession involves the construction of 150km of sewerage piping and expanding the South Pest STW by 40. water fees rose by 13% and sewerage charges by 16.000 180. Hodmézövásarhely 25 year sewerage concession BWI Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details ) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Eurawasser Suez (France) / RWE (Germany) 2. utility fees rose by Ft 230 for the average household. and a 25 year operating concession. 54% of which is treated: 33% to secondary standard and 67% to primary standard.000 110 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . was awarded to Eurawasser AG. 40-45% of effluents in Budapest will be treated to at least secondary standard.000 Borsodviz Rt. Budapest’s water provision utility.0 604 6.000 75.000m 3 per day secondary sewage treatment plant is to be built.000 217. 60 kilometres south of Budapest. The trunk main will be connected to a further 19. Water provision for the city was 285million m³ (drinking) in 1996.000 BWI VE (Germany) / RWE (Germany) 0 1.0 35% 48% 18% 2015 1. At Dunaújváros. The Dunaújváros and Veszprem STWs are currently under preparation. Budapest’s sewerage services was privatised in 1997.950. km3) Per capita (1998.000 Total 2. In total..000 Pesci Vizmu Suez (France) 180. In January 1999.217.217. Water fees were Ft1.000 6.000 180. Gelsenwasser (Germany) 150. a new 15.000 Status Water and sewerage privatised separately City study: Upgrading Budapest’s sewage treatment 53% of the population of Budapest is connected to the sewerage network. km 3) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Privatisation of Budapest 6.819. m 3) Withdrawals (1990. The concession award was delayed when the municipality blocked proposals to raise water fees.000 1.000 people currently using septic tanks.000m³ per day).3 9% 55% 36% Fovarosi Csatonazasi.HUNGARY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Freshwater Total (1998.7%. Csepel has been completed (600.000m³ per day) and South Budapest for 2005+ (60. km3) Per capita (1998.000 Kapsovar Suez (France) 75. The two extant STWs are being upgraded and four wastewater treatment works are to be built for Budapest by 2015. Groundwater Total recharge (1998.000 150.2 per m³ in 1990 and Ft45 per m³ in 1996.000m³ per day.950. Financing of the project is via 25% equity and 75% debt. The operational contract for Favorsi Vizmurek Rt. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Budapest 25 year sewerage concession BWI Budapest 25 year water provision concession Eurawasser Debreen 20 year water and sewerage concession Eurawasser Kapsovar 25 year water and sewerage concession Suez Pescs 25 year water and sewerage concession Suez Borsodviz 20 year water and sewerage concession Borsodviz Rt. 98% of the city is connected to mains water. along with 8million m³ for industry. A 25% stake was sold to a joint bid by Berliner Wasser-Betriebe and Veolia.000 150.000 75.8 685 1. m 3) Withdrawals (1991. km 3) For domestic use (1990) For industry (1990) For agriculture (1990) MAJOR CITIES Population 2000 Budapest 1.

The cities of Delhi.4million villages. The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act 1977 compels specified industries to pay fees to the relevant State Pollution Control Boards for water consumed. Each State Pollution Control Board in turn reports to the CPCB. The UNICEF 2000 estimate for access to safe drinking in rural areas in India was 79%. After years of delays. while 45million people were affected by contaminated groundwater. In 1992. while being responsible for ensuring compliance with the government’s environmental law. million In urban areas 2002 In urban areas 2015 In urban agglomerations 2015 Infrastructure development According to the Ministry of Rural Development. Political delays and the need to demonstrate genuine value for money make this a market for the patient. Bangalore and Madras can set their own tariffs. To date. along with the ODA on a more local basis.INDIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS INDIA The government hoped to provide potable water to all of India by August 15. or 89% had access to water in 2002. The CPCB is backed by the 1974 Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act and sets national environmental standards (individual states are free to exceed them) and policy. million Total 2015. the opening up to private sector investment of water and sewerage remains a tantalising prospect. 1million children per annum were dying in India from diarrhoeal diseases. The MUD is positive about privatisation on an O&M and B OT basis.246. it is also evidence that real progress can be made through capacity building exercises. it was found that the average per capita water supply for Class I towns (100. A new universal service target has been set for 2004. It has met four times since 1983 and no decisions have yet been made on updating the 1988 national water policy. Calcutta. It examines proposals and provides guidance. The 1995 Water Information Act puts the centralisation of water data on a statutory basis.000 to 100. the 50th anniversary of independence. Central government directs overall policy. Instead. reflecting their concern about the pace of sanitation projects. Bombay (Mumbai). Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Politics and Government The pace of progress is summed up by the National Water Resources Council.2million out of 1. The Government has set a target of providing universal drinking water connections by 2005. according to UNICEF (the United Nations Children’s Fund).000). For cities. Bangladesh has raised objections about the losses that the project would entail. with R340 billion (€7. water and sewerage policy is carried out at three levels: central government.049. The NRCD is involved in the various River Action Plans designed to improve the water quality of India’s 14 main water basins.4 28% 32% 12% 111 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .670 28% 26% 46% 1. 1. 1997.000 and above) was 147L/day and 78L/day for Class II towns (50. US$487 US$2. Hyderabad.5 1. Only connect? The Indian Government is considering a scheme to link 37 of the country's rivers into the canal network at a cost variously estimated in 2003 at US$116-200 billion against an estimate of US$68 billion in 1995. Cities are autonomous from central government with regard to privatisation policy. The Ministry of Environment and Forests (MEF) oversees the Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB) and the National Rivers Conservation Directorate (NRCD). for example. which was formed to address urgent state and national water issues. the member states and city government. via the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank. in 1998. The MUD (Ministry of Urban Development) advises all state level plans. Plans. While the withdrawal of foreign companies from a variety of power projects during 2002 does not inspire confidence. The MUD water provision targets are 110L/day for cities and 270L/day for Delhi.45 billion) having been spent on various drinking water projects across the country. characterised by India’s exceptionalist approach. nine years of feasibility studies have taken place and construction would take a further 14 years to complete. Population Total 2002. when approved are forwarded to the Ministry of Finance and the Dept of Economic Affairs for external support.

1% 14. The politics of privatisation India’s exceptionalist tradition means that the onus lies with foreign investors to argue the merits of their proposals in Indian terms. Overall. The sewerage connection figure stated refers only to the 212 Class I cities (a population of 100. covering 102. but information on household connections has been released. 3% and 10%. Some sources maintain that the 70% figure refers to Class IV only. the Government announced plans for a desalination plant in Chennai. 87%. 20% of towns and cities have partial service coverage.1% 49. 32% of usable groundwater resources are currently being extracted. these are 68%. There are no other identified sewage treatment works in India.000 billion for sanitation and wastewater treatment. 30% and 2% respectively.1% 3.0% 73.7% 16. 20% of people in urban areas had access to water-flush toilets connected to a sewerage system and 14% use water-borne toilets connected to septic tanks or leach pits. 'Sewerage' refers to mains sewerage.9million people in 1988). In 2002. and for cities in coastal areas.INDIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Data from the 2001 Census of India is still being processed. Calcutta and the Ganges Basin are understood to be keen to look at STW BOTs. The Congress Party has indicated that it supports international involvement for drinking water provision and sewage treatment projects.000-100. the Government seeks private sector investment first in the area of drinking water.7% 15. The real cost for access to water is likely to be in the region of Rs400-800 billion and a further Rs500-1. In rural areas.060 million from Hudco. with Rs83.9% 46. This would be the first of a series of such plants to be built near Chennai.5% 43. 20% of effluents are treated (13% secondary and 7% primary).119 towns and cities have complete sewerage and sewage treatment services. covering a further 20. Overall.506 coming through the World Bank and Rs18. Spending on water and sanitation has increased in recent years and this trend is set to continue. 0. For cities in major river basins. Access means at least a public lavatory in the same street.4% 22. 'Sanitation' refers to lavatories with a two septic tank composting system. Urban households: Sanitation Water closet Pit latrine Other latrine Internal sanitation Closed drainage Open drainage No drainage Urban households: Drinking water Tap Hand pump Other Tap – within premises Tap – near premises Tap – away 68. In Class II cities (50. In contrast. 20% have access to sanitary toilets. A number of states and cities. 23% from groundwater and 4% from combined sources.2% 19.7% to secondary treatment. the coastal capital city of 112 85% 147 34% 3% Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .6% 13. As part of the 2004 budget. 73% of water is abstracted from surface water.4% sewage is subject to primary treatment and 1. Sewage effluents are estimated to account for 75% of the wastewater volume and 50% of the total pollution load. The estimated cost will be Rs204. Both the timings and the costs are likely to be on the optimistic side.000).7% 34. Informal examinations of the 14 major river basins in the 1990s found that 30% of their length is of I-II quality and 70% is of III-IV quality. The National Rivers Conservation Directorate is willing to support BOT bids as part of its future policy. Urban Services Safe drinking water L per cap per day Access to sewerage % Sewage treated Sewerage and sewage treatment Sewerage services are defined as operating on two levels. including Harayana state. In class 1 citiies.898 million.7million people.000+. 8 out of 3. with universal access to potable water unlikely before 2015 and sanitation taking another decade.1% For Class 1 cities.

transporting it 60km to a reservoir and handing it over to the municipality. Such cities say they have contracted out between 50% and 100% of the management of water treatment plants. India currently has a national average of 2. Local BJP administrations such as the Mumbai Municipal Council will not necessarily support privatisation. The Rs 11. Demand by industry 1970 1990 2000 2025 Pricing Water was traditionally seen as God’s gift both by Hindus and M uslims.000 million m3 in 1997 to about 41.151 small towns.000m 3 in 1947 to 2. Involving the private sector in the contracting out of operation and maintenance (O&M) work has been gathering in popularity in India.INDIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS the southern Indian state of Tamil Nadu in 2004. the management of the sewerage network will be put out to private sector operation. pumping stations and wastewater treatment plants and that this has generated cost savings of between 10% and 50%.000m 3 per year in 2047. with only a small proportion of middle-income families supporting it. In three agro-ecological zones (Western plains and Kachch.464m 3 per capita.896 500. The swadeshi (self-reliance) approach is losing favour. The Goa project is for abstracting water at source.57billion people. and the Bengal and Assam plains). Although the greatest demand for water will still come from agriculture. but has suffered from delays. The BJP at the national level has also stated that it supports the privatisation of utilities. The Accelerated Rural Water Supply Progamme (ARWSP) has been allocated Rs 26 billion in 2004-05. including cases where disinvestment or closure or sale is justified. the Tata Energy Research Institute (TERI) predicts that India's rivers and lakes will no longer be able to meet the demand for water from the country's 1. Northern plains.850. This project has been under development since early 1997. m 3) Withdrawals (1990.000L to be charged. In Bangalore leakage detection and strategic planning is partially outsourced and private detectives – paid only by results – are employed to detect illegal water connections.00 1. although in some regions it is as low as 411m 3. The Rs 10 billion ($217.5 billion in 2004-05 on projects in 2. a service contract for water piping. especially for 113 1. Similarly Chennai Metro has also shared its use of service contracts. A Board for Reconstruction of Public Sector Enterprises (BRPSE) will advise the Government on the measures to be taken to restructure PSEs. pumping and treatment O&M has been regarded as a success. while Hyderabad has contracted out staffing for water treatment O&M work. The partial privatisation of Tirupur’s services has suffered from severe underfunding to date. The Left Front remains ambiguous about foreign investment. India will become a water-scarce nation by 2050 unless urgent steps are taken that go beyond government capital investment in irrigation projects. Water availability per person has already gone down from 6. domestic water demand will increase from 20. who prefer irregular supplies of tankered water than the Rs 45 per 1. In addition. In Madras. the availability of water in 2047 will be less than 75% of the demand. the demand will be concentrated in the cities and will be for water of higher quality. Their stance is that foreign investors ought to demonstrate that India will benefit from their actions. km 3) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Water supply and demand If current trends over the next 50 years continue.0 5% 3% 92% 6million MI 15million MI 30million MI 120million MI Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . It will focus on renewal of water sources and on serving uncovered and partially covered habitations.39 million) plant would have a capacity of around 300 million L per day. Moreover. km3) Per capita (1998. Outsourcing work in progress Progress has been made in some areas. The Tirupur water provision BOT was meant to get the go-ahead in March 1999. In Ajmer (Rajastan). The Urban Water Supply Programme will also spend Rs 1. Proposals for private sector management in Goa and the cities of Tirupur and Dewas are also currently under active consideration.6 billion project involves bulk water provision. Freshwater Total (1998. allied with foreign investment. This is due to a lack of support from industrial customers. The project will be financed through a public-private partnership.000m 3 in 1997 and could fall to 760m 3 by 2047. contracting out sewerage O&M since 1993 has resulted in savings of 20%. followed by water distribution and sewerage with a 30 year concession period. It was also emphasis ed that public-private partnerships will be encouraged for the expansion of water supply and sanitation. This means that there is considerable pressure at the local and rural level for it to be provided as a free (or nominally priced) resource.

the Tata Energy Research Institute recommended that the state of Gujarat considered some form of PSP in seeking to meet its Rs8. except hydropower and seeks to encourage water conservation. Karnakata Cochin Hyderabad. The institute believes that all PSP models are applicable under current state laws. with Delhi retaining the balance for the central pollution control agencies.56% to 3. The unregulated private sector thrives under these conditions in Delhi. resulting in a rise in annual income from Rs81. Given the small size and uneven distribution of India’s industry.7 million) by 2003. Andhra Pradesh Panjum.000 3. DJB has annual revenues of Rs 2.30 billion (US$50.9 billion is required for 100% coverage of urban water supply and sanitation.8 million) and debts of Rs36 billion (US$795 million) and Rs16. the first such water structure to be formed in any Indian state.000 5. Although DJB will be corporatised. this approach has not met with great success to date. the state government of Karnataka examined privatising urban drinking water supply and Jharkhand issued a notice seeking private investor participation of in water supply in Ranchi.8 million) in interest liability.3 million to Rs 637.2 3% 1% 96% Security State guarantee State guarantee State guarantee State guarantee Debt from state State guarantee State guarantee Status Evaluation stage Abandoned Abandoned Re-evaluation Abandoned Operational Evaluation stage Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Legislation will be sought in order to establish a Delhi Water Regulatory Commission.006) per m 3.6 billion. As 75% of municipal connections are unmetered.00 359 150. The 74th constitutional amendment gives local authorities the responsibility for planning. there is a need to consider metering before tariff rationalisation can be implemented. Delhi’s fundamental financial challenge Annual operating costs for the Delhi Jal Board (DJB) have gone up from Rs2. sewerage and sanitation services. Funds have to be raised by the authority.76 billion (US$61 million) in 1998 to Rs7billion (US$154. Tamil Nadu Cost (Rs million) 13. Mango and Adityapur towns.35 Bangalore 40 5 The Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess (Amendment) Bill introduced in 2003 seeks to strengthen the financial resources of pollution control boards and promote water economy by factories. Maharashtra Tirupur. which also has the right to determine and enforce its own charges.2 billion (US$357. Bulk water provision projects proposed to date City Bangalore. m 3) Withdrawals (1979. attempts to start operating water services on a self financing basis have focused on using higher industrial charges to cross subsidise domestic fees.000 4. In 2002. The new charges are expected to bring in around Rs 2 billion a year. km3) Per capita (1998.600 million spending needs for basic urban water supply. Goa Pune. Rs/m 3 Water cost Water tariff Delhi 9-10 0.000 7. Chas. maintaining and upgrading water supply.8 million in 2000. politicians have ruled out any material private sector involvement.53 (£0.20) per m 3. there is a broad realisation that private sector financing and management is now needed in India.000 Type BOOT BOT BOOT BOOT BOT BOT BOT 114 350.000 10. State Pollution Control Boards will receive 80% of tax revenues . The tax was last increased in 1991.INDIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS domestic use.80% of total public sector expenditure. In 2003. operating. 2003) found that municipal water tariffs covered 4-12% of the cost of water treatment and delivery. km 3) For domestic use (1979) For industry (1979) For agriculture (1979) The private sector and privatisation The Eighth Five Year Plan aimed for expenditure for water and sanitation services to increase from 0. In many cases. A survey of water prices in 2002 (GWR 169.200 private tankers Rs100 (US$2. The average annual investment on O&M of urban water supply and sanitation s ystems has been estimated at Rs 23. with 1. In consequence.87 billion (for a population of 217million at Rs110 per capita). About 85% of water supplies serve residential consumers who pay Rs0. with a total public sector outlay on water supply and sanitation for urban areas of Rs 57. Groundwater Total recharge (1998. The tax will be applicable to all industries. Dhanbad. The total investment requirements for water supply and sanitation based on various reports indicate that an investment of Rs254. Tamil Nadu Chennai.500 15.

000 22.000 2.000 855.000 2.990.577.977. BHEL will also look after Operation and Maintenance (O&M) of the plant for ten years.567.000 3. The sewage treatment plant will have its own power plant which will be run by biogas.391.9 million) contract was awarded by the Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (CMWSSB).000 8.597.023. Some 15% of the output is going to domestic consumers. the state of Chattisgarh cancelled the concession.445.860.000 16. making it self-sufficient and lowering operating costs.000 6. Raduis Water Company signed a 22 year BOT contract to deliver 4million L of water a day to a 23km industrial belt along the Seonath river in Chattisgarh state. Larsen & Toubro has a 32 year concession for operating the pipeline.058.626.000 1.000 833.000 868.721.000 5.081. which was signed two years before Chattisgarh became a separate state from Madhya Pradesh (Source: GWR.000 1.000 1.420.513. This is a 55.000 1.000 776.018. with the facility entering service by early 2005.000 1.000 1.000 791. The WWTW has been completed and the households need to be connected to the system by the municipality. but it is alleged that water demand is materially below what had been expected.000 1.000 12.000 1.000 1.000 875.400.452.000 1.000 5.000 4. 2003).065.000 115 Status N/A Considering private sector involvement N/A N/A N/A N/A Bulk water project under development N/A Political opposition to private sector for now N/A N/A N/A Considering water treatment proposals N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Bulk water scheme abandoned N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Bulk water scheme abandoned N/A Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . MAJOR CITIES Population Agra Ahmedabad Allahbad Asanol Amristar Aurangabad Bangalore Bhopal Bombay (Mumbai) Calcutta (Kolkata) Chandigarth Coimbatore Delhi Dhanbad Durg-Bhilainagar Faridabad Ghaziabad Guwahati Gwalior Hubli-Dharwad Hyderabad Indore Jabalpur Jaipur Jamshedpur Jodhpur Kanpur Kochi (Cochin) Kozhikode (Calicut) 2000 1. It is developing a 12. generated within the facility.030.232. with a permitted return of 15% over the concession. charging Rs8 per m³ against an actual cost of Rs24 per m³.000 1.425.000 7.157.046. These are subsidised by Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation for three years.000 928.100.000 2015 1.000 1.427. The Rs364 Million (US$7. In April 2003.000 2.497. post commissioning.508.000 1.259.000 797.000 1.884.000 13.340.000 1.027.INDIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Indian companies noted Four contract awards to Indian companies have been identified.4 million m 3 pa) WWTW at Perungudi for Alandur Municipality. where IVRCL has installed the underground sewerage system.826.120.086.000 1.230.000 20.293. The state wishes to terminate the contract. IVRCL: Alandur wastewater treatment First STP Private Ltd (95% held by IVRCL)is a JV with VA Tech Wabag.000 1.000m 3 per day (4.000 1.000 1.000 16. work has started on the Visakhapatnam Industrial Water Supply Project.337.000 2.000 2. Radius: Cancelled bulk water project In 1998. with equity financing from the municipality (Andhra Pradesh Industrial Infrastructure Corporation) and from the private sector.000 2.000 1.000 1.000 1.641.747.000 1. Some Rs250 million has been spent by Radius Water to date.5km pipeline from the River Godavari to augment the 153km Yeleru Left Bank Canal.612. three of which are in operation. BHEL gained a wastewater treatment construction and operations contract in Chennai.000 1.578.000 1. BHEL: Chennai WWTW In September 2003.461.000 1. Cons truction will take 18 months.148.441. 170.686.044.000 995.000 906. L&T Holdings and PSL Holdings.035. Larsen & Toubro: Visakhapatnam bulk water In Andhra Pradesh.000 3.

The BOT is being operated by Mahindra Realty and Infrastructure Developers Ltd.655. first proposed in 1994.068. Water & Wastewater International.465.089.000 2.658.294.635million m 3 per day treatment plant at Sonia Vihar in New Delhi in 2001.000 500. two-thirds of which will go to supply about 1. December 2003.000 6.000 100.117.000 1. UUI: Tirupur bulk water BOT The Tirupur project is now in operation.000 1.000 1.221.374.000 1.080.000 853.000 0 Larsen & Toubro Larsen & Toubro (India) 500. 17 (2).368.000 N/A N/A Considering private sector involvement N/A N/A N/A Considering private sector involvement N/A N/A Bulk water scheme abandoned N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A International contract awards Ondeo Degremont: Water treatment BOT Ondeo Degremont gained a 10 year BOT contract for a 0.000 776. p5 Total 600.000 1.353.000 2.000 0 First STP IVRCL (India) 0 100.000.000 1.000 116 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 1.000 0 Ondeo Degremont Suez (France) 1.000 1.INDIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS MAJOR CITIES Lucknow Ludhiana Madras Madurai Meerut Mysore Nagpur Nashik Patna Pune (Poona) Rajkot Ranchi Solapur Srinagar Surat Thiruvananthapuram Tiruchchripalli Vadodara Varanasi (Benares) Vijayawada Viskhapatnam 2.000 Tirupur textile mills.000 2. with funding from a US$222 million rupee-denominated debt and equity package.000 5. 27-28.000 3.398.014. S (2002). (2000).733.312.000 2. March 2004.000 1.000 954.672.000 100.000 837. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Tirupur 30 year bulk water BOT UUI Delhi 10 year water treatment BOT Ondeo Degremont Visakhapatnam 32 year bulk water concession Larsen & Toubro Alandur 10 year WWTW BOT First STP Chennai 10 year WWTW BOT BHEL Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company Population served (country) Water Sewerage UUI United Utilities (UK) 600.000 1.000 1. It is understood that the contract is now in operation.309.011.522.143.000 1. Presentation to IBC. IMB.000 1. pp 103 Global Water Report 191.199.000 Sources: Munjee. and United Utilities International.000 1.018. Narain.000 1.997.000.000 974.000 885.000 1.843.187. The contract is worth Rs 2 billion (€50 million).000 2.974.000 BHEL BHEL (India) 0 100.000 844. aims to 0.000 1. replacing around 400 water tankers.000 3. the rest to domestic customers supplied through the municipal corporation. Privatisation of water & sewerage projects in India.000 1. Global Water Report 185.312.000 1.000 8.127.330. London.000 2.112.902.715.000 1. The US$220 million BOT (including US$140 million in construction cost) water scheme.000 1. N.185 million m3 per /day.000 1.000 6.699. Financing of Water & Sewerage Projects.000 999. Industrial customers will pay Rs45 per m3 and domestic customers Rs5 per m³.

concerning the control of water pollution. there was no functional national water policy. There are 306 PDAMs (municipal water utilities). Nevertheless. Population Total (2002.000 117 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Urban Services Safe drinking water l per cap per day Access to sewerage % sewage treated 217.230 19% 43% 38% Water resources and degradation Indonesia has abundant water resources along with rapid urbanisation and a minimal water provision and sewerage infrastructure.000 l/sec (946 million m³ pa) with 20. Water provision in most major cities is in a similar state to that of Jakarta. Tariffs typically cover 70% of operating costs. Average distribution losses are 40%. reporting directly to the President. 40% showed contamination. with the aim of reducing distribution losses to 25% for large towns/cities and 30% for medium and small towns. Water supplies to cities have been affected by catchment degradation. These stakes have been unwound. Sewerage facilities serve only 5% of the urban population. market oriented democracy remains a volatile process. 1993) Industry Domestic Total Volume 900 1. Effluent discharge into river systems (m t/pa. A programme to control the pollution of 24 main rivers in 1989 failed because there was no effective monitoring. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2020) In urban agglomerations (2015) Urban water services Less than 50% of the population has access to safe water. 60% serving less than 10. while sewerage and sewage treatment issues are just starting to be addressed. Environmental issues are now covered by Bapedal (Environmental Impact Management Agency). the Jakarta contracts have proven to be robust in terms of their ability to meet political and economic instability. saline ingress and excreta contamination. there is no reliable data as to how compromised these have been by excess abstraction.000 customers. Water provision is to be improved for 22million people in urban areas. falling to 30-50% in urban areas. All international involvement in privatisation projects during the Suharto era had to be carried out in partnership with one of his family’s companies. Two general water related Acts have been passed but these are seen as having little practical value. with 30. notably in the case of the two main Jakarta concessions. These are the Act of the Republic of Indonesia No 4 of 1982. untreated sewage and the lack of regulation of the discharge of industrial effluents.4 45% 58% 12% 36% 125 5% 0% Politics and environmental legislation Prior to 1992. Of samples taken in 1990. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services US$817 US$3. The 1995-99 Repilita VI (Sixth Five Year Plan) allocated US$1.533 BOD 1.38 billion to urban and rural water provision.349 517 1866 While there are significant groundwater resources available for urban areas. but the concerns about shifting allegiances remain.653 2.INDONESIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS INDONESIA Indonesia’s transformation into a stable. while regulations concerning industrial effluent discharges are non-enforceable. and the Government Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia No 20 of 1990. million) Total (2015.1 250. concerning basic provision for the management of the living environment. conflicts between urban and agricultural use. The Ministry of Public Works and the provincial governments are meant to be responsible for water laws. which is a nonministerial government agency.

300 7.331 916 7. but much of this money has been misappropriated. the anti-corruption law.000 53% 2010 99. with the majority of funding for medium and large cities coming from international agencies (for example the IFC and ADB) and the private sector. In 1999.5million people in rural areas. reaching 16. water production was 91. The current rates of sewerage network development would reach the 85% target in 90 years. Currently.100 % coverage 20% 32% 3% 2% 13% 4% 10% Source: Indonesia: Overview of Sanitation and Sewerage Experience and Policy Options. With the exception of projects that have involved the private sector. in 1997. but severe flooding in Jakarta during 1996 brought matters to a head. World Bank. Bulk water sales (l/sec) Household taps Public taps Non domestic Total sales Available supply Distribution losses 1990 16.000 25% Indonesia’s proximate water provision needs have been estimated as requiring US$7.000 18. the Government stated that it sought to have 85-100% of households connected to suitable sanitation services by 2003 against 52% in 1996. Golden Grid (New South Wales and Sydney Water) is seeking to develop a 25 year BOT. Freshwater Total (1998. In total. Currently 9% of the population has no facilities and 6% use communal blocks. m 3) Withdrawals (1987. Until the 2001 Water Pollution Control Regulation.800 10. In the mid 1990s. was passed. EASUR.800 2.255 52. Law 28/1999.000 9. Currently.000 186. Sewage treatment coverage City Bandung Cireon Jakarta Medan Surakata Tangerang Yogyakarta Connections 90. 2. there was a belief that water and sewerage were not in the end going to be privatised. sewerage services access 0. 2002.008 24. economic and political factors are understood to have militated against these plans. km3) Per capita (1998. the Government aimed for 80% of its urban population to have piped water at the household level by 2000.000 248.000 83.49million people in Jakarta. This law provides the legal basis for the anticorruption commission to require public officials in sensitive positions to declare their assets prior to assuming their posts and to agree to have their assets open to an official audit during and after their term.7 million m ³ of effluent is discharged into the river network per day.000 l/sec. Neither target has been met. 0.8 billion. It seeks to operate with water supplies regarded as a commercial good.400 8.530. municipalities have been made responsible for managing it. Subsequently. The Ministry of Settlement and Infrastructure’s water resource bill was passed in March 2004.251 74.000 4. or a total of 210.0 12.INDONESIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS villages being connected. just 3% of the city’s sewage is treated. In 1994-95.000 people. The Government has also formed several working groups to draft a presidential decree on im proved procurement procedures designed to improve the implementation of public projects. In 2001. wastewater from households was not defined as a water pollutant. km 3) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Politics and privatisation Water privatisation was at first mooted to pay government debts a well as to alleviate water provision and s pollution problems.3 6% 1% 93% 118 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . at a cost of 3 trillion Rupiah. The Government is currently seeking US$4 billion for current projects. Water requirements US$3 billion has been spent on urban water supply projects since 1970. Likewise.

International companies are expected to carry out all necessary consulting and fieldwork before any proposals are submitted. The rate of progress has been slowed by political change. but it is anticipated that up to 10 more project awards can be expected to be made in the next five years. a stricter reporting regime will be put into place. these have been advancing slowly. Groundwater Total recharge (1998.000 1. reducing leakage from 65% to 52%.000 was served by 320. Currently.000 1.595. the city area’s population of 8.000 762. In return for the new rate increases.094 2000 11.155.018.000 connections.655.230 Because of the effects of Suharto’s downfall and the Asian financial crisis in 1998. after Government Regulation No. with all supplied by 2022. 35% in 2001. km3) Per capita (1998. Bandung. By 2002.000 3.000 3.000 2. 40% in 2003 and by 30% in 2004. due to water being provided by corrupt staff. The main water networks were constructed in the 1940s. which in turn awarded 25 year water supply concessions to RWE/Thames (East Jakarta) and Suez (West Jakarta) in 1997. water delivery in terms of quality and quantity appears to have failed to improve in the intended manner. six BOT and concession awards have been made.422.000 illegal connections. there were still approximately 40.000 1. progress has concentrated upon low earning households: Household connections Total Low income houses 1997 505.409. agreement on price rises has been deferred in exchange for capital spending deferrals.000 2. However. PT PAM Lyonnaise Jaya has repaired 241km of pipes.245.0 1. Rates were increased in 1998 by 20%. the actual connection rate was only 50%.000 787. A total investment of US$314 million is needed for these projects. bulk water projects for Palembang. Suez has sought to extend its initial investment period from 5 to 10 years.000 915. All connected properties were metered. A cross-subsidy system continues to be applied.268. m 3) MAJOR CITIES Population Jakarta Bandung Surabaja Medan Ujung Pandang Palembang Malang Badar Lampung Semerang Tegal 226. Private wells and vendors supply the rest of the population. 20 opened the water sector to private investors. along with 230 miles of new pipes.879. with water available for 19 hours per day.407. In general. connections were set to rise to 70% by 2002. Distribution losses had been reduced from 60% in 1997 to 49% by 2002.000 5.000 1. Spending on infrastructure had collapsed in the 1960s as the Suharto regime diverted assets away from public spending.000 1. In 1993.200.INDONESIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Some 27-30 BOT contracts have been under consideration since 1996.500 2002 610.552. 30% of the population received water supplies directly from Pam Jaya and 16% via public taps.000 969.000 1.000 1. RWE has invested US$46 million in the East Jakarta concession and Suez art least US$50 million with the West Jakarta concession.000 787. Deregulation started to take place in 1994-95. Even so. with distribution losses of 54%.000 25. This is partly due to the poor quality if water available to the concession 119 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .350.4million. Ujungpandang and Manado are being prepared for offer to the private sector. with 80% paying for these services. along with new leakage r duction e targets. To date.461.000 59. In 1993. By 2002.000 Status Water services privatised (two sectors) Under consideration for 2003 Under consideration since 1994 Bulk water provision privatised N/A N/A N/A N/A Under consideration N/A Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Jakarta (East) Privatisation of water provision services Thames Water Jakarta (West) Privatisation of water provision services Suez Medan 25 year water supply BOT Suez Sidoarjo 25 year water supply BOT VE/RWE Talang Kepala 20 year water concession Cascal Batam Island 25 year water concession Cascal City Study: Jakarta Water and sewerage services are administered by Persuahaan Air Minuum Dki Jakarta (Pam Jaya).000 2. Surabaya.051.186. To date. The aim is to increase the customer base by 10% pa from the current level of 2. Under the 1997 privatisation plans. The contracts became operational in January 1998.000 2015 17.

019 17. G.208 50.100 2. September 2004.900 390.000 0 TWI RWE (Germany) 2.V. July 1999.000 0 Distribution losses in the main cities PDAM JAYA Kodya Bandung Kodya Semarang Kodya Kediri Tirta Marta Halmahera Tengah Tirta Monpase Tirta Musi Location/Province Jakarta West Java Central Java East Java Yogyakarta Maluku North Aceh Palembang.000 0 Cascal Biwater (UK)/Nuon (Ned) 540.696.400 673.613. Central Java Kota Magelang Kota Pare-Pare.000 0 Generale des Eaux VE (France) 500. West Java Kota Salatiga. Bali Kota Cirebon. Asia Water. East Java Kota Bandung. Central Java Kota Bogor.000 2.880 483. Consultative Group on Indonesia. DI Yogyakarta Nota Manado.397 144.000 Major urban water authorities PDAM PAM DKI JAYA.000 500.702 31. South Sumatra Leakage 45% 45% 39% 26% 32% 35% 40% 37% Total 3. Population 9. North Sulawesi Kodya Denpasar. Asian Development Bank. Seshagiri. (2001). West Java Tirta Marta.995 18.000 115.700.757 10. South Sulawesi Sources: ADB (1999). It is understood that RWE has been losing US$1 million a month for about two years.500. West Java Kota Semarang.637 141.415. Jakarta Kota Surabaya.INDONESIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS companies and in part because of financial constraints imposed by inflation since 1997.700.483 123.000 2. pp 21-23.666 49.500. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company Population served (country) Water Sewerage Lyonnaise des Eaux Suez (France) 3.862 441. due to the delays in the tariff rebasing procedure.292 1. ‘The riddle of Jakarta’ GWI.900 Connections 610.000 256.435 118.410 297.000 540.099 47. 17 (11) p 6-10. Good governance and anticorruption: the road forward for Indonesia.926 Population covered 33% 45% 28% 42% 36% 34% 36% 63% 85% 63% 77% 48% 120 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .864.495 32.

1million by 2006. Political sensitivities have played a major role in this. The Ministry of Energy of the Islamic Republic of Iran co-ordinates the country’s water policies. with 27billion m 3 of water held by dams by the end of 1978. US$195 million from TSC). as the tenth point of the Revolution. Two National Plans running from 1969 to 1978 emphasised the importance of reservoir construction. German companies gained €700 million in contracts. The former Shah of Iran nationalised water resources in 1967. agriculture depended on the qanat system. canal networks. The Tehran Sewerage Company (TSC) is developing a larger scheme to install a comprehensive sewerage network in Tehran. the potential evaporation is about 300cm.5m by 2029. some 5% of urban sewerage is treated. there has been a long term programme of dam building and well construction. Drinking water quality standards are set by the Department of the Environment (DE). with annual rainfall averaging about 24cm. For example. During 2004. Until recently. The Regional Water and Wastewater Company carries out regional management. two wastewater treatment plants for Tehran (West & Northwest) and by 2005. some US$200 million of World Bank loans for sewerage and healthcare projects were postponed in June 1999 after a crackdown on Jewish Iranians. The average rainfall in 96% of Iran's land area does not exceed 20cm pa. The DE also sets acceptable limits for all hazardous effluents discharged from sources. the network will be expanded and an additional treatment plant will be built in south west Tehran to serve a population of 10. along with about thirty units for recycling wastewater. TSC is implementing a city-wide sewerage and sewage treatment schem e. in small cities. long distance water transport pipelines and water supply plant. In phases 3 to 5. Currently there are some 50. 13 times the rate of precipitation. where the mean annual precipitation is 22cm. Major water and sewerage infrastructure projects have made relatively little headway since the 1979 Revolution. This is an underground channel that conveys water from a highland aquifer to the surface at lower levels by gravity. the Environmental Protection and Enhancement Act (1974) and the Prevention of Water Pollution Regulation (1994). Desalination was increased from 3million m3 pa to 23million m3 pa between 1974 and 1978.000 qanats in use. The first phase will cost US$340 million (US$145 million via the World Bank. Capacity will.IRAN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS IRAN Most of Iran is arid or semi-arid. one-third the world average. contracts for further wastewater treatment plants. The rate of evaporation is correspondingly high. Domestic consumption of water in large cities is approximately two hundred litres per capita per day. In Tehran. Since the 1960s. the Act of the Establishment of Water and Wastewater Companies (1984). with a total output roughly equal to that of the Euphrates River. for implementation between 2006 and 2011. includes a 450. the quantity is one hundred and eighty litres. In total. There are fifteen sewage treatment plants operating in the country. The main items of legislation include the Fair Water Distribution Act (1983). TSC is currently considering proposals for the laying of the US$44 million eastern main trunk line.000m 3 per day treatment plant to serve a population of 2. 121 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Iran is seeking to normalise its relations with most Western economies and water and wastewater infrastructure projects are of a noncontentious nature with regard to the mobilisation of international investment and management. These loans were originally drawn up in 1993 and were only reactivated in 2002. be doubled in phase 2.

a shortage of parts.IRAQ PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS IRAQ Iraq’s water and sewerage infrastructure has been one of the principal casualties of the Iraq war and continues to suffer from the resultant social and political fall-out.5million people in Iraq in 2002. three major contracts have been signed. while the rest of the programme is likely to be financed through hard currency grants and loans. Bechtel’s US$1. Japan has committed $55 million for 30 small scale water treatment works in the Baghdad area and water and sewerage projects are expected to feature prominently in its $3. water and sewerage systems repair and enhancement costs will be US$7 billion. including providing ‘universal’ (in other words. In March 2004. with 9% of people connected to the sewerage system. As part of the Iraq Infrastructure Reconstruction . 77% of Iraqis lived in urban areas in 2000 and the latest data points to 22. According to the United Nations. While USAID guarantees dollar payments for its work.030 million contract covers Baghdad and eight other cities.000 of the Marsh Arabs. USAID. 90%) and Black & Veatch (USA. Bechtel will repair or upgrade a total of 19 water treatment facilities and restore 85% of Iraq’s total sewage treatment capacity.8million people in Baghdad. It is already evident that attacks on foreign nationals means that carrying out the work will be at best challenging. It aims to provide potable water and effective sanitation for 80. To date.1 billion contract to rehabilitate existing water systems and build new treatment and distribution plants. capable in theory of serving 5million people including three facilities that serve 3. Later that month. A US$11 million pilot project to restore parts of Iraq’s southern € marshlands has b een launched by the UN Environment Programme. The contract also involves sewerage rehabilitation and constructing solid waste management systems in the north and south of Iraq. 122 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Secondary contracts worth up to a further US$400 million were also signed. 51% and Amec of the UK. The ministry's 2004 budget is US$150 million (€126 million) compared with US$1 million under Saddam. a series of water and sanitation contracts were announced. Access to potable piped water has decreased from 60% in March 2003 to 50% in 2004. but this will be subject to political sensitivities.6 billion appropriated by Congress to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure. In addition. CH2M Hill (USA) & Parsons Water Infrastructure. FluorAmec (Flour of the USA. Inc. WWTW data is for 2003 Access in these cases means public standpipes and wells as well as household piped water. The first contract was awarded to Bechtel (USA) and Parsons (USA) and was financed by USAID in 2003. In practice. Privatising some of Iraq’s water services within a year is being considered by the authorities.5 billion loan package. also has a contract to provide support to the Public Works and Water Sector Program Management Office. along with a series of smaller projects worth a total of up to $3. USAID completed the rehabilitation of the Sweet Water Canal reservoir and distribution system in Basrah in June 2004 for US$38 million ( 31. 10%) was awarded a contract with a ceiling of US$600 million to rebuild the water sector. financed by the $18. 49%) gained a US$1. The only reliable water services assessment was carried out in 1996: Water and wastewater services in Iraq: Water 96% 48% Sanitation 93% 31% WWTW 27% NA Urban Rural Sources: WHO. for those living in urban areas) access to potable water and 27% of the population with sewerage. The project started this January and runs to December 2005.1 billion. chemicals and power means they are operating well at below capacity. There are 13 major sewage treatment works in Iraq.8 million). A joint venture between Washington International Inc (USA. This work was estimated to take two to three years after the Iraqi Ministry of Water Resources was handed over to local control in May 2004.Phase II.

owned. Nutrient reduction facilities have been installed in the appropriate waste water treatment plants in the 10 sensitive areas designated in 1994 and are already in place in a number of the areas now being designated. In June 2001. With the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) scheme being extended to Northern Ireland.360 5% 34% 62% Service provision and management In urban areas. In 1989 after research to identify the impact of agriculture on water quality. The designation of 12 stretches of river. 75% of public water supply stems from surface water. developed. of which 2 serve cities with a population in excess of 100. water supply systems are public utilities. million Total 2015.8% 24.982 US$36. which are relatively small-scale cooperative water systems. the progress of the PFI is being closely followed in Ireland. Nitrate levels for surface waters and aquifers are within EU standards. Irish surface waters contain a relative low level of nitrate. There were 530 sewage treatment works in 1988.9 4. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services US$30.000. combined with the shallowness could cause problems in the future. million In urban areas 2002 In urban areas 2015 In urban agglomerations 2015 Water quality Inland water quality (1988-90) Ia-Ib Good/Very Good II Fair III Poor IV Bad 70% 16% 12% 1% 3.IRELAND PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS IRELAND Water and sewerage provision in Ireland is caught between the rock of a tradition of free water provision and the hard place of EU compliance costs at a time when structural and cohesion funding is being re-directed towards central and eastern Europe. Urban Services % Water % Sewerage % Sewage treated 98% 95% 40% Development of sewerage infrastructure Population served Tertiary Secondary Primary 1990 0% 21% 23% 123 1995 1.8% 31. 25% of the population effluent was subjected to treatment. Rural water supplies are also organised into Group Schemes. The water supply pipe network and reservoir system are owned. While groundwater resources are generally unpolluted. which are in private ownership.0% 1999 NA 26% 35% Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . changes were announced to the Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations to require a higher level of treatment for discharges into the 30 water bodies. 3 lakes and 15 estuaries as sensitive areas makes the provision of nutrient reduction facilities. except for the small-scale group schemes. the fissured nature of the limestone aquifers means that pollutants can move through them relatively rapidly. there is also little contamination with metals and pesticides. operated and maintained by City and Town councils. There are also very many individual supplies to single dwellings and industrial enterprises in rural areas. operated and maintained by user groups. operated and maintained by the local authorities. Population Total 2002. Distribution losses in 2000 were 47%. it was found that 20% of noted water pollution incidents resulted from agriculture. or tertiary treatment. compulsory for discharges from large sewage treatment plants.4 60% 64% 26% The relatively low level of industrialisation means that the influence of intensive agriculture is higher than usual. In 1988. This. The public water supply system reaches 81% of the population at present while group schemes supply about 10%.

129 from 2005. The EU has responded by cutting Cohesion finance for water projects since 2000: the EU allocated €1. In addition. €4 million for pilots of new wastewater treatment systems for small villages.000 47.2 35% 37% 29% 2015 1. Groundwater Total recharge (1998. Ireland 88 sanitary authorities. 186 between 2002-04. This has traditionally been left to the discretion of local authorities. m 3) Withdrawals (1980.2 16% 74% 10% 3. In the mid 1990s.5 971 0. and has warned that future aid allocations may be cut if Ireland continues to block domestic charges for water. 665 sewage schemes are also being implemented: 50 have been completed. Ringsend in Dublin. some €4.0% 1999 39% NA Compliance with the UWWTD means that Ireland needs a 4.1million population equivalent (PE) sewerage system by 2005. with 12 planning to charge for industrial effluent discharges. km 3) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Paying for water services Ireland is the only country in the EU that does not charge for domestic water on a universal basis. €533 million is being spent on rural water between 2000–06.000 1. along with the need for cost recovery for compliance work up to 2010. and 240 rural schemes. €7 million will be for subsidies for group water schemes. an attempt to impose uniform charges backfired and as a result. will have a 1. In total. €5 million will go to the single house well grant.000 Status Sewage treatment privatised in 2000 The UK Government's Treasury Taskforce for PFI is being used as a model by the Government of the Republic of Ireland to develop public private partnerships for major infrastructure projects.250. the EU wants water metering to be introduced for domes tic customers.149.4 billion is required. while cities such as Dublin and Limerick did not.1 billion under the Cohesion Fund for the environment in Ireland for 1993-02. The EU maintains that the polluter pays principle. km3) Per capita (1998. It will involve private-sector expertise in design and operation.000 124 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . and may bring in private money. km3) Per capita (1998. A central unit is being created in Ireland's department of finance to launch a number of pilot projects for roads and other schemes. Freshwater Total (1998.57 million PE. The Irish government will spend €100 million on bringing rural water supplies up to an appropriate standard in 2004.000 220. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Cork 22 year sewage treatment BOT Northumbrian Dublin 20 year sewage treatm ent BOT AWI consortium Sligo 10 year water O&M AWI consortium Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total Northumbrian NWG (UK) 0 220.187 1. a 50% increase on funds planned for 2003. Spending on sewage and water between 2002-04 will be €726 million. the Local Government Act of 1997 abolished domestic water charges.000 AWI AWG (UK) 50. County councils are to receive €78 million.0 13.000 1. km 3) For domestic use (1980) For industry (1980) For agriculture (1980) MAJOR CITIES Population 2000 Dublin 985.IRELAND PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Population served None Not connected Spending needs 1990 22% 34% 1995 10.4% 32. The main STW.200. m 3) Withdrawals (1980. After 2000-03. Ireland is set to lose large amounts of European Union Cohesion and Structural funds. This has meant that poorer (usually rural) municipalities imposed charges.

ISRAEL . four-year water and wastewater management contract won in July 1996 by Suez saw revenue collection double and leakage fall from 50% to 31%. The increased cost of land and labour is driving the profitability of irrigation agriculture down. Israel: Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations.5 billion in the West Bank over the next 20 years. this had increased to 250million m 3 pa and Israel is currently planning to increase the recovery of wastewater to up to 400million m 3 pa. the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the French Development Agency (AFD).792 US$19. US$180 million is to be invested in wastewater reclamation facilities. US$75 million in aid was granted in 2003 to alleviate water supply shortages the Southern West Bank. an eight-year contract to supervise.3 71% 76% 0% 125 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . via the World Bank. a shift away from agriculture towards higher value uses of water is needed. The need to defer to special interest groups has also precluded the provision of water services on an economic basis in many areas. There were some encouraging signs regarding the resolution of international disputes over water resources. 90% of domestic and industrial users were connected to the sewerage network and 70% of the water collected was reused.4 5. By 1998. the US$28 million.530 US$1. Suez’s management replaced 8.000 meters The Palestinian Water Authority’s National Water Plan highlights investment needs of US$1. US$360 million will be invested in small desalination facilities to be built by private companies. manage and maintain the water and wastewater system in the Gaza Strip is to be awarded in the near term having been postponed from 2001 by the Palestinian Intifada. At the beginning of the 1990s.PALESTINE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS ISRAEL . US$1. 2015 Palestine: Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations.PALESTINE Political sensitivities drive all aspects of water provision and use in Israel and Palestine.754 US$15. This is creating considerable potential for mutual aid between the two states with Palestine taking over the commodity side of food production and Israel concentrating on higher value activities such as seeds and support services. Gaza I. 6. Water provision and use in Israel (1992-93) Domestic use (L/day) Agriculture Industry Domestic Total (million m 3) 275 63% 6% 31% 1.8 92% 92% 35% 3. 2015 The West Bank and the Gaza Strip Water development and management projects in the West Bank and the Gaza strip to date have been related to aid spending or World Bank supported schemes. but these have been superseded by politics.051 Fresh water in all areas of Israel will be restricted to domestic use by 2014. On all sides. along with US$620 million for larger facilities at Ashkelon. accounting for 195 million m 3 pa of water.000 meters and repaired a further 7. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP per capita (Palestine) Water in Israel Israel is one of the leaders in recycling wastewater.5 billion in the Gaza strip and US$3. USIAD work has been frozen due to the intensification of the conflict. along with US$240 million from private companies.7 billion will be invested in desalination and related water projects between 2003 and 2007. or about 10% of total supply. Gaza II. Hadera and Ashdod.3 7.

Israel’s National Water Carrier was conveying 420-450million m3 pa in the 1980s. and Banias (125million m3 pa).500million m 3 pa. and winter runoff. and some irrigation return flows.ISRAEL . according to a 1998 study compiled by the U. and into Israel before converging into the Jordan River. aimed at improving service and cutting distribution losses. but has enough rainfall to be self sufficient in water resources. The increase in water demands placed on these resources have been exacerbated by population growth. The Upper Jordan. Israel allows a flow downstream from Lake Tiberias of 60million m3 pa (about 10% of the natural discharge in this section).4 million over the contract life. The natural discharge of the river was 1. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1989) Domestic Industrial Agriculture Water resources. Water usage in the two main rivers (1990s.S. The Lebanon is also a party to these regional concerns.000million m3 pa. 250. the Hasbani rises in Southern Lebanon. They are unique in that their relatively poor groundwater resources and petrochemical deposits mean that surface water resources have to form the backbone of the water supply. Hasbani (125million m3 pa). the European Investment Bank loaned €30 million in a €65 million package for developing water resources for the cities of Hebron and Bethlehem in the West Bank. million m 3 pa) Upper Jordan 550 0 0 0 0 Yarmouk River 70-100 120-130 150-240 N/A 0 1.400million m3 pa. while water use averages 3. The total natural discharge of the basin averages around 1.300km 2 and is some 230km long. Most of the aquifers and the 126 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 people will be served by the work.85km 3 16% 5% 79% 90% 80% 70% Israel Jordan Syria Lebanon West Bank Israel and Syria have extensively exploited these rivers in recent years. The resulting deficit is met by extracting water. Jordan and Syria Israel. a four year management contract for the two cities has been awarded to VE and will have a turnover of €6.PALESTINE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Water provision and use in the West Bank/Gaza (1990-92) Domestic use (L/day) Agriculture Industry/Domestic Total (million m 3) 57 62% 38% 210 In 1999. which belonged to Syria until 1967 and are now under Israeli control. without recharge. with the work meant to be completed by 2002. along with direct water extractions in the Upper Jordan Valley and on the shores of Lake Tiberias accounts for effectively the whole discharge of the river in its northern section. Jordan and Syria occupy one of the three most arid. The West Bank aquifer (also called the Mountain Aquifer) delivers 600-900million m 3 pa of water with a safe yield of 632million m 3 pa.300million m 3 pa. along with the remaining Yarmouk waters. from groundwater sources and underground aquifers. The estimated total renewable water supply for the region is approximately 2. the Dan (250million m 3 pa). Some 400-500million m 3 pa is discharged into the river through a number of smaller tributaries in Jordan. which. immigration. The Lower Jordan forms the border between Jordan and Israel and then between Jordan and the West Bank. refugee flows and the insistence by various parties on using irrigated agriculture. and the Banias rises on the Golan Heights. Geological Survey. Israel in turn pumps some 70million m 3 pa from the Yarmouk while Syria takes between 200-250million m 3 pa from this river. a total of 200-300million m3 pa. then the river flows along the Syrian-Jordanian border. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Conflict study: Israel. The Dan is within Israel. The Yarmouk (400-550million m 3 pa) rises in Syria. This water is unsuitable for irrigation because of its high salinity and other pollution. Financial and political pressures have restricted Jordan’s exploitation to 120-130million m 3 pa from the Yarmouk. their use and abuse The Jordan River basin drains an area of 18. In relation to this. which forms the axis of the northern part of the system. permanently settled areas in the world. has three sources.70km 3 289m 3 1.

but it does not recognise the realities after the 1967 war. use of the western aquifer by the local Palestinian population was limited to part of the flow of springs as well as some 20million m3 from traditional dug wells in the coastal area. while in the 1960s and 1970s. The original target was for 315million m3 of desalinated water by 2006 but this level is now unlikely to be reached before 2009.PALESTINE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS rain recharge arise in the West Bank and are transboundary in nature.10km 3 187m 3 1. the first two being to Rishon Le Zion and Metullah. Water allocation has been one of the core areas for debate during the current peace process. It is understood that Turkey Total 700. The Via Maris Desalination and Carmel Desalination groups have won BOT contracts to build two desalination plants for US$140 million. Ashdod and Petah Tikva are also setting up municipal water and sewage companies. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Ashkelon 25 year.35 per m 3.000 127 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . reflecting the lower of desalinating brackish water. United Nations vetoes have been used to block World Bank funding for water provision schemes in Jordan.392. The Via Maris group is made up of Tahal Consulting Engineers. Licenses for setting up independent water and sewage companies were first awarded in 2003. MAJOR CITIES City Tel Aviv 413 110 50 58 1. At US$0. Water usage in the West Bank (million m 3 pa) Israel Settlers Palestinians Unallocated Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1986) Politics and practicalities All water disputes in the region revolve round perceptions of water and power. plans to build its plant in Haifa Bay. Mekorot has agreed to purchase 8. at a cost of US$70 million each. Carmel. The plants will be built under a BOT basis.000 0 Export of water from Turkey to Israel Negotiations have been underway between Turkey and Israel since 2003 concerning the export of water from Turkey’s Manavgat River dam to Israel. The only project performing to expectations is VE’s. The intention is to allow these entities to be privatized at a later date. Historically.20km 3 2000 2. 100million m3 pa desalination facility to be located in Caesarea is under consideration. Jerusalem. The 1955 Johnson Plan for water allocation is often invoked by Jordan and Syria. water desalination BOT VE Israel has been developing a series of desalination projects but it became evident in 2004 that these were facing various difficulties. which is composed of Ionics (USA).54 per m 3. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage VE VE (France) 700.001. military raids were carried out on dams. Baran and Dor Chemicals.5million m3 of water annually from a JV between kibbutz Maagan Michael on the Mediterranean coast and Ionics at US$0. Granite Hacarmel.ISRAEL . The water will either be transferred by tanker or via a pipeline. Haifa. The potential for brackish water development is estimated at 180million m 3 pa. The Water Commission issued regulations that require the stateowned Mekorot Water Company to purchase brackish water desalinated by private producers. Any projects that are seen as possibly strengthening one side have traditionally been opposed by the others or their allies. It is understood that the contract covers 50million m 3 of water per annum and will last 20 years.000 2015 2. 30% below the cost of water from Veolia’s Ashkelon plant. A US$120 million.000 Status No privatisation plans at present Private sector developments Israel’s water industry was liberalised in 2003. Each group will construct a desalination plant capable of purifying 30million m3 of water a year. Production in 2006 is likely to be in the region of 160million m3. Via Maris offered the lowest price per cubic metre. Middle East Tubes and Ocean Advanced Industries.

No negotiations between Turkey and countries other than Israel have been disclos ed to date. the nearest Israeli port.20 per m 3 US$0.5million m 3 of water per annum. with Israel taking responsibility for transportation. The dam cost Turkey US$160 million to construct and is capable of supplying potable water at 5. October 2003).PALESTINE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS will take sole responsibility for the marketing and sale of Manavgat water in Israel.5million m 3 of water per day. A US$150 million pumping station and treatment plant entered service in 1999. The Manavgat Estuary is 325 nautical miles from Ashkelon. According to the Israeli Government (GWR.70 per m 3 US$0. or 182.8m 3 per second. Cyprus and other (as yet unnamed) Middle Eastern countries and hopes to eventually sell 0.ISRAEL .00 per m 3 128 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . the cost of water exported to Turkey would break down as follows: Cost of water in Turkey Cost of piping water to Israel Cost of transfer to local network Total cost US$0. Turkey is seeking to export water from the dam to a number of markets including Greek Islands in the Aegean.10 per m 3 US$1.

million) Total (2015. Excess levels of nitrates in drinking water are a particular problem in Tuscany. most of the beaches meet guideline as well as mandatory standards. Tiber. According to official returns. the implementation process has progressed at a remarkable rate.528 US$26. 243L per day. Organic compounds are at a high level in the Po Valley. 129 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . 70% of the overall pollution load is subject to treatment.6 Per capita 297 L/day 324 L/day 352 L/day 548 L/day 57. the 1994 Galli Law has been increasingly important. and Sicily.5 55. Milan. where 51% of the waters are considered to be suffering from some degree of eutrophication. Population Total (2002. Padua and La Specia.2 5.8 6.8 10. According to Veolia Environnement (VE) in 1995. Algal blooms continue to be a problem in the Upper Adriatic Sea due to the discharge of untreated effluents mainly into the river Po. with their basins covering 35% of the surface area and 45% of the population. While legal issues as to the award process abound. where 40% of the capacity is subject to frequent algal blooms.67million people. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Infrastructure and service provision National gross water supply Billion m³ 5. The water quality in natural and man-made lakes is generally poor.40 3% 26% 71% The Rivers Po. Urban areas have a higher than average usage: Rome. river quality in Italy is as follows: I-II: Good – Fair III: Polluted IV: Very Polluted V: Heavily Polluted 50% 32% 9% 9% US$20. Puglia and Sicily is also of concern. Brescia. The population equivalent generated by residents. 300L per day and Turin. Problems remain in different areas of the country with regards to the presence of nitrates in drinking water. commercial and industrial users and tourists is of 99million people. significantly affecting water supplies for 0. Vicenza. 310L per day. 45% in 1987 and 62% by 1995. 80% of the industrial effluent generation is concentrated in the Paduan basin. Access to sewerage rose from 30% in 1980 to 62% in 1987 and 80% by 1995. Saline intrusion into coastal aquifers in Romagna.5 67% 69% 21% 1961 1975 1998 2015 There was an average abstraction of 324L per day in 1975. rising to 30% in 1980. Adige and Arno account for 40% of Italy’s fresh water resources.ITALY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS ITALY Since 1999. with an average water supply of 174L per day to domestic users. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture (1994) Industry (1994) Services (1994) Water quality According to the 1991-93 survey of the 13 main rivers from a total of 156 survey sites taken from the national network of the National Information System on the Environment (SINA). These four rivers are all of poor or bad quality. saline intrusions into underground coastal aquifers and the problem of the presence of organic synthetic compounds such as organic chlorinates. The proportion of domestic sewage subject to treatment was 14% in 1971. some 35% of sewage treatment works were working below par or were in fact not in operation. This phenomenon is particularly evident in Sardinia. Groundwater problems are mainly caused by the intensive use of herbicides and fertilisers. the Marches and Campania. seeking to rationalise the management of Italy’s water and sewerage services and to encourage private sector management and investment.

which operate large facilities for the abstraction and distribution of water.000 billion. Only one of the six cities with a population over 0. 55% of people in Sardinia faced occasional water shortages.165 of Italy’s 7. A quasi market for these activities has been developing in recent years because of the need for credit ratings to raise new debt issues. Water and serwerage entities. with the aim of these then combining water provision and sewerage. which work either individually or in association with other municipalities.200 7. At the same time. km 3) Per capita (1998. In 1995.500 6. there has been increased political pressure to keep prices down in recent years.000 2.075 municipal administrations. Freshwater Total (1998. 2002 Water supply Water distribution Sewerage Sewage treatment 5. Therefore.000 98% 300 90% 85% Italy’s 300 state held municipal service entities have an estimated total value of Lira 50.000 have inadequate sewage treatment or sewerage.161million people are in areas of regular water stress.5% of the population does not have sufficient amounts of water. m 3) Withdrawals (1990.4 2. A survey by Itstat in 2004 found that 1. These assets are mainly in water. One of the central elements for attaining this is to allow the former municipal water utilities to expand their services into other regions of Italy. Sicilian and Sardinian). Regional water scarcity 25% of the overall population has inadequate water resources.7 29% 7% 64% 130 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . While in the north of Italy.5million has an effective sewage treatment while nearly half of Comuni with a population of 10-80.988 Comuni still have no sewage treatment works. and 78% in the south. 55% of the water is supplied by 184 municipal or co-operative waterworks and the remaining 45% is in the hands of 5. 159. when the first direct concession award (Arezzo by Suez and Amga) took place. this rises to 18% in central Italy.896 different public bodies. eliminating the scope for cross-subsidies between these activities and water and sewerage services. for water and wastewater services. km 3) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) The 1994 Galli Law The Galli Law is designed to address the inadequacies of the current operational structure in Italy when faced with a €25 billion ten year bill for basic EU compliance work. These areas are considered to be under the threat of supply disruptions in drought years. A secondary driver has been the opening up of gas and electricity markets to competition. In total. 9. The Law seeks to rationalise various water entities into 91 more manageable entities. the Italian Parliament is currently examining a law proposing the reorganisation of the National Water Network with special emphasis on supplying the southern parts of Italy. 55% on the islands. According to the figures of the association of Italian public water and gas utilities.785 1. Urban Services % Water L per cap per day % Sewerage % Sewage treated Structure of the water market Water supply in Italy is managed by a total of 8.ITALY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Sewage treatment development Year Tertiary Secondary Primary 1995 5% 34% 17% 1999 24% 36% 3% 1998-08 spending is forecast at €31-51 billion although the Public Works Ministry's slower programme is for €4151 billion for 15-20 years. sewerage. Exceptions are three public utilities (Apulian. gas and energy services. 8. The Galli Law started to make an impact in 1999. with 112 of these lacking a sewerage system.

the Galli Law has clearly assisted the development of private sector participation on a broader basis. These municipalities have been lowering their stakes over time. km 3) For Domestic use (1985) For Industry (1985) For Agriculture (1985) Market size and development In 2001. Turin (public) Hera. Puglia & Basilicata (public) ACEA. while 12. The Finance Bill of 2002 has thrown some aspects of the ATO system into confusion and will probably need to be amended.0 524 12.251.000 2001 revenues (€million) 346 248 119 85 52 52 45 Status Corporatised.251.000 2. Under the Law. along with Rome’s ACEA and Como’s ASCM. Groundwater Total recharge (1998.000 1.ITALY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Market structure Private sector ENI Municipal stake sales Moving towards privatisation Municipal entities 1995 3% 4% 0% 1% 92% 2000 8% 11% 6% 9% 66% 2003 11% 10% 18% 8% 53% Given that in 1995.0 billion by 2010 due to a programme of tariff increases since 1994. Privatisation developments Genoa SpA (Amga) was partially floated in 1996.012.000 764.649. municipally owned water and wastewater companies are only to be allowed to develop their activities outside their ATOs between 2003 and 2007. m 3) Withdrawals (1985. Preparations for the privatisation of Acquedotto Pugliese (AP) are underway after four years of delays.000.0 billion.000 1.012. preparing for a partial float 49% of AMGA floated Partly privatised Supply (m m3 pa) 244 385 342 220 161 74 41 Population Served 4.000 3. preparing for a partial float Stake in Arin SpA sold to Italgas in 2000 49% of ACEA floated Corporatised.020. A second wave of ATO IPOs and mergers is gathering momentum. total billings generated €3.000 2. km3) Per capita (1998.294. the municipal share of the market was more than 87%.000 1. ACEA’s Acqua Italia has started rationalising water services in Genoa after acquiring the smaller companies serving the city.000 778.650. MAJOR CITIES Population Milan Naples Rome Turin Genoa Florence Entity AQP. Milan. Genoa (semi-private) 30. This is expected to rise to €5.2% of AP’s capital. AP serves more than four million people. Rome (semi private) Italgas/ENI CAP.000 2.649. Enel has been seeking to acquire AP since 2000. The Apulia region holds 87.000 760.8% belongs to Basilicata.294. Average tariffs of €0. Trieste’s Acegas and Brescia’s ASM.000 1.19 per m 3 by 2010.243.85 per m 3 in 2002 will rise to €1.000 Municipalities Served 338 66 283 194 38 47 90 Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Arezzo Asti Bologna Brescia Calabria Como Florence Frosinone Genoa Contract 25 year concession award 30 year water and wastewater concession 44% sale of Hera Spa in 2003 25% stake sale of ASM Brescia in 2002 30 year water and sewerage concession 49% stake sale of ASCM in 2000 35 year concession award 30 year water and wastewater concession 49% stake sale of Amga in 1996 131 Company Suez/Amga Amga Hera ASM Brescia So Ri Cal ASCM Como ACEA/Suez Acea Amga Spa Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 3.345.000 2015 4.0 53% 13% 34% 2000 4.000 3. Bologna (semi-private) AMGA.000 778.000 890. Lodi & Pavia (public) AAM.000 890.

000 513. mostly since 2000-02.000 5.350.000 Camuzzi Enel (Italy) 44. with further mergers under consideration.450.000 95.000 44.000 575.940.000 600.000 Nuove Aqua Suez (France)/Amga (Italy) 296.000 330.ITALY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Latina Massa Modena Naples Perugia Pisa Pavoda & Vicenza Rome Siena/Grosetto Terni Trieste Vercelli ATO development 30 year water and wastewater concession Water and sewerage concession 22% sale of Meta Modena Spa in 2003 JV for water services 30 year concession award 30 year concession award ATO merger 49% stake sale of ACEA in 1999 25 year concession award 30 year water and wastewater concession 49% stake sale of Acegas.000 2.000 434.000 2.000 1. most notably ACEA’s.770.000 Hera Bologna and other towns (Italy) 2.000 ASM Brescia municipality (Italy) 513.000 Sigesa Bouygues (France) 1.000 2.170.000 So Ri Cal Enel (Italy) 752.000 324.000 Latina VE (France)/Enel (Italy) 600.000 0 Acquedotto Ferrari ACEA (Italy) 350.000 600.000 40.000 0 Acque Toscane Suez (France) 40.000 SAP VE (France) 95.000 Total 6. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage ACEA Rome Municipality (Italy) 6.000 345.000 Acegas Trieste Municipality (Italy) 575.000 0 Severn Trent Services Severn Trent (UK) 600.000 105.000 752.000 296.000 250.000 700.000 132 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 700.000 600.000. The Italian Government is currently considering if the tender processes for the granting of ATO licences was properly carried out.000 30. The Environment Minis try is considering revoking various ATO concessions.000 0 Acquedotto Nicolay ACEA (Italy) 330.000 Meta Modena municipality (Italy) 312.000 600.000 350.000 40. seven ATOs have been floated and have in turn merged with 14 other ATOs.000 815.000 1.700.400.000 324. 2001 Acquisition of Atena ATO VE/Enel Camuzzi Meta Modena Italgas SAUR ACEA/Suez Acegas ACEA Spa ACEA/Suez Severn Trent Acegas Amga A total of 91 ATOs have been set up.000 860.000 752.700.000 Acque Genova Amga (Italy) 440.000 ASCM Como Como municipality (Italy) 250.940.000 700.000 0 Acque Potabili ENI (Italy) 950.000 110.000 950.000 1.800.770.200.000 CGA VE (France) 345.000 Gruppo Italgas ENI (Italy) 5. In the meantime.000 Crea Suez (France) 700.000 0 Siemec VE (France) 0 700.000 0 Amga Genova municipality (Italy) 1.000.000 6.

water services to agriculture are self financing. 2015 Water supply entities Size of System 500.2% of service provision costs.5 127.784 110 US$31. In theory. which were incorporated into the 1994 Basic Environment Plan.230. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation by 2001 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations.650. domestic water tariffs accounted for 90.000 37. with capital spending of ¥6. The Basic Environment Law passed in 1993.720. defines government responsibilities and overall aims for environmental protection.000-500. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Sewage treatment development Year Tertiary Secondary Primary 1984 0% 30% 9% 1987 0% 36% 0% 1990 2% 42% 0% 1996 8% 50% 0% 100% 85% 45% 133 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 Water supply entity Public Private (100+ people) Bulk water Number 21 183 613 1. ranging from river basin systems to rural schemes.407 US$26. The Law for the Preservation of Drinking Water Supply Quality in Headwaters was passed in 1994.000 11. Japan’s debt mountain is forcing a reassessment of the role of the private sector in the domestic market and may see international players entering in due course.000+ 100. Water and sewerage services turnover in 2000 was ¥5.000 20.000 Below 5. there are 4.000 26. The Japanese Environment Agency is mainly concerned with pollution monitoring and carrying out research work. This plan sets out a series of targets for water and effluent treatment and the expansion and upgrading of Japan’s sewerage and sewage treatment network.370 People served 39.127 3.000 Number 11. An average bill of US$360 per capita also implies that there is significant scope for efficiency gains. with sewerage fees acounting on average for only 60% of costs.131 9.200. but the payments do not cover all actual costs.000-100.000 6. The only significant contract gains have been made as part of JVs with the more established players.760 sewerage and sewage treatment systems. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Legislation and management Water management is guided by the 1958 Water Works Act (amended 2001).JAPAN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS JAPAN The insular nature of the market in Japan has meant that Japanese companies have a remarkably low international profile. This implies that there is a deficit of US$7 billion per annum purely in capital spending terms.000-20.940 2% 36% 62% 127.2 79% 82% 39% In addition. In 1995.500 billion (US$52 billion) making Japan the largest water market in the world. The Water Pollution Control Law passed in 1960 allows for the monitoring of and enforcement of standards relating to the discharge and treatment of household and industrial effluents.850.000 5.600 billion (US$45 billion).

400 billion pa (US$2. The sewage treatment O&M market was worth US$4 billion pa in 1997. Mitsubishi holds 5% of the United Utilities consortium serving eastern Manila and is AWG partner for the Beijing No 10 water BOT. compared with 42% for the rest of Japan. Tokyo has been experiencing water shortages both in late summer and during the winter.900 billion.7 billion). but through a series of one year management outsourcing contracts. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) 185. made in the privatisation of water and sewerage services globally. Mitsui and Sumitomo both have a 7.0m 3 91. 1995 54% 27% 4% 2000 66% 35% 12% 2010 90% 60% 90% Connected to sewerage Effluents recycled Tertiary treatment By 2002. a degree of O&M outsourcing for sewage treatment works has been in place since 1953. remained commonplace in Tokyo until the 1980s. This is due to inadequate water storage and distribution facilities in the region. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) 547.5% stake in Thames Water’s Izmit project in Turkey. While all urban water and sewerage services are in municipal hands. 95. The only cases where they have been noted are as equity partners in extant consortia. The water supply extension programme has been budgeted at ¥1. bathing and coastal waters were at their lowest quality since the 1970s. in consequence.4km 3 19% 17% 64% Environmental and service shortfalls Since 1995. Another factor has been the lack of impact that Japanese companies have. Septic tanks for example. 1978 46% 31% 1988 66% 39% 1993 76% 47% Flush lavatories Sewerage The 8th Five Year Plan for Sewerage Construction ran from 1996 to 2000. 134 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .JAPAN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Infrastructure development Nationally.469m 3 13km 3 29% 41% 30% Privatisation and private sector players The traditional resistance towards privatising Japan’s water or sewerage services and its reticence towards foreign companies is being eroded by the country’s mounting debt problems and the need to make water and sewerage services cover their costs. River water quality Good-Fair 1989 69% 1991 75% 1996 74% In 1997. sewerage coverage was 70%. In the 13 major cities . As much of the water and sewerage network has been developed since the 1960s.0km 3 1.344. and aimed to lay the foundations for a modern sewerage and sewage treatment infrastructure. it is generally in good condition.0km 3 4. For example. Eutrophication in service reservoirs has affected drinking water supplied to 14million people in recent years. 96% were connected to sewerage. with a fall in the quality of lakes also noted. 62% of wastewater was treated in 1995. 60% of sewerage and 30% on wastewater treatment works. It is not privatised in the conventional sense. Marubeni is Vivendi’s JV partner for the Chengdu BOT water supply project in China. Marubeni also has a JV with VE for a variety of projects in China and other East Asian economies.5% of people are connected to piped water supply. When including industrial effluents. The low level of sewerage in Japan (54% in 1995) marks the country from the rest of the industrialised world. Capital spending on sewerage in recent years has averaged ¥3. of which US$1billion pa was operated by private sector operators.

In 2000.002.000 1. the plant could be operational by 2007. MAJOR CITIES City Tokyo Osaka Nagoya Kitakyushu Sapporo Kyoto Hiroshima Sendai Sources: Ministry of Environment.000 876. Japan’s largest sewage treatment operations company.000 953. 7-9.000 3.444.926. Japan’s most comprehensive PSP scheme to date is currently under consideration.JAPAN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Market breakdown for sewage treatment O&M in public and river basin sewage systems Municipal operators Ebara Nihon HELS Industry Other private operators 38% 10% 21% 31% According to industry sources in Japan. Asian Water 18 (5).000 11. (2002). Japan Water will operate the city’s water treatment and distribution infrastructure for 5.000 1. pp10-13 PSP in Japan.000m 3 per day facility at a cost of ¥24 billion (US$205 million). this market is expected to grow by 50% in the medium term. Japan Water.899. Web Site. In 1999.157.000 3. Due to budget constraints. the local government currently supplies 2. The city of Wakayama to the south of Osaka has commissioned a feasibility study to replace three old plants with a new 92. legislation was introduced to encourage the consolidation of water and sewerage entities to improve their cost effectiveness.000). won the first O&M contract for water services for the city of Miyoshi (population 40. although to date this has in reality been limited to the use of PFI projects for their design and build capabilities.013.000 1. In consequence. In 2001.000m 3 per day WTP due to be commissioned in 2005. September 2003.T. July 2002.000m 3 per day industrial WTP at Wakayama since 2002 and in March this year.000 1.5million m3 per day of treated bulk water and some industrial water. Japan edges towards PSP.000 2015 27.283. Sumitomo Metal has been operating a 155.5 year O&M contract for Geihoku.013. guidelines were introduced to encourage multi year O&M contracts at sewage treatment works. In Saitama prefecture to the north of Tokyo. strategic alliances are being developed in anticipation of the opening up of the rest of the Japanese market: Japan Water J-Team Hitachi Public Services Marubeni Vivendi Thames Water Japan Nihon HELS/Mitsubishi Ebara/Nippon Jogesuiodo Sekki Co Hitachi Marubeni/Vivendi RWE/Mitsui There is much more private sector involvement in industrial water services than for municipal water services.000 people is the first medium term PSP contract in Japan. J.000 11. Since 1999 three developments have made the rest of the sector more attractive to the private sector. legislation was passed allowing the use of private finance in water and sewerage projects. a town of 3.000 2.750. This has subsequently evolved to allow one city to operate another city’s services.000 2. In addition.000 2.000 866. Global Water Intelligence. a 50:50 JV between Mitsubishi and Nihon HELS. Geihoku’s nine water supply systems are now operated by J -Team. Global Water Intelligence.849. a venture between Ebara and Nippon Jogesuiodo Sekkei (NJS) a water consultant. If approved. A 5.5 years. the renewal of a sludge treatment line at the Okubo WWTP will be implemented in the form of a 20-year BOT contract and the bid process is expected to commence in February 2004. In November 2002. the prefecture chose to contract out the operation of a new 150.139.813. pp14-15 2000 26. Testar.190.000 Status N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 135 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .

In Amman during the 1998 drought. network rehabilitation. municipally supplied water was only available for two days a week. aimed at channeling water from the Red Sea to the Dead Sea.6million people. The original 1997-2011 plan was to cover 61 facilities at a total cost of US$5 billion. The World Bank is assisting Jordan with a plan that aims to pump 2billion m 3 of water per annum from the Red Sea to raise the level of the Dead Sea back to its historic levels of about 395 meters below sea level as opposed to its present level of 410 meters. The draft law is said to include safeguards for employee rights and a clause giving the government the right to maintain a golden share in any privatised institution. Water from the Bassel Dam in southern Syria has started to flow to Jordan. the Dead Sea is expected to dry up by 2050 Privatisation of Amman’s water and sewerage management Jordan has adopted a draft law on privatisation that came into effect at the end of 1999. using a desalination facility remains under consideration. which has caused problems for n=both Jordan and Israel. In consequence. operation. but sewage treatment remains at an early stage of development. despite its estimated cost of US$3 billion. The Greater Amman water management project was awarded to Suez in 1999 (Ondeo 75% and Montgomery Watson-Arabtech Jardaneh. the daily availability of drinking water is the lowest for an urbanised area in the world. running water is only available for a few hours of the week. This figure does not take into account distribution losses and other municipal uses. management. privatisation has only now been taken seriously because it is a prerequisite to Jordan's entry into the World Trade Organisation (WTO). Zahra and Mujib DBO water treatment scheme was won by a JV between ABB SUSA and Earth Tech (Tyco). In Jordan. Five groups have prequalified to bid for the project. due to institutional conservatism. and a program of meter repair and replacement. A 25 year concession to pump and distribute 100million m3 of water per day 325km from the Disi aquifer has been under consideration since 1998. The 51 month contract aims to improve the efficiency. the actual daily delivery of water is 85L a day. water supplied for domestic usage is about 115L a day. The 55million m 3 per day spring water treatment plant is being funded by USAID. The project seeks to improve the efficiency of the water distribution system through leakage management. Water provision and use in Jordan (1992) Domestic use (L/day) Agriculture Industry Domestic Total (million m 3) 115 74% 5% 21% 875 Sewerage systems and treatment plants have been built or are under construction in most towns. The overall project cost is US$136 million. The 186 mile pipeline is designed to prevent the continuing shrinkage of the sea. Although initiated in the mid-1980s. The contract has enjoyed limited success. 136 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .29 billion 2002-2011 water sector policy plan’s 53 projects include 10 projects worth €998 million earmarked for PPP. with less than 20% of effluents subject to treatment. In the longer term. 25%) and has been supported by a US$55 million World Bank loan in March 1999. with US$200 million provided by the Jordanian Government and the Social Security Corporation. and delivery of water and wastewater services for the Amman Service Area. covering about 1. Municipal water demand has surpassed the available supply since the mid-1980s and summer rationing was introduced systematically in most provinces since 1988. Water Management Jordan’s revised €2.5million m 3 of drinking water to Amman in August 2000. reducing unaccounted-for water by at least 25% as well as increasing sales revenues. In Amman. the building of the Red-Dead Canal. the Government of Jordan contributing US$17 million. and Italy US$20 million.JORDAN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS JORDAN Water Resources In the Amman-Zarqa area where some 60% of the national population lives. In September 2002 a US$800 million plan for piping water to the Dead Sea was unveiled. Capital spending in 1997/98 was running at US$98 million pa. Water and sewerage facilities are to be upgraded and the sewerage network extended. the European Investment Bank US$44 million. Without this. The Greater Amman area accounts for 45% of the country's total drinking water consumption. Capital spending of US$625 million will be required. Jordan’s estimated US$120-140 million Wadi Main. This is the result of an accord with Syria to pump 3.

000. Ondeo and Morganti of the USA have been awarded a 25 year BOT for a 530. with the rest coming from local sources. with the consortium running the plant from 2006-28.148.JORDAN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS MAJOR CITIES City Amman 2000 1. US Aid. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company Population served (country) Water Sewerage Ondeo Suez (France) 2. The As -Samra facility will replace an existing waste stabilization pond treatment system and will provide drinking water to about 2million residents in the Jordanian capital Amman and surrounding towns.000 0 Total 2. the US Agency for International Development is providing 60% of the project's US$169 million cost.000.000 2015 1.000 137 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Construction started in May 2004.654.000m 3 per day water treatment plant in northern Jordan.000 Status Water management project for Suez Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Northern Jordan 25 year water treatment BOT Ondeo A water treatment BOT for Northern Jordan Suez’s Ondeo Degremont.

the 1996 level of usage was 32. with 5% from domestic sources. Of the 10 main river basins in 1996. Population Total (2002. Current projects include: industrial effluent treatment (US$11. Kazakhstan’s greatest challenge remains coping with its Soviet legacy of resource degradation.23-0. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Water resources Total water resources in an average year are estimated at 100. Reformulate 18.5 15.656 US$5. There is an average shortage of 6. Ili and Karatal) as moderately polluted (Grade 3) and three (Shu and Talas) as clean (Grade 2). one (Satysu) as polluted (Grade 5). 24% from agriculture and 71% from indus try. km3) Per capita (1998.72km 3. m 3) Withdrawals (1996. However. especially in the Aral Sea. one (Ural) was classified as extremely polluted (Grade 7). In consequence. one (Ertys) as highly polluted (Grade 6). along with an endemic shortage of water. water management (US$10. US$1. Urban Services Safe drinking water l per capita per day Sewerage Political responses The Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources has drawn up a series of priority projects for 1998-2000. million) Total (2015.870 11% 32% 57% 15. including 10.86km 3 is assessed as suitable for use.42 4. along with a long-term plan for 1998-2030. As for groundwater. The Aral Sea is arguably the greatest global environmental catastrophe to date.5 million). Freshwater Total (1998.04km 3.24km 3 in 1993-95. Groundwater pollution from mineral extraction.7 2% 17% 81% 138 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . In terms of seasonal and geographical availability. industry and petrochemicals is widespread. one (Nura) as rather polluted (Grade 4). Water use has been falling since 1991 (36. three (Syr-Darya. 15. for industrial use. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Water pollution Effluent discharges of polluted water into rivers fell from 0.34km 3 pa in 1991 to 0.6km 3 pa. Its problems are described in the country entry on Uzbekistan. sewerage (US$15. water remains a severe constraint on development.0 million).484 33. km 3) For domestic use (1993) For industry (1995) For agriculture (1995) Urban water services Per capita water use in urban areas ranges from 25-500L/day (Almaty 251L/day) against a range of 15-320L/day in rural areas.5km 3 with 46km 3 suitable for use. Total wastewater discharges in 1994 were 6. Planning is carried out within the National Environmental Action Plan for Sustainable Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan (NEAP/SD).0 million).0 million) and a leakage demonstration project for Almaty (US$20.KAZAKHSTAN REPUBLIC PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS KAZAKHSTAN REPUBLIC VE and Cascal’s contracts in Almaty (Alma Ata) and Astana demonstrate that the private sector has a role to play in the economically beleaguered central Asian republics.91km 3) with the move from Soviet-led cotton irrigation projects to a more sustainable agricultural policy.3 56% 58% 8% 81% 250 91% 75.6% of urban drinking water samples taken in 1994 failed on hygiene grounds.3km 3 in a drought year. rising to 18. this remains a most difficult market as VE has found out.80km 3 of brackish water.

km3) Per capita (1998.5 million out of US$20. the Japan Bank for International Cooperation signed a loan agreement for Yen21. During the first year of the contract. with water provision going from 4-6 hours per day to a 24 hour service. m 3) Withdrawals (1996.87 2.133 3. The use of alternative sources is increasing. Billing was only introduced once the water provision service was seen to have improved. The contract is now profitable on an operating basis and Cascal has an option to buy the suburb’s water company at a nominal price. concentrating on financial institutions and the petrochemicals industry MAJOR CITIES Population 2000 Almaty 1.361billion (US$180 million) with the government of Kazakhstan to develop Astana’s water supply and sewerage systems. Between 1990 and 1997 the proportion of piped water failing water quality standards rose from 9% to 26% and approximately 50% of the population drinks water that fails salinity and hardness standards. between 1997 and 1998 alone. the Government has sought to encourage international investment along with privatisation proposals. except where it is related to the petrochemical industry. (1) A 30 year water management contract for Almaty has yet to start due to contractual problems. VE enters Almaty and Astana and leaves Almaty VE was awarded two contracts in March 2000. (2) A US$40 million contract for 51km water pipeline and pumping station renovation for the new capital Astana (population 320. Biwater (Cascal) was awarded a five year O&M contract for water and sewerage services in the Kaselen suburbs of Almaty. The World Bank (Kazakhstan joined the IFC in 1993) provided US$16.9 million for initiating the long term upgrading of the city of Atyrau’s Vodocanal water and sewerage systems in June 1999. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total Cascal Biwater (UK) / Nuon (Netherlands) 0 VE VE (France) 0 - 35.000 Status Partial privatisation of some suburbs 139 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .KAZAKHSTAN REPUBLIC PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS According to the draft State Programme on Poverty Reduction for 2003-2005. there was major improvement in service quality.130.000 by 2020). partly since the police services are involved in the procedure. Groundwater Total recharge (1998. 75% of the population is connected to a water network. to grow to 690. A 25% collection rate has been improved to 90%. km 3) For domestic use (1996) For industry (1996) For agriculture (1996) Private sector involvement Since 1993. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Kaselen (Almaty) O&M for water management Cascal Astana Water management VE Japanese aid for Astana In 2003.144.91 58% 28% 14% 2015 1. Kazakhstan’s environmental legacy and its low population density have limited private sector investment to date. In rural areas about 9% of the population have access to piped water. Both the Asian Development Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development are active in the country. in part due to 22% of water pipelines not functioning.000 Cascal’s activities in Almaty In 1998. the percentage of people using decentralized sources increased from 16 to 23%.000.

2015 Water is a class issue Families who are connected to piped water in cities pay KSh240/m 3 for water.4billion for the water system. along with 10% for sewerage. involving improving basic services and reducing distribution losses from their current 50% level for some 2million people and may be developed into a concession contract in the future.KENYIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS KENYA The privatisation of Kenya’s urban water services is set to develop over a series of phases in the medium to long term. The contract started as a 10 year outsourcing contract for Nairobi's water services for a flat fee.4km 3 378m 3 1. This has in part been due to the economic consequences of drought and flooding between 1997 and 2001. allows for concession contracts to be awarded. The Kenyan AfterCare Study of 1998 forecast total spending of US$2. which has a number of separate urban areas.343million m 3 in 2010 and to 5. 65% of the overall population have access to safe water – 70% of the urban and 46% of the rural population.020 25% 13% 62% 31.5 36. The Government’s failure to provide universal water access by 2000 has been a major boost for PSP at the national level. This remains a challenging market. Access to piped water in the region is 29%. Total water demand was approximately 3.000 meters by 2009. A PSP contract for the 2. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Water and sewerage services 93% of Nairobi receives potable water and 35% some form of sewerage. along with 350 community water schemes. investment has been falling. political opposition to the presence of foreign companies has even resulted in aid funding being withdrawn. There are 742.000 meters in the first four years and a total of 130.1million people living in Mombassa would include the whole of Mombassa and the coastal region.000 connections to 35 sewerage systems serve 2million people.552million m3 in 2020. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1992) Domestic Industrial Agriculture 7.9 38% 52% 10% 67% 69% 140 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Urban data Served by piped water Access to sewerage A partial privatisation VE and its local partner Saureca Space gained a management contract in 1999 for water services in Nairobi.1km 3 20% 4% 76% US$393 US$1. compared with KSh845/m 3 for those who use vendors. 145. A new plan seeks universal water access by 2010. with capital spending in 2001-02 42% of its 1994-95 level. which is becoming a critical issue due to periodic droughts in recent years.000 water connections and 680 piped systems in the country. At the local level.150million m 3 in 2000 and is forecast to rise to 4. In reality. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2000 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. This does not include the need for more water storage capacity. involving installing 40. It also authorises the setting up of a national regulator and appeals systems. The 2002 Water Act.0–1.6 billion being needed to upgrade and extend the water and sewerage networks. which may be a benchmark for how PSP can be extended and made acceptable through the deliverance of measurable service improvements. Studies carried out in 2001-03 point to an immediate need for US$1.

18 m 3 141 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . regulate and supervise water services boards and ensure access and expansion. However.000 Financial performance of water service.980 1. Operator Ministry of Water NWCPC Nine municipalities Nairobi municipality Systems 630 40 N/A N/A Connections 280. whereas the WST Fund is charged with the responsibility of a financing instrument for expansion of water services particularly to the poor.250 Three water boards were set up in 2004: the Water Resource Management (WRM) Authority.KENYIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS The National Water Conservation and Pipelines Company (NWCPC) was set up in 1988 to operate systems that could be run on a cost recovery basis. The WRM Authority will see to the restoration of degraded water catchment and depleted aquifers to guarantee availability of the resource for development.. the NWCPC has since accumulated debts of KSH1 billion and is unable to service its interest charges. Washington D. 15th May 2003 World Bank (2004).500 1. World Bank 1. the Water Services Regulatory (WSR) Board and the Water Services Trust (WST) Fund. The WSR Board will licence. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1992) Source: PriceWaterhouseCoopers (2003): Building Kenya Together. Kenya: towards a water-secure Kenya: water resources sector memorandum.000 230.C. 1 of 1.000 70. USA. Conference on Private Sector Participation in Kenya’s Infrastructure.000 160.1 km 3 35 m 3 0. 2001 (KSh million) Nairobi NWCPC Revenues 1. Vol.200 Expenses 1.

but in the longer term. the government had sold shares in 25 local companies worth about US$3 billion.000 126. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. (or US$1. Drinking water The Government is upgrading and expanding its desalination facilities.80 per 1. In 1999.4 3. Kuwait's Ministry of Electricity and Water awarded the construction contract for a US$500 million desalination plant for the proposed Sabiya New City development. Kuwait has adopted the World Bank’s proposals for privatising the Ministry of Electricity and Water.000 gallons) and US$0.5 0% 0% 100% 2015 1.000 Comments Wastewater privatised 142 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .30 per 1.KUWAIT PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS KUWAIT The development of Kuwait’s first comprehensive sewage treatment scheme involves one of the world’s largest sewage treatment works. Groundwater Annual withdrawal (1994) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) MAJOR CITIES City 2000 Kuwait City 879. supplies 83million m3 per annum of potable water to the industrial area and existing water distribution complexes. 2015 US$15.136. Water services are currently earmarked for privatisation in the medium term.000 US gallons to industry.0km 3 37% 2% 60% Privatisation The Employment Law for the privatisation of various non-oil state enterprises and utilities was enacted in 1994.0km 3 10m³ 0. with the share sales to be handled by the Kuwait Investment Authority. The Iraqi occupation of 199091 caused considerable damage to these plants but most of them are once again fully operational.40 per 1.9million people. Water is sold at US$2. New desalination plants providing a total of 40million m 3 per annum were put into operation during 1997-98.193 US$16. The Az-Zour facility (80million m3 per annum) was extended to provide a further 50million m 3 per annum in 2002 at a cost of $250 million. Construction of the facility will start in 2004 and it will enter service in 2007.4 96% 97% 53% Population and water Kuwait has a population of 1. all of whom effectively live in five urban areas.00 to tanker companies who sell it on at US$3.000 US gallons to residents. The original plant was built in the 1980s for $230 million. Virtually all of Kuwait's water comes from government constructed seawater desalination plants.240 2. It is likely that the water and sewerage networks are also to be considered for PSP. One of these was the largest in the world with a production of approximately 200million gallons of drinking water per day. A plan for the sale of 300million m 3 pa of water by Iran to Kuwait via a $2 billion dedicated pipeline from northern Iran has been under development since 2002. Freshwater Annual availability (2000) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1994) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) 0. By 1998.

Global Water Intelligence (2002).900. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Sulaibaya 30 year sewage treatment BOT Utilities Development Co Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Utilities D. With a tariff of US$0. 3/8 p9. The facility is designed to be operational by the end of 2002. There is an option to extend the facility to handle 600.47 per m3. Co UU (UK) 0 1.000m 3 of wastewater per day in the future if needed.000 143 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . with projected revenues of US$2 billion over the contract’s life.000 Source: Sulaibaya achieves financial close. This will be the world’s largest membrane-based water reclamation facility. and will supply up to 122million gallons per day of potable water to the industrial area and existing water distribution complexes. The facility will treat 375. Total 1. following delays over assessing the three shortlisted bids. A US$390 million BOT wastewater treatment plant contract at Sulaibaya was awarded to the UU and Bechtel led consortium in 2001.KUWAIT PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Private sector participation In 1999. Kuwait's Ministry of Electricity and Water awarded the construction contract for a US$500 million desalination plant for the proposed Subiya New City development. it is anticipated that the facility will save the country US$3 billion during the life of the concession.000m 3 of wastewater per day from 2005.900.

3% of samples due to the dilapidated water supply system and the absence of iron separation equipment. the levels of various chemical indicators failed to comply with government standards in 34. As with Estonia and Lithuania.LATVIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS LATVIA Water resources and distribution Both surface water and groundwater are used in equal amounts in Latvia. Water quality is considered to be quite good in 80% of Latvian rivers. the EBRD’s financing was arranged as a US$90 million loan portfolio for supporting projects to be carried out by Suez’s Degrémont. In smaller towns. 7% for energy production and 9% for fish farming. Sewerage and sewage treatment In 1991. the daily water supply per capita in the cities of Latvia was as follows: 339l in Riga. The ‘800+’ programme began in Latvia in 1995. quite high concentrations of oxygen. but following the pattern in the other Baltic states. According to drinking water quality data. In addition. More than 90% of the population in Riga. 8% for agriculture. Between 1993 and 1996.000 Status PSP under consideration 144 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . reconstruction projects for wastewater treatment plants have begun in Liepaja.7% of drinking water test samples in communal water supply systems. One of the priority areas for the National Environmental Policy Plan of Latvia is to reduce total nitrogen emissions into water from point sources and the leaching of nitrates and phosphates from agriculture by 50% of the 1994 level by year 2010. through the refurbishment and construction of 800 sewage treatment works by 2010. aiming to improve water supply and wastewater treatment in small towns and rural areas. resulting in a significant improvement in the treatment of wastewater. 54% in Liepaja and more than 80% in other cities and towns are served by mains water. including 58% for domestic and commercial use. Compared to the 1970-1980s. Bacterial levels exceeded the standards in 10. Despite a reduction of mineral fertiliser application by 90% during 1987-1996. There are no current plans for the privatisation of Riga’s water and sewerage services. Trends of nutrient concentrations at the observation points in the lower reaches of the large rivers have not significantly changed since 1991. 18% for industry. Inland water quality Latvian rivers have moderate levels of organic pollution and nutrients. In 1995.7% and not good in 7. and 139l in Liepaja. mainly due to high concentrations of iron. such a move appears to be likely. In some cases. quite good in 47. Cesis and Riga. significant decreases of nitrogen and phosphorus loads in the seven largest rivers have not been observed.9%.7% of them. MAJOR CITIES Population Riga 2000 761. the EBRD provided €18 million out of a €97 million loan package for the upgrading and expansion of water and sewage treatment works serving Riga. Biological water quality is considered to be good in 44. Privatisation prospects In 1996. nitrogen compounds by 57% and phosphorus by 39%. Daugavpils. In 1995. the figure is typically 50%. the biological quality of the Lielupe River has generally improved. excepting slight decreases in the concentrations of phosphates. 331l in Ventspils.6million m 3 of water were abstracted from natural water resources (about 1.5% of the available water). and rich flora and fauna. the biological water quality of 198 small rivers was investigated. total losses in water supply systems are estimated to be up to 25% of water abstraction rates. 455. the amount of wastewater has been reduced by 42%.000 2015 761. secondary sewage treatment works were installed in Riga. 223l in Daugavpils. Since 1991. biologically degradable substances by 70%.

A further US$1. which is being financed by a US$21 million soft loan from France’s Agence Française de Développement. but in 1998. Some industrial facilities (and hospitals) have water meters installed. All of these authorities will in turn be expected to develop regional integrated land and water management. 70% of Lebanon's fresh water sources were found to be subject to bacteriological pollution. In addition. the country used 1.000 million for water treatment and distribution has been identified. In 2000. Longer term. compared with 150L per capita per day in Beirut. Suez Ondeo has been appointed to manage water and wastewater systems in the city of Tripoli for four years from 2003.000m 3 per day. and the income is not enough to cover operation and maintenance costs. In 1998. US$1.THE LEBANON PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS THE LEBANON The civil war’s legacy lingers on The civil war effectively obliterated the Lebanon’s water and sewerage treatment facilities. provides for Ondeo to repair and expand WWTPs and water supply networks. although internal resources are only 2. The Government is proposing financing the construction of a US$200-220 million 260.84billion m 3 in 2015. In 1997. Water demand was 1. The regional authorities are to install water meters to house connections and to develop pricing policies that reflect individual household usage rather than fixed per day water supply. The World Bank has supported this project and seven consortia had pre-qualified at the time of the postponement in 2002. Only 40% of Lebanese domestic customers pay for their water. Capital spending plans The Government has estimated that US$900 million needs to be spent on infrastructure for basic water provision needs over a three year period. mostly on agriculture. A reformed water management system Water resource management has been rationalised into five regional water authorities and the Litani River Water Authority. pricing policy is to reflect investment costs.48billion m 3 in 1998 and is forecast to rise to 2. will not be responsible for agricultural water supply. Much of the water supply is only chlorinated or not treated at all where it is withdrawn from the ground water. the current pricing policies have one unified price per cubic metre per day for all household connections within a given water authority's jurisdiction. The UN Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia believes that Lebanon could see serious water shortages by 2025 unless losses are curbed. the Government announced plans to "transfer the full cost of providing water supply and sewage disposal services from the state to consumers through an equitable tariff and collection system" but only Sidon Water Authority has domestic water meters that charge on a volumetric basis. 25% in underground reserves. with a further US$409 million in 1997. US$140 million of water provision projects were being carried out. Lebanon has 2. For household use. In 2004.85billion m3 of water pa. mainly due to household effluents and industrial pollution.14billion m3. 145 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Domestic consumption of water in the country as a whole was 60L per capita per day in 1997. Three of these five will oversee all aspects of water management (including wastewater) while two of these authorities (the Bekka and the South). all sewage effluents were discharged untreated. equivalent to 70% of the minimum daily requirement. Secondary treatment plants are planned for inland areas where the effluent from these plants will be used for specific agricultural uses. Capital spending for sewerage projects and sewage treatment works was US$90 million in 1996. By 1996. 80% of drinking water was not subject to treatment. The Lebanon has a nominal water treatment capacity of 385.0 billion on inland facilities and US$1.152 billion on sewerage networks. The contract. US$750 million needs to be spent on coastal sewage treatment plants. Much of the water is wasted or contaminated through pesticide use and industrial pollution. with immediate additional spending needs of US$770 million identified.2billion m 3 pa. while 60% of the country’s water distribution capacity had been rendered inoperable. A number of primary treatment facilities with sea outfalls are being developed for the coastal zone with the short term aim of all wastewater to be subject to primary treatment. and demand is expected to rise to 4billion m 3 by 2025.000m 3 per day water treatment plant and pipeline for Beirut through a 28 year concession have been delayed due to political concerns.

it was regarded as a mechanism for ensuring resource stability in the region. By 2020.1 billion and has a similar funding pattern with €99 million being made available by the European Investment Bank.5million m 3 per annum. The cost of phase 1A amounted to €1. The project period runs from 1990 to 2017. an agreement was signed between Lesotho and South Africa to proceed with the Lesotho Highlands Water Project (‘LHWP’) for the transfer of water from Lesotho.3808 per m 3. While there is no water service element per se. water exports from the project have become Lesotho’s largest export earner. By the end of 2002. About 115m 3 per second of water flows out of Lesotho via the Sengu River. the total volume of water delivered was 2. along with hydropower generation to enable Lesotho to replace electricity imports with locally produced energy. the full yield of the system will be 933. The fluid politics of water Times and politics change. there is a levy paid by water customers in Gauteng to finance the project.5 million). South Africa’s need for reliable long term water supplies resulted in two water export feasibility studies in Lesotho's Highlands in the 1950s and 60s.278million m3. 1986.9 Water Total Water supply 18. to supply the state of Gauteng.2 9. and turns it north towards Johannesburg and Gauteng Province. Phase 1A and 1B of the LHWP has resulted in savings to South African water users estimated at US$30 million per year. a new feasibility study was launched in the 1970s. 56% of the cost savings will go to Lesotho in terms of a royalty payable for the sale of water to South Africa. which has a population of more than 10million. the cost of Phase 1B was estimated at €1. four further dams will be linked to the scheme. The LHWP exploits this by arresting the southern flow. The levy is to remain at this level for fifteen years. In addition to the royalty payable to Lesotho.4% of the Government of Lesotho’s budget. surrounded by the Republic of South Africa. storing the water and redirecting it northwards to the Vaal River. From 1 October 1996.7 29.1million m 3 in the year to 31st March 2001 to 593. affecting 20. Some problems There are a number of costs associated with the project. the levy was R 0. Sources external to the project have pointed out that the project involves the loss of 11. However. compensation and rural development costs were estimated in 1989 by the authorities linked with the project at US$39 million.2 27. generating royalties of R863million. 146 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . This in turn will exacerbate the country’s dependence on food imports. At the project’s inception.2million m 3 in 2002. Water rich and water poor Water is arguably the only abundant natural resource in Lesotho. delivering a total of 82m 3 per second. 18m 3 per second of water was being delivered to South Africa from the Katse Dam.LESOTHO PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS LESOTHO The Lesotho Highland Water Project Lesotho is a small country of some 2million people. This area accounts for more than 40% of South Africa's urban population by the year 2000 and over half of its industry. the EU Commission (€50 million) and the European Investment Bank (€23. who are mostly subsistence farmers. The water r oyalty in 2002-03 contributed 6. In 2002. On 1st October 1990. Water transferred increased from 574. delivery tunnels and pumping stations.000 hectares of grazing or arable land. The water transfer project is based upon a series of reservoirs.5 1. On October 24. compared with a yield of 574million m 3 per annum at the end of phase 1A. or 4% of the total project’s cost. The dams trap water that normally runs into Lesotho’s Orange River which are discharged into the Atlantic Ocean.000 Basotho people. the project was seen as a means of getting water to the arid townships of the region. transfer tunnels. Total environmental. The Highland Water Project described below is the world’s largest water catchment and transportation infrastructure project to date. the levy was set at seven cents per m 3 of water and was increased to ten cents per m 3 from 1 October 1991.6 At the completion of phase 1B. The project therefore merits attention because it demonstrates the economic power of water. In 1998. The aggregate benefits (savings) to both South Africa and Lesotho amassed from the LHWP have a net value of about US$1 billion for Phases 1A and 1 B. Both failed because agreement could not be reached between the two Governments on payment for water exports. After the democratic transition in 1994. the World Bank (US$69 million). LHWP – Phases 1A and 1B m3/second Katse Mohale Matsoku Year Commissioned 1998 2003 2003 Phase 1A 1B 1B Supply Type Dam & tunnels Dam & tunnels Weir & runnels Incremental supply 18. Of this sum. which in 1979 and 1983 recommended a 70m 3 per second water transfer scheme.5 billion and attracted external funding from European export credit agencies (US$380 million).

or up to 17 years with a 40% decrease in water consumption. initiating the bidding process and assisting the government in awarding the short term management. now part of the US group Jacobs. which is financing the project. Other companies involved in the project yet to be tried include Spie Batignolles of France and the UK’s Sir Alexander Gibb. developing the acceptance criteria. through its local agent.000 to Masupha Sole. In September 2002. Acres maintains that it was unaware that some of its money that was being used on the project was being secretly paid to Sole's Swiss bank accounts. and devising and implementing a programme for private sector participation in the delivery of water and sewerage services. 147 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . The latter involves specifying the best form of management contract.LESOTHO PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS In May 2002. the Lesotho High Court found Canadian engineering firm Acres International (Acres) guilty of paying bribes for contracts on the project. It is unclear if the aspirations of people living in these townships have been fully factored in for those assumptions. An internal investigation by the World Bank in 2003 found that there was insufficient evidence to punish Acres. the former chief executive of the Lesotho Highlands Development Authority was sentenced to a total of 18 years in prison. The company had paid US$278.8 million in 2003. the firm faces being disbarred by the World Bank. He had been convicted on 13 counts of bribery and fraud for taking bribes of about US$2 million over a period of nine years from international consultants and contractors. Acres was fined €22. This will also affect Acres involvement with the Bujugali Dam in Uganda and the Nam Theun 2 dam in Laos. Masupha Sole. For example. If the judgment is upheld. projections by Rand Water indicate that the second phase (the Mohale Dam) could be delayed by some years with a 10% decrease in water consumption. Utility privatisation is under consideration The UK’s Adam Smith Institute has been working for the Lesotho Government since 1997 with the aim of developing an effective legislative and regulatory framework for the water sector. Longer term considerations Some authorities on water conservation now believe that South Africa ought to concentrate on conservation as a means of postponing the further development of the project.

Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Sewerage and river water quality There are more than 700 sewage treatment works in Lithuania with a total capacity of about 1.510million m 3 in 1991. the Water Law (1997).8 24.LITHUANIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS LITHUANIA There has been a widespread attempt to upgrade the country’s infrastructure and the mobilisation of private sector investment since the early 1990s. Industrial use fell from 216million m 3 in 1991 to 49million m 3 in 1996.3 US$3. fresh water extraction was 4. A draft Standard on Drinking Water. where all the treated wastewater (10.8 84. Wastewater discharge has fallen from 252million m 3 in 1997 to 168million m 3 by 2002. the Law on Environment Pollution Taxes (1991). economic restructuring. 148 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . The recycling of wastewater has only been used in the town of Akmene. and the introduction of taxes for water and effluent discharges.6 90.6 308. which is being belatedly put into place.2 67% 67% 0% In 2004.2million m3 per day. Water pollution taxes US$per tonne BOD Nitrogen (N) Phosphorus (P) 1994 24. 90% being for rural areas.582million m 3 compared with 4. by 2004. Hygiene Requirements and Monitoring is under preparation.977 US$10. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. Despite this. 1997 17% 15% 67% 1% 2002 2% 18% 61% 19% 86% 80% 80% Untreated Primary Secondary Tertiary With the reduction of pollution loads as a consequence of the taxation regime and upgrades to some sewage treatment facilities.4% of the population was connected to the sewerage system in 2002. with an average capacity of about 100m 3 per day. Other legislation includes the Law on Environmental Protection (1992).4 1996 40. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Laws Lithuania is undergoing a radical programme of revising environmental legislation and standards in preparation for compliance with EU environmental standards. 2015 Water usage In 1995.000m 3 per day) is utilised in the cement factory. 304million m 3 came from groundwater resources. The decline in consumption during recent years is related to the decline of industry. 60. Lithuanian Environmental Strategy Action Programme (1996). water quality in rivers and lakes has somewhat improved. In 1995.5 3.320 9% 32% 59% 3. plans were prepared to rationalise the country’s 50 larger and 200-300 smaller water entities into 5-10 regional companies. This has been held back by a poorly developed legal infrastructure. and the Draft Law on Drinking Water (in preparation). Domestic/municipal consumption was 196million m 3 against 369million m 3 in 1991. the country laws remain in need of drastic revision by 2005.

or about 83% of wastewater generated will be treated to secondary or tertiary standard. Some Litai315 million (US$80 million) is needed for the construction of water purification facilities in Lithuania.720 21. The water provision services for Vilnius are to be privatised on a concession basis.600 As part of Lithuania's EU accession programme.920 27. Tertiary treatment currently exists in six cities. serving Vilnius. or 53% of effluent generation. but the percentage is expected to increase with the building of new purification stations in Vilnius.174m 3 0. On completion. the EBRD provided €11 million out of a loan package of €67 million for the construction of a water treatment plant at Kaunas. 1.LITHUANIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS River water quality (1995) % Good Fair-Poor Bad 43% 48% 9% BOD emissions from point sources (tonnes pa) Year 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 31. 209million m3 pa. A total of US$250 million has been spent on wastewater treatment projects between 1992 and 2002.900 27. Funding constraints are severe. as appropriate. Kedainiai.25km 3 81% 16% 3% 149 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . This iron is purified from 28% of the supplied water. and it is currently uncertain how all of these projects will be completed.56km 3 4. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Privatisation prospects In 1995. Tertiary treatment is being used in current construction and upgrading projects with a total capacity of about 110million m 3 per year. Anyksciai. tertiary wastewater treatment is planned in 47 cities and towns. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1993) Domestic (1993) Industrial (1993) Agriculture (1993) Water resources 87% of Lithuania's water resources have levels of iron and manganese that exceed permissible rates. The plant provides water for 700.000 people and was constructed by Degrémont (Suez).000 16.20km 3 332m 15. and the Pagiriai water fields.

000 boreholes have been drilled. 150 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Under a national water supply programme some 3. All public water is vested in the President of the Republic who has control of the utility. A 1998 survey showed that 23.000 boreholes would need to be drilled to cover 100% of the population at a cost of MK360 million (€8. along with outstanding client accounts and weak debt collection systems. The Water Resources Act provides for the control. To compensate for the latter. the Government has set up "training projects for retrenched workers". Attempts to commercialise its water utility have been hampered by the debt burden the company carries. conservation and use of Malawi's water resources. The Water Supply Authority is one of the 100 state enterprises that Malawi has identified for privatisation. An official admitted that there was some resistance to the privatisation of the water utility because of fears of price rises and job losses. Malawi's four-year old privatisation programme is being carried out under the terms of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).4 million).MALAWI PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS MALAWI Access to clean water has improved from 48% in 1994 to 56% in 1999. Control of the waters is vested in the Minister of the Environment.

Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Water and sewerage provision (million) Urban Rural Total Leakage Sewerage 1990 9. In recent years. million) Total (2015. followed by Penang and Pahang. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) River quality and pollution Industrial development and urbanisation. 1993 (508). with local players making significant advances in the past wo years. Specific legislation includes the Waters Act. 5% of the population had secondary treatment and 5% primary treatment. This reflects a period of rapid population growth and urbanisation.MALAYSIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS MALAYSIA Malaysia has taken a systematic approach towards encouraging private sector management and investment in water and sewerage services as part of its ‘2020 Vision’ of becoming a fully developed nation by 2020. Thus an improvement between 1994 and 1995 has been countered by a significant deterioration since 1995.20 % 99% 87% 92% 37% 79% US$3. Quality by river Clean Polluted Very polluted 1987 49% 47% 3% 1996 28% 43% 29% 24.6 63% 71% 6% By 1998.0 29. only 25% of rivers were classed as clean.905 US$9. agricultural effluent 27% and industry 8%.17 5.10 % 96% 67% 80% 43% 42% 2000 12.120 11% 46% 43% In 1994. It is likely that this is in part accounted for by the assessments being based on overall river quality. along with the higher relative cost of installing piped water compared with basic sanitation measures. Private sector involvement has come both from local and international companies. Amendment A953 in 1996). 96% 220 94% 22% 151 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . 1974 (127.65 7. thus making year-on-year comparisons more volatile. Urban Services Safe drinking water L per capita per day Access to sewerage % Sewage treated Regulatory framework Malaysia’s framework legislation is laid out in the Environmental Quality Act. allied with a minimal sewage treatment infrastructure has resulted in a dramatic deterioration in river water quality in recent years. Water policy has further been confused by a dispute between Malaysia and Singapore. whereby resources were fully committed towards keeping up with developments in urban areas. a number of rivers are now unsuitable as sources of drinking water and are affecting further development. During that period. Domestic sewage accounted for 65% of the BOD load. 1989 (418) and the Sewerage Services Act. data on inland water quality has been volatile. with access to some form of sanitation having risen from 70% in 1980 to 94%. Population Total (2002. Malaysia seeks to develop its water and sewerage services on a fully t concessional basis and is belatedly preparing for an independent regulator and a formal concession award process. Johor is regarded as the state with the most polluted rivers.33 22.93 15. In consequence. access to potable water actually fell from 80% to 78%. which outlines the Ministry of the Environment’s powers and objectives.

Making water bills commercial remains a sensitive issue. is the supply of funding and planning of water projects in the states.2 billion) on upgrading water and sewage services between 2005 and 2010.MALAYSIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Government. the Selangor Government spends RM1 billion (€300 million) on operational costs and collects RM200 million (€60 million) from consumers. but there have been a number of problems with the reading of meters. km3) For domestic use (1993) For industry (1993) For agriculture (1993) Privatisation and priorities Malaysia prefers full concession awards. Individual states are supposed to levy fees which pay for basic O&M.543 19. with 20-60 years being usual practice. km3) Per capita (1998. Tariffs are amongst the lowest in South East Asia. with 62 water resource projects earmarked for 2000-50.7 23% 30% 47% Malaysia’s sewerage is covered by the previously privatised Indah Water Konsortium (IWK). Access to sanitation Household sewerage Septic tank Flush latrine Other latrines None 1970 3% 17% 3% 59% 18% 1980 4% 22% 30% 26% 16% 1990 5% 37% 45% 6% 6% 456. Loans are approved by the Federal Government. planning and privatisation The traditional role of the Government. with government input with respect to health and environmental matters dealt with on an ongoing basis. with all extra work funded by central government. Pressure to privatise water services at the state government level is coming from the need to recover increased costs. Current treatment capacity of 10. It is unclear how extant contracts would be affected. the 1993 Sewerage Services Act was passed in accordance with the National Privatisation Policy. industrialisation and urbanisation and is forecast to rise by an estimated 4% a year until 2010. Until 2004. no open bids took place and thus came through private sector proposals. states sell about 35% to 40% of the water produced. During the 1970s. Tariff charges are decided by state governments. This used to be in the form of grants. Freshwater Total (1998. a systematic approach to the award of PSP contracts is to be adopted. This is response to the ad hoc manner in which previous contracts have been awarded. and cannot cover costs as 8 out of 17 state water providers ran a deficit in 1998. This is how Indah Water gained its nation-wide sewerage contract.259 12. allied with long concession periods. It 152 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .086 31.42) by 2006 and to RM2. These costs are set to rise in order to cover investments in "analytical instruments and monitoring systems" as a result of a stricter standards laid down in the Safe Drinking Water Act. with no competitive bidding.49 (€0. This means that new contracts such as the proposals in Selangor and Sabah are unlikely to be awarded until an independent regulator is established and a suitable tendering process is in place.62) by 2011. now it has been turned into 0% interest loans.730 MlD is adequate for current demand. At the same time.0 21. Low water prices mean that there is little illegal abstraction. For example. Regulation is to be agreed upon within the terms of the individual contract. m 3) Withdrawals (1998. but needs to be expanded to meet future growth. Typically. In consequence.50 per m3 (€0. via the Public Works Dept. Water consumption in Malaysia grew by 8% a year between 1981 and 2001 because of population growth. Water tariffs in Malaysia will be increased from RM0. only nine of these had even been partly implemented because of limited funds. IWK has found that it is much harder to force people to pay for sewerage as part of bills than it is to force them to pay for water. The Government thus now regards water and sewerage as a commercial area. Its privatisation or commercialisation has to be approved through economic planning units. 19 master plans were unveiled in order to implement the National Sewerage Development Programme. (PWD). to mobilise funds and management. Metering is common for all household connections.14) in 2002 to RM1. By 1990.628 Malaysia is to spend RM50 billion (US$3. Water demand 2000 2020 2050 MlD 9. especially in the use of external consultants. The Government has much experience of working with the private sector for evaluating problems and projects.25 (€0. wherever possible. as demonstrated by the political fallout over revising sewerage tariffs after privatisation.

MALAYSIA

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

remains usual to have the sewerage component as a top up on the water bill. The State Water Authority cannot compel the customer to pay the sewerage component of the bill. IWK had debts of MR700 million by 2000. The government took it over for MR200 million. The private sector continues to encounter problems with low tariffs and poor tariff collection. In 2001, private sector expenditure was RM2.76 billion while revenue was RM2.23 billion. In 2003, the Federal Government announced that it is to take over the management and financing of water supply projects from the country’s states, after some states revealed they were having cash flow problems relating to their infrastructure work. In Selangor, the state owns private water companies and contractors some RM3.9 billion. Only four of Malaysia’s states made profits from the sale of water in 2001. Groundwater Total recharge (1998, km³) Per capita (1998, m 3) Withdrawals (1993, km³) For domestic use (1993) Companies noted The relationship between companies and their contracts has evolved constantly since the 1980s. United Utilities was part of a consortium that gained two concessions in 1993. In each case, its role is now limited to that of a minority shareholder (in Prime Utilities and Intan Utilities) with a degree of management input. While Prime Utilities has taken over the national sewerage concession, Intan Utilities has in turn ceded management control to VE after the French company became its main shareholder. Indeed, VE has also gained the subcontract for the operation of Puncak Niaga’s facilities. MAJOR CITIES Population Kuala Lumpur

71.0 3,310 0.4 50%

2000 1,379,000

2015 1,882,000

Status Bulk water privatised

Water supply by state and contract type in 2000 Water supply (m3) Kedah Sarawak Labuan Perlis Pahang N Sembilan Sabah Perak Malaka Kuching Sibu Pulau Pinang Terengganu Selangor Johor Kelantan LAKU Total Corporatised 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 510,523 3,436,500 0 0 221,380 4,168,403 Privatised 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1,049,544 0 0 1,285,409 213,700 0 2,548,653 Government 987,805 186,000 60,454 91,232 762,044 527,542 718,488 969,419 386,364 380,000 130,650 0 0 0 0 0 0 5,199,998

Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Johor-Barhu BOT contract, water supply Suez Kota-Kinabalu BOT contract, water supply Suez Perak BOT contract, water supply Suez Ipoh, Perak Concession, water supply Intan Utilities/VE/NWWI Selangor Concession, water supply Puncak Niaga/VE Malacca Concession, water supply VE Johor O&M/Concession, water SAJ Holdings/RWE Kertih 20 year industrial water outsourcing VE Penang BOT, water treatment PBA Kedah Concession, water supply Taliworks Selangor Concession, water supply SPLASH Nationalcontracts Industrial effluent treatment Eco Water Negeri Sembilan 10 year water distribution Salcon O&M
Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

153

MALAYSIA

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

City Study: Kuala Lumpur Water provision is managed by the Selangor Waterworks Department. The central area of the city has a population of 1.145million, all of which are served by a total of 0.675million connections. Metering is commonplace. In 1993, the average domestic tariff was US$0.327 per m³, compared with a cost of water production of US$0.627 per m³. In consequence, cross subs idies come from domestic and industrial water users paying more then the economic cost. Water quality is considered to be fair, with the treatment capacity in 1993 covering only 39% of water produced for the city. Another problem is low water pressure. 25% of the city is currently covered by a sewerage system, with the rest using septic tanks. Treatment of effluents is understood to be minimal. As a result, there has been a gradual privatisation of water and sewerage services for the city since 1993. Sewerage has been taken over by Indah Water, which in turn is gradually developing a network of sewage treatment works. Bulk water provision comes in part from the privatisation of Selangor’s water services to Puncak Niaga and Vivendi. The privatisation of actual water services to the city is now actively under consideration. As noted above, billing and commercial versus developmental concerns are the main issues that need to be resolved before the formal contract award process takes place. Conflict Study: Raw water supplies to Singapore A series of agreements drawn up between Singapore and Malaysia from 1927 to 1990 set out terms for the provision of bulk water from Johor to Singapore until up to 2061. These tariffs have become the subject of a dispute initiated by Malaysia. The water infrastructure has been developed by Singapore, which is also responsible for its operational costs. Under the 1961 agreement, Malaysia supplies Singapore with raw water at RM0.03 per 1,000 gallons and Singapore in turn supplies Malaysia with treated water at RM0.50 per 1,000 gallons at a rate whereby both tariffs are effectively cancelled out. Malaysia is currently proposing that from 2011 it will provide Singapore with treated water (from the facilities developed by Singapore) at a cost put at RM0.45-0.60 per 1,000 gallons in 2000-01, rising to RM3.00-8.00 during 2002, before negotiations broke down. The state of Johor aims to become self sufficient for treated water by 2004, thereby decoupling the import/export element of the original agreement. Singapore is currently reducing its dependence on imported water from Malaysia through wastewater reclamation (‘NEWater’) and desalination and is considering proposals to pipe in water from Indonesia. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company Population served (country) Water Sewerage Total CGE Utilities VE (France) 5,600,000 0 5,600,000 Ondeo Suez (France) 1,565,000 0 1,565,000 SAJ Holdings RWE (Germany) 2,600,000 0 2,600,000 Intan Utilities Intan Utilities (Malaysia)/VE 600,000 0 600,000 Puncak Niaga PN/Central Plus (Malaysia 4,100,000 0 4,100,000 Taliworks Tailworks Bhd (Malaysia) 500,000 0 500,000 PBA Bhd PBA Bhd (Malaysia) 1,260,000 0 1,260,000 SAJ Ranhill Bhd (Malaysia 2,000,000 0 2,000,000 Eco Water Eco Water (Malaysia) N/A N/A N/A SPLASH KSB (Malaysia) 0 0 0 Salcon Salcon (Malaysia) 500,000 0 500,000
Sources: Keong, L M (2002). Asia Water, 18 (2), p 8-11. Malaysian Water Association: Malaysia Water Industry Guide 2002 Malaysia’s big moment. GWI, March 2004, pp 19-21

154

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

MALI

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

MALI
In 1987, 25% of Mali’s 283,000 urban housing units had direct access to piped water, 17% with water piped to the inside of the unit and 8% with water available outside. In the capital Bamako, 26% of households were connected to piped water in 1993, while 2% had direct access to sewerage. The city had no sewage treatment. Overall, 46% of the urban population was considered as having suitable access to potable water in 1996 (against 41% in 1991) and 58% as having access to adequate sanitation. In 1987, 1.3% of all households were connected to flush lavatories. By 2000, 27 of the 34 towns with more than 10,000 people had formal water systems, covering 52% of the population. Average water consumption in 2000: Less than 2,000 people 2,000 – 5,000 people 5,000 – 10,000 people 10,000 + people 20L per day 31L per day 31L per day 45L per day

In October 1994, the Government of Mali signed a four-year delegated management contract for water and electricity services with the SHEC Group after an international tender. SHEC consists of SAUR (30%), EDF (30%), Hydro-Quebec (30%) and CRC-SOGEMA (10%). The contract is based upon a fixed fee relating to the time spent by SHEC on the contract with a performance-related element built into the contract. This contract has been in effect similar to a consulting or technical assistance contract. Staff pay levels have been maintained or improved while there has been no corporate restructuring programme. Indeed, a series of performance-related bonuses have been paid. At the same time, no tariff rises for water services were requested. This contract has restricted itself to addressing those areas where private sector advice could make the most dramatic impact to service efficiency. In fact, by 1999, water production had increased by 24% since 1996 while water prices have been cut. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Urban areas 20 year. concession, water provision SAUR

Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total SAUR Bouygues (France) 115,000 0 115,000

155

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

MEXICO

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

MEXICO
The privatisation of Mexico’s water and sewerage services was intended to be one of the major stories of the late 1990s, although the 1994-95 Peso Crisis did not help matters. Since 2000, there has been a political impasse between the Federal Government and the Provinces, partly due to the emergence of an effective two party system. A number of medium sized schemes are now succeeding in mobilising investment again. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Regulation and national plans The National Commission for Water is responsible for developing and enforcing a series of five year water plans. The current plan (PROMMA) runs from 2001-2006 and aims to provide potable water to 89% of the population with 65% of household wastewater being treated. The Commission for Water and Drainage for Metropolitan Areas is responsible for water and sewerage management in urban areas. The major laws are the General Law on Environmental Protection (1988 and revised in 1996), and the National Water Law (1992 and supplemented by the 1994 Regulations for the National Water Law). The Ministry for Social Development has imposed taxes for effluent discharges. The National Water Law also introduced the concept of tradable water rights. The 2001-06 National Water Plan: 2001 Actual 88% 76% 23% 7% 6,150 2002 Actual 88% 77% 28% 26% 6,337 2006 Plan 89% 78% 41% 100% 7,094

US$6,230 US$8,970 5% 28% 67%

% connected to piped water % connected to sewerage Wastewater treated [1] Water & pollution permit compliance Levies, fees & taxes (MXN million)

[1] The original PNH 2006 wastewater target was 65%. Source: PNH 2006, in OECD (2003) OECD Environmental
Performance Review: Mexico

Inland water quality Good Fair Poor Bad

2000 5% 22% 49% 24%

25% of the country’s surface has adequate water supplies, which enjoy 82% of the rainfall. Most of the population lives in the arid areas. According to the Environment Minister in 2001, Mexico has 60% less water per capita than 50 years ago, 73% of its supply is contaminated and 93% of its rivers are polluted. Population 2002 (million) 2025 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations, 2015 Water provision and public health In Mexico City, water connections were 92% (64% indoors) and access to sanitation was 90% with 68% having access to flush lavatories. By 1995, water and sewerage connections were 98% and 94% respectively. Urban water and wastewater services 1991 76% 75% N/A 1995 87% 67% 25% 2000 87% 73% 24%

102.0 119.6 75% 79% 25%

Piped water Sanitation Sewage treatment

Under Mexico’s Standard NOM-001-ECOL-1996, all 139 municipalities with more than 50,000 people and industrial sites with a BOD5/sus pended solids generation of more than 3t/day are meant to have appropriate wastewater treatment by 2000. As of 2002, 24% of the population was connected to a sewerage system, with 27% of sewage collected is treated at 978 WWTWs, with 11% being treated to primary standard and 16% to
156

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

MEXICO

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

secondary standard. Meanwhile, 5.4km 3 pa of industrial wastewater is generated, with 15% treated (34% primary, 62% secondary & 4% tertiary) at 1,405 WWTWs, but only 503 operating in compliance with national standards. Effluent treatment, 1994-1999 (m3/second) Effluent discharge Installed cap Operating cap Effective cap Effluent treated (%) 1994 261 42 32 14 12 1998 291 63 41 29 14 1999 320 67 42 N/A 13

A water treatment programme was started in 320 municipalities in 1991 to reduce the risk of cholera. This involved 95% of municipal piped drinking water being chlorinated along with the prohibition of the discharge of untreated sewage effluents for market gardening. Only 30% of drinking water is fully treated. 225 out of 1,018 regional water treatment plants were in need of repair in 2001. Distribution losses are between 40-48%. Urban Data Served by piped water Litres per capita per day Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Investments and service plans Current income at US$1,503 million pa accounts for 42% of required financial resources. Money and management are at a premium. One challenge for municipal performance is that authorities typically last three years and water managers jus t two. Thus there is little management or political continuity. In addition, high levels of debt and the inability to generate cash for loan repayments meat that just 21 states and six municipal water works met the Mexico’s Federal loan criteria in 2003. The International Monetary Fund is disbursing US$1 billion in loans for water and sewerage projects, with US$1.4 billion being allocated to water and sanitation projects by the Ministry of Cities and total Government spending set to be in the region of US$1.66 billion, compared with US$800 million in 2003. $million Capex Opex Total Total – annualised 2001-06 11,911 9,487 21,398 3,566 2007-12 10,131 10,644 20,775 3,463 2013-25 20,184 25,562 46,796 3,900

88% 380 74% 15%

Various estimates point towards US$58-89 billion being required over a 25 year period to achieve universal and sustainable access to water and sanitation. While total spending has been boosted to US$2.2 billion pa since 2003, it is evident further investment is needed. 2000 44% 88% 76% 23% 14 2025 BAU 44% 88% 76% 60% 16 2025 SG 24% 97% 97% 90% 30

Urban unaccounted for water Drinking water service coverage Sewerage service coverage Wastewater treated Investment (MXN billion pa)

BAU = Business As Usual Scenario, SG = Sustainable Growth Scenario Source: PNH 2006, in OECD (2003) OECD Environmental Performance Review: Mexico

A series of measures to help preserve water supplies has been launched in a move that could help Mexico pay its Rio Grande river water debt to the USA under the 1944 treaty. A deal reached by U.S. and Mexican Governments earlier in 2003 said the two countries will invest in water conservation measures and mandates the modernisation of the water infrastructure, aiming to achieve greater efficiency in water use. Mexico also seeks to boost the amount of treated and reused wastewater from one-third of output to two-thirds by 2006. Other challenges stem from Mexican politics and their several legacies. Since the 2000 elections ended 71 years of rule by the Institutional Revolutionary Party, there has been a piecemeal transition from a centralised state to one with more local decision making, but without an effective transfer of operations. While in constitutional terms, water belongs to the state, this does not allow for the economic and environmental opportunity costs involved when water is transferred from one state to another or to Mexico City. Meanwhile, up to half of users do not pay for the service, health regulations stipulate that at least a minimal supply must be maintained to domestic nonpayers.

157

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

MEXICO

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1991) Domestic Industrial Agriculture Politics and privatisation

375.40km³ 3,729m 3 77.8km³ 17% 5% 77%

Mexico has a long tradition of private sector water contracts. Concessions were awarded in Pueble, Saltillo and Monterrey in 1855, 1899 and 1904 respectively. In the 1920s there were 20 concessions in operation. Since the 1940s, these were taken over by the state. Privatisation in Mexico was revived in the wake of the 1992 National Water Law. At the same time, Federal support for water and sewerage services in the provinces was eased to encourage the commercialisation of the services. After strong progress between 1992 and 1994, economic problems have meant that progress in subsequent years has been piecemeal. Many of the current generation of privatisation contracts were awarded shortly before the 1994 Peso crisis, which caused problems with regards to the quality of earnings in hard currency terms. Contracts such as Biwater’s sewage treatment BOT in Puerto Vallarta have suffered from the inability of anticipated tariff increases to be imposed. Companies such as Biwater have concentrated on working within new financial constraints to deliver high service quality with the longer term in mind. 50 wastewater treatment BOT contracts were awarded up to the end of 1999. In 2001, twelve were operational (with a PE of 6million), while 20 have been cancelled and twelve are under re-negotiation. Azurix entered the market in 1999 by buying out private sector stakes in two concessions. Azurix’s activities were sold to Suez in 2002. Likewise VE has gradually increased its holding in its Omsa JV from 33% in 1993 to 50% by 1998. From 2003, the Government aims to award concessions for 180 cities with a population over 50,000. This will cover water treatment and provision services, with 49%, 51% and 100% stakes being available. In reality, five BOT contracts awards were identified in 2003 and a further four in the year to date. Even so, a marked increase in local companies bidding for contracts points towards healthier conditions than for some time. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1985) Domestic Industrial Agriculture Privatising sewage treatment Private sector involvement is also being sought for wastewater treatment. 16% of Mexico’s sewage treatment capacity is handled by the private sector, involving a total investment of US$400 million (the 1999 figures are Government estimates). Sewage treatment in Mexico, 1994-99 Effluent discharge (m 3/s) Installed treatment capacity (m 3/s) Operating treatment capacity-nominal (m 3/s) Operating treatment capacity-adequate (m 3/s) Effluent treated (%) Treatment operating adequately (%) 1994 261 42 32 14 12 33 1995 272 48 41 17 15 35 1996 277 51 33 20 12 39 1997 284 57 39 25 13 44 1998 291 63 41 29 14 46 1999* 320 67 42 N/A 13 N/A

139.0km³ 1,450m 3 24.0km³ 13.2% 23.0% 63.8%

MAJOR CITIES City Ciudad Juárez Culiacán Guadalajara Leon de los Alta Mérida Mexicali Mexico City Monterry Puebla de Zarago Querétaro San Luis Potosi Tijuana

2000 1,239,000 750,000 3,697,000 1,293,000 849,000 771,000 18,066,000 3,267,000 1,968,000 798,000 857,000 1,297,000

2015 1,781,000 892,000 4,265,000 1,654,000 1,038,000 954,000 20,434,000 3,906,000 1,997,000 1,079,000 1,046,000 1,937,000
158

Status N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Four water management contracts awarded N/A Water and sewerage privatised N/A N/A N/A
Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

MEXICO

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

MAJOR CITIES City Toluca Torreon Case study: Siapa

2000 1,455,000 1,012,000

2015 2,707,000 1,157,000

Status N/A N/A

Guadalajara’s municipal utility Sistema Intermunicipal para los Servicios de Agua Potable y Alcantarillado (Siapa) plans to spend U$700 million on improving water and wastewater services over the next 25 years. This will cover drinking water and wastewater management for the 3million people in Guadalajara, Zapopan, Tlaquepaque and Tonala. Water will be brought from Lake Chapala, leakage will be reduced and seven WWTPs will b built. e Support will come from the Japanese Government and the Inter-American Development Bank. In addition, the municipality’s investment grade debt rating will be used to mobilise new debt when cash flow allows. Siapa provides drinking water to 93% of the Guadalajara region and wastewater services to 89%. It had revenues of 1.5billion Pesos (US$140 million) in 2002 and is profitable, with a steadily improving debt profile. Finances have been improved by adopting fixed tariffs to avoid metering abuse and charging for wastewater services. Siapa spent US$50 million in 2002 implementing a plan to measure water leakage in order to control and improve water pressure. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Aguascalientes 30 year water and sewerage concession Caasa (Omsa) Cancun 30 year water and sewerage concession DHC Chiuahua 10 year sewage treatment BOT Atlatech (Cygsa) Culiacan Sewage treatment facility concession TECSA León Sewage treatment work BOT Suez Matamoros Industrial effluent treatment BOT Suez NE Mexico City 10 year water management contract Industrias del Agua NW Mexico City 10 year water management contract Servicos de Agua Potable (Omsa) Pemex 4 industrial WWTW plants for Pemex CYDSA Puebla Sewage treatment facility concession TECSA Puebla Water and sewerage concession Omsa Puerto Vallarta 15 year sewage treatment BOT CTAPV Saltillo 25 year water and sewerage concession Empresa Paramunicipal SE Mexico City 10 year water management contract Tecnologia y Servicos del Agua SW Mexico City 10 year water management contract Agua de Mexico Torreón Sewage lagoon BOT Suez Xalapa Water & sewerage DBFO Earth Tech Orizaba Water & sewerage DBFO Earth Tech Morelia Water & sewerage BOT Aquasol Pachuca Water & sewerage BOT Aquasol San Luis Potosí Wastewater BOT Degremont/Suez

Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Parent company Population served Company (country) Water Sewerage CTPAV Cascal (UK/Ned) 0 300,000 Industrias del Aguas Suez (France) 2,000,000 0 DHC Suez (France) 430,000 430,000 Suez Suez (France) 0 2,100,000 Omsa VE (France) 7,800,000 4,300,000 Agua de Mexico United Utilities (UK) 2,000,000 0 T y S del Agua (TECSA) Suez (France) 2,800,000 0 Aguas de Cancun Suez (France) 383,000 383,000 CYDSA CYDSA (Mexico) N/A N/A Empresa Paramunicipal Agbar (Spain) 650,000 650,000 Earth Tech Tyco (USA) 400,000 500,000 Aquasol Aquasol (Mexico) 0 500,000

Total 300,000 2,000,000 430,000 2,100,000 7,800,000 2,000,000 2,800,000 383,000 N/A 650,000 500,000 500,000

Sources: World Bank (2002). Private Solutions for Infrastructure In Mexico. Country Framework Report for Private Participation in Infrastructure. World Bank and Public-Private Infrastructure Advisory Facility. OECD (2003) OECD Environmental Performance Review: Mexico. OECD, Paris, France .

159

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

MONGOLIA

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

MONGOLIA
Mongolia is characterised by the extreme contrast between the urbanised areas, which accounted for 64% of the country’s 2.7million population in 1998 and the rest of the country, where low-density nomadic pastoralism remains commonplace. In the central region there are substantial water resources, partly in the form of large, fast flowing streams. However, in the desert south, western and eastern provinces, the water resources are much scarcer and are generally of poorer quality with increasing salts and diminishing water levels in groundwater tables, streams and lakes. In 1999, 70% of the urban population had access to improved drinking water and 30% to sewerage. Political change brings the prospect of change The Communist administration lost the 1996 general election to the Democratic Coalition, ending 72 years of one party rule. In consequence, Mongolia is seeking to expand its international activities, especially with economies other than the former Soviet Union and the People's Republic of China. A privatisation programme was started in 1997, which may well embrace urban water and sewerage services but there are no significant developments to date. Water resource management The Ministry of Nature and the Environment is responsible for water resource use, management and development strategies. Under the Ministry there is an Agency for Environment P rotection, which maintains national co-ordination and monitoring of the water resources. The Governor's offices of the Aimag and municipalities are responsible for water supply and wastewater treatment. The Mongolian Law on Water was enacted in 1995. Water resources management, monitoring and controls have failed to maintain water quality and supply, and generally have only documented the loss of resource reserves and quality. High rates of leakage are usual, while inefficient supply systems generate higher flows that in turn overwhelm sewage treatment systems. In addition to the waste of water, this overloads the sewage system and more than doubles the electricity requirements for operating the water supply pumps. Agricultural, rural residential and indus trial uses of groundwater in Gobi, and western and eastern Mongolia, are contributing to low water table levels and increasing salinity levels. There is an urgent need to improve water monitoring activities throughout the country. Water quality tests have been conducted in 14% of the country's 20,000 bored wells, although a number are currently known to be contaminated. Actions to improve the supply and reduce the waste/leakage of water in urban areas include the introduction of meters for each apartment block in Ulan Bator (Ulaanbaatar) and a graduated, steeply rising tariff for excessive per capita consumption of water. In addition, the World Bank is supporting an emergency leak repair programme through a US$39 million loan in 1996 and has financed a series of service improvements that were completed in 2001, including a new service reservoir for Ulan Bator. The ADB organised a US$8.5 million aid and loan package in 1997 to provide improved water supply to 125,000 people living in informal settlements in five provincial capitals. Water and sewerage services In 1996, 20% of domestic and industrial effluents, or 119.2million m3 were treated in 121 sewage treatment works, with 35 million m 3 of wastewater discharged into the natural surface water without any treatment. There is no recycling of wastewater. In total, some 70% of urban sewage is treated, while domestic wastewater in rural areas is mostly discharged into the environment without treatment. The overall sewerage coverage is about 25%. In the capital Ulaanbaatar, 90% had access to safe drinking water in urban areas and 74% to sanitation in 1995. Identified areas of concern in 1997 included an emergency leakage repair programme, allied with water metering on at least the apartment block level. Distribution losses in Ulan Bator have been estimated at 60%.

160

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

MOROCCO

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

MOROCCO
Since 1995 Morocco has adopted an aggressive attitude towards privatisation, awarding the Casablanca contract on a multi utility basis, also seen in Rabat and a number of other cities over the next two years. The adoption of a multi-utility contract has allowed investment to be focussed towards sewerage and sewage treatment development, while allowing this work to be partially funded by electricity revenues. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services

US$1,218 US$3,810 15% 33% 52%

Management
A national plan for water and water resource management was adopted in 1995. This has been augmented with regional and city based plans for the larger urban areas. The emphasis remains on irrigation issues, but there is an increasing concern about the need for sewerage and sewage treatment infrastructure. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations, 2015

30.1 36.5 57% 65% 21%

Service coverage
In 1985, 63% of urban households had piped water, compared with 2% of rural households. 90% of urban households had lavatories of some description, compared with 19% of rural households. In 1983 87% of households in Rabat had access to potable water and 95% had access to adequate sanitation, but none of the sewerage effluents were treated. The Moroccan Government is seeking to mobilise an additional 6.2billion m3 of water pa on top of the current withdrawal of 13.9billion m 3 pa by 2020. Connection to piped water in urban areas was planned to rise to 90% in 2000 and to 98% by 2020. 80% of the rural population is to be connected to piped water by 2005. In 1997 PAGER, a rural water provision programme was launched. It is seeking to serve 11million people in 31,000 localities through the rehabilitation of 30,000 water storage units, installing or renovating 20,000 water pumps and developing 1,300 local water sources. The rate of sewerage connections in urban areas is to be improved to 90% in 2005 and 95% by 2015. All major urban centres are to be provided with primary treatment by 2005, with these facilities being upgraded to secondary or tertiary standard between 2005 and 2015. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment

85% 69% 5%

Pricing policies
Domestic water is provided for DH30 per year where usage is below 24m 3 per annum, except in Casablanca and Rabat, where it costs DH84 and DH74 respectively. Since 1996, measures have been taken to discourage excessive domestic usage by bringing in additional charges for usage above the basic quantity. These are DH2.47 per m3 in Méknès and DH7.15m 3 in Casablanca for 24-60m 3 pa and DH9.87 per m3 in Casablanca for more than 60m 3 pa. Industrial tariffs in 1996 raged from DH1.59 per m 3 in Méknès to DH6.01 per m 3 in Safi. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1993) Domestic (1992) Industrial (1992) Agriculture (1992)

30.0km³ 1,071m 3 11.1km³ 5% 3% 92%

161

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

MOROCCO

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

Privatisation proposals and progress
Since the enactment of the 1995 National Water Plan, Morocco has sought to privatise most of its major urban utility services and has been notably keen to attract international management and finance. To date, 35% of the urban water and sewerage sector has been privatised, with the privatisation of a further 25-30% under way. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1985) Casablanca and Rabat In 1997, Lyonnaise des Eaux de Casablanca (Lydec) was awarded the 30 year Urban Community of Casablanca (UCC) concession contract. This was part of the overall privatisation of Casablanca’s urban services, which is described in the Suez entry. The water contract is worth DH5 billion (US$517 million), for the expansion and upgrading of water distribution and treatment. 75% of the population is currently connected, which will increase to 85% in 5 years, 95% in 10 and 100% in 25 years, price rises were seen in years 2 to 5. The wastewater contract is worth DH16 billion (US$1.6 billion). It involves the construction of three WWTWs, including recovery systems and the creation and extension of the sewerage network in development zones of western Casablanca. Currently 7% of the population is connected to the sewerage network. In 1998, Lydec water and sewerage accounted for US$100 million in turnover (30% of the total) and 60% of investment, reflecting the need to upgrade and extend the city’s water and sewerage services. The privatisation of Rabat utility services was awarded to Electricidade de Portugal and Pleiade (Portugal), Alborada (Morocco) and Urbaser (Dragados), with a 30 year concession. Rabat’s utilities serve 1.7million people, with a €138 million (US$130 million) turnover for water, sewerage and electricity services in 1998. In 2002, Dragados sold its stake to Vivendi Environnement. MAJOR CITIES City Casablanca Rabat Fes Marrakech

7.5km³ 268m 3 3.0km³

2000 3,541,000 1,496,000 907,000 822,000

2015 4,862,000 2,105,000 1,300,000 1,210,000

Status Water and sewerage services privatised Water and sewerage services privatised PSP plans postponed No plans announced

Further privatisations under way
Water and electricity services to Fez and Méknès were due to be privatised in 2001. Fez (1.3million people) had an approximate turnover of €108 million pa in 2001 and Méknès (0.6million people) will have a turnover of perhaps half of this. This privatisation has been delayed. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Casablanca Water and sewerage services Lydec Casablanca Bulk water provision concession Lydec Rabat Water and sewerage services VE Tetouan & Tangier 25 year water and sewerage concession VE

Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Lydec Suez (France) 2,800,000 300,000 VE VE (France) 2,900,000 450,000

Total 2,800,000 2,900,000

162

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

MOZAMBIQUE

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

MOZAMBIQUE
After two decades of civil war ending in 1995, Mozambique’s economy and infrastructure have been devastated. As a result, since 1995, the country has been open to all initiatives that might improve its water and sanitation services in an affordable manner. 25% of Mozambique’s 18million people have access to safe water. In rural areas, 80% of the population does not have access to safe water. An epidemic of 10,000 cases of cholera, which broke out in August 1997, killed 400 people in a few months, underlining the problems facing the country’s water and sanitation services. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services The National Water Plan Mozambique unveiled a National Water Development Plan in 1995. It acknowledged that many of the assets of the sector are either not functioning or are likely to fail in the near future, while the majority of the population still does not have access to a regular supply of safe drinking water. The Plan states: to permit services to be financially viable, the price of water has to reflect its economic value, eventually covering the cost of supply; water resources management will be decentralised to autonomous catchment authorities and water supply and sanitation services are to be decentralised to autonomous and financially self-sufficient local agencies. The Government’s role will therefore be restricted to setting priorities, defining minimum service levels, and the regulation of the activities of the service providers, including overseeing any planned privatisation processes. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations, 2015 The role of the state The Water Law of 1991 defines the institutional and legal framework for licensing and allocation of water concessions. Under this law, the National Water Council (CAN) provides inter-sector co-ordination and strategic decision making. Infrastructure development for the extension of coverage service and the corresponding investments will remain the responsibility of the state for the foreseeable future. On the other hand, management or operation of the water supply systems will, in principle, be carried out in a financially viable way and will be independent of the civil service. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Urban water and sanitation According to the Public Works and Housing Ministry in 2003, Mozambique needs more than US$1 billion to meet the millennium target of reducing by half the people deprived of clean drinking water and basic sanitation by 2015. The National Statistics Institute found in 2001 that 37% of the population has access to piped water or a protected well and 50% had access to basic sanitation facilities. Of the total urban population, 35% have access to safe water supplies. In 1980 the coverage was estimated to be about 48%. The 1995 Plan’s objective was to increase the coverage so that 50-80% of the population is supplied with safe drinking water by 2002. In 1999, 81% of the urban population had access to safe drinking water and 68% to improved sanitation. All water companies had a target to supply at least 50% of the population by then. The target for Maputo, the capital city, is 60%, and higher targets have been set for Xai and Chokwe (70%), Inhambane (75%), Pemba and Tete (80%). If these targets are achieved an extra 1million people will be served. Most of the expansion will be in the peripheral areas, where the proposed quality of service is one standpost with two taps per 500 people. The target coverage for the various levels of service is 30% by standpipes, 25% with yard connections and 20% with house connections. To achieve these targets water losses will have to be reduced from about 40% to less than 25%. Capital spending for these targets is estimated at US$30 to 35million pa, against US$20 to 25 million pa in recent years. Tariffs were adjusted in 2000 to cover operation, maintenance costs and 50% of depreciation costs. Full cost recovery is aimed for 2003.
Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

US$195 US$1,050 33% 25% 42%

18.5 22.5 35% 46% 20%

17% 15% 0%

163

MOZAMBIQUE

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

For sewerage in urban areas, short term investment will concentrate on the rehabilitation of the existing sanitation infrastructure, especially in cities with poor sanitary conditions such as Tete, Quelimane, Beira and Maputo at a cost of US$5-10 million pa. By the year 2000, urban sanitation taxes should be introduced in all the major cities to cover operation and maintenance costs. In 1995 approximately 100,000 urban families had latrines. The official target was to increase this number to 200,000 families by 2000. Freshwater Annual Availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1992) Domestic (1992) Industrial (1992) Agriculture (1992) Rural water provision Sufficient water sources were constructed to increase the coverage of supply to the rural population from 6% in 1980 to 30% by 1993. A 1999 survey pointed to 26% coverage that year against a Government target of 40% by 2000. The level of service is where a shallow well or borehole equipped with an operational hand-pump will serve 500 people in a radius of not more than 500 meters. These targets imply the construction of around 6,000 new water sources to serve an additional 3million people. To carry out these activities an investment of about US$15 to 20million pa will be required between 1995 and 2000, compared with the previous level of US$4-9 million pa. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Privatisation and players In 1998, Halcrow carried out an assessment of the water systems in Maputo, Beira, Quelimane, Nampula and Pemba. This study was designed to formulate the basis for including the private sector in the operation of these water systems. Halcrow found that tariff increases would not be affordable outside Maputo in the medium term and that finance needs to be raised through improving the efficiency of the services, allied with leakage reduction and increasing the number of people paying for these services. In 1998, the Government announced that water provision services for Maputo, Beira, Quelimane, Nampula and Pemba would be privatised on a lease (BOT) basis for Maputo along with management contracts for the other four cities. The contract also involves the commercialisation of water services for Maputo's neighbouring industrial city of Matola and Beira's neighbouring city of Dondo. US$120 million is to be invested over the first five years of the contract on upgrading facilities. The contract is linked to US$117 million in donor funding, US$92 million of the initial donor grant is for the service expansion programme, with the remaining US$25 million for operating the services. The World Bank, African Development Bank, Dutch Government and the European Union funded the grant. The contract was awarded in September 1999 to Aguas de Mocambique (ADM), a consortium consisting of SAUR (38.5%), IPE-Aguas de Portugal (31.5%) and the Mazi-Mozambique consortium (30%). Mazi-Mozambique is led by the Mozambique Community Development Foundation, an NGO and includes local private companies Norte Investimentos, FLOTUR and MG-Mozambique Gestores. The consortium forecast a US$50 million turnover over the first 5 years. The contract grants ADM a full commercial concession in Maputo and Matola for 15 years and similar concessions in the other five cities for five years. MAJOR CITIES City Maputo International finance The first World Bank water project to take place in Mozambique was given the go-ahead in February 1998. This involved a US$36 million credit to assist the Government to improve water supply and sanitation in rural and urban areas. This project will lay the groundwork for an increase in the quality, coverage, and sustainability of water supply and sanitation services through new systems and encouraging privatisation policies. The Mozambique National Water Development Project’s total cost of US$56.9 million will be financed by a US$36.0 million IDA credit and co-financed by the Government of Mozambique and various bilateral institutions. In June 1999, the African Development Fund (ADF) loaned US$26.44 million for a water supply rehabilitation project in Maputo. This project is concentrating on water supply and sanitation systems to bring these to the unserviced areas of the Hulene/Laulane/Mahotas suburbs of Maputo. The project concentrates on rehabilitation and extension works to the existing water supply system to increase the filter capacity at the water treatment, distribution and upgrading works as well as the installation of an additional water storage facility. The total cost of
164

100.0km³ 5,350m 3 0.61km³ 9% 2% 89%

17.0km³ 910m 3

2000 1,092,000

2015 1,899,000

Status BOT lease contract for water provision

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

MOZAMBIQUE

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

the project is estimated at US$31.9 million. The work is being carried out by the Ministry of Public Works and Housing and ran for three and a half years from September 1999. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Maputo/Matola 15 year water provision BOT Aguas de Mocambique Beira/Dondo 5 year water provision BOT Aguas de Mocambique Quelimane 5 year water provision BOT Aguas de Mocambique Nampula 5 year water provision BOT Aguas de Mocambique Pemba 5 year water provision BOT Aguas de Mocambique Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Aguas de Mocambique Bouygues (France) 2,5000,000 0

Total 2,500,000

165

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

NAMIBIA

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

NAMIBIA
Water and was tewater assets and services are relatively advanced due to the German colonial legacy and the need for active water management in an extremely arid country. Of the 533,000 people living in urban areas, 341,000 have household water connections and 75,000 are served via standpumps. 96% of the urban population has some form of sanitation, with 349,000 having access to the sewerage network. Namibia aims to have 97% urban sewerage coverage by 2010. Groundwater accounts for 73% of water resources. Only 3% of the country’s rainfall is used, due to the high rate of evapotranspiration. While Nam Water has been commercialised, privatisation has been restricted to new facilities and service extension. Nam Water has a turnover of N$250 million and an asset base of N$1,400 million, with an annual capital spending of N$150-200 million. An AA credit rating allied with cost recovery means that the entity is able to fund its current activities. The commercialisation of water supply in Namibia’s Windhoek Municipality has been based on cost recovery for those who can and developing a system of cross subsidies for the poor. This is being challenged in 2004 by a lobby who argue that water and sanitation ought to be free. The capital Windhoek is having its main drinking water treatment facility built and operated by Berlin Wasser International and Vivendi Environnement (now VE). The consortium will operate the water reclamation plant for 20 years. This facility is being financed by Germany’s KfW (construction) together with the European Investment Bank (EIB). The contract generates a turnover of €2 million pa. The capacity of the plant will be 21,000m 3 per day. This is nearly 50% of the city's total water consumption. The water supplies from the current central Namibian reservoir system and from wells has run too low. The city's long experience in the reprocessing of wastewater into industrial and drinking water could not be of any further help. 226,000 out of the city’s 271,000 people are served by household water and sewerage. All of Windhoek’s wastewater that is collected by the sewerage system is treated. In December 2002, the NAD100 million (€11.4 million) water reclamation plant for Windhoek entered service. This is the first multiple-barrier facility in which domestic sewerage is treated to produce potable water. Raw sewerage is initially pumped into the Gammams Plant before the semi-purified water is piped to the new plant for further treatment and chlorination. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Windhoek Wastewater treatment BW/VE Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total BW/VE Veolia (France)/RWE 0 135,000 135,000

166

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

NEPAL

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

NEPAL
Water resources In general, water availability is good, with 8.02% of available resources being abstracted in 1995. While coverage in rural areas has improved from 1.58million (11%) in 1980 to 6.95million (38%) in 1990 and 10.70million (60%) by 1994, continued urbanisation has resulted in a fall in coverage in urban areas from 0.71million (80%) in 1980 to 1.20million (75%) in 1990 and 1.33million (64%) by 1994. There are no recognised sewerage facilities. Water management Water policy is overseen by the Ministry of Water Resources and the Department of Water Supply and Sewerage. Water and sewerage services in urban areas are operated by the Nepal Water Supply and Sanitation Corporation (NWSSC). In rural areas, including Kathmandu Valley, water projects are carried out at the village level, with financial and technical assistance from the Asian Development Bank and various international aid organisations. The NWSSC is regarded as being seriously underfunded, and is therefore having problems in maintaining its current assets, let alone expanding them. Pro Public (an environmental and human rights NGO) has brought a number of cases against the NWSSC demanding improved accountability, the elimination of alleged corrupt practices and the effective implementation of the 1992 Water Resources Act, which sets standards for drinking water quality that to date have not been met. The NWSSC operates in the urban areas of the Kathmandu Valley, providing water to 85% of urban areas, but only 20% of urban areas are connected to its sewerage network. Total water demand in the valley is es timated at 160 Ml/day and growing at 6% per annum, but water production varies between 90-130 Ml/day according to the season. 24 hour supply is understood to be the exception, alongside distribution losses of 30-40% and a bill collection rate of 70%. The US$464 million Melamchi Water Supply Project is intended to augment supplies by 0.27 million m 3 per day by 2009 but has been delayed by the Maoist insurgency in the Melamchi River area. In August 1999, a case at the Supreme Court brought by Pro Public, resulted in a ruling demanding that Nepal's Ministry of Environment set national standards for sewage and effluent levels in water. This ruling follows an earlier decision commanding the Government to ensure that sewage is treated prior to discharge into the two main rivers that flow through the Kathmandu Valley. Nepal's 1997 Environment Protection Act makes the Government responsible for setting acceptable pollution reduction targets. Privatisation in the Kathmandu Valley Since 1997, the World Bank has been encouraging the Government of Nepal to consider proposals for the award of a ten year management lease contract for water and sewerage services for the Kathmandu Valley. The award process was revived during 2001 alongside two acts designed to enable PSP to take place. The Drinking Water Supply Act and the Drinking Water Monitoring and Tariff Fixation Commission Act were passed in 2002. The contract was expected to generate revenues of US$400 million. In 2003, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) gave a US$1.4 million technical assistance grant to support water and sanitation sector reform in the Kathmandu Valley, including the establishment of the National Water Supply Regulatory Board (NWSRB) and the Kathmandu Valley Water Authority, and a private sector participation scheme, this time based on an O&M contract. Japan has also provided a grant of JY927 million (US$7.57 million) for improvements to the water supply system in the Kathmandu Valley. A six year, extendible O+M contract, linked to US$100 million in capital spending and US$15 million in loans from the ADB was being prepared for the end of 2004. Five international companies have expressed interest in the proposal against one for the 2002 proposal. One difficulty is that tariff rises of 50% are anticipated in 2004-05, in part due to the cost of the Melamchi project.
Sources: Global Water Intelligence, October 2001, pp 10-11. Asian Water, March 2004, pp 10-13.

167

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

THE NETHERLANDS

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

THE NETHERLANDS
The Netherlands are sending out mixed signals regarding their role in global water management. While Nuon seeks to become an international service player, its home market is being closed to private investment. Even so, the Delftland wastewater treatment privatisation resulted in cost reductions of 30% below the original es timates. Economics (2001) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Water management The Dutch have been developing integrated water management systems since 1798, when the DirectorateGeneral for Public Works and Water Management (Rijkswaterstaat) was founded. Two thirds of the country is truly man made and lies within two metres of the mean sea level. As their saying goes, ‘God created the world, but the Dutch created the Netherlands’. Almost all industrial wastewater is subject to secondary or tertiary treatment. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations, 2015 Water infrastructure and usage There has been a consistent decline in the total abstraction of fresh water since 1970. (million m 3) Groundwater Surface water Total 1970 1,157 10,787 11,944 1980 1,008 8,190 9,198 1990 1,049 6,751 7,800 16.1 16.8 90% 91% 14%

US$25,886 US$29,100 3% 24% 73%

Between 1975 and 1990, a national network of sewage treatment works was constructed, along with the connection of 97% of the population to the sewerage system by 1994. The proportion of the population connected to sewerage services increased from 73% in 1980 to 93% in 1990. There were 485 sewage treatment works in 1988, of which 64 serve cities with a population in excess of 100,000. Sewage treatment Tertiary Secondary Primary Sewerage only Not connected Urban data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment 1980 2.6% 61.9% 7.9% 14.5% 14.1% 1990 4.4% 74.4% 7.5% 6.8% 6.9% 1995 8.0% 84.0% 1.0% 2.0% 5.0% 1998 78.1% 19.6% 0.0% 0.0% 2.3%

100% 93% 93%

There is an effluent discharge into surface waters of 13million PE via major rivers. The public sewage treatment capacity in 1987 was 22.7million PE. Proactive measures taken by the Government since 1985 resulted in an 81% decrease in BOD loads between 1970-92 and 73% between 1980-92. The system is being further extended as part of the compliance programme for the EU’s UWWTD by increasing the proportion of facilities offering tertiary treatment from 8% in 1993 to 35-50% by 2005. Inland water quality (1986) Ia - Very Good Ib - Good II – Fair III – Poor IV –Bad

12% 65% 18% 4% 1%

In contrast, the 1990 survey quoted in ‘The Dobris Assessment’ (1995) has 5% of river waters as ‘Good’, 50% ‘Fair’, 40% ‘Poor’ and 5% as ‘Bad’. The figures are so different that it is to be assumed that they are not strictly
168

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

THE NETHERLANDS

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

comparable. The Netherlands continues to face pollution problems in the coastal areas due to the high effluent concentrations in the rivers Rhine, Meuse and Scheldt from Belgium and Germany. For example, the river Meuse is highly polluted and is a major source of nutrient pollution. The river Scheldt is the mos t polluted river flowing into the North Sea. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic Industrial Agriculture Costs and financing Until 1995, there was no charge for surface water abstraction by industrial users, while groundwater cost f 0.01 per m³. There is now a ground water tax of €0.168 and a domestic usage tax of €0.136 per m³. Total annual costs for municipal sewerage services are currently in the region of f1.5 billion. Maintenance work of f7 billion is currently needed, with f5 billion required to catch up on overdue maintenance work and some f2 billion to reduce storm overflows from sewage systems. Annual expenditure on water quality management is expected to rise over the plan period (1998-2006) by approximately 2.2% towards the end of the period. The total annual costs to municipalities as a result of these investments (totalling around f9 billion) are expected to amount to almost f2 billion in 2005, an average annual increase of 3.6% over the 1998-2006 plan period. Over the 1995-2001 period, the water control boards invested f2 billion in water quality management, with total annual expenditure on the management of water quantity expected to rise by 0.2% pa over the 1998-2006 plan period. The Dutch Aquatic Outlook indicates that domestic water charges will increase as a result by around f 0.09 per m3 by 2015. The annual increase will therefore amount to less than f 0.01 per m3. During 1995-2006, sewerage charges are expected to rise by an average of 6% pa. In contrast, the pollution tax made itself felt during the early 1990s and during 1998-2006 the tax levy is expected to be restricted to an annual rise of around 2.4%. Overall water and sewerage fees will rise by f 75 per capita pa over the 1998-2005 plan period. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1985) Domestic Industrial Agriculture 4.5km³ 286m 3 1.1km³ 32% 45% 23%

10.0km³ 5,797m 3 7.8km³ 5% 61% 34%

Privatisation prospects become confused The 80 public water companies are currently being rationalised into 30 larger entities. In 1945, there were 208 companies, so this is part of an ongoing programme. In addition, there are a number of private permits granted to individuals, farms and industrial customers. The public sector is responsible for at least 95% of all water provision, with all private permits being on a localised basis. Nearly 100% of the population is connected to the public water distribution system, which is the highest share of all European c ountries. The construction of new water purification plants has become very important in recent years, due to the increasing problem of contaminated ground water (e.g. from agricultural and industrial activity), the main source for drinking water. In September 2000 a Bill was passed outlawed public water companies in the Netherlands from handing over shares or control to non-public bodies. Public water companies will retain exclusive rights to the production and distribution of drinking water in their distribution area. In consequence, if Noun is privatised, its Dutch water activities would have to be sold back to the state. In October 2002, the €1.5 billion Delftland wastewater treatment concession for the Hague was awarded to the Delfluent Consortium, led by Veolia Environnement (VE) (40%); two Dutch publicly owned water distribution companies, Delta Water (20%) and Waterbedrijf Europoort (20%); Rabobank (10%), Heijmans Betonen Waterbouw (5%) and Strukton(5%). The contract started in 2003 and involves operating the existing plant at Houtrust and developing the new €258 million plant at Harnaschpolder. VE (50%) will lead a JV, along with Delta Water (25%) and Waterbedrijf Europoort (25%) for operating the facilities and 90km of sewerage network. Delftland serves the Hague and surrounding areas. This will treat sewerage for 1.7million people. The 30 year contract involves €600 million of capital spending in total, designed to bring the region into line with EU standards to comply with the UWWTD by 2005. MAJOR CITIES Population Amsterdam Rotterdam

2000 1,105 1,078

2015 1,115 1,082

Status PSP illegal PSP illegal

169

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

NEW ZEALAND

PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS

NEW ZEALAND
In contrast to Australia, New Zealand typically enjoys an abundance of high quality water resources. However, there are areas with supply shortages, along with a poorly developed sewage treatment network for smaller towns and cities and problems relating to agricultural run-offs. Privatisation has made stolid progress to date. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Legislation The Resource Management Act 1991 emphasises the intrinsic values of ecosystem biodiversity and quality as a central component in water management, with the emphasis changing from multiple-use management to environmentally sustainable management. The Ministries of Health and the Environment produce water quality guidelines and standards, with the former responsible for monitoring drinking water supplies. The Sustainable Land Management Strategy, adopted by the Government in 1996 has concentrated on agricultural impacts on water quality. The allocation of water and groundwater management systems is the current area of government concern. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations, 2015 Inland water quality The Pupu Springs on the South Island have been described as possibly the clearest freshwater in the world. Their vertical clarity has been surpassed only at a few sites in Antarctic sea waters. Good Fair/Poor Bad 40% 40% 20%

US$14,872 US$21,740 8% 26% 66%

3.8 4.2 86% 87% 28%

10-40% of New Zealand’s lakes suffer from some degree of eutrophication. More than 90% of the eutrophic lakes are in the North Island and these are usually linked to agricultural run-offs. Water provision There are 1,638 community drinking water supplies, serving 85% of the population. Of these, 7% (serving 54% of the population) are considered safe, while a further 2% (serving 5% of the population) are of borderline safety. However, 19% (serving 18% of the population) have an unsatisfactorily high risk of contamination. The remaining 71% of water supplies (serving 8% of the population) have not been graded because they are in communities of less than 500 people. Approximately 15% of the population are not connected to community supplies. Until the mid 1990s, demand for water was increasing steadily throughout New Zealand. From 1970 to 1990 the amount used by people in Wellington and Auckland increased by 25% and 32% respectively. Since the Auckland water crisis of 1993, and the adoption of water conservation strategies, Auckland’s water use has reverted to early 1980s levels or around 300Lper day, 21% down on the 1988 figure of 380L per day. Urban Data Served by piped water Usage (L/day) Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Development of sewerage services In 1950, New Zealand had five sewage treatment plants. By 1997 there were 220, with 80% of households connected to them. Surveys in 1976 and 1981 showed that just over 60% of the population were connected to sewerage treatment plants. Around 17% of the population had their sewage discharged untreated, mostly into the sea, and around 20% were not connected to a sewerage system at all, but relied on septic tanks. In the intervening decade, the percentage connected to treatment plants is believed to have risen to about 80%, while those discharging untreated sewage are less than 5%. Some 15–20% of people probably still use septic tanks.
170

99% 350 90% 80%

Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005

A 1991 survey of local authorities serving populations greater than 20. suspended solids by 86% and faecal coliforms by 98%. Nitrogen and phosphate removal is generally poor. Treatment Tertiary Secondary Primary % of systems 9% 50% 41% Two thirds of treatment plants serve communities with populations of less than 20.000 United Water RWE (Germany)/VE (France) 25.000 105.000 examined data on 74 sewerage systems which serve 2.0km³ 46% 10% 44% Sewage treatment and effluent discharge A 1992 survey of 17 of t e larger sewage treatment works found that BOD loading was reduced by 91% on h average.000. any further privatisations will be linked to sewerage expansion and upgrading schemes.000 300. but the Government has stated that it is currently against privatising services for a city as a whole.000 Status Partial privatisation of sewerage 171 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . reflecting the lack of tertiary treatment. It is likely that in the medium term.102.403. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita MAJOR CITIES City Auckland Privatisation New Zealand has to date adopted a somewhat ad hoc approach to privatisation. In 1976 and 1981.859m 3 2.000 105. harbours or the sea. AWG (UK) 0 300. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Pakapura District Water and sewerage concession United Water Ruapehu Water and sewerage BOT United Water Thames -Coromandel Water and sewerage BOT United Water Wellington Sewage treatment DBO AWI Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total AWI (NZ) Ltd.0km³ 88. There is a broad shift in planning for the construction of more secondary and tertiary facilities so as to direct effluents away from river and coastal disposal to recycling. Two project-related contracts have been awarded.000-20. 60% of the population had their sewage discharged into estuaries.0km³ 53. Type of discharge Population Sea discharge Estuary discharge River/lake discharge Recycling 0ver 20.NEW ZEALAND PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1991) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) 327.000 198.000 2015 1.000 5% 3% 64% 28% Recycling sewage (discharge to land) typically only takes place where there is tertiary treatment or at small facilities.804m 3 2000 1.000 25% 25% 37% 14% 5.5million people.

4 per month. 189.000 172 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Water Supply and Sanitation Assessment.000 over the next five years. This includes the privatisation of the national water company. 162.000 being served via septic tanks and 482. SNE.5 million in service extension and installing water fountains while the World Bank is leading a group of backers for a €35 million infrastructure rehabilitation programme.6million people) is the initial target area.000 people are served through household water connections. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details ) Company Parent company Population served (country) Water Sewerage VE VE (France) 600. Twenty-eight private operators and 50 Water Users Associations have been trained so far.000 via water vendors. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Major Cities 10 year renewable lease VE In Niamey. 48% of the population has access to safe water. In January 2001 Veolia Environnement (VE) was awarded a 10 year renewable lease contract for water services to Niger.NIGER PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS NIGER In 2001. Niamey (0.6 million as part of its Poverty Reduction and Growth Facility (PRGF) to commercialise various utility activities. Currently. There is no piped sewerage. The first aim is to increase the number of connections from 58.000 through public standpipes and 202. there is no formal urban sewerage network and most water provision is at the street pump level. Total 600. From 2004. Water vending and sanitation are carried out on an informal basis. the World Bank lent Niger US$18. 50 small town water supply schemes are to be rehabilitated and local private operators will take over their maintenance by 2005. with concerns about its potability. The average charge for household water connections is US$1.000 0 Source: (The first paragraph) WHO (2000). with formal water and sewerage provision in urban areas officially covering 70% and 79% of the population respectively. with other addressable markets to be covered later. However. VE has 51% of the equity and will spend €5.000 via latrines. 28.

and Bauchi. the country’s size. The Ministry of Water Resources intends to increase water supply coverage from the current 40% to 60% by the end of 2003.000. Sanitation systems for Nigerian cities are inadequate. it is also a country characterised by political instability and ethnic and religious conflict. using an average 70L of water per capita per day. while in the state capital. all of which nominally receives treatment. There is no sewerage or sewage treatment in Ibadan (population 1. The government aims to bear 50% of rural water supply and 30% of all urban water supply projects initiated by states from 2004. with marginal rates for water in order to allow the corporations to break even. with direct finance from the Government. the annual cost of environmental degradation in Nigeria exceeds US$5 billion. In reality. Despite the fact that water sanitation is a high priority for health and quality reasons. 30% is connected to mains water. where 68% of households are connected to piped water. The government seeks to improve this to 60% by 2010. 68% of households had access to piped water in Lagos (10. The World Bank approved a US$120 million loan in 2004 to encourage the reform of urban water management. 2% of the city’s population is connected to sewerage. A Government/World Bank pilot project on small towns water schemes had started in the states of Kogi. Akwa Ibom. Officially 84% of the country’s urban population in 1996 had both access to safe water supplies and adequate sanitation. Most industries thus dis charge untreated effluent into adjacent water 173 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 out of 50.0 161. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations.5% of GDP) on environmental protection and resource programmes. 30. A survey in 1999 found bacterial levels in 90% of tap water samples taken in Lagos to be above WHO limits.2 million m 3 per day and restoring access to 10million people. Katsina and Niger states. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment 84% 84% 2% Good water resources. sewerage problems 85% of Nigeria is regarded as having good water resources and storage capacity because of the six month rainy season. 2015 US$328 US$860 39% 33% 28% 120. The country’s problem areas are in the north.48million in 1995).000 customers are connected. Akwa Ibom Corporation (Akwa Ibom state) has been turned into a limited liability company as part of a US$73 million loan from the African Development Bank designed to encourage the commercialisation and reform of utility services in Nigeria. oil revenues and burgeoning urban population cannot be ignored. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Service coverage and delivery In 1993. water was provided free of charge. while three more schemes are planned in Ebonyi.NIGERIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS NIGERIA Nigeria is one of the most challenging emerging international water service markets. although until recently profits were not allowed.29million people in 1995). At the same time. Of that state's population. increasing water supply capacity by 1. the Government has been unable to allocate funds in this area. using an average 70L of water per capita per day. This was taken as evidence for the readiness of people to buy bottled ‘pure’ water and thus to pay for potable water supplies.7 46% 56% 15% Water provision is being commercialised Until recently. In urban areas 180 water schemes have now been completed. close to the Sahara. 50% of urban Nigerians (20% in unofficial urban areas) and 35% of rural Nigerians had access to potable water in 2003 and the urban figure may be 30% overall due to poor maintenance. The Akwa Ibom Corporation’s remit is limited to supplying water to urban areas with a population in excess of 5. According to the World Bank. Some 90% of industry in Nigeria does not have pollution control equipment of any sort. Since the mid 1990s there has been a gradual move towards partial commercialisation. Along with concerns about corruption. The Federal Government of Nigeria spends US$300-US$500 million a year (1% to 1.

point out that while enhanced service delivery and extension will come about through PSP. A US$256 million loan financed rehabilitation project ran from 1991 to 1998. Capital spending requirements point to US$1. Private sector participation is being considered if there are no increases in tariffs. Adelegan & Adelegan (see sources. Industrial effluents pass through the facility untreated and discharge into the surface water.5 billion for the state’s water systems through PSP with Lagos and the Nigerian Environmental Protection Agency (NEPA) and then the six state water boards. Currently. Enugu. The World Bank has allocated US$245 million in funding for capacity building in these states. During 1999-2000. The aim is to attract investment of up to US$1.000 809. In March 1999. Where waste treatment plants exist.000 8. Guinness Nigeria has awarded a €3.000 2015 2. VE.0km³ 1.549.815m 3 4.2 billion being needed during the first 15 years of a contract and US$2. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1992) Domestic (1992) Industrial (1992) Agriculture (1992) Industrial effluent problems A central WWTP for industrial effluent exists in the oldest industrial estate in the country at Ikeja in Lagos. However. Established since the early 1970s. In 1991. with the Federal Government expecting state governments to implement their own development plans.000 174 221. it was found that Nigeria’s water systems were working at 40% of their installed capacity. Challenges include the difficulty of knowing how many people in fact live within the city. even though budget allocations are controlled at the central level. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Privatisation in prospect Until recently. In the past. seven states are currently suitable for PSP: Ogun. this plant has been inoperative since the mid 1980s. Thames (RWE) and Severn Trent have prequalified for the Lagos State Water Corporation privatisation process. During 2002-03.000 1. The main area of concern is how sewerage services can be commercialised. Gombe.2 billion (€15.0km³ 31% 15% 54% 87.966. declining financial resources are making this less feasible.NIGERIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS courses either directly or through sewers.5 billion over 25 years.000 15. Suez. in reality these facilities do not exist. Other cities such as Lagos use latrines and cesspits. the only sewerage system is in the new Federal capital Abuja. installation. which will generate US$2 billion in revenues over 25 years. Before this can go ahead.8 million contract to Biwater (Pty) Ltd for the design.9 million) in various parts of the state. the capacities are usually inadequate or the plants have broken down due to poor maintenance or lack of spare parts. this will consist of US$5 million in emergency funding. Plateau.0km³ 714 m Status Privatisation under consideration Privatisation under consideration Privatisation under consideration Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Although the guidelines and standards for industrial pollution control specify the establishment of central waste treatment facilities. the Nigerian Government indicated that water utilities were going to be included in the country’s privatisation plans. Rivers. In each case. the legal framework to permit concession awards needs to be put into place. LSWC has undertaken the construction of 10 micro-waterworks costing NGN2. According to the World Bank. and the rate and extent of deterioration is accelerating. followed by US$30 million in infrastructure development funding linked to a formal PPP process. Kano and Kaduna. and commissioning of an effluent treatment plant at the Ogba Brewery in Lagos. along with the profiling of spending and the relationship between Lagos and the Lagos State Water Corporation (LSWC).665. the IFC examined privatisation options for the Lagos state government. Lack of financial resources has stalled the rehabilitation and expansion of the plant. The delegation of responsibilities between the state and federal governments remains a problem. supply.356. Work started in October 2003 and will be completed in December 2004. and it will be a high risk market for private sector investors. MAJOR CITIES City Ibadan Lagos Ogbomosho 2000 1. sewerage and sewage treatment was not a part of the water corporations’ remit. below).542. working on over 250 individual water systems. The shortfall of this approach led to the National Water Rehabilitation Project. it has been the standard in Nigeria to wait for a capital infusion through foreign aid or a Federal Government to rehabilitate or replace water and sewerage systems instead of maintaining the infras tructure.

The state is experiencing 3% pa population growth. In 2002. 175 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .J. Sources: A Strategy for Restoring Urban Infrastructure and Services in Nigeria (1994). the KSWB has a good record.US$38 million for rehabilitation.7million with cities of Kaduna (1.000). 2nd April 1997. responsible for urban water supply. the first for a state water board but little progress has been made. under the State Ministry of Water Resources. There are many challenges: low income levels. Adelegan O. with many below the poverty line (US$1 per day). Assets have been vested in KSWB but the Ministry of Water Resources acts as a custodian to these. Water Bulletin. while service levels are bad and thus the willingness to pay is low. 27th Wedc Conference. with Nigerian collaboration. resistance to PSP is expected due to the threat of tariff increases and lay offs. (2001). and has a target for 100% service coverage by 2025. UK. & Adelegan J.NIGERIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Case study: Kaduna State Water Board The state of Kaduna has a population of 2. but there remains much room for progress. Wedc. Capital expenditure of US$257 million is needed .A. Investment appraisal of the privatisation of water supply in Nigeria. Document prepared by the World Bank. the rest for expansion. Loughborough. PSP was planned for 2002-03. KSWB charges US$4.6 per month for households and 50% of bills are collected. As a result. In addition. with a system coverage of 46% and unaccounted water at 38%. The Government aims to use a lease contract as a stepping stone towards concessions in the longer term.5million) and Zaria (800. Currently the Kaduna State Water Board (KSWB) is a Parastatal. households accounted for 76% of consumption and 21% of revenues. In the regional context.

Domestic consumption was 260L per capita per day. It now appears that privatisation opportunities will appear on a one-off basis.0% 46.0% 1999 51.0% 13.0 billion for sewerage. The average purification efficiency of municipal treatment plants was 72% and the rate for the entire country has been around 70-72% since the 1990s.0% US$41.5 4.0% 21.3% of available water. it was an issue of finding the right privatisation model and seeking to meet Norway’s specific concerns over water and wastewater utility management. NKr0. The capacity for wastewater treatment is about 5. 65% of water is treated before being used as drinking water.0 billion for treating industrial discharges.5 billion for sludge handling and NKr2. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. 67% of urban sewerage is treated. Urban data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Sewerage and sewage treatment Long term spending plans for upgrading Norway’s sewerage network are as follows: NKr10.0% 20.NORWAY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS NORWAY After years of delays and political infighting. For water purification.4million PE. The proportion of Norway’s population connected to sewerage services increased from 34% in 1980 to 77% in 1990. usually in relation to the construction of a new facility.576 tonnes of phosphorus.0% 1.600 2% 31% 67% 4. Around 80% of the population of Norway lives in areas with municipal sewage systems. At present.0% 1. two concession contracts have emerged in Norway. The average household paid US$200 pa for water and US$300 pa for sewerage services in 2000. some 64% of the estimated total intake at municipal sewage treatment plants and separate treatment facilities in sparsely populated areas. Currently.0% 7.7 78% 86% 0% 80% 57% 57% Tertiary treatment Secondary treatment Primary treatment Sewerage only Not connected Norway has built a number of sewage treatment plants with secondary treatment in recent years.0% 1990 43.974 US$36. 176 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . 2015 Water provision A national programme for improving water supply was launched in 1995 with the goal of securing satisfactory and safe water from all waterworks supplying more than 100 people. The target is to increase this percentage to 100%. 87% of supplies are drawn from surface water. municipal sewage treatment plants released an estimated total of 563 tonnes of phosphorus.0% 23.0% 1. and secondary treatment is planned for all plants serving more than 2000 people. In 1996. Norway’s sewage treatment facilities removed 1. In 1994. Sewerage and sewage treatment 1980 26. The water and sewerage sector has traditionally been seen as parts of the municipalities. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Water and sewerage services Norway has an abundance of water and supply is adequate for domestic.0% 1.0% 13. agricultural and industrial uses. In 1997.0% 20. 500 new drinking water disinfection plants and 500 additional plants for colour removal are needed.0% 15.0% 20. Water is generally regarded as a free resource.0% 1995 51. In both cases.0% 20. Political change is starting to alter this picture. some 85% of the population.0% 7. withdrawals of ground and surface waters were 0. There is no effective pricing for water abstraction by agriculture and industry.

000 people in Oslo in 1999.0km³ 21. a concession was awarded to a consortium headed by Northumbrian Lyonnaise International as a JV with the municipality. In 1999.000 2000 779.0km³ 31% 15% 54% 96.000 0 MAJOR CITIES Population Oslo Total 250.0km³ 88.NORWAY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (date) Domestic Industrial Agriculture Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1985) Domestic Industrial Agriculture Private sector players 384. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Baerum JV water provision contract Baerum Vann Oslo Sewage treatment concession AWI Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage AWI AWG (UK) 0 250.923m 3 0. The municipality is seeking to abolish metering and bring in fixed charges.000 Baerum Vann Suez (France) 50. Anglian Water International (AWI) was granted an option for an operations concession for a sewage treatment works serving 250.673m 3 2. to sell this stake to a JV between Suez and Kværner (Norway) fell through due to political resistance to the JV.000 50.1km³ 27% 73% 0% In 1995. the municipality of Bærum (located to the west of Oslo) turned its water and sewerage company into a limited company. along with selling a 49% stake to an outside investor.000 Status Sewage treatment concession 177 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . The concession was awarded in October 2000.000 2015 836. The original plan.

Groundwater Annual availability (2000) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) 1. This approach has resulted in two stalled privatisations to date and the principal of third time lucky is seen as being paramount. with its preferred level of subsidies.OMAN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS OMAN Oman was the first of the Gulf states to consider PSP beyond co-generation projects. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture (1990) GDP in Industry (1990) GDP in Services (1990) US$8. It is intended that the Salalkah Sanitary Drainage and Services Company will be listed on the Muscat Stock Exchange. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment 96% 98% 0% To date. The plant will serve 134. The Government has ruled that BOOT contracts will operate via a locally based joint stock company. [4] Muscat WWTW BOOT and [5] Barqa power and desalination BOOT.340 3% 58% 39% Some 84% of Oman’s population live in urban areas.000 people.2km³ 5% 2% 94% A new attempt at privatising the Muscat WWTE was underway in late 2004. The Muscat wastewater treatment plant project has resulted in a 30 year BOOT concession being awarded to Cascal after SECTO withdrew in 2001.9 77% 83% 0% Water BOOT projects are intended to sell water to the Government.8 3. Five projects were outlined by the Ministry of Development in 1994.0km³ 376m 3 0. along with the implementation of an independent regulator. Population 2002(million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. The Ministry of Electricity and Water was corporatised by 2001. 178 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . This in time is designed to open the way for privatising Muscat’s sewerage services. the implementation of these plans has not been a smooth one. which have started to emerge as fully fledged BOOT concepts.9km³ 388m 3 1.002 US$13. Oman has been the pioneer in utility privatisation in the Gulf since 1994.4km³ The Government is also currently seeking to award a two year O&M contract for the Salalah wastewater treatment facility. It is proposed that 40% of each BOOT’s equity is to be floated on the Oman Stock Exchange in Muscat: [1] Salalah WWTW BOOT [2] Al Massarat groundwater distribution BOOT. It is a part of Oman’s plans to raise sewage treatment top 80% of the population by 2013 and to 90% by 2017. just 14% of Muscat’s sewage was treated in 2003. However. Freshwater Annual availability (2000) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) 0. with 91% of the urban population officially receiving safe water supplies and 75% having adequate sewerage services in 1991. leading to a 20 year operations contract. which will in turn sell this water on to customers. [3 Al Ashkara desalination BOOT. 2015 2. Cascal in turn pulled out and the process is being restarted.

In a sense. since it has allowed the Government to start addressing international concerns regarding corruption problems. Some degree of private sector participation was called for. This is demonstrated by the fact that the Government’s 1988-2003 Perspective Plan did not include environmental or public health concerns. One site at Kalabagh is under consideration. but no further details were given. The UN said 56% of the population had access to safe drinking water and 24% had adequate sanitation. Pakistan is likely to face political and economic isolation until a timetable for a return to civilian rule is put into place.5 34% 40% 25% 53% 172 77% 5% Environment and public health issues In Baluchistan province. but it does not include members of the provincial environmental protection agencies and thus has little concrete effect with regards t influencing Government o policy. The Pakistan government has approved six water development projects worth US$1.5 billion) in September 2003. the United Nations (UN) recommended that water needs to be priced to reflect its cost in Pakistan and to end agricultural cross subsidies. The plan has been found to be poorly defined and probably over-ambitious in terms of affordability and its ease of enforcement and monitoring. In 1998. the IMF is concerned about the financial difficulties of the Water and Power Development Authority. A National Conservation Strategy was set out in 1992. In Sindh province. In 2003.940 27% 23% 50% 149. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Privatisation and politics The Government was elected in February 1997 on a mandate for encouraging the privatisation of various utilities and industries under the auspices of the Privatisation Commission. IMF and ADB lending to Pakistan was resumed in January 1999. General Musharraf called for Pakistan’s four provinces to develop an integrated plan for using water from the Indus. The 1983 Environmental Protection Ordinance is currently under revision. The EPA in particular is lacking suitable monitoring and enforcement powers. However. and to agree on the construction of at least two major dams on the river.7 billion (€1.PAKISTAN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS PAKISTAN Pakistan slow return to political normality after the fall-out from various incidents between 1998 and 2002 has left reforming water and wastewater services somewhat in the lurch. Pakistan is understood to be preparing to resume its full scale privatisation programme. the groundwater table is decreasing by 2-3 metres every year as a result of a prolonged 3 year drought and wasteful irrigation methods. Population Total (2002. million) Total (2015. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) The environment and politics In September 2003. This may have significant repercussions with India. but no details have emerged about resuming the privatisation of Karachi’s water and sewerage services. which also uses the river. this is a respite. The federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is seen as weak in comparison with Government departments that are seen to oppose environmental and public health related measures. the North West Frontier and Punjab. an Environmental Protection Council was set up. the Council of Karachi's Industrial Associations 179 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . with a ten year investment plan.9 240. The privatisation programme was temporarily halted with the suspension of foreign aid and finance to Pakistan in May 1998 following the resumption of nuclear testing by Pakistan and India. while a feasibility study for a reservoir at Bhasha in the northern region would be completed in 2004. where it believes that the Government needs to finalise restructuring plans and restart its privatisation programme once economic conditions allow. Urban Services Safe drinking water L per cap per day Access to sewerage % Sewage treated US$408 US$1. which flows through Sindh.

000 2015 16.000 2.000 1. Hyder. Biwater International (Biwater).263. 45% of the rural population has access to clean water. International Water (United Utilities/Bechtel).452.066. m 3) Withdrawals (1980. Thames Water.000 1.526.500.721.891. there have been recent calls by a number of Islamic scholars to recognise that the provision of water carries a monetary value.000 Status Privatisation proposals stalled Privatisation under consideration N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 180 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . MAJOR CITIES Population Karachi Lahore Faisalabad Peshawar Gujranwala Rawalpindi Multan Hyderabad Islamabad 55. To date. km3) Per capita (1998.221. Groundwater Total recharge (1998.142.000 8.PAKISTAN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS (CKIA) estimates that industries are losing production worth Rs100 million (€2. In 1992 there were three sewage treatment works in Pakistan.000 1.000 1. Data on environmental degradation is thin.197. two of which were understood to be operating intermittently.000 1. but this needs to be set against the condition of Pakistan’s service infrastructure and the need to upgrade it. Companies seen Seven firms pre-qualified in February 1998 to submit tenders for the proposed privatisation of the Karachi Water and Sewerage Company: Anglian Water International.000 1. Biwater has been awarded one US$14 million construction contract to increase and improve potable water supplies to Karachi. The World Bank believes that industrial effluent pollution loading increased 6-10 times between 1963 and 1988 at a time when GDP increased threefold.6 2% 2% 97% Pakistan is moving towards market based approaches for abating water pollution and optimising water availability.000 2.000 1. 51% of the urban population and 6% of the rural population had access to sanitation. Freshwater Total (1998.000 1. In 1987.325. km3) For domestic use (1991) For industry (1991) For agriculture (1991) 248. including two water treatment works and a pumping station serving 30% of the city.678 155.750. Générale des Eaux (VE) and Suez. km³) For agriculture (1980) Privatising water services The move towards a legal system based upon Shariah Law poses certain problems with regards to commercialising water provision.000 2.068. the only formal privatisation proposals have been for Karachi’s water and sewerage services. 38% of the population as a whole has access to piped water.854.00 89% 2000 10.0 1. Groundwater is free while water provision to industry and agriculture is subsidised.521.000 1. m 3) Withdrawals (1991. In 2002.1 million) daily due to the shortage of water.00 372 45.000 3.032. In 2002.223.000 5. but there are considerable reservations about its quality.000 2.000. 60% of infant mortality is understood to occur because of waterborne diseases. km³) Per capita (1998. In addition.

The first phase will involve designing pumping stations.000million pesetas will be invested during the total concession period. The total loan package is for US$65 million. west of the Panama Canal.REPUBLIC OF PANAMA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS REPUBLIC OF PANAMA In 1999. The entire project involves 164km of sewerage pipes.000 people in Panama City. Aguas de Panama began operating the US$25 million Laguna Alta bulk drinking water plant in 2003.000 181 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . little subsequent progress has been made. serving an area of around 500. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Laguna Alta 30 year water BOOT Biwater Panama currently plans to clean up the Panama Bay along with developing Panama City’s sewer network. The government currently can afford to contribute US$18 million. but this is the first PSP contract in the country. In all.7million inhabitants for the next 30 years. and 20million gallons per day for the remaining 27 years. As a counterpart. a WWTW and separate drainage networks for rainwater and sewage and will focus on the older parts of Panama City. with local funding of US$20 million. Arraijan and Capira areas. Although ten companies and consortia expressed interest in the concession and six qualified for the formal bidding process in 2000.600L per second. along with other urban areas in the republic may be privatised in due course. Panama city’s water and sewerage services. with 51% of its stock to be held by a strategic private investor for water provision and sewerage. The estimated cost of the five year project is US$380 million. Biwater has built eight water treatment plants in Panama since 1982. around 21. Laguna Alta will supply a minimum of 15million gallons per day for the first three years of the 30 year concession.000 inhabitants.000million pesetas at the current rate of exchange and more than 300. each with a capacity of 1.000million pesetas during the entire concession). 24 sewage pumping stations. The Inter-American Development Bank is providing a US$45 million loan for preparing the restructuring of Panama’s water and sewerage services. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Biwater Cascal (UK/Netherlands) 350. Biwater was awarded a 30 year BOOT concession for bulk water provision to Laguna Alta for 350.000 0 Total 350. 24km of sewerage mains and three new WWTWs. the annual billing foreseen for the services rendered is approximately US$80 million (almost 12. This will require an investment of US$50 million in the first five years and another US$90 million over the following 25 years. The 20million gallons per day facility will serve the residents of the La Chorrera. This concession will involve serving a population of over 2. Instituto de Acueductos y Alcantarillados Nacionales (IDAAN) will come within private sector financing and management.

is the sole provider of piped water and sewerage services in all towns and cities with populations of 4.PARAGUAY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS PARAGUAY Empresa de Servicios Sanitarios del Paraguay (Essap). The World Bank approved a US$40 million loan in 1997 for the former and the Inter-American Development Bank approved a US$12 million loan in 2001 for the latter. the government has been preparing for the privatisation of Essap. A national regulatory agency was set up to oversee Essap and to see how medium sized firms can support its activities through semi-independent sewerage projects. owned by the Paraguayan Government. Since 1997. sources say. In Asuncion.7million fourth rural water supply and sanitation project and its US$17.1 million small-communities drinking water supply and sanitation program. Essap is under consideration for PSP. It would need to pay off the company’s US$500 million in debts and to mobilise finances for its belated service expansion. the connection rates are 86% for water and 68% for sewerage. a project supported by the World Bank since 1999. As a result. The project is a part of Senasa's US$55.000 people or more. is planning to spend US$26 million supplying 450 communities with drinking water. 42% of the population in these towns is connected to piped water. most of water provision is in fact carried out by private vendors. Senas a. Paraguay's national environmental sanitation service. and 35% to the sewerage network. 182 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Work recently began and drinking water is expected to reach residents in July.

Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Service provision In 1990. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. including 51% with flush lavatories. 2015 Regulatory background Peru has adopted legislation that supports b oth the private sector and decentralisation.0km³ 1. which provides water and sewerage services to 5million out of Lima’s 6.0km³ 7% 7% 86% Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic Industrial Agriculture Services in the main cities 1991 Lima Arequipa Trujillo Piped water 94% 91% 78% Indoors 85% 67% 69% 183 US$2. The Water Law of 1995 also allows for the marketing of water rights. the President of Peru decided to abandon the proposal in the shorter term. which seeks to minimise the Government’s role in public interest elements and to rely on regulation and market forces. partly financed by the World Bank. along with attempts to outlaw private investment in the entity. due to low rainfall in their regions.314 households in urban areas found 75% had piped water and 58% had flush lavatories. 70% of connections have 10 hours of daily supply. A 30 year concession contract was drawn up. with investment demands being US$600 million in the first five years and US$1 billion in the first ten.PERU PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS PERU While Lima remains in political limbo. A survey of 12. Under this legal framework. Peru’s Pacific Coast watersheds have been organised into five autonomous entities (Privatisation Plans table below). Urban data Served by piped water Access to sewerage Sedepal The privatisation of Sedepal. although the timing of any further privatisations remains uncertain. various moves towards a partial flotaton of Sedapal were made. The coastal cities of Peru (notably Lima) are characterised by increasingly severe water shortages. It appears that the Government continues to aim for a partial privatisation in the medium term. entrusting private users with the responsibility for managing water use. Since it was first formally mooted between 1995 and 1996.67million people was intended to be the follow-up to Aguas Argentarias. As a result. Peru is notable for being the first international market to award a concession contract to an Italian water company. the action of the state will be redirected from complete responsibility for water allocation and the construction and operation of water development projects to a role of mainly support and control.8 32.000 water meters were installed.113 US$5. The water pressure in 70% of the districts does not meet the recommended standards.641m 3 19. it has been bitterly opposed by anti-privatisation elements. In preparation.0 74% 78% 30% 75% 58% 40. and 20% have more than 20 hours. The law has been influenced by the 1981 Chilean water law. The Government has instead decided on a US$400 million investment programme.010 7% 38% 55% 26. a series of regional contract awards have been taking place. It is unlikely to be the last. During 2004. 406. In cities. in 1997. 49% of urban households were supplied with piped water (38% with inside taps) and 60% with sanitation.

their bills are lower.30 per m3 against up to US$3.000 2015 9.000 connections or 1.000 184 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 connections.000 Status N/A After submitting the only bid.000ha for agricultural production.081. Odebrecht will construct the first stage of the dam as well as the tunnel which will transport water to the irrigated areas. The Peruvian government is providing roughly half of the money for the US$140 million project.00 per m3 for water supplied by vendors.000 68% 32% 40.000 141.000ha in the Olmos area.2 kkm³ 25% 15% 60% These privatisation proposals to some extent represent a wish list.443. Odebrecht’s concession only covers the first stage of the project. or some 1million people. piped water in Lima cost US$0.000 Sanitation 87% 70% 74% Flush 83% 66% 56% 303. The intention is to announce the concession holders by the end of 2004.0km³ 12. since the privatisation of Sedapal remains dependent on political circumstances.000 6% Urban population Water coverage Sewage coverage Water connections Metered connections Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage ACEA ACEA (Italy) 800. In May 2002. Brazilian construction firm Odebrecht has won the 20-year concession to develop the Olmos water supply and hydroelectric project in Lambayeque department. This will cover water and sewerage services for 190.000 17% Emfapa Tumbes 180. Eps Grau 800. and Odebrecht will supply the rest. but once complete.219m 3 2. the project aims to supply 2. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Cono Norte 27 year water concession ACEA consortium A 30 year concession covering Piura and Tumbes in northern Peru is being developed.PERU PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS In 1998. Sewerage in the main cities 1991 Lima Arequipa Trujillo Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1973) Domestic Industrial Agriculture Privatisation plans Five privatisations have been in preparation since 2000: Company SEDAPAL SEDAPAR EPS GRAU SEDALIB EPSEL Connections 1. Investment requirements for Eps Grau (Piura) and Emfapa T umbes (Tumbes) are estimated at US$221 million and US$50 million respectively. while piped water customers use on average six times as much water. As a result. to be able to generate 600 megawatts of electricity and to irrigate more than 150.25million people. MAJOR CITIES City Lima 2000 7.050 million m 3 pa of water.000 79% 64% 150.000 102. The project will take water from the Huancabamba River to generate electricity and help irrigate 30.000 96.000 147.000 0 Total 800.388. The eventual coverage for these two concessions would be for 250. there were violent demonstrations in Arequipa when the Government went ahead with its auction of the power utilities Egasa and Egesur.15-0.

sanitation accounted for 3% of water related spending.PHILIPPINES PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS PHILIPPINES The privatisation of Manila’s water and sewerage services has continued to attract attention.0% 2000 0. 1994 1.000 5. Spending of P158 billion will be required if 50% of the urban population is to have adequate sanitation services by 2015. 78. Sewerage remains a relatively low priority outside Manila. Cebu (610. In 1987.0% 1980 45% 56% 1987 63% 69% 1993 81% 72% US$975 US$4.700 1.2% 87. Access to services Access to safe water Access to sanitation Sewerage services The only major sewers cover 8% of the metro Manila area. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Water services In 1980. 52% of BOD discharged was via domestic sewage.6 96.000). million) Total (2015. The Act superseded previous legislation and the Philippine Water Code (1979). Population Total (2002.0% 78.000 out of each 100. apart from industrial discharges that directly impinge upon drinking water quality. whereby private customers were given the highest priority. Approximately 31% of illnesses monitored for a five-year period were also caused by waterborne sources. 56% of the population had access to sewerage or septic tanks.000). 45% of the population had access to the water supply. Sanitation coverage is currently 65% rural. 86% in Metro Manila. 1.0% 100. Cauayan (340.010. These have demonstrated the sheer impact foreign exchange exposure can have. Small sewerage systems exist in Davao (central area population 850. (all discharged untreated).161 % coverage 8% 2% 1% 3% 1% 2% 1% During the late 1990s and early 2000s. with 31% via piped water. 8041) was passed in June 1995.000 1. 85% urban. Zamboanga (442.3 60% 69% 30% 185 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . By 1987.020 4. Isabela Davao City People served 1. 15% unsafe sanitation and 16% none. one of the highest known rates in the world. 55% in other urban areas and 62% in rural areas.170 18% 30% 52% Diarrhoea morbidity % access to sanitation % access to safe water Sewage treatment coverage City Metro Manila Bagulo City Zamboanga City Vigan City Bacolod City Cauayan. Just over 36% of the country's river systems were classified as sources of public water supply in 2003 and up to 58% of groundwater sampled is bacteriologically contaminated and needs treatment.000). especially due to the differing fortunes of the two concession companies.000) and Isabela (district population 1.000 people die each year because of diarrhoea. In 1980.300 3. This recognised the Government’s past shortcomings in water provision and is aimed at improving both the extent and quality of water provision.4% 93. 63% had access to safe water. 69% had safe sanitation.08million). The term ‘safe’ with regards to drinking water is open to debate. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Privatisation and priorities The National Water Crisis Act (Republic Act No. with 48% from industrial sources.360 2. along with the need to secure a stable revenue base when upgrading services.

The contracts are to be run on a 25 year BOT basis. Benpres Holdings of the Philippines.0 2. 11% of the population were connected to sewerage services in 1990 and 16% (828. The privatisation of MWSS was arranged by the IFC to mobilise US$6 billion of investment for upgrading and expanding the water distribution system and in the longer term. This will run from 2002-05 and is fully open to foreigners.146. each taking over the existing assets.494 3. Benpres was awarded the first solicited bid outside Manila.000 in Makat) in 1993. Metro Manila is a conurbation in the true sense. Water losses of 65% in 1986 were cut to 58% in 1991 and 56% in 1992. was founded in 1972. MAJOR CITIES Population Metro Manila Davao 323.0 4. The DPWH is responsible for the major water and sewerage projects and also for rural services. The population of Manila is expected to double by 2025. 70% in the 1980s and 80% 1993/94.000 in central Manila and a further 56.000 1. Major cities have separate service entities. This was a P70 million 15 year DBO for the Laguna water system serving the town of Magdalena. The Philippines want ideas for technology transfer as well as straightforward projects. with each responsible for improving these and adding new assets. the former building on its role in the MWSS privatisation. km³) For domestic use (1980) For industry (1980) For agriculture (1980) Water companies noted Cascal.PHILIPPINES PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Privatisation has been spurred by the passing of the National Water Crisis Act and the realisation that previous plans have not begun to address public health concerns. to install a modern sewerage and sewage treatment infrastructure. A broadly based privatisation of urban sewerage and bulk water provision is now under way. The Government was less keen on privatising the actual water distribution system except in areas of greater shortages. m 3) Withdrawals (1980. 35). while small towns are managed via a collective organisation. Effluent Regulations 1982 (revised 1990 DENR Administrative Order No. Water coverage was 53% in the 1970s.5million people in four cities and 37 municipalities. The MWSS sewage system was built from 1904-11 and designed to cover 500. Urban Services Safe drinking water L per capita per day Access to sewerage % Sewage treated 91% 135 88% 1% Environmental management and laws The National Water Resources Council (NWRC) is a semi-autonomous entity under the Department of Public Works and Highways (DPWH). 40% of those within the area currently live below the World Bank’s definition of the poverty line. Freshwater Total (1998. VE and Suez are all active in the Philippines. Sewage goes to a long sea outfall. Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 186 .000 Status MWSS privatised Proposals under development City privatisation study: Manila’s MWSS The Metropolitan Water and Sewerage System (MSWW).4 8% 4% 86% 180.000 1. km³) Per capita (1998. The Metropolitan Water and Sewerage System (MWSS).579. The MWSS has been split into two zones. Some of this comes via water theft and illegal connections.9 0% 50% 50% 2000 9.000 2015 12. United Utilities. 34). as long as they are able to find ways to pay for the work needed.476 55. In August 1999. seeing themselves as a potential regional centre for the environmental services sector. serves Manila. The core items of legislation are: Water Usage and Classification (1978) with revised Water Quality Criteria (issued in 1990 DENR Administrative Order No. along with solid and hazardous waste management.000 people.365. George Kent Holdings (Malaysia) and Brown & Root (USA) have all been seeking contracts. The Philippines are keen to privatise bulk water supply and sewerage. The area covers 11. m 3) Withdrawals (1990. with the population growing at 3% each year. km³) Per capita (1998. km³ For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Groundwater Total recharge (1998.950. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) is responsible for implementing legislation and carries out environmental management work along with the Environmental Management Bureau (EMB).

400.97 US$/m 3 0.000 4.32 4.000 700.000 500.4 million m 3 of potable water 24 hours a day to Metro Manila and adjoining areas.000 Source: Philippines Environment Monitor 2003.PHILIPPINES PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS MWSS remains as a regulatory overseer for the concession holders for the life of the contracts. Cebu is the Philippines’ second largest city but suffers from a perennial water shortage. Cebu. Metro Cebu Water District currently supplies 275.33 0.300. The World Bank 187 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 370.400. The scheme would supply at least 0.000 370.000 0 18.23 million) water supply project in Carmen. Each adopted differing pricing patterns: Operator MWSS (in 1997) UU/Ayala (eastern) Suez/Benpres (western) Peso/m 3 8. In both cases. Then chief difference between the two concessions had been that the UU / Ayala concession enjoys a customer base underpinned by industrial and commercial customers who were in a position to ride out the challenges posed by the currency crisis of 1997-98.7 billion (US$67 million) Laguna Lake bulk water supply BOT project intended to supplement Metro Manila’s potable water supply. The project would supply an average of 50. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Clark EZ Development of industrial zone services CGE Utilities Forto Bonifacio Development of industrial zone services CGE Utilities Kailangan 15 year water services management Benguet Magdalena 15 year DBO for water services Bayan Water Manila (east) Privatisation of MWSS Manila Water Company Manila (west) Privatisation of MWSS Maynilad Water Services Subic Bay Development of services for new town Subic Water Project proposals Ayala Corporation has announced that it has submitted a BOT proposal for a P1.9 billion (US$34.000 Manila Water Co UU (UK) / Ayala (Philippines) 3.000 Maynilad Water Suez (France) / Benpres 4. The IFC set the following performance targets: Water distribution Coverage Water availability (Hours/day) Sewerage Coverage 1998 67% 1998 16 1998 3% 2001 85% 2006 24 2023 83% 2006 100% 2006 24 2023 83% The contract awards to Suez and United Utilities represent the largest water and sewerage privatisation in Asia to date.19 The subsequent performance of these two contracts is examined in detail in the company entries. in partnership with Stateland Inc.000 cu m of water daily to the Metro Cebu Water District from Luyang River in Carmen.000m 3 per day and the will increase water supply by 26% and address the unserved demand for water connections. It is fair to observe that the status of the Suez / Benpres contract remains a live issue and is moving towards a sustainable modus operandum. The government is preparing to issue tenders for the P3. it is evident that significant work has been made in terms of improving network efficiency and service coverage.09 0.78 2. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total Subic Water Biwater (UK) 370.000 CGE Utilities VE (France) 0 0 0 Bayan Water Services Benpres Holdings 18.300.000 0 27.000 Benguet Benguet (Philippines) 27.000 3.

estimates by the Government point to US$700 million pa being spent on water related work in Poland. Poland claims that it is currently spending €3 billion pa on environmental capital expenditure against an accession requirement of €40 billion. In 2003 the Government cut the levies that water suppliers pay for using water resources.9% 20.0% 2000 5% 35% 40% 20% US$4. a number of PSP awards have been made.6% of GNP). The compliance costs for water and wastewater upgrading and extending for EU accession has been variously estimated as between €20 and €40 billion in 1998.1% 1990 6. This is intended to water suppliers to reduce their prices. as accepted by the EU.7). Water abstraction and discharge fees covered approximately 18% of costs in 1992 and 15% in 1996. Environmental spending was US$2. The EU believes that these figures have been exaggerated. Some 5% of this is currently coming from foreign investment.1 billion in 1998.8% 30.042. There are 700 water utilities.894 US$10.3% 33.560 3% 31% 66% 38.84 per m 3. will be PZN 0.3% 35. million) Total (2015. with only 6% of the population in rural areas having access to sewage treatment.0% 27. Population Total (2002. From April 2003. Poland is seeking transition derogations up to 2016 because of the estimated cost of EU compliance. with a further €3 billion for waste management.8 billion in 1990.3% 27. The country is hoping to postpone various compliance targets. River water quality Class 1 2 3 4 Urban Services % Water L per capita per day % Sewerage % Sewage treated 1985 4. up from US$0. or water for domestic purposes. These call for suitable levels of service.8% 1995 2. Surveys using biological criteria point to up to 88% of rivers being of class 4 quality in 1990 and 96% in 1995. In 2000. Poland probably faces the most daunting environmental challenges of those countries currently seeking accession to the EU. provision of increasing treatment standards with time. with US$2. the average water price was US$0.6 billion required for sewage treatment works and US$4 billion for sewerage.9% 30. In 2000. financial incentives for the private sector and protection of consumer interests. Since 2003. The UWWTD is the main concern. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Laws and spending Polish water law has been revised to bring water and sewerage laws in line with EU standards by 2002.2 62% 64% 18% 94% 124 83% 79% 188 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .POLAND PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS POLAND Through a legacy of mis -management during the Soviet era. with 40% of this going to water (equivalent to 0.03 (US$0. Class 4 rivers are those which are biologically dead and whose water cannot be used for agriculture or industry. but derogations awarded offer limited respite. Water standards will cost a total of €18 billion.8% 37.6 38. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Pollution and problems Polish data is on the harsh side because the worst performing parameters are used as definitive. Tariffs are to be established by water companies and approved by the local community with yearly revisions and the prospect of differential charging. the levy per m³ of surface water taken to produce drinking water.8% 43. down from PZN 0. but the climate remains a febrile one. 300 of which serve urban areas. The official aim is to reach EU standards by 2010.

91. Gelsenwasser. including 66% in urban areas (up from 57% in 1992). In 1992.65 1.9% by sewerage systems. 42% of the population connected to the sewerage network had no treatment in 1980.000 rural households were connected to water supply systems. 643 of these towns had sewage treatment works. These services cover 98% and 97% of the urban population respectively compared with 80% and 74 % respectively for the rural population. 48% of the largest industrial sites had no effluent treatment facilities. Between 1990 and 1996. 590 of Poland’s 860 towns had sewage treatment works. The sewerage network is seen as being in poor condition. The city of Stettin was expected to start a prequalification process for the award of a water and sewerage concession by the end of 2000. SAUR Neptun Gdansk has increased the proportion of water that meets the Government’s water quality criteria from 8% in 1992 to 25% in 1997.31 In 1992. Effectively all aspects of the operation of water and sewerage services are in the hands of the local authorities.000 people unilaterally. The major French water companies have been helping to frame the privatisation process. The Government aims to have 100% water supply and sewerage coverage by 2010. water pollution. over 900. By 1996. 17% of all industrial discharges were untreated. VE. with 66% of industrial effluents subject to primary treatment only. The privatisation of Poznan’s PwiK was abandoned. Water companies noted SAUR is involved in the management of Gdansk’s water and sewerage facilities. SAUR’s experience in Gdansk may alleviate this. SAUR and Suez are bidding for the Poznan concession.2% of the Polish population was supplied with water from municipal systems and 87. It is up to each authority to decide if privatisation will take place. 105 primary and 538 secondary.278 12. by using the EU’s €75 million Instrument for Structural Policies Pre-Accession (IPSA) grant. The main development to date has been the planned flotation of Warsaw’s water and sewerage services since 2000. By 1995.1 13% 76% 11% 189 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . CH2M Hill (USA) has developed a plan for water provision for the city which it hopes to turn into a BOOT contract.85 1. there is some reluctance at municipal level. compared with 29% in 1992.1% of rural households. Sewage treatment covers 3.31 1. 25% of effluent generation is from rural areas and its lack of treatment means that it has a disproportionate impact. Freshwater Total (1998. In Krakow. UU. and 17% to secondary treatment.000. RWE Aqua. m 3) Withdrawals (1992. even though it was linked to a concession. 43% of the population had access to a sewage treatment works. In the last few years. An urban/rural divide In 1997. km³) Per capita (1998.4 1.39 1995 1. In November 1999 SAUR gained a €40 million 25 year water and wastewater management and renewal contract for Ruda Slaska. 5% of factories had plants with an inadequate treatment capacity.POLAND PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Development of urban water and sewerage infrastructure Treatment level Tertiary Secondary Primary None 1990 0% 36% 24% 40% 1995 4% 50% 14% 32% 1998 18% 48% 13% 21% 1999 24% 47% 8% 17% Effluent treatment and generation Billion m 3 pa Effluent generated Effluent treated 1990 2.25 1998 1. Atkins Water was commissioned by the Krakow Municipal Water and Sewerage Company (MPWiK) to undertake a range of efficiency studies with the potential of privatisation to mind. when the municipality decided that it could develop its services for 650. 465 to secondary standard and 125 to primary. km³) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Privatisation prospects The pace of privatisation is stepping up after a slow start. 49. While the Government remains committed to privatising water and sewerage services. resulting from sewage from rural areas is becoming an increasing problem. but remain directly under the control of the municipalities and the Government’s Environmental Council. Urban water and sewerage services such as the second Warsaw STW have been reconstructed as limited companies. which has a population of 170. In 2003.

053. 209-221.494.000 Total 135. km³) Per capita (1998.64million inhabitants.000 with a treatment capacity of 260. This project is at the study phase.000 300. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Silesia (two towns) 25 year water and sewerage BOT VE Dabrowa 25 year water and sewerage BOT RWE Biesko Biala Strategic partnership with municipality UUI Miskloc 20 year water and sewerage concession Pwik w Glogowie Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage RWE RWE (Germany) 135. 165.000 150.000 Krakow 859. washing machines and power showers). VE's OTV is involved in the design of a third STW for northern Warsaw.g.061.000 Gdansk 893.000m 3 per day.000 people at a cost of US$128. The second STW has a capacity of 112.325.000 150. J.547. e. ideally through an IPO. The rest of the effluent is directly discharged into the Vistula river. The city’s first STW has a treatment capacity of 240.000 UUI United Utilities (UK) 300. for treating a population equivalent to 850. Approximately 25% of the population is subject to water shortages.000 2. The Geographical Journal.000 VE Veolia Environnement (France) 70.000 people.5 million.000 Lodz 1. Poland: The Environment in Transition. serving 300.000-600. m 3) Withdrawals (1990.274.0 70% 30% 0% 2015 3. One sewage treatment work treats the effluents of 500.000 Status N/A Privatisation plans being drawn up N/A Management contract since 1995 BOT plans under consideration Central Warsaw has 1.000 City Study: Warsaw 36.000 892. (1999).000m 3 per day.000 300. partly due to a 113% increase in distribution losses between 1975 and 1991. at a time when consumption rose by 39% (reasons include.000 70.000 1.000 70.000 913.POLAND PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Groundwater resources Total recharge (1998. Degrémont was involved in the design and construction of the second Warsaw STW and the upgrading of the original STW in a project which is being partially funded by the EBRD. km³) For domestic use (1990) For industry (1990) For agriculture (1990) MAJOR CITIES Population 2000 Katowice 3.000 Glogowie Gelsenwasser (Germany) 150.000 135. The construction of this US$150 million facility is expected to be integrated into the Warsaw Water flotation procedure. customer affluence. 190 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000m 3 per day. The EBRD is encouraging Warsaw to float Miejskie Przedsiebiorstwo Wodociagow I Kananlizacji (MPWiK) in the shorter term.0 931 2. and more direct methods of private sector finance and involvement are under consideration. 98% receiving potable water and 95% connected to the sewerage network.000 Source: Warner.000 Warsaw 2.

PSP has already taken place in more cases than has been appreciated. Water quality and requirements Portugal remains an essentially rural economy and this is reflected by the country’s water and sewerage infrastructure. along with the Water Resources Planning Process covering the River Basin Plans and the National Water Resources Plan.Bad US$11. North of Lisbon (agricultural run-offs) and Algarve (salt water intrusion). along with 90% sewerage and wastewater treatment.280 4% 27% 69% 75% 25% There are groundwater problems in the Ave Basin and Aveiro/Estarreja (industrial wastes).Fair III/IV Poor .. even after the sale of Agbar’s Lusagua. mainly in the Algarve. Portugal rebuilt and retrofitted 35 STWs during 1998. However 41% of these plants are not working properly. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Regulation Portugal is developing a strategy for the integrated management of coastal areas and water resources. in anticipation of the phasing out EU funding.251 STWs in Portugal of which 278 provide primary treatment and 955 secondary treatment.PORTUGAL PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS PORTUGAL The future of the state held IPE Aguas de Portugal is currently under discussion. 3. Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 191 . The plan aims to increase wastewater treatment to 95% by 2005. The next stage is expected to take place by 2006. This strategy includes an inventory of water use and sources of water pollution.948 US$18. Access to piped water Region North Centre Lisbon & Vale do Tejo Alentejo Algarve Total Access to sewerage Region North Centre Lisbon & Vale do Tejo Alentejo Algarve Total 1990 36% 39% 79% 69% 76% 55% 1995 44% 52% 86% 83% 68% 63% 1997 51% 54% 86% 84% 81% 68% 1999 59% 71% 89% 85% 84% 75% 1990 65% 68% 92% 83% 82% 77% 1995 70% 84% 97% 89% 82% 84% 1997 71% 89% 98% 92% 88% 86% 1999 78% 95% 99% 94% 91% 90% The aim is to have 95% access to piped water by 2006. River water quality (1991) Ia/Ib/II Very Good . Sewerage and sewage treatment Year Tertiary Secondary Primary Sewerage only Not connected 1996 0% 25% 13% 17% 45% There are 1. Lisbon. and Madeira. A wastewater discharge licensing system has been established.8million people live in areas with water shortfalls. It is understood that despite occupying most of the market. The National Plan for Wastewater Treatment (Plano Nacional de Tratamento de Aguas Residuais) was drawn up with the broad aim of ensuring EU compliance for sewage treatment.

preferably to Portuguese entities.1 521 3.06million people through six contracts: four for direct service and two for bulk water provision. m 3) Withdrawals (1990. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Spending needs 10.m 3) Withdrawals (1990. albeit with a dramatic tailing off in 2002. Overall.PORTUGAL PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Population Total (2002.878 7.000 2.000 2015 4. km³) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Companies noted Agbar’s Lusagua JV was the dominant private player company in Portugal. The 1993 water policy reforms created conditions for the quasi-privatisation of the water market.861.000 1. while retaining ownership of the assets. Lusagua was sold to Aguas de Portugal for €23. serving 1.3 15% 37% 48% 2000 3.544. while Esc530 billion is required for sewerage and sewage treatment.5 million in 2001.0 10. Groundwater Total recharge (1998.0 3. MAJOR CITIES Population Lisbon Porto 5. km³) Per capita (1998. Lusagua had a 2000 turnover of €10 million. Political pressure for some effective form of privatisation will be maintained because of Portugal’s relative dependence on EU funding for water and sewerage compliance work. Urban services % Water % Sewerage % Sewage treated 97% 95% 85% Private sector participation legalised Private sector involvement was specifically outlawed in 1977.000 Status Piecemeal privatisation underway N/A 192 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . ADP serves 70% of the country’s population through 14 water supply and 14 wastewater treatment companies and has been valued at €2-3 billion. Esc270 billion is needed for expanding piped water provision to at least 95% of the population. Aguas de Portugal expects to have at least some of its local companies partly privatised through share sales from 2004. Privatisation has been erratic to date because of the public and political expectations of lower prices. EPAL has been in existence for over 100 years.0 39% 23% 39% 38. Freshwater Total (1998. EPAL (Empressa Portugesa das Aguas Livres) serves water to 0.400.0 66% 78% 68% Portugal has enjoyed €1.940. The Government has invited foreign companies to consider taking a stake in EPAL to finance part of its compliance programme. IPE Aguas de Portugal and EPAL.31million people in Lisbon along with a number of small contracts in other areas. AdeP has also acquired the Dos Lagos concession in Brazil from ProLagos. km³) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Privatisation prospects 93% of the population is covered by two groupings accounting for 268 municipalities. million) Total (2015. VE and Severn Trent have gained a number of contracts. The government is seeking to sell the individual companies on a concessional basis. Municipalities are allowed to privatise their services at their own pace. public control of water operations was retained via a 49% private sector holding cap. private sector capital of Esc300 billion is needed. Until 1998.45 billion in Cohesion funding for environmental projects between 1993 and 2002. km³) Per capita (1998. Compliance work from 2000 to 2006 will cost Esc800 billion ( 4 billion) and € even with a maintained level of Cohesion funding.

1million were served by small contractors with local companies.000 255.2million people were served by various forms of PPP contract.000 0 154. Approximately 0.000 FCC FCC (Spain) 244.000 250. approximately 1. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total Aqualias VE (France) 184.000 IIG de Aguas Severn Trent (UK) 154.000 193 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 0 244.PORTUGAL PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Fafe 25 year water provision concession IIG de Aguas Frielas 25 year water and sewerage concession Aqualias Mafra 25 year sewerage concession Aqualias Matoshinbos 25 year water concession FCC Ourem 25 year sewerage concession Aqualias Paredes 35 year sewerage concession Aqualias Santo Tirsa 25 year water provision concession IIG de Aguas Valongo 30 year sewerage concession Aqualias In 2003.

QATAR PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS QATAR All supplies from groundwater or desalination Effectively Qatar has no surface water. QEWC is 43% owned by the Government and 57% by local investors. and in the absence of any other source of water supply. while constructing more desalination plants for potable and industrial water supply. Agriculture is therefore almost entirely dependent on irrigation from pumped groundwater. Privatisation proposals slowly evolving The World Bank is developing proposals for the privatisation of a number of state owned industries and utilities. Groundwater is becoming 5% saltier every year because of too much water being pumped from the ground by farmers with saltwater ingress into underground aquifers as a consequence.1m per year and the quality of water is being compromised by sea water ingress and the intrusion of saline water from deeper aquifers. In 2003. In 2000. ground tanks. QEWC was granted the power to charge for services and to operate on a commercial basis. these resources are being progressively contaminated by nitrate run-offs from agriculture. It is estimated that Qatar aquifers will be depleted in 20 to 30 years at recent rates of groundwater withdrawal. after the previous set of proposals outlined in 1999 fell through. based on the calculated average natural recharge over the last 20 years is some 35million m 3 pa. QEWC invited bids for a privatisation feasibility study.5-1. more than one third of the 1977 estimate of total groundwater reserves in the country of 2. It is expected that 5m 3 per second (160million m 3 pa) of water would be delivered from Iran’s Karun River.5million m3 pa in 1994. At the same time. The estimated safe yield of the aquifer. This would be used to increase the remaining groundwater reserves through artificial recharge to combat and minimise the environmental impact on the deteriorating water quality caused by salt water intrusion and soil degradation. Imported water from Iran is being negotiated and the Government has commissioned a study to test the feasibility of using this water for direct irrigation purposes. Qatar is looking to import water from Iran. This represents approximately three days' supply based on an average national consumption rate. in buffer reservoirs. Qatar is seeking to restrict the use of groundwater resources to agriculture. The Qatar Electricity and Water Company (QEWC) is a JV company.500million m 3. As a result. totals approximately 1. The total available potable water storage in the country. The Government’s current pricing policy of supplying potable water free of charge to the prime residence of all Qatari nationals may need to be reconsidered depending on the nature of private sector involvement required. and water towers. Groundwater and water imports The total gross extraction of groundwater for irrigation purposes increased from about 44million m 3 pa in 1972 to about 220million m 3 pa in 1995. In order for the Government to maintain irrigated agriculture. The annual production capacity for desalinated water is presently 126million m 3 pa. with private sector involvement in the power generation plant. The abstraction for public supply increased from 4million m 3 pa to 6million m 3 pa in 1977 and then fell back to 2. The accumulated groundwater deficit during the period 1972-1995 was 994million m 3. while the Ministry of Electricity and Water owns the desalination plant. the use of desalination has increased so that all demands for domestic and industrial water supply for Doha and its surroundings are met by desalinated water. 194 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .1million m 3. elevated tanks. Desalination plants account for 96% of municipal potable water production. groundwater levels are falling by 0. Since 1954. In Qatar the renewable water resources are now totally depleted.

6 54% 56% 10% 0% 29% 8% 63% By 1997. The country’s real challenge lies in the rural areas where out of 13.052 US$6. The formulae used are under review for the more efficient allocation of water. Distribution losses are 24% overall and 25% in cities.097 villages.4 21. 50% of urban sewerage was treated. There still remained some 12-13% of the rivers’ length where the degradation was such that it rendered them almost lifeless.64 billion needs to be invested by 2023 to upgrade Romania’s water and wastewater infrastructure to meet EU requirements. In order to take into account the special needs of the poor the taxes and prices for household and agricultural use of water is one third less than those for use by industry. Recycling of wastewater is undertaken in only a few local industrial installations. Sewage treatment (1992) Tertiary treatment Secondary treatment Primary treatment None US$2. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Water pricing and plans Current water pricing covers all provision costs. 50% of which gets its sewage treated. this percentage is regarded as too low. an average of €1. The Romanian Water Association (ARA) stated in 2003 that it believes that €18. There is no metering for domestic customers.000 people) has no sewage treatment.100 million a year which would need to be made up by the private sector. Including industrial effluents. The Government seeks to remove current water provisions by 2003-05 through extending the distribution of potable water by 5% and increasing the efficiency of existing treatment plans by 20-30%. only 2. This implies that 17% of people in the area have access to STWs. 42% of the area’s population lives in urban areas . On average these plants treat 40m 3 per second. There are 2. Some 50% of industrial discharges are untreated. The estimated cost for achieving universal coverage of water and sanitation in Romania is about US$500 million in the short term (3-5 years) and about US$700 million in the medium term (5-10 years). 81% 254 L/day 69% 35% 195 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .560 16% 31% 53% 22. The city of Galati (330.ROMANIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS ROMANIA The EBRD and IFC have overseen the privatisation of Bucharest’s water services and are now making headway into secondary cities. Urban Services % Water Domestic consumption % Sewerage % Sewage treated Water provision Approximately 50% of water is treated for drinking purposes. The proportion of good quality rivers improved from 35% in 1985 to approximately 54% in 1994. Population Total (2002. there will still be a shortfall of around €1. the EBRD has identified a basic level of €250 million needed for investments in municipal and industrial effluent treatment. 77% of these are connected to sewerage networks.220 million a year.4 billion for urban areas.541 have piped water and 358 have sewerage. million) Total (2015. This includes €14.770 water treatment works in Romania of which only 40% operate. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Sewerage and sewage treatment The Siret River basin has a total population (including some people in the Ukraine) of four million. After taking into account possible EU grants and government financing.

ROMANIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Freshwater Total (1998.000 0 Amiantit Amiantit (Saudi Arabia) 200. all finance has been through Central Government grant transfers.000. The MUDP is designed to encourage private sector involvement in the water companies in these cities. Six international companies have pre-qualified for the bid. RAJAC has a turnover of €23 million and this project is linked to EBRD aid.000 tourists) is seeking to award a 20 year concession. Capital spending of US$1. starting with a US$28 million loan in December 1994. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Bucharest 25 year water concession Veolia Ploiesti 15 year water concession Apa Nova SRL Zetea Water DBOT Amiantit Constanta Regia Automoma Judeteana De Apa Constanta (RAJAC).001. plus up to 400. Prior to MUDP.639 26.000 Status Privatised Privatisation of Bucharest’s services Bucharest’s water company.000 0 VE VE (France) 2.000 people.11 per m3.000 196 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Craiova. Groundwater Resources Total recharge (1998. km³) For domestic use (1975) For industry (1975) For agriculture (1975) MAJOR CITIES Population Bucharest 8. which serves the county of Constanta (600.0 8% 33% 59% The EBRD has developed a Municipal Utilities Development Programme (MUDP).000 2015 2.000 people in the city via the construction of a F350 million water treatment works. through a €34 million ISPA loan allied with local loans. m 3) Withdrawals (1975. km³) Per capita (1998. with a strict set of performance criteria and future tariff increase limits.000 200. Timiosara and Tirgu Mures.000-360. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Apa Nova SRL VE (France) 250.0 1.000. km3) Per capita (1998.17 per m3. RGAB supplies sewerage for 85% of the city. averaging 800 L per capita per day at US$0.0 61% 38% 1% 2000 2. Water supply for the city is through taps (92%) and standpipes (8%). m 3) Withdrawals (1994.001.000 million is needed for water and sewerage over the life of the concession.000 0 Total 250.3 368 1. three submitting compliant bids (UU/Bechtel. VE have acquired 70% of RGAB’s equity for €35 million in 2001. Iasi. cities with a population range of 164. In 2001.000 2. Suez has a 25 year BOT for bulk water provision to 920. VE’s Apa Nova Bucaresti SA won with a tariff of US$0. but little progress has been identified during 2004. Six bidders pre-qualified. Suez and VE) with Azurix presenting a letter. Timisoara’s Aquatim funded €438 million in wastwater upgrades. km³) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Privatisation and the EBRD 37. covering water and effluent treatment in Brasov. Suez holds 51% of the consortium and its Degrémont subsidiary will hold the remaining 49% of the equity.000. the Regia Generale de Apa Bucuresti (RGAB) was privatised under the IFC's auspices.

Owing to the poor quality of water from these sources (and a number of other reasons). The Plan of Action of the Government of the Russian Federation for Environmental Protection and Resource Management for 1996-1997 has been approved. The complexity of the system of environmental responsibilities of the various state agencies is a further problem. 25% of water withdrawal facilities are not surrounded by protection zones.3%.230 7% 38% 55% The fundamental law on the Protection of the Natural Environment was enacted in 1991.1 133. The law was intended as setting a foundation for more specialised environmental acts. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Sewerage and sewage treatment Effluent treatment rose from 2. despite significant resource contamination. the first increase in recent years.92km³. Overall improvements have been attained by Russia divesting itself of its central Asian republics and thus no longer including the Aral Sea within its boundaries. and 11-13% of the samples showed bacterial contamination. Total effluent discharges were 24.THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION Broadly speaking.5km³ and thus 11% of effluents are treated. and interested ministries and agencies and local government bodies are taking part in its implementation. The level of pollution of the coastal seas is constantly high.6km³ in 1996. 2015 Water usage The total water intake from renewable water resources throughout the Russian Federation was 92. 144. for household and drinking purposes 19. along with the concept of the transition of Russia to the model of sustainable development. but the post 1993 constitution has limited its worth.4 73% 74% 21% 81% 87% 20% 197 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . 9%. 40% of drinking water was of potable quality and 30% of domestic effluents were treated. Overall. The number of water bodies with severe violations of water quality standards is gradually increasing. agricultural water supply 4.405 US$8. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Legislation and its enforcement US$2. irrigation 14. Developments and contract awards are gathering in Moscow and St Petersburg. On the whole. 20% of the drinking water samples taken in 1990-94 did not meet chemical safety criteria. the management and condition of the Russian Federation’s water resources is in a poor condition.2km³ in 1995. More than 40% of piped water from surface sources is not treated. while the other facilities are typically non-compliant. Preparation of the Law on the Protection of the Environment in the Russian Federation is currently being considered.3km³ in 1996 as compared to 96.3km³ in 1995 to 2. In 2001. but with the recent entrance of a number of vibrant local players it is also evident that this is going to be a most intriguing market. affecting 68% of urban and 10% of rural consumers. the country's existing system of drinking water supply is in a critical situation.1%. a decrease of 3. About 10% of groundwater intakes have reported exhaustion of water supplies. water consumption for industrial needs totalled 53. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations.3%. and other uses.1% per cent.

187.000 1.000 864. revenues received from the abstraction of water were US$7.88 million m 3 in 1995. At the beginning of 2002 Mosvodokanal cut the supply of 198 788. Financing of measures concerning the use and protection of fresh water sources is provided by: the federal budget (18%).000 1. It appears likely that the monitoring of the discharge of industrial effluents has eased during this period.88 billion in 1995. local budgets (18%).000.102. VE is involved in the construction of a sludge treatment plant for St Petersburg worth €70 million.320m³ 2000 8. At the same time.000 1.045.000 952.000 1.115m 3 77.000 1.0km³ 5. and points to total spending of US$1.000 918.38 million m3 pa.000 1.2% of drinking water samples failed bacterial contamination tests in 1991.000 1.4% by 1995.000 899.68 million m 3 pa in 1992 to 3.000 1.5 million per km³. a subsidiary of Bazovyi Element. compared with expenditure on the maintenance. resources of enterprises (53%).000 4.218.000 840.7km³ 29.110. while 1.009.012.321.141.000 1.000 1.488.000 1. part of Austria’s EVN.083. water discharge by domestic customers rose from 2. This is equivalent to a cost recovery of 40%. JSC Russian Communal Investments (RKI).000 881.635.000 2015 8.088.43 million m3 pa for industrial and power customers. In consequence.140.132.000 991.144. operating in Nizhnii.137.00.000 1. In 2002.312. Alfa Eco (Alpha) is present in Orenburg. environmental funds and other sources (5%). Krasnoyarsk Krai and Buriatia. Novogor (Russia New Municipal Systems.367. a number of Russian water utilities have been emerging.1km³ 19% 62% 20% In 1995. Meanwhile.000 4.000 934. P15): JSC Russian Utility Systems (RKS) was formally registered in May 2003 and has some 50 short-term contracts for communal services with municipalities and regions.000 1. repair and use of networks of US$19.000 1.000 871. a collapse in living standards for the majority of the population has taken place to the point where environmental concerns are overshadowed by apparently more immediate concerns. while usage by industry fell from 1. The failure rate on chemical criteria for recreational water bodies rose from 48% in 1991 to 72% in 1995 and from 53% to 65% for bacterial contamination over the same period. Likewise. one involving Suez.70 million m3 pa to 0.174. Novgorod Oblast and some cities of Irkutsk Oblast.000 1.61 million m3 pa over the same period of time.000 1.THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1994) Domestic Industrial Agriculture Financing 4. The following companies were noted by Global Water Intelligence (August 2004.000 Status Two wastewater contracts Private sector water consulting support N/A N/A N/A N/A Novogor N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A RKI N/A N/A N/A Alfa Eco Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Water usage by domestic customers rose from 3.162.000 1.8 million per km³ of freshwater collected. Krasnoyarsk and Voronezh. while falling from 0. The quality of drinking water has been affected by drives to develop land surrounding water abstraction areas to the point where these sources are being materially contaminated.000 811. this rose to 3.05 million m 3 pa to 0.276. the budgets of member states of the Federation (16%). Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Privatisation prospects Three contracts have been awarded to WTE. Mosvodokanal claimed that it was owed R30 million (€965.000 1. part of Interros) took over the water utility of Perm.000 1.000) in unpaid bills by regional administrations and municipal institutions.29 million m3 pa to 2.000 771. MAJOR CITIES City Moscow St Petersburg Omsk Novosibirsk Ekateringburg Samara Perm Chelyabinsk Ufa Kazan Rostov-On-Don Volgograd Krasnoyarsk Saratov Tolyatti Ulyanovsk Voronezh City Study: Moscow Water and sewerage services are provided by Mosvodokanal.

Mosvodokanal in turn owes R70 million (€2. The Environmental Impact of Transition – a case study of Moscow city. 222-231. In the meantime Mosvodokanal has filed a counterclaim against Mosenergo for R16. 165. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Moscow 11 year.650.000. J (1999). Geographical Journal. O&M WTE Moscow 12. O&M WTE Moscow 13 year.5 year.000.000 Source: Oldfield.000 1. wastewater build.000). water BOOT Suez/WTE Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage WTE EVN (Austria) 1.25 million) to energy supplier Mosenergo.000 0 Total 1. 199 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .9 million (€540. wastewater build.000 650.000.THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS drinking water to several towns in the Moscow region.000 Suez Suez (Austria) 1.

In 1998. Currently water costs US$0. Current production costs for desalinated water in Saudi Arabia are estimated at SR2. This in turn has been causing water table problems. In 2003 the National Commercial Bank noted that the SWCC projects a 20-year investment requirement of SR11. This plant has a capacity of 50million gallons per day.9 billion for sewerage and sewerage treatment. with 85-90% of water currently used for agriculture. The Ministry of Water Affairs was formed in 2003.60 per m 3 for large industrial customers.41 million pa against an operating cost of US$90 million pa (US$1. this compares with a total surface water availability and annual groundwater recharge of 4. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Water resources and applications The country is seeking to reduce over-abstraction through a reduction in water from 16.000m 3 per day. which serves the Holy City of al Makkah (Mecca). The country is also seeking to ease its depletion of groundwater for agriculture. 8.0million m 3 per day.SAUDI ARABIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS SAUDI ARABIA Falling oil prices and finite reserves have forced Saudi Arabia to reconsider its traditional approach of investing heavily in water and desalination infrastructure while failing to maintain these assets. and buildings in the area have not been designed to cope with this. Even so. of which. Population Total (2002. million) Total (2015. Some 8% of wastewater is fully treated.612 US$12. For example. although more radical measures are still called for. It deals with private sector participation and foreign investments in water.03 per m 3 for domestic customers and US$1. but had been allocated a maintenance budget of US$0.9million m3 pa. This includes US$9 billion in water treatment and distribution and US$4.5million m 3 pa to 12. Saudi Arabia generates 154. desalination and wastewater reuse projects. SWCC now plans to construct 17 desalination plants (with a total capacity of 2. US$14 billion is needed for basic services over the next 20 years in Riyadh.960m 3 goes to agriculture and related applications.60million m3 pa. but operational problems means the real figure is some 65-70million gallons per day. the Jeddah 1-4 desalination plants are meant to generate 95million gallons per day. In addition. with a full cost of water and wastewater services of some SR4. This is a reuse rate of 73. The new ministry will also be involved in setting new water tariffs.7 87% 91% 24% 100% 60% 25% 200 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . 113.800m 3 of wastewater per day. Due to a number of delays and continuing problems with extant plant. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Desalination extension plans The sixth Plan (1995-99) sought to have all drinking water obtained via desalination plants.3million m 3) so as to provide a total capacity of 3. Urban Services Safe drinking water Access to sewerage % Sewage treated Maintaining extant assets Lack of maintenance has held back the operation of these facilities and their use. Shifting the onus of the private sector from installation to operation and maintenance ought to optimise the life of installed and planned assets.5 32. In consequence. US$8. Currently.1 per m 3).2 million m3 of water out of 14.6%.2million m3 pa to 14.650 7% 58% 45% 23.72) per m³. or 700.7 (US$0. Saudi Arabia currently utilises 185million m³ per year of treated wastewater effluent. mainly via a fall in agricultural use from 14.0million m 3 of wastewater generated that year was recycled. the SWCC was given a revised set of targets in 1999. Saudi Arabia has 24 desalination plants in operation with a 600million gallon per day capacity.5 billion (US$3 billion) a year on water supply and sanitation projects from 2003 to 2022.33 per m³).6million m 3 pa. the water network suffers from distribution losses in the region of 40%. Another example is the Shuaiba facility. Sewerage coverage is less than 60% and the population is growing by 3% per annum. groundwater supplies have a 15-20 year life.67 (US$1.

for a US$1.000 1.429. m 3) Withdrawals (1992. This involves charging for services on a cost recovery basis before PSP begins. Water Management in Jubail and Yanbu Population 1996 2003 107.335. There remains scope for optimising water reclamation through the treatment of domestic and industrial effluent and the recovery and beneficial reuse of treatment effluents. UCO is to concentrate on water and power for Jubail and Yanbu as outlined below. along with Korea’s Doosan.000 Status Corporatisation under development N/A N/A Corporatisation under development 201 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . The private sector is needed to finance this and to bring the eventual cost down. The cities of Jubail and Yanbu are being used as pilot projects for private sector involvement with the UCO.4 119 17.000 2015 5.000 2. In 2003. km³) Per capita (1998. The private sector is being involved in a series of mooted desalination projects.0 9% 1% 90% Short term investment needs of US$17 billion have been identified by the government.000 Desalination (m3/day) 1996 2003 433 700 193 353 Reclaimed (m3/day) 1996 2003 33 66 15 25 2. m 3) Withdrawals (1985.000 1. 120km south of Jeddah. along with US$81 billion is needed by 2022 to increase desalination capacity by 6% pa and water treatment by 11% along with developing a suitable wastewater management infrastructure.549.000 127.192. The company will be partially privatised via a share sale to the public with 75% being retained by the state through three holding companies.600-2.000 million general upgrade of the water and wastewater facilities which began 1997.536.SAUDI ARABIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Freshwater Total (1998.183.063. (SWCC) and Saudi Electricity Company (SEC) invited international developers to submit expressions of interest for the country’s first independent water and power project. The Agriculture and Water Ministry and regional seven water boards are being rationalised into a new Water Ministry to centralise the management of resources and manage the privatisation process. PSPs are to be carried out under the auspices of the Water & Electricity Company (WEC).2 billion co-generation facility for Jubail while VE’s Veolia Water and Suez’s Ondeo Services are looking at other projects.000 57.000 4. km³) Per capita (1998.20 109 7. with the second phase being for 700MW and 24million gallons of water per day. The Jeddah Water and Sanitary Drainage Authority is seeking to develop a series of BOT projects for Jeddah and Makkah. Philippines/Co Groundwater resources Total recharge (1998.000 87. km³) For domestic use (1992) For industry (1992) For agriculture (1992) Involving the private sector 2.000 7. Utilities in Saudi Arabia are being taken over by the Utilities Company (UCO) as part of a move towards the full or partial privatisation in the future. km³) For domestic use (1985) For industry (1985) For agriculture (1985) Pilot privatisation at Jubail and Yanbu The first development was a JV between the Royal Commission for Jubail and Yanbu (RCJ and Y) and Bechtel and Parsons Corporation (both of the USA).000 891. A law was passed in 2000 allowing foreign companies to hold 100% of their businesses in Saudi Arabia as opposed to having to use locally based joint ventures. The first phase will have a water capacity of 176million gallons per day and up to 700 MW in power generation.34 5% 8% 87% Jubail Yanbu MAJOR CITIES Population Jeddah Mecca Medinah Riyadh 2000 3. at Shouaiba. No date has been fixed to date. Sumitomo of Japan is considering constructing a US$2. These are the two leading industrial cities in Saudi Arabia.

SAUDI ARABIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Proposals for Jeddah and al Makkah In 2002.5million inhabitants and three major urban areas: the Holy City. Suez was awarded a contract to oversee an investment programme for al Makkah of more than €10 billion over the next 10 years. The water situation is especially critical in Jeddah. Jeddah and Taif.6million inhabitants. Less than 20% of the city is equipped with a sewer system. The province has 7. 202 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . the second largest city in the country with 2.

timing. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic Industrial Agriculture 26.9 13. especially with regards to collecting bills. access to potable water increased from 67% to 72%. with 85% having access to water by 1996. and a private operating company. Between 1996 and 2000. the state 5% and the employees hold the remaining 9%. water provision was 28l per person per day in 2000. Nationally. net of inflation in order to make the entity self-financing. These problems were to blame for the financial problems faced by the country’s Regie Autonome de Distribution (RAD). SAUR International and GTHE. along with 22% having access to public standpipes and 25% being connected to the sewerage network.2 50% 58% 26% 82% 83% 0% SDE is bound to the State Government of Senegal through a performance contract that sets targets for improvement of the service.SENEGAL PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS SENEGAL Water provision services to Dakar and other urban areas were privatised in 1995 through a leas e contract. 2015 Privatisation proposals Water and electricity services in Senegal have suffered through the inability of the utilities to deal with unauthorised connections and unpaid bills. In order to ease the burden of enforcing payments. 51% of the urban population received potable water supplies in 1992. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment SONES and Sengalaise des Eaux The SONES enterprise was broken up into an asset-owning company. 33% of the population are seen as not having adequate water availability. The contract also specifies quality. Sengalaise des Eaux (SDE). particularly those of local authorities .933m 3 1. The government awarded a ten year lease for operating Senegal’s water services in 1996 to a SAUR led consortium.5km 3 5% 3% 92% US$503 US$1. This contract has subsequently highlighted the limitations inherent with leasing. Senegal has responded by hiring the International Finance Corporation to act as a consultant to see how the contract can be developed so as to optimise performance. 203 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . a group of local civil engineering firms hold 51% of SDE’s share capital. with Senegalese investors holding 35%. In return. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. 4% of sewage effluents collected in Dakar is subject to treatment. Overall.4km 3 2.580 18% 26% 58% 9. and supply and payment arrangements. which are monitored by SONES and the Office National de l'Eau Potable (ONEP). Average water usage in Dakar is 69l per capita per day. These criteria relate to facility maintenance. 56% of households were connected to piped water in 2000. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Urban water and sewerage services In Dakar. which retained the former utility's name (SONES) and which owns the water assets. water quality and commercial management. SDE can raise prices by 5-7%. 20% of water provided to the urban population received treatment in 1992. the Government of Senegal decided to divest its water and electricity services in 1995.

3 million m3 in 1997 to 114. the number of private water connections increased from 135. (2004) Innovative Contracts.078. but not to an extent that has jeopardised .0% Since 1999.000 Source: Brocklehurst. even within its financial and operational constraints.800. it has become evident that the contract has been providing material benefits. while revenues rose by 47% between 1996 and 2001 at a time when tariffs rose by 20%. J. MAJOR CITIES City Dakar 2000 2.000 2015 3. from 940 in 1995 to 1.0% 75.800. Water delivery has increased from 96. 204 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . C.501 in 2001. USA.000 Status Water services leased to SDE Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Dakar/urban 10 year lease contract SDE Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total SDE SAUR/Bouygues (France) 3.824 in 2002. World Bank. There has been an increase in the number of clients from 241. Sound Relationships: Urban Water Sector Reform in Senegal.25million people).63million) in 1995 to 89. Washington DC. the number of public standpipes in Dakar rose by 5 percent. Coverage figures for the Dakar region show that the proportion of the population served increased from 80.000 0 3.SENEGAL PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1985) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) The contract in reality 7.671 in 1996 to 327.0% 0. 1. which has impinged upon SDE’s returns. Over the same period.60km³ 844m 3 0km³ 25. WSSSB Discussion Paper Series.5% as of the end of 2002 (2.481.6 million m3 in 2002. Leakage remediation has performed poorly because distribution losses turned out to be higher than had been assumed at the outset and indeed both the original and revised technical efficiency targets will not be met.414 in 1995 to 181. In the Dakar region (75% of the total service area).424 in 2002. & Janssens.3% (1.

122 pumping stations and six sewage treatment works (with sea outfalls). In addition. which guaranteed water at US$0. Privatisation of water provision In 2002.SINGAPORE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS SINGAPORE Service provision Effectively. The proposed project will be a DBOO based on a 20 year 0. with Darco having taken an early interest in these proposals. with 60% of water resources piped in this way.000m³ of water per day by 2005. which would be operational by 2006.000 gallons or more. Malaysia is seeking to revise the 1961 agreement. The first NEWater project. there is a separate sewerage charge. This is equivalent to the water needs of some 350. Singapore aims to reduce its dependence on Malaysia for water through a series of desalination plants and wastewater recovery schemes.40 per 1. 50% to secondary standard and 40% to primary standard.000km of sewers.36 million m³ per day by that time. which uses reclaimed effluents. 99% of the population is linked to the sewerage network. Singapore’s Hyflux (70%) and Suez Ondeo (30%) gained a 20 year BOT contract to build Singapore's first desalination plant that will supply Singapore with 136. Water would be transferred via two undersea pipelines of 450 kilometres between Riau’s Kampar River (250km) and Bintan Island and Singapore (200km ).2million people are connected to the water and sewerage system. along with a 60 million gallon per day expansion of the main plant at an additional US$115 million. All water and sewerage services are managed by the Public Utilities Board (Water Department).000 gallons until 2061 to US$1. The next major PSP project is for the fourth and final NEWater reclaimed water project. US$332 million has been spent developing and expanding four storm water treatment and reclamation schemes. These sewage treatment works handle 90% of sewage effluents. 10% of Singapore’s anticipated water demand of 1. Distribution losses have fallen from 11% in 1988. An agreement signed by Singapore and Indonesia in 1991 allows the two countries to jointly develop a water transfer system capable 4. 205 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Ondeo subsequently sold its stake to Hyflux as part of their debt reduction strategy.000 people.116 million m3 per day bulk water supply contract with capital spending currently estimated at US$90-100 million. Water resources Singapore remains broadly dependent on imported water from Malaysia’s Johor state.7 billion on sewerage facilities between 1992 and 2003. Drinking water quality is of a high standard. as these facilities are expanded and upgraded to secondary and tertiary standard.100m 3 of water per day to supply both Singapore and Indonesia. Singapore has 2. Three water treatment works are being upgraded between 2002 and 2010 at a total cost of US$107 million. In response. In addition.546. It is likely that PSP would be involved. to 8% in 1990 to the current level of below 7% since 2002.008 per 1. The first water agreement with Malaysia expires in 2011 (signed with Johor state in 1961) and the second water agreement with Malaysia expires in 2065 (signed with Johor state in 1962). entered into service in 2003. Water fees for domestic customers relate to water usage per month so as to encourage water conservation. The scarcity and cost of water limits average household consumption to 168l per capita per day.25-1. The Ministry of the Environment spent US$2. despite being operated by Singapore. all of Singapore's 3.

312 24 2110 28. using water meters to obtain a 30% decrease in the consumption of drinking water. the city does not anticipate developments in the near term.738 87. and petrochemicals. one of the better figures from central and eastern Europe. While PSP for BVS has not been ruled out.553 801 1543 38. Water and wastewater management In 2001. Only 635 million m3. Distribution losses in 1996 were approximately 22%. 83. The shares in these companies are in the process of being transferred to local authorities. compared with 80% in 1990. or about 42% of wastewater released in 1991 was treated. ammonium ions.000 206 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .618 2000 53. sulphates.262 1996 47. nitrates.721 88. In 1991.238 49. they will be in a position to be sold to other entities if desired. and 1.000 150. Bratislavskej vodarenskej spolocnosti (BVS). manganese. Slovakia’s ground water contains high levels of iron. active carbon dioxide. approximately 88.858 In 1991. reducing the overabstraction of groundwater resources by cutting the agricultural use of groundwater to 30% of current levels.847 801 1535 37.000 tonnes of insoluble substances.6% of the population was supplied with water from public piping. and reducing distribution losses in the water distribution system to 10-15% of total volume. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total TVS Suez (France) 150. 87% of water samples were judged unsuitable for consumption against 63% in 1983. encouraging the recycling of wastewaters so as to bridge the gap between the volume of water extracted and discharged. while increasing the proportion of all wastewater subject to secondary and tertiary treatment by at least 20%. Wastewater treatment (1000m 3) Mechanical (primary) Chemically (secondary) Biologically (secondary) Combined (tertiary) Total 1990 18. after which.015 107 6251 25. which serves Bratislava is 59% held by the city council.816 79.921 1997 47.027 5 643 36.183 89.000 people in Bratislava and the west of Slovakia. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Trencin 20 year water & sewerage concession TVS Slovakia has seven water utilities.1% in 1996 to 55.3% by 2002. the Government set a series of mid to long term objectives for bringing water management into line with EU norms as well as taking sustainability into account when planning.611 1995 48.SLOVAKIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS SLOVAKIA One of the driving forces behind Slovakia’s ‘Velvet Divorce’ from the Czech Republic was their differing attitudes towards EU accession and environmental management.857 tonnes of oil and other petrochemicals were released into the river system. The table below outlines the development of sewage treatment since 1990. Water and wastewater plans In 1995.000 150. 506 tonnes of inorganic salts. Connections to sewerage had increased from 37. as well as chlorides. Groundwater quality has begun to deteriorate significantly. BVS aims to invest Sk700m (€17 million) in 2004 on capital projects and serves 750. These include: a 50% reduction in the amount of pollutants discharged in effluents via a 60% increase in the volume of wastewater subjected to treatment.

Water provision Approximately 47% of the total amount of piped drinking-water is used by households. four municipal wastewater treatment plants were built or completed. Sewerage treatment None Preliminary Primary Secondary 1994 25% 12% 48% 15% 1997 25% 4% 23% 48% In 1995 and 1996. In 1995. on the basis of the creation of a privatisation agency. Privatisation started in 1991. Class 1 1-2 2 2-3 3 3-4 4 1989 1 4 24 39 8 14 10 1993 0 9 23 36 17 4 11 1996 0 5 20 46 15 10 4 Organic pollution indicated by chemical oxygen demand (COD) and biochemical oxygen demand (BOD) reached its peak in 1989. 207 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Slovenia is the most economically and politically advanced part of the former Yugoslav Federation. equivalent to 45% of the total amount of effluents discharged. a considerable improvement of the quality of all watercourses was noticed. The same could be said for phosphate. through the adoption of a pricing policy for cost-recovery and equitable allocation of water in the Water Act. with 31% of effluents receiving only primary treatment. Domestic and commercial water users are taxed in proportion to the pollution load of the wastewater discharged. Of the 30% connected to the sewerage system. Up to 1994. along with ordinances on the water quality standards of surface fresh water and groundwater. the sewage treatment capacity was 190million m3 per year. Environmental spending and sources of finance Budgeted spending on water and wastewater was US$391. 30% of inhabitants are connected to municipal wastewater treatment plants. mostly due to the contents of heavy metals and organic compounds. Half of these effluents are treated. 64% of effluents are treated to secondary standard. Sewerage and sewage treatment In 1996.1 million for 2001-03 and US$519. Exemptions from the tax can be granted if the revenues are used to fund projects aimed at reducing water pollution. 14% from private wells. In 1995 and 1996.REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA The Republic of Slovenia gained independence from Serbia in 1992. 39% by industry and the manufacturing sector. the pollution of some rivers deteriorated again to some degree. The quantities of wastewater from industry and mining have decreased by 60% since 1980. Approximately 30% of water costs are recovered through pricing at present.4 million for 20042006. while 8% are supplied to livestock farms. the quality of individual watercourses further deteriorated. 5% to the tourist industry and 1% to all other purposes. Management and financial strategy A new Water Act was adopted in 1998. Dissolved oxygen in most of Slovenia’s waters poses no problems. 77% of drinking water is distributed from public networks. By 1997. 45% have septic tanks. There is a pressing need for the adoption of secondary and tertiary treatment on a broad basis. but was delayed until December 1992 when the enabling legislation was passed. 5% from rain water reservoirs and 4% from other sources. with the rest having no formal sewerage or sewage treatment services. Inland water quality The quality of watercourses improved gradually from 1989 to 1994 due to a decrease in industrial sewage. Water and sewerage services are to become self financing in the medium term (2005-2010). the monitoring requirements concerning the quality of surface water and the ecological quality standards of water.

Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Kranjska Gora 15 year wastewater concession WTE Maribor 25 year wastewater concession Aquasystems Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Aquasystems Suez (France)/Aquaplus (Austria) 0 190.500 Total 190.500 208 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 people). Slovenia’s second largest city. This was the first BOT wastewater treatment contract to be awarded in central or eastern Europe.000 WTE EVN (Austria) 0 3.000 3.REPUBLIC OF SLOVENIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Privatisation progress A 25 year concession contract was awarded to Suez and Aquaplus for a sewage treatment works serving the city of Maribor (190.

Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations.8 44. for users who do not pay for their operational. Between 1994-2001.8million without adequate sanitation has only been made since 1999. The policy and functions of the Department of Water Affairs and Forestry prior to the 1994 elections were constrained exclusively to water resource management. Responsibility for water supply lies with local governments. In consequence. in the light of recent public health problems. South Africa has to address the current ANC policy of free water provision up to a certain level which. private sector participation in South Africa is meeting fierce opposition from the Communist party and trade unions. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Water resources and distribution South Africa is presently the 26th most stressed country in terms of water availability per person. This works out as 25l of safe treated water per person per day at a maximum distance of 200m from the dwelling. 2015 Water as white gold? The 1956 Water Act is regarded as having applied the rules of the well-watered countries of Europe to the arid and variable climate of South Africa. can be seen as a case of ‘free water and cholera’.070 4% 32% 64% 44. those who were not allowed to vote were effectively excluded from Central Government capital spending. As a consequence. The previous regime was characterised by a marked reluctance to ascribe a value to water resources. While water rights remain in Central Government hands. This envisages resource reviews every five years and catchment management. the largest example of this kind. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Reforming water provision The Water Services Act (1997) and National Waters Act (1998) have been designed to provide for the equitable distribution of water resources upon the principles of sustainability and economic prudence. some of the largest inter-basin transfer schemes in the world have been developed. management or capital c osts.3 57% 63% 32% 99% 79% 10% 209 .SOUTH AFRICA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS SOUTH AFRICA Even though water and sewerage services for the majority of the country’s population remain in a most unsatisfactory state. The irony here is that under the Apartheid regime. water was held under state control and subsidised to protect minority interests. in terms of the norms and standards described in the government's policy. is situated in an arid zone. It is a semi-arid country with unevenly distributed rainfall (43% of the rains fall on 13% of the land) and with high annual variability and unpredictability. An estimated R20 billion of water resource infrastructure has been built by the Government. The role of PSP has been left to state governments: it remains too politically contentious to be dealt with. See the country entry for Lesotho for the Highlands Water Project. While a number of small contract awards have taken place. The industrial heartland of the country. The National Water Resources Strategy (NWRS) was published in 2002. they are now to be ascribed with an economic worth and can be operated by the private sector. Progress on the 20. thus one well-constructed Ventilated Improved Pit (VIP) per household is the minimum Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 US$2. Household connections will not be considered as part of the basic infrastructure because conventional sewerage is not regarded a viable. Where local government fails to perform its function.5 bn (€471 million) in cutting the number of people without access to safe water supplies from 14million to 7million. Investment by the Government was related entirely to political patronage.299 US$10. the post Apartheid government spent R4. The Department of Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) manages water resources and seeks to ensure that all people have an adequate water supply and sanitation service. the DWAF is empowered to take direct action to strengthen local government and temporarily perform the functions of local government. The Department did not regard itself as responsible for ensuring that citizens had a water supply and indeed had no political mandate for such responsibility. The Government aims to provide universal services by 2010. surrounding Johannesburg.

At the same time.2million people.6% 5.SOUTH AFRICA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS requirement. WSSA (Suez) serves a total of 2.5million people through a variety of management and technical assistance contracts. operate. These users will in future be granted water abstraction licences. Perhaps the greatest challenge lies in managing growth projections and usage. capital spending is needed to reduce wastage and to deliver a perceived improvement in water quality and service. with the Ministry’s budget falling from ZAR2. Suez developed a national partnership to support local workers in building rural water supply systems through training provided by Suez. four relatively small and local privatisations have taken place. Meters have been installed to dispense 6.268 million (€573 million) on service extension.63 billion) National Water Resource Strategy to allow for a more efficient management of the country's water resources and address water shortages including building about 20 dams. reflecting a gradualist stance by various parties. One has been for a tourist area (SAUR and Dolphin Coast). one for a municipality (Biwater and Nelspruit) and two are for BOTTs (build. Johannesburg was unable to account for 42% of the water it paid for in 2001. The five year Johannesburg Greater Metropolitan Council management contract was awarded to Suez and is tied to US$300 million in financing.011m 3 13.000 users account for 90% of national water demand.8km³ 1.80km³ 108m 3 2km³ 10. Five million South Africans still require access to a basic supply of water in 2003.6% 83. The 2001 Free Water Policy.8% The economics of equitable provision Privatisation and prospects The South African Municipal Workers' Union (SAMWU) and the Communist Party. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic (1990) Industrial (1990) Agriculture (1990) Water and sewerage services (2000) Inadequate sanitation No potable water Inside lavatories Outside lavatories Pit latrines Bucket system Informal 51% 29-34% 48% 17% 28% 4% 1% 44. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1980) Domestic Industrial Agriculture 4. The aim is to bring clean water to 1million people by 2005. The Government estimates that 46. while the backlog of about 18million people without sanitation is to be cleared by 2008. the Government approved a R21 billion ( €2. the Government spent R5. equivalent to ten years of capital spending. The Strategy will also ensure that about 6million South Africans have access to clean water.000L of free water per household each month. but it is preventing rural investment since cost recovery is unfeasible. To date. guaranteeing 6m 3 of free water per person per month may be populist.608 million (€349 million) in 2003 to ZAR1.5 million) in 2004. train and transfer) for rural areas (WSSA in the Eastern Cape and Northern Province). In 2004.5% of the schemes were operating below the standards of the reconstruction and development programme. part of the ANC–led Government are ideologically opposed to privatisation per se. A Water Affairs and Forestry survey in Kwa Zulu-Natal found that 56.3km 3 17% 11% 72% Tariffs need to remain affordable and at the same time. From 1994 to 2001.334 million (€178. providing water to an additional 7. water budgets at the Ministry for Water Affairs and Forestry (DWAF) are being devolved to local government. Larger water u sers are now being managed on an economic basis. Water tariffs in Johannesburg have risen by 40% between 2001 and 2004 since the start of the Johannesburg Water (JW) contract with Suez. It appears the longer term demographic effect of Aids has not been 210 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . The free basic water policy currently extends to 26million people (66% of those served) and is being expanded to 29million (77%) in the medium term.

The concession is worth R350 million for the running of the council’s water and sanitation services. per household and (4) full water connection and flush toilet.000 residents. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total Metsi a Sechaba Biwater (UK) 270. with an increase in tariff collection from 75% to 97%. The consortium will pay the council R1. US$172 million of investments are to be made during the life of the concession. The overriding concern for the city is to provide basic water services to the 92. covering all of Greater Nelspruit's 260. (2) standpipe with VIP. The consortium will invest R150 million in the next five years to improve water and sanitation in the town. per household. M Pillay & G Moloi (2002). Since the concession award. Plans for a concession for Cape Town have been postponed. Most of the people have not yet enjoyed regular running water. 211 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .150.000 56. operation and maintenance targets are on track. (3) 200 litre water tank and septic tank. The JV is run by Biwater International (40%) and Sivukile Investments (60%). This concession is seen as a battleground by the anti privatisation lobby and thus it remains contentious irrespective of its actual performance.554.000 1. Residents may start at level 2 and upgrade to 3 or 4 as affordability levels improve. the borough of Dolphin Coast (56. MAJOR CITIES City Cape Town Johannesburg East Rand Pretoria Durban West Rand Satolburg Port Elizabeth 2000 2. Nelspruit 30 year water and sewerage concession Biwater Queenstown 10 year BOTT concession WSSA Fort Beaufort 10 year BOTT concession WSSA Siza Water: A tourist resort concession In 1999.000 Status Some O&M outsourcing Private sector involvement under consideration N/A N/A Corporatisation of water provision in progress N/A N/A N/A A full privatisation .219.458. UK.541.000 3.950. Cranfield International Water Policy Conference. price changes and capital expenditure deferments are being discussed.Nelspruit The privatisation of Nelspruit water services was agreed in early 1999 after 28 months of negotiations. In consequence. or acceptable sanitation services. This is the first municipal deal for privatised water and sanitation in South Africa.000 1.000 2.SOUTH AFRICA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS factored into many water demand management models.25 million a year for monitoring the process. In addition.703.000 people) awarded a 30 year concession to SAUR’s Siza Water. Africa Energy Forum.000 270. Policy Development in the Water Sector – The South African Experience. Two former townships and six peripheral urban areas have been incorporated into Greater Nelspruit. which is based on cost reduction and cost recovery rather than a pro-poor policy.006. but has subsequently seen demand rise by just 5% in 2002. uses 3% of salary bill for staff training and has encouraged staff share ownership.930. Future challenges include further enlargement of the municipal area and a pricing policy.000 WSSA Ondeo (France) 300.000 2015 3. Customers choose from four levels of service: (1) Community has own service (no service from Siza Water).000 56.000 300.000 260.000 1.000 270.590. Progress on the deal will be reviewed by the council in five years.000 1.000 Sources: L J Abrams (1996). Bridging the gap: greater understanding between public and private sectors will extract the best from both – what could this mean for Africa’s water sector? Water 21.000 2. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Dolphin Coast 30 year water and sewerage concession Siza Water Co. it has increased the number of employees.000 1.000 3. Distribution losses have fallen from 30% to 16%.152. September 1996.391.000 1.255. Cranfield University.000 informal households that are currently without such services. London. July 2002.000 1. billing arrears of more than R20 million needs to be dealt with.000 2.000 Siza Water Company SAUR/Bouygues (France) 56.811.000 1.000 1. Siza Water forecast a 40-50% increase in service demand after the contract award.552.020.

59 17. including the construction of 52 sewage treatment works. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture (1994) Industry (1994) Services (1994) Sewerage and water quality River water quality has improved since 1988: between 1994 and 1997.10 40.34 18. 212 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .42 39.45 23. The Government aims to see the percentage of rivers of fair/good quality rise from 14% in 1995 to 70% by 2001. Inchon.6 billion) was spent on water pollution control. The main legislation is contained in the Water Quality.6 trillion (US$4. along with 80% connection to the sewerage network and 80% sewage treatment. million) Total (2015. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Management The Environment Administration (founded 1980) was upgraded to ministerial status as the Ministry of Environment in 1990. with specific bureaux for water and sewerage opened in 1994.9 trillion (US$24 billion) for environmental im provements by 2005.93 33. This in part reflects a realisation that South Korea.9 trillion (US$23 billion) for the construction of 224 sewage treatment works.61 28.82 24.95 32.40 US$10. Urban Services Safe drinking water Access to sewerage % Sewage treated Infrastructure plans The Comprehensive Measures for Water Management is due to run between 1996 and 2011. Korea is keen to comply with OECD norms.60 40.006 US$16.71 26. Piped Water 83% 90% 95% Potable Water 43% 85% 90% Sewage Treatment 45% 65% 80% 1995 (actual) 2001 (planned) 2011 (forecast) It is understood that a fundamental restructuring of water supply and sewage services will take place in 2005. which in turn has become the framework for 24 separate Acts between 1990 and 1997. In addition.84 System capacity (000 gallons/da y) Water Sewerage 22. Population Total (2002.19 31.SOUTH KOREA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS SOUTH KOREA Private sector involvement has opened up for sewage and effluent treatment projects over the past year.950 5% 44% 51% 47.91 11.7 80% 83% 45% 100% 100% 50% 1995 1997 1998 1999 2000 Under Green Vision 21. A total budget of W90. W5.4 49.9 trillion has been allocated (US$75 billion) for these projects. The Pollution Prevention Act (1963. has missed out on opportunities in what would typically be regarded as their home markets.70 16. 43. like Japan.786km of new sewage pipes are to be laid.96 15. The figures below are from the 1997 interim assessment. revised 1971) was replaced by the Environmental Preservation Act in 1997.62 26. Development of water sewerage systems People served (million) Water Sewerage 38. including W26. Seoul. based on the creation of seven full water services public companies: KOWACO (national). Water Supply and Sewer Systems Acts. Pusan.54 47. This includes W28. This is to finance a comprehensive water and sewerage service extension and upgrading plan over the next 12 years.04 25. including three relating to water quality and sewerage and two for water resources management. South Korea seeks to raise access to piped water to 95%. Green Vision 21 (1996-2005) is aimed at forming a comprehensive environmental compliance programme for the country.

000 213 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 1.000 2. institutional settings to support the restructuring are weak. Wastewater treatment is to be improved from 59% to 82% by 2005 at a cost of W2.000 3.000 2.000 1.000 1. This has been extended to allow BOT contracts. with issues such as water pricing. partly financed by a water use charge system that aims to raise W200 billion (US$167 million) pa.800. its South Korean partner company.000 Status Privatisation under consideration Sewage treatment privatised Sewage treatment privatised Privatisation under consideration N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total 900.000 1.395. m 3) Withdrawals (1992. systematic management of water supply still needing technical as well as institutional support.1 2.000 2. Freshwater Total (1998.522. Daegu. VE and Suez have gained sewage treatment contracts. this remains possible. VE has also gained a comprehensive effluent management contract with Hyundai.888.000 907. However. The 1997 Act relating to Water Resource.550. The two contracts signed to date involve US$344 million of capital spending.275.000 1.353.000 900.000 1.830. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Chilgok-gun 20 year sewage treatment BOT VE/Hyundai (Korea) Inchon 20 year sewage treatment BOT VE/Hyundai (Korea) Pusan 28 year sewage treatment BOT Suez/Hanwha (Korea) Yangju 24 year sewage treatment BOT Suez/Hanwha (Korea) Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Suez Suez (France) 0 900.379.7 26% 11% 63% 1.887 23.000 66. km³) Per capita (1998. Groundwater Withdrawals (1985.SOUTH KOREA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Daejeon.000 876.7 trillion (US$2. km³) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Privatisation prospects Private sector involvement and funding in the construction of water treatment facilities was permitted in 1994.270. the reduction of water leakage.000 1. including foreign companies if they work in partnership with Korean companies.000 2015 9.3 billion).000 3.675.857.000 2.0 0% 83% 17% 2000 9. km³) For domestic use (1985) For industry (1985) For agriculture (1985) MAJOR CITIES Population Seoul Pusan Inchon Taegu Taejon Kwangchu Songnam Ulsan P’ohang Puch’on Suwon Ansan City Study: Seoul 20million people live in Seoul and the Han river basin.000 3. VE anticipated being involved in the construction of 26 sewage treatment works for a total of US$1 billion. which supply 12million tonnes of water per day to the city.000 1. In addition. Water treatment plants built by Degremont account for 20% of drinking water in Seoul and 80% of Busan’s.698. accounting for nearly half of the country’s population.000 2.884.230.340.636. and Gwangju.000 984.184. Water Quality Improvement and Local Resident Support in the Han river watershed was implemented to improve the quality of water entering the Paldang reservoir and the Han river.550. While water treatment plants have yet to be privatised. Industrial development and population increases resulted in a consistent decline in raw water quality for the Seoul between 1990 and 1997.918. the proportion of liquor and telephone taxes that are allocated to water and wastewater projects is being raised from 21% in 1997 (equivalent to US$500 million pa) to 30% by 2003.000 929. This aims to enable the Korean water services industry create players in the market to compete with companies active in Asia.000 VE VE (France) 0 2.000 2.000 790.

The National Hydrological Plan proposed in 2000 was abandoned following the Socialist Party winning the 2004 elections. with the emergence of an increasingly competitive market. Plans for 17 desalination plants at a cost of €3. especially in South America.8 billion as an alternative water source for the southern areas of Spain are under consideration. However. southern Spain. Water shortages are a widespread concern. Overall.SPAIN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS SPAIN The private sector has been making steady progress over the past decade. the Balearic and Canary Islands. Spain’s sewerage and sewage treatment infrastructure remains at an undeveloped stage. Distribution losses have exacerbated these regional problems. The shortfall for the Balearic and Canary Islands is to be tackled via new desalination plants.0 41. the country has in fact made appreciable strides towards modernisation. Water is both unevenly distributed and rainfall is markedly seasonal. especially along the Mediterranean coast. Supply efficiency for irrigation projects is in the region of 40%. It found 40% of rivers to be of Class I – II/III (good to fair) and 60% to be of Class III – IV (fair to bad) quality. There have been plans for an overall increase in water availability of 20. or 850 L/day per capita. using 489 data points found 222 to be of good to excellent quality (45%). especially when it comes to monitoring water quality. Guadalquivir. Andalusia. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Development of sewerage infrastructure In comparison to most of the major western economies. This has also resulted in a wide range of contract gains internationally. A 1999 survey of rivers. other areas have a minimum shortfall of 2.7billion m³ pa will remain. Management and politics The main problem for those seeking to modernise the management of Spain's water resources is that the great disparities in water availability and need means that regional interests will continue to block plans to integrate its water management. This means that more than 50% of current water resources are not being exploited.2billion m³ pa (16%) would come via groundwater. million) Total (2015. 92% of which is found in northern Spain in the Duero. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Water quality and resources Survey information is relatively poor at present. with a projected deficit of 6. What are known as the nine hydrographic confederations (river basin agencies) are seen as impotent. Sewage treatment Population served Tertiary treatment Secondary treatment Primary treatment None 1975 0% 7% 7% 86% 1980 0% 16% 13% 71% 1990 4% 38% 11% 47% 2000 4% 58% 21% 17% US$15. These occur in the eastern Pyrenees. of which 3. The firs t national survey was carried out in 1990 and was based on informal data. Demand for urban and industrial water by 2010 is expected to be 15billion m³ pa. Population Total (2002. given the undeveloped state of the system prior to the end of the Franco regime in 1976. The table below highlights that. Tagus and Ebro basins.0billion m³ pa by 2010.6billion m³ pa. Segura. Guadalquivir. there is an ‘excess’ of 27billion m³ of water per annum. The recent decision to abandon water transfer in favour of desalination may have similar repercussions.5million people live in areas of water stress. But the long term problem areas .961 US$21.2 78% 81% 18% 214 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . 18. Eastern Pyrenees. 207 of fair to poor quality (42%) and 60 to be of bad quality (13%).460 4% 28% 68% 41. Overall. while the urban water network has distribution losses ranging from 25% to 50%. Segura and Jucar. In Andalusia and Extramadura there are regular supply limitations during the summer.

Spain considered developing a water market to encourage external investment and open the market up for more privatisation while restricting the role of the state. which will allow the Spanish Government to redirect water resources to priority sectors of need.000 50.000+ Private 2. A further drought in 1999 has concentrated minds again. Many water and sewerage services are currently being run at a loss by municipalities. In addition. km³) Per capita (1998. At the time. This has been compounded by the generally held belief amongst the municipally held sewerage companies that until EU laws are impending.224 208 56 97% 265 95% 70% 110.000-50. as seen in California.82 billion for urban water supply. km³) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Privatisation and the private sector The private sector is making steady progress in Spain. m 3) Withdrawals (1992. Generally speaking. thus the temporary respite offered in 1997 and 1998 eased political pressure for reform. this was in response to the drought of 1995 and 1996. €2. there is an inverse relationship between water scarcity and price.26 billion for water quality imporovements. Many municipally held entities in the water short regions of southern Spain continue to provide water at a loss. Freshwater Total (1998. Ferrovial and Iberdrola are also building up portfolios of contracts. Aguas de Valencia (30% held by Bouygues) has been gaining a number of small contracts in recent years.SPAIN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS The proportion of Spain’s population connected to sewerage services increased from 18% in 1980 to 86% in 2000.3 2. it is expected that 6575% of the Spanish water provision and sewerage market will be privately held. Dragados entered the water and sewerage market in 1991. The higher figure depends upon the fate of Madrid’s Canal Isabella II. the latter having acquired Obrascom’s water activities in order to gain economies of scale. The reform creates a market in water with the aim of rationalising the use of resources by allowing water rights to be bought and sold. In Barcelona. it has made steady inroads.72 billion for water transport. the legislation allows for the establishment of water banks. 63% of the sewerage market (where sewerage services are provided) was in private sector hands and 32% of this was estimated by FCC at the time to be under their control.000 people pa. Agbar believes that it has 55% of the private sector. Structure of market in 2000 Population Up to 10. the price of drinking water is Ptas211 per m 3 for water. At the same time. FCC and Aguas de Barcelona (part of Suez Lyonnaise via direct and indirect stakes) were the only private sector players until 1985. Spain's parliamentary environment committee used fast-track procedures to approve new legislation designed to improve water conservation. Effective competition has only emerged since 1991.510 288 59 Public 5.000–900. the implementation of a national hydrological plan to provide a long-term solution to the problem of Spain's scarce and unequally-distributed water remains as contentious as at any point over the past decade. By 2010.775 35. In September 1999. having been responsible for approximately 30% of Spain’s water and sewerage construction work since 1951. €2. The law will also make obligatory the metering of water used for irrigation and creates a regulatory framework for new waterconservation schemes such as desalination and the use of grey water on parks and golf courses. after which Aguas de Barcelona has gained some 50% of all contracts.61 billion for wastewater treatment and €1. Private sector progress was limited during the Franco era.8 bn 2001-08 Plan Hidrologicio Nacional Capex includes €2. but since 1976. compared with Ptas150 per m 3 for the rest of Catalonia and a Spanish norm averaged at Ptas70 per m 3. The private sector is gaining contracts for serving 650. Urban services % Water Consumption (L per day) % Sewerage % Sewage treated Making a market for water In 1997. 215 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .5 12% 26% 62% Private sector involvement dates back to Aguas de Barcelona’s original water provision contract in 1911. they need not be considered. The €18. In 1992.000 10.

000 216 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 Urbaser Grupo ACS (Spain) 2.200.000 15.000 3500. km³) Per capita (1998.000 2.000 350. Aguas de Sabadell is a semi private company formed for water provision services to the municipality of Sabadell. to avoid seeking contracts outside Madrid and Castilia.000 350.000 9. The municipalities of Bilbao.1 people for sewerage and is financed through internal cash generation and syndicated loans for longer term capital spending work.000 700.7 521 6.000 Madrid 3. The company gained the final Province of Buenos Aries regional concessions in Argentina in 1999.6miilion people for water and 3.000 OHL OHL (Spain) 300. After the backlash against the original privatisation moves. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details_ Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total FCC FCC (Spain) 7.5 million for 1999.000 Iberner RWE (Germany) 270.976.000 2015 2.0 22% 78% Canal de Isabel II (CI II) was founded in 1851 to provide Madrid with water.500.100.250.000 Aguas de Valencia AgVal / Bouygues (France) 2.000 270. even if held by them.000 2.040.000 13.500.000 Ferroser Ferrovial (Spain) 350.440.000 3.000 100. Argentina and Morocco and had a budget of €104. Tarragona.000 500.000 9.040.200. which are distinct from their municipalities. It has consistently been under the direct ownership of the municipality and operates as a corporatised entity.SPAIN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Groundwater Total recharge (1998.000 Aguas de Barcelona Suez (France) 11.200. Pamplona and Santander have formed their water provision and sewerage companies into separate entities.000 270.976.729. The consortium is looking at contracts in Uruguay. MAJOR CITIES Population 2000 Barcelona 2.000 Status Aguas de Barcelona Corporatised. but no privatisation before 2002+ Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Albacte Water and sewerage concession Aguas de Barcelona Cadiz Water treatment Canal de Isabell II L’Ampolla Water and sewerage concession Aguas de Valencia Masalfassar Water and sewerage concession Aguas de Valencia Oviedo Water and sewerage concession FCC Sabadell 50 year water provision concession Aguas de Sabadell Salamanca Water and sewerage concession FCC Valladiod Water and sewerage concession Aguas de Barcelona Only selected recent contract gains above are included.000.729. Comphana de Aguas de Grande Bilbao is a consortium of 48 Basque town councils. CI II serves 4.Ondagua RWE (Germany) NA NA 3. CI II may be broken into two or three parts if and when it is privatised. the company has b een told to desist from bidding for international contracts and despite some success in Spain. m 3) Withdrawals (1990km³) For domestic/industry (<1990) For agriculture (<1990) Corporatised entities 20.000 Pridesa .

In reality. Non revenue water. for example. Colombo) which already has the highest existing sewerage coverage of 73%. while O&M contracts may be used in the medium term. Tariff collection rates between 1993 and 2001 have been between 89% and 99%.67 19.17 113. this all-or-nothing approach towards PSP has probably resulted in the postponement of appropriate contracts being put into place. The Water Services Reform Bill was introduced in November 2003. and not the state. The main opposition party.000 people in the Kalutara to Galle area. which has been exercised since 1990. This would require an annual investment of US$200 million for 10 years. As a result. with wealthier people.000 live births. NWSDB overall 23% 4% 4% 4% 35% Colombo City 25% 15% 8% 5% 53% 217 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Water investments and plans The Government has set a target of total coverage by water supply and sanitation by the year 2010 through its National Programmes. whereas per capita investments in the Southern Region. However. is in power in six of the seven provincial councils currently functioning. the World Bank provided a US$39. concessions outside Colombo are unlikely before 2015-20.95 Greater Colombo Regions Average Revenue collection started in 1982 and since the 1990s. the National Environment Act (NEA) was passed and the Central Environment Agency (CEA) was formed. Water supply had reached 70% coverage by 1994. 2001 Leakage Free supplies (standpipes) Illegal connections Metering errors Total Privatisation pondered The World Bank is seeking to reform the water sector. NWSDB is considering the potential for outsourcing leakage detection and repair services. Monthly consumption (m3) 2000 2001 22. which has effectively blocked the bill. along with private sector participation. the People's Alliance (PA). full concessions were sought in the Kalutara to Galle Coastal Strip project. which requires some US$218 million in investment. of which an estimated half resides in the low income settlements. In the meantime.8 million grant for improving access to drinking water and sanitation for 940 villages in war-affected areas of Sri Lanka.SRI LANKA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS SRI LANKA Management In 1980. saying that it must be approved by all provincial councils. the annual allocation has been US$100 million.50 19. In rural areas sanitation projects are implemented by different agencies with donor assistance. while urban areas have been somewhat neglected. 3. compared to the national average of 19. so as to achieve the Sri Lankan Governm ent's aim of "safe drinking water for all" by 2010. bill collection. The infant mortality rate in these areas is between 32 to 54 per 1. Private sector involvement and finance ought to be mobilised according to the World Bank. these have been used to encourage water conservation.4%. The Alliance for the Protection of Natural Resources and Human Rights challenged it in the Supreme Court. Instead of seeking O&M contracts for populations of 50-200.000 people.70 16. who are connected to the capital Colombo's sewerage system.67 154. Over the past 10 years. As a result of the progressive billing scheme.40 21. of which US$80 million had been annually disbursed. new water connections and fleet management. are proposed at US$8 per capita which presently has only a 47% coverage.62 235. Manila Water Company (Ayala Corporation and United Utilities) is considering developing a suitable form of contract for 500. being made to pay the operation and maintenance (O&M) costs of a proposed new system.95 17. Proposals for new investments average US$61 per capita in the Western Region (including the capital.15 Monthly bill (Rs) 200 2001 199. with sanitation at 50% coverage by the same time. In 2003. Currently. The drinking water supply system is managed by the National Water Supply and Drainage Board (NWSDB). per capita daily consumption has decreased from 200L per day in 1995 to 140L in 2003 with the medium term of reducing this to 100L.02 125. The CEA was given enforcing powers through an amendment of the NEA in 1988.27 178.7million people (21%) live in the urban areas in Sri Lanka.

There is no general desire to see privatisation in the near future. laundry. Sweden has some 800. Where the water is delivered by the municipality the households pay for distribution and treatment of water and wastewater at cost. This approach has been a twin edged sword commercially. The need to manage costs at home and the appreciation that market opportunities are being missed abroad are having gradual repercussions.000 private wells. While services are clearly outstanding. the industry will pay for the production of water.977m 3 2. cooking.SWEDEN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS SWEDEN Sweden has for some time been held as an example by various anti-privatisation NGOs. 2015 Water provision There is no shortage of fresh water in Sweden. the delivery and the treating of wastewater at cost price. Perhaps there are two motivations for this. The objective is to reach full cost recovery.0km³ 19. sanitation. with entities such as Stockholm Water being forbidden from seeking international privatisation contracts despite their service delivery record at home and the high regard in which their consulting work abroad is held.0 83% 84% 20% 100% 100% 100% 178. In addition. 30%.9 9.969 US$26. The water and sewerage sectors are seen as parts of the municipalities. In contrast. 5%. For agricultural use there is no pricing policy.7km³ 35% 30% 4% 218 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services A purist approach Given that the water flowing from Stockholm into the sea is regarded as fit to drink. Overall. 10%. In the case where the water is delivered by the municipality. their costs are hard to bear. Nearly 100% of the drinking water from the urban municipality water plants is more or less treated. The use of fresh water in households in 1994 was as follows: personal hygiene. it is evident that environmental compliance in Sweden follows the country’s singularly purist agenda rather than allowing itself to be held back by the ambitions of other nations. but larger ones are in the public domain. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. US$26. 20%. cleaning and car washing. Freshwater Annual availability (2000) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1995) Domestic (1984) Industrial (1984) Agriculture (1994) Financing services Every landowner has the right to groundwater resources below his property and small lakes are likewise private. The country remains understandably content to plough its own furrow and is set to remain committed to municipal water ownership and management for the short term.050 3% 28% 69% 8. 15% and dish washing 20%. Thus the VE contract award is not a total surprise. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Structure of ownership The 300 water suppliers in Sweden are either municipalities or municipally owned and have a monopoly in their respective areas. almost all cost for water production. The total volume of fresh water used is 3. delivery and wastewater treatment are currently recovered through pricing policies already in force.3 billion m 3 pa. in Sweden official water distribution losses are seen as being in the region of 20-22%.

Sweden had already more than satisfied the UWWTD with 95% of the population served by tertiary sewage treatment works. in 2003.000 808. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage VE VE (France) 50.0% 1. 54% of all sewage undergoes advanced treatment. The target is for 100% coverage in the medium term.612.704.0% 1. there were six municipalities that had outsourced their water activities.0% 0.0% 6. water and wastewater VE A number of local O&M contracts were undertaken with local companies on a trial basis in the late 1980s and early 1990s.0% 0.0% 20. Skanska and NCC with the exception of Norrtalje.000 778. Development of sewage services Sewage treatment Primary Secondary and tertiary Total 1970 19% 44% 63% 1975 3% 78% 81% 1980 1% 81% 82% 1985 1% 93% 94% 1990 1% 93% 94% 1992 1% 94% 95% By 2000. which awarded a contract to VE in 2002.0% 0.0% 7. All of these are with Swedish companies such as Ragn-Sells.0% 1995 87. although there is no plan for the recycling of wastewater.0% N/A N/A 20. 100% of urban sewage is treated.000 2015 1.0% 5.000 Total 50.SWEDEN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Groundwater Annual availability (2000) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1995) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) Sewerage and sewage treatment 1980 61. MAJOR CITIES City Stockholm Göteborg 2000 1.0km³ 2.000 50.000 Comments PSP currently ruled out PSP currently ruled out Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Norrtalje 10 year contract.0% The proportion of the population connected to sewerage services increased from 82% in 1980 to 93% in 1995.0% 9.6km³ 92% 8% 0% Tertiary Secondary Primary Sewerage only Not connected 1990 85. In addition.245m 3 0.000 219 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .

in that they were formed prior to 1950 and can have some private capital. Switzerland seeks to have 100% of urban effluents treated in the medium term. 97-98% of urban domestic sewerage is treated. Sewerage and sewage treatment 1980 41% 32% 0% N/A N/A 1990 62% 28% 0% 1% 9% 1995 71% 23% 0% 0% 6% 2000 82% 14% 0% 1% 3% Tertiary Secondary Primary Sewerage only Not connected Water services remain a public sector concern The municipalities own all sewerage services. existing shares of water concerns in private hands continue to be purchased by the municipalities. the water and sewerage sectors are seen as parts of the municipalities and in 1996. However.SWITZERLAND PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS SWITZERLAND Sewerage runs like clockwork The proportion of the population connected to sewerage services increased from 70% in 1980 to 90% in 1990. 180 out of the 900 municipal sewage treatment works are regarded as being in need of upgrading or replacement. There are some corporatised water services. Investments in sewerage and sewage treatment accounted for SwF2 billion in 1997. 55% of these effluents were recovered for agricultural use in 1994. By 1995. Switzerland reaffirmed that privatisation is not to be considered in the foreseeable future. Indeed. and 97% of this is to at least secondary standard. most sewage treatment works were seen as being UWWTD compliant. while sewerage service charges seek to cover at least 90% of costs so as to encourage preventative measures 220 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . even though many lakes will fall into the sensitive waters category. Water tariffs are intended to recover 60-80% of costs. which were typically formed between 1950 and 1970.

4km 3.1km 3.5 25. while the Taipei City Water Supply Department looks after Taipei. 28% is currently utilised. Taiwan vies with South Korea as the most developed of the Asian economies. They have resulted in 11. along with various Regulations on effluent standards passed between 1988 and 1997. Water distribution losses are estimated at 20%. There are currently no plans for stake sales of water concerns. Nevertheless. 1991 (revised in 1997). million) Total (2020.0–3. The Water Resources Planning Commission reports to the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA). The EPA carries out end of pipe audits of industrial discharges.4km 3 in 1997. Water demand forecasts Total extraction of water was 19. of which. The first BOT infrastructure contracts of any kind were awarded in 1997. Urban Services Safe drinking water (1991) L per capita per day % Sewage treated (1997) Water resources 3. Groundwater supplies between 21% (wet year) and 41% (dry year) of water needs. Population Total (2002. with the first such contract for bulk water provision being awarded in 2002. Reservoirs supply 18 – 20% of needs depending on the level of rainfall. Economics (2001) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services US$12. Domestic water consumption accounted for 2. Use of water in agriculture is expected to be constant at 15. The two main items of legislation are the Water Pollution Control Act.0 69% 77% 24% 84% 3. Singapore and Hong Kong. with the Central Government looking after the financing.2–5. while industrial water consumption accounted for 1. and is forecast to rise to 21. The Taiwan Water Supply Corporation is in charge of overall water supply. Groundwater shortage in Taipei and the city Kaohsiung affect industrial concerns as almost all the domestic water for these cities is obtained from river water. having a total capacity of 2.7km 3 in 1997. Construction is approved on a local basis.5km 3 pa in 1997. and is forecast to rise to 4.0km 3 by 2036. BOT projects for transport have been permitted since 1997 and the state’s engineering.0km 3. The country is approaching privatisation cautiously. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2020) In urban agglomerations (2015) Organisation and regulation The Ministry of the Interior is responsible for sewers. This reflects the potential constraints that Taiwan’s water resources may impose on economic growth and rising consumer expectations. 1974 (revised in 1991) and the Drinking Water Management Act. but a shortage of funds for developing the sewerage infrastructure is creating opportunities for international companies.2–23. without further infrastructure development. the market for pollution control equipment in the country has been growing at 6-7% pa between 1996 and 1999. The maximum potential for sustainable water abstraction is estimated at 20 billion m³ pa. Investment in water provision and distribution accounted for 0.000 fines between July 1994 and June 1998 for violations of effluent discharge limits. The monitoring of water availability and its use is of a high quality. These forecasts point to an excess in demand over currently 221 22. 78% of rainfall takes place between May and October. which in turn asks the Government for funding and advises on spending priorities. and is forecast to rise to 2. Actual regulation was marked by a progressive relaxation of effluent limits in the mid 1990s in order to stimulate economic development.022 5% 32% 63% After Japan. It also resembles South Korea in recently unveiling a cautious liberalisation programme that intends to encourage international investment in water and sewerage infrastructure development and services operation in the medium term.0km 3 by 2036.112 7% Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .156 m³ per capita pa of water is available.87% of GNP from 1953-1992.876 US$13.TAIWAN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS TAIWAN Political and economic liberalisation are creating opportunities in Taiwan for the medium to long term. power and telecommunications companies are either partly privatised or in the process of privatisation. 20% of the population relies on groundwater as the primary water source.

This is currently running some years behind schedule.33million people. while Phase 3 plans to extend to Taichung (0. The official target for Phase 2 is for 40% of sewage effluents to be treated by 2000.3% 1990 65% 8% 16% 11% In 2001.5 13% Over-abstraction of groundwater has resulted in saltwater ingress. covering Taipei will result in 17% of sewage being treated.45 million m 3 of drinking water per day to 15. with the 1998 National Environmental Protection Plan aiming for 26% of sewage to be treated by 2011 and 7% of effluents treated in 2001.8 – 2. The main period of construction is expected to be from 2003 to 2010. In 1996 water utilities in Taiwan provided 8.5 2.2–.5% 23. with the remaining 2% treated by two 20 year old secondary STWs and two small tertiary STWs.6million 222 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Phase 2 includes covering Kaohsiung and 11 other areas.295 2.54% pass 64.000 samples per annum are taken. source contamination had caused some deterioration in water quality. 35% of rivers were of bad to fair quality. Until recently. m 3) Withdrawals (1997.5% in 1981 to 84. further development of the country’s reservoirs and bulk water supply network looks necessary in the longer term. all of this being in Taipei. Drinking water quality: 1991 1996 1997 1998 1999 98.908 0. Internal renewable resources Total (1998. km 3) For domestic use (1997) Development of water services Access to piped water rose from 69.972 13. Water quality standards Drinking water quality is assessed under Article 11 of the 1997 Drinking Water Management Statues.447 1983 74% 4% 17% 6% % of BOD 23.03% pass 99.10% pass 99. Phase 1. While distribution losses can be reduced from their current level of 20% to perhaps 15-18%. Domestic usage rose from 66m 3 per capita per annum in 1977 to 121m 3 per capita per annum in 1995. The EPA has drawn up a three-stage plan for treating up to 70% of the country’s effluent load. km 3) Per capita (1998.84million people).2% 53.3million 2. Sewage treatment plan Phase 1 2 3 Cost (NT$) 40billion 106billion TBA Capacity (m³ / day) 1. Phase 3 has not yet been formally approved and requires financing to be organised. Taipei’s main sewage treatment work offers primary treatment (5% of sewage). The EPA’s long-term (Phase 3) aim of reaching 60-70% sewage treatment is now unlikely to be attained until 201520.2million 1.59% pass 99. 15.TAIWAN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS sus tainable resources of 1. Effluent discharge of Taiwan (1990) Domestic sewage Industrial effluent Agricultural effluent River water quality Good / Very Good Fair Poor Bad m m³ / day 4. Sewerage infrastructure At a national level.0km 3 per annum by 2036. while river quality has declined because of uncontrolled discharges. 7% of sewage was treated in 1996.17% pass 97.2% in 1991.

probably during the next 5-10 years.000 1. building new facilities and operating the new plant for a period of 15 years.68million m³ per day or 247million m³ pa.463. the first bulk water provision privatisation award was made in 2002 to Suez. Industrial effluent has been charged since 2002.5million m³ per day. while there are no current plans to charge domestic customers. the Bureau of Water Resources has overseen the development of five water quality protection zones.697.74million m³ per day. Water supply is unlikely to be privatised for 1020 years.5million living in outlying towns and suburbs.000 1. Seven water treatment works treat 2.TAIWAN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Improving river water quality Since 1998. The water tariff operates on a sliding scale with an average tariff of US$0. The 1998 National Environmental Protection Plan sets river water quality targets until 2011.000 Note: The United Nations does not recognise Taiwan’s separate existence (while doing so for Hong Kong).550. with no surcharge for sewerage services.000. water treatment 223 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . All properties are metered.336 2006 >68% 2. covring equipment overhaul. 59% of households were connected to mains sewerage. The River Basin and Marine Management Plan will cost NT$147.0 184 6.000m 3 of drinking water per day from March 2004.244 per m³ with charges increasing above 10m³ pa.189.1 billion and run from 2001-11.000 0 3. m 3) Withdrawals (1997. km 3) For domestic use (1997) Private sector opportunities The sale of stakes in water and sewerage entities remains some years away. via 422. Sewage effluents total 0. 1996 62% 2. with a capacity of 0. so the economic and population data used is not strictly comparable with the rest of this publication. A further facility (Chitan V) will be constructed by 2011. In the meantime. the facility will also serve a further 1. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Kaoshing 17 year water treatment BOT Ondeo In 2002 the Taiwan Water Supply Corporation awarded Suez and Ecotek (China Steel of Twiwan) a contract for the overhaul and operation of a drinking water plant in Kaohsiung.000 2015 2.5million people. Water use was 675million m³ pa. By 2002. MAJOR CITIES Population Taipei Kaoshiung City study: Taipei Water supply and sewerage services in the metropolitan area are run by the Taipei City Water Department. While the city has 1. The river basins involved provide water for 14million people. Sewerage is currently being considered for privatisation. All 1. km 3) Per capita (1998.0 2% 2000 2.095 households were connected to the water supply in 1993. Chitan IV being completed in 2001. Distribution losses are estimated at 24%.568 4. of which Ondeo Degrémont’s share is €90 million. Groundwater resources Total recharge (1998. with the remaining 30% of the city connected to mains sewerage.000 Status Privatisation probable in the medium to long term Suez.678. Year Unpolluted river waters BOD reduction (t/day) Policy implementation At present there are no fees for wastewater discharge.000. The new facility will produce 450. The contract is worth €200 million.379 septic tanks. ROC Government and EPA statistics have been used (yearbooks and from their respective web sites). with an average daily consumption of 281L per capita.475 2011 >70% 2. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total Ondeo Suez (France) 3. 93% of which comes from domestic sewage.

Urban data Served by piped water Access to sewerage Rural scarcity remains the norm Much of Tanzania is characterised by extreme aridity and the need for water for basic agricultural development. [2] private sector participation (PSP). Only 5-10% of the households have sewerage. 65% of the urban and 43% of the rural population have access to potable water within 400 metres. These are at best an interim measure.3 45. can only supply 10% of the daily required water capacity. Nine of these ponds have been set up in Dar es Salaam and several others in small municipalities. By 1993. [4] decentralisation of service delivery from Central Government to district councils.000 connections. 27% of the population who live in high density urban sectors use pit latrines which are in typically in a poor state of repair. Tanzania was placed within the idealistic end of the African political spectrum. which was privatised in 2003. Iringa and Mbeya. in 2002. while well intentioned. The city has 35-40% distribution losses and provides 272. The Government has attempted to treat part of the waste through waste stabilisation ponds. The majority of the waste collected in the sewage system is channelled to an ocean outfall without treatment.8million litres of water per day. Approximately 35% of the city’s sewage was treated. between 1983 and 1994.9 34% 47% 18% 73% 97% Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Dar es Salaam has the oldest sewage system in the country. In 1999.000 water meters as a first phase towards a water demand management and distribution loss identification strategy. did little to encourage the development or maintenance of water or sewerage services. In Dar es Salaam 35% of the population have inadequate water supply and 45% have inadequate sanitation. In July 2002.TANZANIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS TANZANIA Political considerations have led to the neglect of Tanzania’s urban water and sewerage services. For example. the UK water and sanitation charity provided potable water supply infrastructure to 224 US$267 US$580 45% 15% 40% 36. but better than no treatment. ending a three year development process. At present over 40% of water is unaccounted for and with 98. The 1990s saw a fundamental re-appraisal as to the role the private sector can play in the development of public services. Currently. Germany and the European Union are currently providing US$51 million to provide safe drinking water to one million water users in Mwanza. Privatising these services carries the potential of generating real improvements in service delivery from an exhausted infrastructure. approximately 80% of the urban poor in Tanzania lack water and sewerage services because of chronic underfunding. DAWASA. A fairly austere form of socialism was adopted. against a demand for 409. The ponds are capable of removing up to 70% of the BOD. only 20% of Dar es Salaam's three million inhabitants have a sewerage connection. 2015 Services in Dar es Salaam The city consumes at least 60million gallons per day whereas the Dar es Salaam Water and Sewerage Authority (DAWASA) supply capacity is less than 6million gallons daily.2million litres per day in 2003. Dar es Salaam got a US$117 million loan from the World Bank for the installation of 100. only 22% of households in Dar es Salaam were connected to piped water and 6% had sewerage services. Affordability issues will need to be carefully handled. leaving the water with a reasonable dissolved oxygen level. The four key issues in the revised policy are: [1] demand responsive approach (DRA) principle leading to community ownership and management (COM) of water/sanitation facilities. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services An experiment in need of fine tuning? In the 1960s to 1980s. The country has been largely dependent on international finance and aid agencies. the Cabinet approved a revised National Water Policy (NAWAPO). [3] integration of water supply and sanitation and. which. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. WaterAid. This is notably the case in Dar es Salaam. Nationally.

In 1971. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Dar es Salaam 10 year water & sewerage O&M Cascal A 30% price increase and a two-tier billing system aimed at keeping the price of water low for the poor has resulted in increased prices for the poor who do not have individual connections and have to buy water from vendors who will pass down the price increases. Furthermore.000 people. the majority of which were planned for completion during the first five year period. By 2007-08. the government launched a twenty-year rural water supply programme to provide the rural population with a clean. The Tanzanian Government seeks to have all rural households within 400 metres of a reliable source of potable water. The US$161 million project is being co-financed by the African Development Bank (US$48 million).000.080. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1998) Domestic Industrial Agriculture New approaches to rural needs In 1999 it was announced that after a series of field trials. Government policies in the water sector attempted to redress the urban-rural imbalances in water development. revealed that only 42% of the anticipated 89% coverage had been attained in the rural areas.0km 3 2.5 million). of the USA was to provide up to US$30 million of solar water pumps to the Tanzanian Ministry of Water and the Drilling and Dam Construction Agency. In consequence. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita MAJOR CITIES City Dar es Salaam 30.TANZANIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS approximately 630. the European Development Bank (US$37 million).2km 3 9% 2% 89% 2000 2.115. developing more community water points will reduce the price for most of the city residents. the urban water supply and sewerage situation had seriously deteriorated. DAWASA (US$12. A review of the water programme by the Ministry of Water in the early 1980s. and adequate water supply within 400m of each house.000 Total 3. the Government's privatisation programme had resulted in the sale of nearly half of the state owned enterprises.000 2015 4.000 Status Some O&M outsourcing Urban services are being privatised The Government’s divestiture programme in 1993 concentrated on the privatisation of commercial enterprises. although there are no firm timetables for this target as yet.0km 3 932m 3 80. After independence in 1961. In June 1996.000. was enacted in 2003 as part of the Government's economic liberalisation programme to enable PSP. WorldWater Corp. By 1998.000.000 gallons per minute and can be used for potable water and irrigation in rural areas. the Parastatal Sector Reform Commission (PSRC) awarded a 10 year O&M contract for the water and sewerage services in Dar es Salaam to Cascal (Biwater/Nuon) JV. safe. the World Bank (US$55 million) and City Water (US$8.770m 3 1. These pumps have a capacity of 5-2. it was noted that as a result of government's emphasis on rural water supply. It is of interest to note that WaterAid found that villagers were willing to exchange 10-15% of their household cash income for water from these projects.000 3. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Cascal Biwater (UK)/Nuon (Netherlands) 3.5 million). policies affecting the National Urban Water Authority (NUWA)/Dar es Salaam Water and Sewerage Authority (DAWASA) were changed to allow encourage cost recovery and the Dar es Salaam Water and Sewerage Authority (Dawasa) Act.000 225 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .

or 75% of the population within its coverage area. or 6.356 people. rising to 10million by 2001. This new law created three environmental organisations: the Office of Environmental Policy and Planning (OEPP). creating the National Environment Board (NEB) and the Office of National Environment Board (ONEB). transferring the supervision of the Office to the Ministry of Science. for the rest of Thailand).060 US$7. Population Total (2002.425 people in 300 districts of 42 provinces in 1998.5million people in Bangkok in 1991. the Ministry of Science. In addition. Technology and Energy. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Government departments and law Thailand’s first environmental law. the MWA served 6million people.369. This act was amended twice in 1978 and 1979. the PWA seeks to upgrade 230 water treatment works for bht 35 billion (US$945 million). Water policy is enforced by MOSTE. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Management Water is managed through the Metropolitan Waterworks Authority (MWA. Technology and Energy changed its name to the Ministry of Science. plans and strategies at both national and local levels as well as the enforcement of laws and regulations. This compared with shortages affecting 228.THAILAND PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS THAILAND Thailand has both encouraged the development of home-grown water companies and the use of international management for its water and sewerage services.664 families or 945.437 families. the Pollution Control Department (PCD) and the Department of Environmental Quality Promotion (DEQP). Poor water treatment facilities mean that water has to be boiled or filtered before use and 20% of the population use bottled water instead. Urban Services Safe Drinking water L per capita per day Access to sewerage % Sewage treated Water provision and pollution The MWA served 4.415 704 Sold(m m 3/day) 857 474 Connections (million) 1.350. These three organisations are mandated to promote the effective implementation of policies.2 69. according to the interior ministry. in 364 districts of 44 provinces in early 1999. Thailand’s East Water has performed strongly given the domestic climate. 31% of water is lost due to leakage. A comprehensive privatisation programme has been under development since 2000 and may well emerge during 2005. for Bangkok) and the Provincial Waterworks Authority (PWA.0 US$2. Rural water provision remains a problem. These acts had limited effect and in 1992 the 'Enhancement and Conservation of National Environmental Quality Act' (NEQA) of 1992 (B. 94% 172 98% 5% 226 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Technology and Environment (MOSTE).E. million) Total (2015. The PWA served 3. with widespread seasonal scarcity. Water shortages affected 1. 2535) was passed. Water services 2001 MWA PWA Produced 1. which includes the Wastewater Management Authority and the Department of Environmental Quality Promotion and the Pollution Control Department. with 79% of the city area covered.010 10% 40% 50% 62. compared with current resources of 300million m 3 a day.7million people in 1991.6 32% 37% 15% US$700 million is to be spent linking three rivers in eastern Thailand to provide 504million m 3 of water by 2006 and 647million m 3 by 2016. In 2001. The Enhancement and Conservation of National Environmental Quality Act was passed in 1975.45 3. In consequence.

000 0 VE VE (France) N/A 0 Total N/A N/A 800. it acquired Electricity Generating Pcl’s 70% stake in Egcom Tara. the company seeks to be involved in the new privatisation programme and is concentrating on gaining concessions in Bangkok. the State Enterprises Policy Committee (SEPC) rejected an application for a direct supplies concession for Thames Water and prohibited the Provincial Waterworks Authority (PWA) from offering any new private deals until the completion of a World Bank-sponsored review. EW also has an industrial water JV with VE. The MWA will be split into West and East Bangkok zones. while 18% were in good condition. km 3) Per capita (1998. MAJOR CITIES Population 2000 Bangkok 7.000 0 Bangkok RWE (Germany) 400. The authority also plans a nation-wide overhaul of water systems to reduce unaccounted for water levels from the current 35. In 2000.000 N/A 227 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . the Government announced that the PWA would launch 12 major water privatisation projects for bulk water supply.0 314 1. The PWA will meanwhile be split into four regional entities. The SEPC ordered the PWA to change its service concessions with Thames into turnkey construction contracts. which generated combined revenues of US$385 million in 2002. In 2004. Factories were not linked up to the privatised systems because they continued to use cheaper water from artesian wells. km 3) For domestic use (1987) For industry (1987) For agriculture (1987) Privatisation plans In July 1998. The PWA privatisation is worth an estimated US$1 billion. Water competition for industrial customers was introduced in 2001. m 3) Withdrawals (1990.0 60% 26% 14% 2015 9. Thames Water’s water provision contract to northern Bangkok was extended in 1995 to cover additional water management operations. with five concessions from PWA gained by East Water’s Universal Utilities.1 5% 4% 91% 43. km 3) Per capita (1998. This project started in mid 1999. the Pollution Control Department found water quality in 33% of major rivers to be polluted.372. it was announced that the Government was considering an IPO of the MWA which in turn would be linked with one or more strategic partners.0 1. The PWA has introduced a new method of calculating water bills by the end of the year to better reflect actual costs. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Egcom Tara East Water (Thailand) N/A 0 East Water East Water (Thailand) N/A 0 Pathum Thani RWE (Germany) 800. Groundwater Total recharge (1998. a privately held water supply company. The PWA had already been forced to pay a private operator BHT118 million ( €3.3 million) compensation because of the resulting underutilisation of the available capacity.000 Status Partly privatised Privatisation moves unsteadily forward In July 2000. PWA hopes the price increases will reduce the losses incurred from subsidising industrial water consumption and pave the way for eventual privatisation.816.845 33. water treatment and water distribution in 10 provinces in the medium term and that further concessions for Bangkok are to be awarded.000 110. km 3) For domestic use (1980) For industry (1980) For agriculture (1980) Companies noted East Water (EW) remains the only private sector company entirely devoted to water activities. Freshwater Total (1998.6% to 25%. m 3) Withdrawals (1980. In addition to its current network expansion plans.THAILAND PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS In 1998.000 400. with the corporatisation of the PWA starting in 2000.

02) per m 3 for households in the first year.16) for industrial use.08) for hospitals. 228 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . the consultation process failed to meet with the Asian Development Bank’s guidelines for good practice. Asia Water 18 (3) p 9-13. department stores and hotels. state agencies and state enterprises would not pay the fee for the first 10m 3 of water each month. The fee will be phased in over three years to minimise this. The rate was set by the Drainage and Sewerage Department: THB2 (€0. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Bangkok 30 year BOT. Concern has been raised about the emphasis on post hoc effluent treatment rather then concentrating on sources of industrial pollution. water distribution RWE East seaboard Water provision to seven provinces Eastern Water Lampang THB800 million water supply project Eastern Water/VE North Bangkok Water management Pathum Thani Ratcharburi THB690 million water supply project Eastern Water Source: Brown. via a service fee. (2002). At the same time. while the operators were unable to demonstrate suitable technical capabilities.04) per m 3 of water for household use.23) a month for treatment. and THB8 (€0. Listed water & sewerage service companies (Please see company section for details) Company Activities Region Eastern Water Water distribution concession Eastern seaboard Corporate malpractice concerns The US$750 million Samut Prakarn wastewater management project has been put on hold due to concerns about the lack of transparency. markets. THB4 (€0. starting with THB1 (€0.THAILAND PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Paying for sewerage Domestic and business customers were charged for wastewater treatment for the first time in 2003. S. The cost per household was estimated at THB60 (€1. Households.

the Inter-American Development Bank supported a proposal for a 25 year concession for water and sewerage services. Since developing a concession would take too much time in the run up to the 1995 general elections.TRINIDAD & TOBAGO PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS TRINIDAD and TOBAGO The Trinidad and Tobago Management Contract The Water and Sewerage Authority of Trinidad and Tobago (WASA). In 1996. A management contract was chosen because of the poor quality of operational information available. designed to assist the development of conditions suitable for private sector participation.000 customers were metered. 30% by an international company and 10% by Government employees. Until the mid-1980s. WASA and the Government of Trinidad and Tobago. In the first phase. WASA increased tariffs by 35% for customers receiving water for more than twelve hours a day so as to encourage the private sector operator to expand coverage and ensure a reliable service.27million people. The contract has been seen as politically contentious during its five year life. The contract award process has yet to be started. undeveloped institutional arrangements and the potential for slow legislative change. to ensure that the politics of the increase would not sour the arrival of the new operator in the eyes of the public. a two-phase strategy was adopted. The tariff increase was introduced in 1995. In 1994 the Government decided to adopt a phased privatisation strategy for the service. During the five years of this contract. not least because there was a certain comfort to be found in providing a cheap but substandard service. 229 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . The sewerage system served only 30% of the population. the government had not raised rates for fifty years and by the end of 1992. The contract allowed for Severn Trent to negotiate a follow-on contract within a specified time limit after which it becomes open to all. maintenance. The contract ended in April 1999. provides water and sewerage services to the island’s 1. Management contracts were seen to be the most flexible way of allowing the authorities to gain hands on experience of private sector contracts in the sector. The process was supported by a US$80 million loan from the World Bank. a concession contract would be developed. piped water was available for less than twelve hours a day. WASA would contract a private operator to provide a management team to meet operational. The contract covering water supply. distribution losses were about 50% and 1% of the 240. This timing was meant to separate the two events. In 2003. sewerage and sewage treatment and disposal was awarded in 1996 to a JV between Severn Trent. and investment targets and follow an agreed business plan over the term of the agreement. it had accumulated losses of US$800 million. It is understood that this will involve a an operating company with 60% of its equity being locally owned.

000m 3 per day to 150.000 households with 4. The European Investment Bank lent Tunisia €50 million for encouraging the privatisation of businesses and utilities in December 1998. 199 towns will be connected to the sewerage network by 2011. a further 100. Meanwhile.000m 3 per day. serving 0. which is an urban connection rate of 77%. To meet demand by 2006. Secondary treatment is being used wherever it is possible. The latter was meant to increase to 77% by 2000.TUNISIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS TUNISIA Water provision All households in urban areas are connected to the mains for potable water. Sewage treatment development Million m 3 pa 1995 1996 2001 2006 Plants 48 50 66 83 Capacity 135 140 175 185 Treated 111 120 155 165 Privatisation projects and prospects The Tunis West Water Treatment Project is designed to promote the participation of the private sector in the management and financing of the country’s infrastructure. with 40. 230 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . saw 25 towns connected to the sewerage network with 111 towns covered in total. There was a reduction in leakage of 28% in 1996. The Tunis West wastewater treatment plant proposal. treating 120million m 3 of water with 30million m 3 recycled for irrigation and 8million m 3 for amenity gardens.6million people are connected to the sewerage network. There were 50 sewage treatment works in operation in 1996. Distribution losses in 1993 were 34% (280 million m 3 of water distributed and 209 million m 3 billed for).210 730 165 85 980 Groundwater 719 745 0 0 745 Sewerage and sewage treatment The 8th Plan (1991-96). a national spending plan). 660. 1996 Resources Usage Irrigation Drinking Industry Total Surface water 2.4million people by the 2023 target date.000m 3 per day of capacity being be added to the existing 80. two WWTWs in Tunis are to be expanded: The Choutrana plant's capacity will be raised from 110.000m 3 per day of capacity is required. The project involves the construction of a new water treatment facility with a capacity to serve 1.0million people is to be developed for US$100 million via a 25 year BOT concession remains under c onsideration six years after it was originally proposed in 1998.700 754 200 0 954 Deep underground 1. There are also plans to separate stormwater flows from sewage effluent in the country’s earlier systems.7-1. The average household usage is 100L per day. Deep boreholes account for 45% of drinking water. but new sources are being developed.000m 3 per day Sud Meliane plant. Current groundwater resources are expected to be used up by 2010. with current sanitation plans for 160 towns. along with a 65% connection rate in rural areas. Water resources Million m 3 .

2% N/A N/A 1995 0. It is widely expected that water privatisations will take place in the medium term.0% N/A N/A 1990 0. Freshwater Total (1998.TURKEY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS TURKEY The deaths as a result of the Izmit earthquake in 1999 were a stark reminder that as far as infrastructure is concerned.3 82.5% 91% 84% 5% Tertiary Secondary Primary Sewerage only Not connected International players noted Suez and Thames Water have a major presence in the country. Izmit (bulk water provision) and Antalya (O&M. but political opposition and legal problems remain. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Population Total (2002.5% 50.6% 7. km 3) Per capita (1998. This makes life difficult for international finance.0 3.0% 0. million) Total (2015.1 66% 72% 30% Water shortages in recent years have become a widespread problem that has been exacerbated by rapid urbanisation. In this sense.638 US$6. whereby some form of independent international arbitration would be more attractive.074 35. International construction companies are likely to find favour in the medium term as service rehabilitation and extension gets underway.0% 0. Spending plans The Istanbul Water and Sewerage Administration (ISKI) allocated US$450 million for infrastructure projects in 2003.6% 8. m 3) Withdrawals (1993.0% 3. There is a high level of public support for privatisation. Urban services Safe drinking water Access to sewerage % Sewage treated Sewerage and sewage treatment 1985 0.1% 0. Turkish courts are responsible for the operation of BOT concessions whereby the courts have to clear each project and all objections to them.4% 37. having been designed with earthquakes in mind.390 16% 24% 60% 70. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) US$2. The dam built by RWE /Thames Water was unaffected. while United Utilities/Bechtel and SAUR were involved in the bidding for Antalya. with am emphasis on sewerage and sewage treatm ent.5 16% 11% 73% 231 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Privatisation Turkey was one of the pioneers in the use of BOT contracts in the developing economies during the early 1980s. the quality of the plant installed can matter as much as its quantity. water and sewerage) are groundbreaking contracts. km 3) For domestic use (1992) For industry (1992) For agriculture (1992) 196.

The principal components were: US$236 million Export Credit Guarantee Department (ECGD) supported credit loan arranged by Nat West (UK). 23%). km 3) Per capita (1998.000 3. the three year construction phase has been completed and in 1999. A reservoir supplies water to Izmit. Sumitomo (Japan.000 2.000 1. US$803 million of debt finance was arranged. The water treatment works is 5km downstream from the reservoir. These investments are reflected in their respective holdings in Izmit Su As. 35%).155.5%).000 0 Total 535. km 3) For domestic use (1990) For industry (1990) For agriculture (1990) 20. and has a capacity of 480million litres per day.953. US$167 million Turkish commercial loan.362.091.000 933. Guris (Turkey. Mitsui (Japan. 7.000 1.200. The reservoir has a capacity of 60billion litres with an annual yield of 142billion litres.000 535.000 1.000 2.000 Izmit Su As RWE (Germany) 1.5%).000 232 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 Status Partial privatisation of bulk water N/A Privatisation under consideration Privatisation under consideration N/A N/A Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Antalya 10 year O&M for water and sewerage ANTSU Izmit 15 year concession.166. 7.000 2015 11. Since then. 12%) and the remaining 15% by the Izmit municipality. US$40 million Japanese commercial loan and US$180 million JEXIM credit loan. US$180 million COFACE buyer credit loan.551. The project involved 100km of pipeline being built. US$140 million of equity finance was provided by Thames Water (UK. Groundwater Total recharge (1998. connecting the reservoir to the city of Izmit.000 3. m 3) Withdrawals (1990. the contract entered its 15 year operational phase.704. the surrounding towns and villages and to Istanbul. The project was 85% debt and 15% equity financed.000 1.200.214. The treatment facilities cost US$100 million to build. Gama (Turkey.3 43% 0% 57% MAJOR CITIES Population Istanbul Ankara Izmir Bursa Adana Gaziantep 2000 8.778.288.000 1.00 314 6.000 757. the operating company.TURKEY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Izmit Izmit had a troubled start because of the Turkish BOT award system delaying the start of the contract implementation process for nearly two years. bulk water Izmit Su SA Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage ANTSU Suez (France) 535.

service coverage in the area served by NWSC had improved to about 50%. There were no formal measures to recover water fees until 1987. providing services for about two hours a day.3% urban and 49. which also oversees the overall management of Uganda’s water resources. private sector participation may be invited in the medium term. is charged at the full rate of interest. by 1985. for the provision of urban water and sewerage services. which in most cases have been inadequate. These were interim measures. Uganda seeks to have 100% urban water coverage by 2010 and for rural areas by 2015. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. since 1993. operation and maintenance work and capital spending have been minimal except where directly supported by donor agencies.3 12% 14% 0% 60% 96% 0% 233 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Kampala had its water treatment works capacity expanded to meet the demand up to 1998. Urban data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment 25. If these can be used to develop the basis of a commercially viable water and sewerage service for urban areas. a German firm.5 billion in 1992 to USh21. but KRIP has been hampered by lack of administrative support. In consequence.P Gauff. was contracted to manage the Kampala Revenue Improvement Project (KRIP). 2015 Commercialising the NWSC In 1987. Lira. The NWSC was expected to strengthen measures for cost recovery.5 billion. The government believes that it can attain these targets. Mbarara. NWSC has extended its services to cover Masaka. Kasese. having reached 60. H. The NWSC The National Water and Sewerage Corporation (NWSC) are responsible for water provision to Uganda’s main urban areas. which. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services US$236 US$1. By 1997. nor an effective charging system. In Kampala. Tororo and Mbale.0 39.UGANDA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS UGANDA The main concern in Uganda is to continue the sectoral and service delivery reforms of the past two years. since they did not take into account the NWSC’s debt. Subscribers thus had to purchase untreated water from vendors. arrears have built up by an average of some USh5 billion pa. water was regarded as free for all Ugandans. Fort Portal. Under the President. Jinja and Entebbe. The collection of bills ranged between 60% and 100%. It was formed in 1972. Revenues increased from USh5. NWSC therefore relied on government subsidies. with NWSC attaining an operating profit in three of those five years. 83% of the population use pit latrines. and become fully self-financing in its operations. and smaller urban centres is run by the Government’s Directorate of Water Development. NWSC rehabilitated water and sewerage systems in nine major towns. an attempt had been made to improve revenue collection by privatising that department in late 1997.8% rural coverage in 1999-00. Idi Amin. The water supply systems in the urban centres operated at less than 10% of capacity. Paid for water increased from 3-5% in the mid-eighties to 30% in 1993 and levelled off at 40% for the next three years. the Ugandan Government liberalised the economy. Water and sanitation service provision in rural areas. but in rural areas access to safe sanitation is restricted to 51% of the population.390 44% 18% 38% Nationally.5 billion in 1996 and operational expenditure rose from USh5. Gulu.0 billion to USh19. With international credit guaranteed by the Government (but lent to NWSC at commercial interest rates). In consequence. Having started off in Kampala.

Unaccounted for water Tariffs have not increased since 1994. The NWSC and politicians support some degree of privatisation and the current state of legislation is regarded as being adequate to take this forward. 234 39. The World Bank and the ODA have been involved with the NWSC in the development of proposals for the contracting out of water and sanitation services. NWSC profits rose by 60%. an indexing component was introduced in April 2002.824 5/12 2001 39% 28% 89% 6. It was found that for cost recovery (including debt).840 278 13 65.0048) to UG$11 (€0. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic Industrial Agriculture Long term plans The Minister for Water. cost reduction and customer care.5 million) in 2001 to USh6. Customers within 50m from the NW&SC main water pipe will be connected free of charge and paying their water bills directly to the corporation. water losses through leakage and illegal connections have fallen from 60% in 1998 to an average of 39% in the country as a whole. The National Water and Sewerage Corporation (NW&SC) has increased water tariffs by 10%.3 billion ($2.2km 3 32% 8% 60% Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . due to the cost of servicing its accumulated debt.200 million. 60-65% of the urban population has access to water services and 10% is connected to sewerage networks. on the basis of increased water demand and network efficiency work.9 billion ($4 million) in 2002. linked with expanding coverage. from UG$10 (€0. No 7 of 1995. revenues. There have been some pilot projects using the private sector for community management in Jinja and Njeru and private sector involvement in arrears collection. In 2002. Lands and Environment stated in August 2000 that the government plans to provide safe water and sanitation facilities to all Ugandans by 2015. Privatisation prospects Private sector involvement is in line with the NWSC statute.412 3/12 1999 53% 37% 80% 5. The Public Enterprises Reform and Divestiture (PERD) Statute No. the initial improvement programme addresses five areas: Bulk water and sewerage services.0km 3 3. and 28% in Kampala in 2002.UGANDA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Reforming the NWSC In 1998. 40% of the population had access to safe water and 30% had access to adequate sanitation.8% in 2002.560 414 40 47. a 135% price rise would be needed. water distribution. from USh4.9 of 1993 seeks to reform and divest public enterprises. Instead.0053) per jerrycan (20L) in order to extend standpipes to customers. Water consumption rose by 4. NWSC lost USh4. Reform programme Programme 100 Days SEREP I SEREP II Area Performance I Area Performance II Service Support I Service Support II Duration Feb 1999 – May 1999 Aug 1999 – Jan 2000 Mar 2000 – Aug 2000 Sep 2000 – Sep 2001 Dec 2001 – Nov 2002 Dec 2000 – Sep 2001 Jan 2001 – Nov 2002 Ndombolo ya Solo.052 451 22 53.048). Programme implementation 1997 60% 44% 70% 4. According to NWSC.158m 3 0. The NWSC has seen seven phased performance enhancement programmes since William Muhairwe took over as Managing Director in November 1998.021 10/12 UFW* – Kampala UFW* – others Meter coverage Connections pa Debt age (days) Staff/1000 connections Water connections Break even rate * . Water kiosk owners have been selling a 20-litre jerrycan of water at UG$100 (€0.

360m 3 235 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .M. 1997.000m 3/day up from 85. Uganda. Water utilities research: NWSC. This project is designed to improve the efficiency of utility operations. improve the customer data base. Strategies and challenges of improving water and sanitation service delivery – a case of National Water and Sewerage Corporation. 29. the World Bank loaned Uganda US$48. The contract seeks to reduce losses and waste from the water distribution system. Ondeo was awarded an O&M contract for various O&M services in Kampala. while encouraging the privatisation of them where appropriate. London. Service coverage of the company’s water supply system has improved from 50% in 1998/99 to 60% in 2001/02. In 2000. Kampala pullout for Suez Ondeo Suez carried out a two year management contract with NWSC between 2002 and 2004.000 and 15. Kayaga (1997). the NWSC has yet to be formally included in the asset sale process. Uganda. July 2002. Eight private water operators responsible for water supply in 25 urban centres in Uganda have formed the Association of Private Water Operators in Uganda (APWO-Uganda) in 2003.O.5 million for the Privatisation and Utility Sector Reform Project. This contract is viewed as a trial for greater PSP. but decided not to seek to renew it when it expired in February 2004. The current proposal is for a lease contract of around ten years for towns in the NWSC service area. Total water production currently stands at an average of 130. billing system and operate the water supply and sewerage systems in Kampala on an efficient and cost effective basis. To date.000m 3/day in 1998. Onek & S. South Africa. 23rd WEDC Conference Durban.0km 3 1. In January 2002. These urban centres are small towns with populations between 5. extend water metering.000. Water 21. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Sources: H. Africa Energy Forum. W T Muhairwe (2002).UGANDA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS with asset sales typically linked to a market listing.

UKRAINE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS UKRAINE It is tempting to regard Chernobyl as one of the lesser problems facing the Ukraine.1 3.287. Water extraction from ground water sources reached 4.28 1990 29. million m³ Total Groundwater Industry Agriculture Household and municipal 1988 27.350.6billion m³.892. The introduction of private sector and international finance for water and sewerage projects remains at an early stage. Treatment capacity in 1994 Tertiary Secondary Primary million m³ pa 23 1. In 1994.7 1. The capacity of wastewater treatment facilities increased by 641million m³ from 1993 to 1994 and by 644million m³ pa between 1990 and 1993. Compared with 1990.999.67 1992 25.775million m³ pa. Water consumption In 1994 28.914.289million m³).680.54 4.895 million m³ of wastewater. In 2002.0 3.7 The total input into these installations was 5.528. is treated.28 1990 1.0 9.18 718.873million m³ (32.13 128.727. Financial instability and a decrepit and badly managed water provision infrastructure do not make an attractive proposition when seeking to modernise the Ukraine economy.142.4%) of contaminated water and 1.053million m³ (7.459. Wastewater discharges have declined by 27% since 1990.9% of overall demand for industrial purposes.86 10.5 million) is expected to start in the near future and will focus on the city’s discharges. including the capacity of installations that discharge wastewater directly to the inland water bodies (8. including more than 2km³ of contaminated wastewater and 375million m³ of untreated sewage effluent.32 64.9km³ of wastewater discharges. while discharges of contaminated wastewater increased by 35% as compared to 1990.0 Discharges of wastewater and contaminants In 1994 15.575.083.4 601. 26% less than in 1990.0 8.52 1992 2.03 110. The Dnieper river basin The Dnieper basin is the major source of fresh water in the Ukraine.6billion m³ of water was abstracted from inland water bodies for household and industrial use.31 4. the Helsinki Commission (Helcom) noted that municipal and industrial wastewater treatment at the city of Lvov needs to be improved urgently. Contaminated water discharges 1988-1994.53 1. and 16% of untreated wastewater. with industry accounting for 46% and 57% respectively and agriculture accounting for the remainder.696. Household and municipal utilities accounted for 48% of contaminated water.0 3.506. Discharges of contaminated wastewater were 500million m³ higher than in 1993. equivalent to 83.963.060.499. The sewerage network is in poor condition and needs renovation to avoid groundwater pollution. including 4.895. 236 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .81 403.3 2.291 10. with no change from 1993.93 18. 17. although some contaminants were lower or at the same level as in the previous year. Only 45% of the wastewater discharged into the Dnipro River.536.18 318.363.64 1994 22.573. Water resources and use 1988-1994.31 1.58 284. The basin received 7. The volume of recycled and secondary water used was 53.508. million m³ Industrial discharges Untreated Agriculture discharges Untreated Household and municipal Untreated Effluent treatment The total capacity of wastewater treatment facilities was estimated in 1995 to be 8. water intake has fallen by 18%.822.06 1994 2.05 13.99 3.267.168.4 290.4billion m³.0%) of untreated wastewater.782 207 1988 1.6 14.87 3.48 102.39 19.6 9.346.19 458. yet this river’s surface and underground resources supply water to two-thirds of the Ukrainian population.223.79 93.028million m³ of waste water were discharged.0 3.15 91. A US$40 million project (€40.533.0 1.3km³ of water was extracted from the Dnipro basin within Ukrainian territory.7 166.

equivalent to 24% of the total rural population of 15. 12. The capacity and effectiveness of water treatment facilities cannot meet the increasing demand for wastewater treatment. In 1994 5. the water and sewerage entity serving the city of Zaporizhzhia’s 500. Private sector responses The first international loan for a water or wastewater project did not take place until May 1999. The EBRD has lent €26.7million.3% of communal water supplies (1. due to the lack of an integrated system of water supply management. with 10. 237 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . The city was selected because it charges for its services on a cost recovery basis and is financially self-sufficient.5 million to Zaporizhzhia Vodokanal. The loan is being used to upgrade the city’s water and sewage treatment works to improve the quality of the city’s drinking water and to ease discharges into the Dnieper basin.8 million.9% of piped water did not meet hygiene standards (2% more than in 1993).7million people in rural areas enjoy h guaranteed water supplies for household and drinking purposes.UKRAINE PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Drinking water quality Water supply to the Ukrainian population has been declining from year to year. The city of Lviv gained a US$6 million loan from the Swedish Government in 2003 for the refurbishment of its water supply and wastewater systems. The total cost of the project is US$40.000 people. By 2000. Only 3.8% more than in 1993) and 6.4% of water pipes belonging to other bodies (1.4% less t an in 1993) also failing.5% of water supplies were failing drinking water quality standards and half of the villages with piped water were being served through failing systems.

The UAE continues to seek ways of making privatisation play a positive role.5 year operation and maintenance contract. 238 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Al Taweelah A-2 will then be built for 2001 at a cost of US$700 million.800 million. Capital spending of US$140 million was needed for the first phase. the 1982 Mafraq sewage treatment works served 330. Al Taweelh project stages: Taweelah Taweelah A-1 expansion Taweelah A-2 Taweelah A-3 72 million gallons per day currently available 40-50 million gallons per day from 1999 50-76 million gallons per day from 2001 70 million gallons per day by 2010 Sewage treatment works projects All of the Emirates are considering the installation of comprehensive sewerage networks and sewage treatment works so as to optimise the retention of effluents. Costs are to be recouped via the charging of households and the resale of recovered water.000 people connecting 45. The emphasis has been shifting towards the private sector management of water and sewerage services. Thus US$250 million in capital spending for desalination and new resources is being mobilised between 1990 and 2010. Privatisation in various forms is taking place All the major combined power and desalination projects currently under development have a significant degree of private sector involvement. The first phase will serve 45. In Abu Dhabi. Al Taweelah desalination facility Water demand for Abu Dhabi was at 210million gallons per day in 1990. The system is designed to have a PE of 350. Sharajah’s Al-Awir sewage treatment works underwent an expansion from 260 to 520m 3 per day at a cost of US$54 million in 1997. Water demand for Abu Dhabi was 683million m3 in 2003 and is forecast to rise to 1. It is forecast that the peak demand will be 500million gallons per day by 2010. The UAE envisages the positive use of water meters. by attracting international investors and reducing its budget burden. with Thames Water and Sharjah’s Metito (Overseas) being awarded a 27. Part of the water shortfall for agriculture and municipal gardens is to be met through a comprehensive programme of sewage treatment and effluent recovery. In Abu Dhabi. It was upgraded to handle 210. Ajman is the pioneering Emirate The Emirate of Ajman has been one of the privatisation pace setters in the Gulf. Water is currently sold at 25% below its cost price. the Al Taweelah A extension will -1 generate 40-50million gallons of water a day and its management is to be privatised.000m 3 per day by the end of 1999 and 260. Bidders will need to emphasise technology transfer and training. will be constructed on the coast of the Arabian Gulf north-east of Abu Dhabi.140million m3 by 2015 and overall water consumption in the UAE is expected to increase by 44% to 3. cuts in subsidies and ending subsidies for expatriates. Operations started in 2003. The facility will have a water desalination facility capable of producing 50-76million gallons of water per day.000m 3 by 2001. KEOIC (Kuwait) and Black & Veatch (USA) were originally awarded a concession for all sewerage services and tertiary wastewater treatment in the Emirate of Ajman in 1996.000 people. The UAE is planning for the construction of 120 desalination plants at a cost of US$1. Water demand is growing by 10% pa.2billion m 3 by 2025 2015. The concession was delayed for five years before construction started in 2001 by United Utilities and was completed in 2003. 60-70% of water is currently provided by desalination and it is expected that this will rise to 80% by 2005.000 properties. Al Taweelah A-2.000 properties.000. or 150.UNITED ARAB EMIRATES PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS UNITED ARAB EMIRATES The individual Emirates have experienced an increase in water demand of 10 to 40 times since 1970. with revenues expected to be US$450 million over the BOT’s life.

as spending has increased on sewage treatment since the sector was privatised in 1989. million) Total (2015. rather than the expansion of the sewage treatment infrastructure itself. Wales.8million samples taken by the DWI complied with these standards. and is advocating stricter water conservation strategies. Scotland and Northern Ireland) were established in 1995 to take over monitoring the quality. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture Industry Services Regulatory environment Water and sewerage in England and Wales is governed by the need to comply with UK national and EU environmental law and international conventions.3 89% 90% 23% 239 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . it is not surprising to see the UK at the head of market developments. the EA became increasingly concerned about over-abstraction of water from rivers and groundwater. but the sell off of British water companies is perhaps not what was intended when people refer to the sector’s internationalisation. Its role is to ensure that potable drinking water is provided by the water service companies. 1990 13% 62% 8% 84% 2000 28% 64% 2% 94% US$26.1 61. Since 1990. along with providing the highest standard of customer service and value and by the principle that utilities should not exploit their monopoly position. availability and use of all non-tidal waters in England and Wales. 99. The latter has made itself felt from 2000. The Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) was established in 1990 by the Government to monitor the quality of water after it had been treated and at various stages of its distribution process.444 US$26.9% of the 2. The Environment Agencies (England. The regulatory climate in England and Wales has moved on since 1999. In 2003. Population Total (2002. The Private Finance Initiative has been used to encourage competition for the development and management of specific projects and facilities. In 1992. including the water companies. and that it complies with Government. along with designated bathing areas.UNITED KINGDOM PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS UNITED KINGDOM With an identifiable private sector presence since 1619. The improvement in quality chiefly stems from setting mandatory targets for sewage treatment works performance. Set up in 1989. its role is to ensure that all the private sector water companies provide good value for money in terms of services provided along with meeting specified water quality and certain environmental compliance targets. EU and World Health Organisation (WHO) standards.150 1% 24% 75% 59. to court. the EA has been markedly more aggressive towards polluters. The Office of Water Services (Ofwat) is the Government appointed regulator for the privatised water utilities in England and Wales. million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) Sewage treatment development Tertiary Secondary Primary Connected Inland water quality The quality of inland waters has improved since 1990. while competition through inset appointments is (in theory) being used to mobilise otherwise neglected secondary water sources. Companies are subject to regulation from three principal bodies. regularly taking transgressors.

AWG's Hartlepool Water is to supply water to a new industrial complex at Wynyard Park in Teeside.0 51% 47% 3% 240 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .9 billion. The Ministry of Defence’s Project Aquatrine is also using the PFI scheme for three 25 year regional water and sewerage contracts serving 3. 75% being service personnel and their dependants. This is in place of Northumbrian Water. Competition for industrial water is developing slowly in England and Wales and it has become a reactive process whereby water tariffs are renegotiated to head off the threat of losing a large customer. Total contract value will be £2.0% 2001 31. Enviro-Logic advised Ofwat in 2000 that it was pursuing new 200 opportunities. all of which were based upon licence variations. In 1998. No further progress has been noted. This is within the service areas of Yorkshire Water (Kelda Group Plc). of which.500 500 3. The industrial and commercial water market in England and Wales is worth £1.900 1.3% 8.8% 1.8 168 3. with the exception of Albion Water’s (Enviro-Logic) Shotton Paper contract. but this is a separate market with its own specialist players. Groundwater Total recharge (1998. to mobilise a new source of water for the facility. Enviro-Logic stated that a total of 18 applications were at the discussion stage with Ofwat in April 2002. This reflects the favourable geomorphology whereby short. Hartlepool was acquired by AWG in order to boost AWG’s presence in the region. with customers being charged the same tariff as Hartlepool Water's existing customers.000 people. which was previously served by the Ministry of Defence.1 billion. Between 1990 and 1998 there was a net improvement in water quality in 25% of the monitored length of rivers and canals in England and Wales.4% Inland waters in the UK are regarded as Europe's cleanest. The England and Wales major user market by client size Market segment 50-99 Ml pa 100-250 Ml pa <250 Ml pa Total Customers 1. AWG has also gained a service contract for RAF Finningley near Doncaster. km 3) For domestic use (<1990) For industry (<1990) For agriculture (<1990) 9.000 bases with a total capex of £1. The first award was in June 2003 to Brey Utilities (Earth Tech & Kelda). m 3) Withdrawals (1990.0% 8.2% 10. which is lower than Northumbrian Water's.UNITED KINGDOM PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Inland water quality (2001) Category RE1 / A Very Good RE2 / B Good RE3 / C Fair RE4 / D Fair RE5 / E Poor Worse / F Bad 1994-96 27. worth £1 billion in revenues. fast flowing rivers discharge into the sea without the potential for pollution build-ups seen in longer rivers such as in Germany or France. users of more than 250Ml pa were opened to competition. This has led to a ‘water broking’ market developing where companies seek to gain such contracts on behalf of a client and in turn gain a percentage of the savings.2% 18.000 pa for 20 years (£12. Thames Water gained the PFI contract for water supply and sewerage upgrade for Tidworth Garrison against Southern and Wessex.9% 0. while Awg was pursuing 55 at the time. The garrison serves water and sewerage to 11. Competition Since 1998. there have been three announcements by the Government and Ofwat allowing greater degrees of direct competition for the provision of water and sewerage services to industrial users.65 billion.26 billion is accessible to competition under current conditions via inset appointments and common carriage agreements. 2002/Author Author/Author DETR. where a new licence was granted. In 2000 this was extended to users of 100-249Ml pa and in 2002 to all users of more than 50Ml pa. 2000/Author To date nine awards have been made. £1. The inset appointment is for a minimum period of 20 years.2% 6. km 3) Per capita (1998.8 million in total). AWG has also gained the water provision contract from Essex and Suffolk Water Plc (Suez) to Buxted Chickens.5% 21.0% 35.900 Water £200 million £300 million £100 million £600 million Sewerage £220 million £330 million £110 million £760 million Sources Ofwat. Thames will spend £3 million in upgrading the current system and will be paid £640.1% 31. The on site treatment of dilute industrial wastes is also open to competition.

000 1.433.000 2015 7.000 2. In 1993.000 2. with completion of the main project in 2001 and for a further facility in 2005. Over the next four years. only 83% of households are connected to the sewerage network.127 reservoirs and operates 441 water treatment plants and 643 sewage treatment works. In contrast. which supplies 710Ml per day. they will be subject to constraints on spending and have limits on borrowings.000 1. There are a total of 23 PFI sewerage schemes in Scotland. The Water Industry Commissioner (Scotland’s equivalent of Ofwat) has earmarked £1. Stereau. MAJOR CITIES Population London Birmingham Manchester Leeds Tyneside Liverpool 2000 7. In August 2004.272.026. the Government started considering the reform of Water Service (WS). in time for the EU’s Water Framework Directive’s 2010 self-financing deadline.7million people) across Northern Ireland against a backdrop of historic under investment and ageing water and sewerage infrastructure. SAUR. Barr & Halcrow Northumbrian & Degrémont (Suez) & AMEC UU & Lagan Holdings Earth Tech 241 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Northern Ireland. East of Scotland Water and West of Scotland Water in 2002.000 Status Thames Water Severn Trent Water North West Water Yorkshire Water Northumbrian Water United Utilities PFI in Scotland and Northern Ireland The Private Finance Initiative (PFI) is being used to help fund Scotland’s sewage treatment compliance programme after it became evident that political and public opposition to privatising Scotland’s water and sewerage assets and operations would be insurmountable.640.000 domestic. Scottish Water is responsible for 1.252. Scottish Water. The EU’s UWWTD and its 2000 and 2005 compliance deadlines have driven the PFI in Scotland. Northern Ireland’s water and sewerage services. Average leakage levels in Northern Ireland are 37% of treated water supplies. agricultural. the Water GoCo will be entirely self-financing. through two private consortia (Stirling Water and United Utilities. M J Gleeson & Montgomery Watson Thames Water.000 951. Ireland Value (£m) 100 20 50 50 45 84 60 80 57 50 50 10 N/A Consortium Thames Water.UNITED KINGDOM PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Northern Ireland’s Water Service In 2003. the Government estimated that the cost of EU environmental compliance for these activities would be £5 billion by 2005-10. under the title of Scottish Water Solutions).640.433. Ireland N. WS aims to treat 56% of the population’s effluents and it is already set to miss the EU’s 2005 wastewater treatment targets by at least 20%. there have been significant delays in the awarding process.000 915. and Water Service has to service 59. Aberdeen and Peterhead was only awarded to Kelda’s consortium in August 1999. It serves 720. Wherever possible.272.000 1. will upgrade water and sewage treatment facilities throughout the country. The main schemes to date are as follows (£ million): Scheme Almond Valley & Seafield Esk Valley Levenmouth Ayrshire Inverness & Fort William Tay Morray Coast Aberdeen & Peterhead Daldowie & Shieldhall Dalmuir Inverclyde Kinnegar Newry Authority East East East East North North North North West West West N. From 2008/09. 99% of households are connected to the water network. along with the Irish Republic does not directly charge for its domestic water and sewerage services.000 980. For example.000 private septic tanks. A number of the original schemes have been grouped together in order to achieve economies of scale. These in turn arose from the merger of 11 municipal entities in 1996. Degrémont and AMEC United Utilities United Utilities United Utilities Yorkshire Water. construction work was due to commence in 1998 with a completion date of 2000.252. Demand is forecast to grow by 150 Ml per day by 2030. While water and sewerage in Scotland and Northern Ireland remain public. commercial and business customers (1.000 2.000 2. M J Gleeson & Montgomery Watson Northumbrian and Degrémont Northumbrian. BICC & Earth Tech Caledonian Taylor Woodrow. In reality. In 2003.8 billion capital spending to be carried out between 2003 and 2006. with an original value of £587 million. WS was created as an agency of the former Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland in 1996. the Government decided that Water Services Northern Ireland will become a Government Owned Company from April 1st 2006. Scottish Water Scottish Water was formed from the merger of North of Scotland Water.

when rivers are at their most sensitive. Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total Anglian Water AWG (UK) 4.170.625.000 United Utilities United Utilities (UK) 6.000 7.792.000 5.788.000 0 290.000 0 3.000 Mid Kent Water Swan Group (UK) 569.400.230.394. Current projections point to a need for 1.200. three PFI contracts and Northumbrian Water.000 Dee Valley Dee Valley Group (UK) 258.170.000 3.000 3.162.000 5.043.000 South Staffordshire South Staffordshire (UK) 1. By 2020.500. in turn encouraging a demographic shift towards these regions.000 Northumbrian Water Northumbrian Water (UK) 4.000 Dwr Cymru Glas Cymru (UK) 2.000 0 1.000 0 424.043.UNITED KINGDOM PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS In Northern Ireland.000 2.000 0 1.230.000 4.280.000 Thames Water RWE (Germany) 7.000 East Surrey East Surrey Holdings (UK) 473.000 12.000 0 258.000 63. only contract awards made since 1989 have been included in the above table.000 1. For example. The increasing seasonality of rainfall will in turn reduce the recharge season for groundwater.397.310.000 8.360.547.000 Cholderton Water Cholderton Water (UK) 3.258. For the sake of brevity. while the table below consolidates all of each company’s contracts.000 Earth Tech Tyco International (USA) 0 63. Package A Kelda / Earth Tech England Inset appointment for RAF Tidworth Thames Water England Inset appointment for RAF Finningley Anglian Water England Inset appointment for Wynward Park Anglian Water England Inset appointment for Buxted chickens Anglian Water England Inset appointment for brewery sewerage Albion Water Wales Inset appointment for Shotton Paper Albion Water West Scotland Daldowie sewage treatment PFI Caledonian (ScottishPower) West Scotland Dalmuir sewage treatment PFI SAUR (Bouygues) West Scotland Inverclyde sewage treatment PFI Northumbrian Water Group North Scotland Inverness sewage treatment PFI United Utilities North Scotland Moray Coast sewage treatment PFI United Utilities North Scotland Tay sewage treatment PFI United Utilities North Scotland Aberdeen sewage treatment PFI Yorkshire Water (Kelda Group) East Scotland Esk Valley sewage treatment PFI Thames Water East Scotland Almond Valley sewage treatment PFI Thames Water East Scotland Ayr sewage treatment PFI Northumbrian Water East Scotland Levenmouth sewage treatment PFI Northumbrian Water Northern Ireland Kinnegar sewage treatment PFI Hyder Infrastructure Northern Ireland Newry sewage treatment PFI Earth Tech Only companies referred to in this book are mentioned in the above table.840.000 8.000 South West Water Pennon Group (UK) 1.000 Wessex Water YTL Holdings (Malaysia) 1.0-1.000 2. At the same time.516.310.000 Veolia Water UK VE (France) 3.000 Southern Water South Downs (UK) 2.000 Bristol Water Bristol Water Holdings (UK) 1. Demand for water resources is growing in those areas where its availability is falling.000 0 3.000 7. the Northumbrian Water Group entry represents two former SWCs.000 Case study: British Waterway’s proposed ‘water grid’ England and Wales are set to face increasing seasonal and regional differences in precipitation and evapotranspiration.000 Cambridge Water CKI (China) 290.066.000 0 1.066.000 5.093. summer precipitation in South East England will decrease by at least 3 -5% with evapotranspiration increasing by up to 20-25%.280.185.000 Bournemouth Biwater Group (UK) 424.000 0 569. economic growth is concentrating on the South and East. proposals are being developed for PFI financing through the Alpha (£153 million on water treatment works) and Omega (£122 million on wastewater treatment works) projects for implementation in 2004 and 2005 respectively.233.280.400.500.4million new household units being needed in 242 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .700.516.000 5. while run-off will fall by 5-20% during low flow periods. Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company England & Wales Project Aquatrine.000 2.000 Portsmouth Water Brockhampton Group (UK) 655.000 Yorkshire Water Kelda Group (UK) 4. with winter run-off rising. Further privatisation projects are under consideration.000 1. There are a number of specialist nonsewerage service companies involved in various PFI consortia.000 0 655.075.000 5.000 Severn Trent Water Severn Trent (UK) 7.000 12.000 0 473.000 4.397.233.406.000 South East Water Macquarie (Australia) 1.

both Thames Water and Severn Trent Water have been considering constructing at least one major new reservoir at a cost of £250-400 million each. British Waterway's (BW) canal network has the potential to become a ‘water grid’ both serving industrial customers directly through inset appointments and providing water for utilities operating in the more water short areas. Occupants are expected to be more affluent than on average and will seek to use water intensive consumer goods such as power showers and dishwashers. thereby augmenting extant resources without the need to construct new reservoirs. This also involves guaranteeing deliveries of water at times of actual or potential shortage. 243 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Although the areas of greatest scarcity are East Anglia and Southern and South East England. which are looking increasingly untenable in terms of rates of return as well as public and environmental concerns. by 2020.UNITED KINGDOM PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS South East England in the next 25 years.

In 1998. anonymous). million) In urban areas (2002) In urban areas (2015) In urban agglomerations (2015) 291. and carry out compliance and enforcement actions.1 1994 750 10. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) Agriculture (1993) Industry (1993) Services (1993) Regulatory background The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) implements a series of regulatory programs under the Clean Water Act (CWA) and the Safe Drinking Water Program. the market offering the most opportunities. From 1972 to 1998 compliance work for the Clean Water Act was supported by US$68 billion in federal assistance for the construction of local wastewater treatment systems. or Clean Water Act (1948.750 2% 26% 72% Number of systems Population (million) Lead in drinking water has only recently become an area of concern. while there are 54. notable strides towards the consolidation of the sector have been taking place behind the scenes.0 US$36. Since 2001. Non-compliant water: bacterial contamination 1993 1. These guideline standards are being revised to bring them in line with WHO standards. At the same. water’s for fighting over” (Mark Twain) and “water flows uphill to money and power” (Californian. for example. This has been followed by RWE’s agreed bid for American Water Works." Under the Clean Water Act all discharges to surface waters of the U. US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) standards were being met or exceeded by more than 90% of water utilities in the USA in 1999. declining to adopt WHO drinking water standards on cost grounds. Population Total (2002. time. it is evident that perhaps 20% of households currently receive drinking water above the new acceptable levels. Service provision 740. The Federal Water Pollution Control Act. In Western Europe. Perhaps 10-15million people are receiving water with lead levels above the WHO standard of 50ppb. and little has changed since. This was reduced to 6% by 2002. similar compliance figures are typically in the 95-99% range.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS UNITED STATES OF AMERICA There are two proverbs which are often quoted to illustrate the nature of water services in the USA: “whisky’s for drinking. along with 16. and biological integrity of the Nation's waters. The USA represents the largest market for water and sewerage services. Capital spending on environmental and drinking water quality has been curbed by the move towards homeland ‘water security’ and higher defence spending after 11th September 2001. As with all good proverbs. the underlying realities are somewhat more complex. VE announced that it regarded the USA as an ‘emerging market’ with regards to water and sewerage services. requires the EPA to set standards for contaminants in drinking water. The Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). This has led to some uncertainty about the development of longer term spending plans.8 1995 400 9. and in terms of opportunities.000 12. highlighting how the European majors value the US market. physical.000 sewerage entities. amended 1996. million) Total (2015.000 people lacked access to potable water in 1999.0 329. By the mid-1980s the federal government had spent US$400 billion on water resource development. Veolia's 1999 acquisition of US Filter was the largest corporate deal in the sector’s history.000 individual water provision entities in the country. last amended 1987) seeks to maintain the "chemical.S. In 1994. monitor drinking water quality. A US$210 million project was launched in 1999 to rectify this through direct investment in suitable distribution facilities. Given that the WHO standards have been revised to 10ppb. must be treated to the level of secondary treatment. while state and local governments contributed a further US$20 billion. there have been various moves to downgrade water and wastewater standards and spending priorities. 19% of the population (45million people) was served at some point during the year with substandard water in terms of bacterial or chemical pollution. It was only in 1997 that the private sector was provided with a level playing field to compete with municipalities.7 80% 84% 37% 244 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .606 US$35.

The overall condition and performance of the country's drinking water and wastewater systems has worsened since the previous evaluation by ACSE in 2001. Urban services Safe drinking water Access to sewerage % Sewage treated 98% 90% 80% Market size (from various reports. 2002-04) There is a market for operating water and sewerage services worth US$47-53 billion per annum. In 1996. US Water News January 1998.7 30.0% 75.0% 14.0 88. debt and innovative ways of delivering performance improvement.0% Tertiary Secondary Primary Connected According to the American Society of Engineers (ASCE). But as shown by the limited funds allocated since 1997.1 20. upgrading or replacement. Government funding has resulted in a projected US$23 billion pa shortfall over the next two decades. This has to be funded by municipalities. In contrast.2 26.9m 5. Currently.0% 1984 27.5 Low 25.8 20.0% 25. 50% of the country's 2. Government funding is anticipated to cover US$535 billion over the next 20 years.0% 63. with urban runoff and storm sewers affecting a further 5%.9m Source: Environmental Working Group based on EPA data.0m 0.0% 13.1 15.0% 24. Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 245 . The market for water supply to households (110million households at an average of US$300 per annum) in the USA is worth US$33 billion pa. Non-compliant water supplies Systems Reporting Violation Coliform bacteria 12.0% 75. US$billion pa Water – O&M Sewerage – O&M Water – Capex Sewerage – Capex Total High 32. Excess levels of nitrates and phosphates were noted in 14%. 19% of the USA’s 3. with the proportion of costs being covered by government funding falling from an average of 50% to an extreme of 10% in 2003.0% 64.5m 11.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Water quality Overall. the federal government spends about US$2.2 Depending upon the source.6 13.0% 18. Sewage treatment development 1982 22.7m 20. smaller communities have been poorly served to date and many municipally run facilities that are understood to be in poor condition. 56% of the rivers in terms of river length were regarded as being of good quality and 8% of fair quality. This excludes s ewerage services.0% 1992 32. Agricultural waste was noted in 25% and runoffs from municipal sewage treatment plants in 5%. Urban sewerage and sewage treatment is generally well developed.7 Mean 29.726 Lead 3.5m 0.0 71.9 104. Since 2000.4 11.5 billion annually for drinking water and wastewater treatment facilities. according to the US Environmental Protection Agency Water Infrastructure Network. replacing the USA’s aging water and wastewater network and upgrading and extending treatment facilities in the United States is expected to cost US$550–1. The treatment of microbiological contaminants in water will require US$20 billion.0% 18. in 2003 there will be an annual shortfall of US$11 billion for replacing or rehabilitating water and wastewater facilities in the United States.9 17. while the level for drinking water spending remains unchanged. with 35% of surface water systems needing filtration equipment installation.246 Inadequate filtration 1. this is open to question.478 Faecal bacteria 2.641 Nitrate 588 Chemicals/pesticides 325 Population Affected 24.8% 25. The EPA anticipates that the percentage of the population receiving sewage treatment will increase from 66% in 1996 to about 88% by 2016.6million miles of rivers were surveyed.000 billion over the next 20 years.4million kilometres of streams and an unknown percentage of the nation's groundwater is polluted to a significant degree.4% 23. with high bacterial levels in 12%. The proposed federal budget for FY 2004 includes a US$360 million cut in wastewater funding.7 21. Some form of pollution or habitat degradation impairs the remaining 36% of the surveyed river miles.0% 1996 33.

Billion US gallons per day Cooling water for power Irrigation Municipal Other Total 1980 210 150 34 46 440 2000 195 137 43 33 408 Sewage treatment works upgrade costs Customers 50.5 41. These figures mirror those recently drawn up by the US EPA at US$499 billion to US$929 billion.000 people.000 24. Market structure for water provision Total number of entities Local systems Government owned Investor owned Market listed Internationally held 56.000 private sector water systems. m 3) Withdrawals (1998. There are 60.000 53. A great majority of these companies are highly localised in nature.000 Up to 3. providing water on a regular basis to at least 15 service connections or 25 people.000 or more people.km 3) For domestic use (1998) For industry (1998) For agriculture (1998) Market structure There are approximately 200.000 people use surface water.km 3) Per capita (1998. According to the EPA. There are 374 entities serving 75. 84% of the systems serving more than 75.500 people per community. Some 95% of private sector contracts have a turnover of less than US$1 million pa. US$10 billion for sewer repairs and rehabilitation. the largest water company in the USA serves 879 separate communities.000 26. The larger companies tend to make more use of surface water. Some 80% of the population is served by 24. at an average of 8. equivalent to less than 8. Freshwater Total (1998.000 community suppliers. the great majority of these are local enterprises.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Water use rose from 1950 to a peak in 1980 and has declined since 1985 as various efficiency and cost accounting measures have made an impact. having been set up to provide water to a specific locality.2 137.800 46.000 14 5 2.1 Facilities 800 6. This includes US$44 billion for treatment. The American Water Works Association (AWWA) has 56. 80% of water supply systems are groundwater based.600 43% 30% 27% 100% 2% 13% 86% 100% The cost needed over this period to reach a universal level for secondary treatment (and where appropriate.000 Total US$billion 58. according to the Congressional Budget Office.1 8. while less than 10% use surface water alone.000 6. Capital spending needs for drinking water and wastewater for 2003 until 2023 were estimated at US$492 billion to US$820 billion.4 37.000 municipally owned and operated water companies.000 member companies. 246 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .000 of these are point suppliers for institutions such as businesses and schools. US$21 billion for new sewers and US$45 billion to correct combined sewer overflows.000 + 3 – 50. 120.7 8% 65% 27% A major private sector company may act as the ultimate holding company for a large number of individual water companies. tertiary treatment) has separately been estimated by the EPA at US$120 billion.983 447. American Water Works (RWE).000 water supplies in the USA. While there are 6.459.

3.4 28.8 0.100. 247 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .5 26.5% 15. Pressure to privatise is only really taking place because of new environmental and public health standards at a time of spending constraints and a dislike of higher bills. While the traditional private sector water companies tend to concentrate on water provision contracts.000 customers per system) that serve majority people. It is easier to gain a concession for sewerage than for drinking water projects.1 264. Rhode Island in 1998. while the private sector has tended to avoid seeking five year contracts in recent years.783 Est.0% 276. if a STW is privatised.1 5.km 3) Per capita (1998. New legislation will be needed to change this. With ROR.1 20.5% 69. In 1998. where contract awards to date have been on an O&M basis. no need to make a profit. these can be amortised.001 . while only about 60% of the smallest systems recovered their costs.10. excessive investment can be called for to boost overall returns.3 96. no penalty clauses for contract underperformance and no risk management was called for.432 4. The Presidential Executive Order 12803 of 1997 was designed to encourage private-public service partnerships. Revenues for approximately 84% of publicly owned and 94% of privately owned systems covered their operating costs. the number of profitable systems rose in the larger size categories (serving over 50.0 276.km 3) For domestic use (1990) For industry (1990) For agriculture (1990) Opening the market According to the EPA. In addition. With an allowable return on investment of 10-12%.0% 1. along with slow and steady profits.8% 6.498 14.3million people had their drinking water provided by the private sector.9% 77.301 . m 3) Withdrawals (1990. along with 85% of water provision in terms of the population served.514.000 501 .531 110. the majority of actual privatisations to take place since 1996 and especially since 1998 have been for sewerage and sewage treatment.8% 185.2 100. A municipality can also bury the real costs by shifting administrative staff to other departments. They enjoyed favourable tax differentials.0 63. Population Served (million) 116. These advantages were equivalent to a 30% cost advantage when bidding.8 42. 34.2 8. Their total turnover that year was US$14 billion. Instead.000 10. 2001 Million people Regulated utilities Municipal outsourcing Municipal Privately served Total Water 23. the water sector is regarded as offering low political risk. while contract management costs are boosted by their need to be reviewed every 12-18 months. 95% of sewerage services were in municipal hands.0 5.300 <500 100% Number of Service Providers 350 3. US EPA. the IRS announced that it would allow privatisation related operating contracts to run for up to 20 years.3% 21. 2004. a lower cost of capital.000 3.0 192. This study has identified 22 private sector companies with a Wall Street market listing providing water and/or sewerage services to a combined total of 33.0% Sewerage 0. in 1995.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS Water provision market structures Structure Very Large Large Medium Small Very Small Total Source: US EPA.5 23% 6% 71% Source: D A Ll Owen.262 53.341 31. municipal water suppliers had several inbuilt advantages over the private sector. Until 1997. because of the need to guarantee interest rates for the longer term.6 7.5million people. company database. Groundwater Total recharge (1998. Size of Operation (Population Served) >100. allowing the use of nonrecourse taxable and tax exempt debt financing. One of the principal constraints is the use of rate of return (ROR) pricing mechanisms. Breakdown of USA water and wastewater services market.1 The percentage of costs recovered for drinking water varies by size of the system. In 1995. The public sector finds it more challenging to compete for 10-20 year contracts. previous grants do not have to be repaid in full.5 18. This process was first us ed for Cranston.2% 100. At the same time.

000 1.278.077.000 Status Some districts privatised Some districts privatised BOO for sewage treatment underway Privatisation under consideration Some districts privatised Water construction privatisation underway N/A Privatised water provision Partly privatised.000 2.000 1.000 1.335.000 3.000 1.051.500.000 1.465.000 1.623.000 1.363.939.328.000 2.000 785.460.640.000 1.877 Source: Public Works Financing.452 218 1.000 2.635.116 178 158 336 1.699.226.000 891.268 137 44 181 1.000 1.000 1.698.053.000 4.000 1.039.143.000 2.000 1.732.323. it is necessary to split corporate activities into those where the assets are owned by the private sector (regulated activities) and those where they remain in municipal hands 248 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .078 363 1.217.000 911.934.000 2.000 4.000 1.000 2.000 1.097.408.000 759.000 2.000 2.603.000 1.000 1.000 2.000 7.151.079.446.000 990.000 3.513.084.000 903.000 3.793 2001 921 347 1.378.252 175 132 307 1.449 217 1. Philadelphia San Francisco Dallas Detroit Houston Boston San Diego Atlanta Phoenix Minneapolis Miami Seattle Saint Louis Tampa Baltimore Cleveland Pittsburgh Riverside – SB Denver San Jose Fort Lauderdale Kansas City Sacramento Portland Cincinnati San Antonio Milwaukee Norfolk Orlando West Palm Beach New Orleans Columbus Indianapolis Las Vegas Buffalo Providence/War Salt Lake City Oklahoma City Memphis Jacksonville Louisville Austin 2000 16.000 883.000 1.397.516.000 1.937.000 1.000 4.000 1.000 2.873.494.188.445.000 1.670 2000 900 352 1.524.000 4.000 891.C.362.000 1.940.449.000 2.000 4.013.667. D.000 1.067.000 2015 17. March 2003 As there are two separate markets for PSP in the USA.989.308.193.119.000 1.000 3.260.000 2.029.000 3.000 1.044.000 2.735.000 4.000 2.000 3.000 1.860.666 2002 1.407.329.559 234 1.000 13.000 894.000 1.025.000 1.008.809.224.000 1.000 2. United Water Resources N/A Privatisation under consideration Privatisation of sewerage management N/A N/A Some sewage treatment outsourcing Private water provision contract N/A DBO contract for water treatment N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Private-public partnership for sewage N/A N/A N/A Sewage treatment privatised N/A Privatisation under consideration N/A Water management privatised N/A N/A Sewage treatment privatised N/A N/A N/A N/A Development of O&M and DBO outsourcing contract awards in the USA.000 3.000 3.386.735.222.000 1.688. 1996-2002 US$(million) Municipal O&M Industrial O&M Total O&M Municipal DBO Industrial DBO Total DBO Total reported revenue Other companies Total market 1997 601 22 623 16 22 38 661 99 670 1998 659 50 709 92 32 124 833 125 958 1999 802 314 1.000 1.816.471.963.441 153 38 191 1.427.000 1.000 3.000 901.000 3.000 4.318.000 14.000 1.000 916.002.000 1.548.000 1.632 245 1.100.000 1.952.000 2.706.689.924.000 1.000 6.064.000 2.944.000 1.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS MAJOR CITIES Population New York Los Angeles Chicago Washington.000 995.000 1.000 1.213.

Leading O&M companies (Y/E 12/2002.000 650. March 2003. US$million) Company US Filter OS United Water OMI AWS Severn Trent OS Earth Tech Eco Resources Thames Water Env.000 990.436 People served 10.078 DBO 63 0 39 18 0 25 0 0 5 0 0 0 153 People served 10.000 35.145.000 2.000 6.514. due to various companies being sold off during 2003-04. The former has a turnover of US$100-150 per capita against US$35-40 for the latter.000 2.000.695. company data.715.000 50. 249 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .440.000 815.000 452.000 1. Hudson Institute. The tables below ranks the major players in terms of populations served in both classes: Leading regulated utilities (Y/E 31/12/2003.000 2.000 5. Woodward & Curran Alliance Water HMMOS Total Parent VE Suez CH2M Hill AWW (RWE) Severn Trent Tyco South West Water RWE BOC Privately held Privately held HMM Total 352 205 190 153 99 70 62 31 30 21 14 3 1.485 360 355 277 187 150 170 140 61 64 57 47 36 21 21 5 3.000 690.250.000 920.000 302.150.000.000 1.545. Mgt Corp.000 Source: Public Works Financing.000 230.300. USA.500.000 677.000 Parent company American Water Works [4] Suez [1] Aqua America California Water Service American States Water SWJ Corp Kelda Group [3] RWE [2] Nuon [4] Middlesex Water Southwest Water Connecticut Water Service Artesian Resources Pennichuck Corporation York Water BIW Regulated turnover 1.000 22.000 810. A survey of the use of public-private partnerships in the drinking water utility sector.000 375. US$million) Company American Water Works United Water Resources Aqua America California Water Service Southern California Water San Jose Water Aquarion Elizabethtown Water Utilities Inc Middlesex Water Southwest Water Connecticut Water Service Artesian Water Company Pennichuck Water York Water Birmingham Utilities Total Differing year-end dates: [1] 12/1999 [2] 03/2001 [3] 03/2004 [4] 12/1002 Numbers are below those for 2002.645.000 156. Sources: NAWC (1999).000 2.000 905.000 5.000 37.UNITED STATES OF AMERICA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS (O&M).000 230.230 O&M 289 205 151 135 99 45 60 31 25 21 14 3 1. NAWC privatisation study.000 130.

at 88%.830 6% 27% 67% 3.000 100.000 260.324. called for tenders for its US$48 million modernisation and systems rehabilitation program project. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Water and sewerage services Access to safe water in Uruguay is high by South American standards.0km 3 37. The World Bank has provided US$42 million of the US$73 million currently being spent on this work.4 3.101m 3 2000 1. OSE.411. 47million m3 pa of effluents are treated in the city of Montevideo and a further 22million m3 in other provincial cities. Currently. Iberdrola and C de Aguas de Bilbao Bizkaia gained a US$150 million concession in 2000. 2015 Sewerage development The Government’s current priority is for the development of a sewerage network and suitable treatment facilities. This includes the construction of a water supply main in the city of Salto and the construction of a new wastewater treatment plant for Durazno. The quantity and quality of coverage is better in the capital. This has allowed the market to develop in a less contentious manner than has been s een in other markets. Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita MAJOR CITIES City Montevideo 23.URUGUAY PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS URUGUAY Private sector participation has been developed in a gradual manner over the past three years. with 45% of water subject to treatment.7 92% 94% 35% 85% 56% 59.000 Comments N/A Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Maldonado 30 year water and sewerage concession Iberdrola Energia consortium Punta del Este 25 year water and sewerage concession Aguas de la Costa Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Total Iberdrola Iberdrola (Spain) 260. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. Uruguay’s state water utility. than in the provincial towns or rural areas. The Punta del Este area is principally used for upmarket tourism and leisure services. The project is partly financed by a US$27 million loan from the World Bank.2km 3 6% 3% 91% In 1997 Aguas de Barcelona acquired 60% of Aguas de la Costa. Urban data Served by piped water Access to sewerage Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1990) Domestic Industrial Agriculture US$3.000 250 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .971m 3 4. Although 92% have sanitation.000 Aguas Costa Agbar (Spain) 100. In May 2003. Many residents have restrictions on supply during the summer months. Montevideo.000 260.000 100.000 2015 1.0km 3 7. which carries a 10 year optional extension from 2018.609 US$7. only 48% are linked to the sewers and the on-site sanitation is normally considered inadequate.

the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) approved the Tashkent Water Supply Improvement Project. In 1982. 10% for industrial applications and 87% for irrigation. The number of mammal species inhabiting in the Aral region was reduced from 70 to 30 and that of birds from 319 to 168 species. with a 21-30 fold increase in salinity. there are between 12 and 18km 3 pa of groundwater resources. In addition. Intensive irrigation began in 1919 when central Asia was incorporated into the Soviet Union and increased rapidly between 1951 and 1986. compared with its natural inflow of 55km 3. mainly for cotton cultivation. the excess figure being accounted for by run-off back into rivers from irrigation schemes. In Karakalpakstan. The cotton plantations are regarded as the most inefficient in the world both for the intensity of water usage and the input of fertilisers and pesticides. and only one species of shield plants survived. the population living in the vicinity of the Aral Sea has increased by 140%. Five times the percentage of women affected a decade ago. Studies show that of the 700.9 per 100 persons between 1980 and 1987. Mott MacDonald and Temelsu of Turkey were appointed to oversee a US$72 million ADB supported scheme to improve agricultural performance in the Ak Altin district by rehabilitating the irrigation and drainage systems. In addition.430km 2 (43% of the surface area) by 1985.6 times. including US$130 million in the areas most affected by the loss of the Aral Sea.000km 2 by 2015-2020. throat cancers by 25% and infant mortality by 20%. 5 fish species remained in the Aral Sea. and 60% of the children examined in Nukus and 64% of those in Karakalpak Autonomous Republic had health anomalies. In some parts of the region. Before the 1970s. Abstraction through irrigation has increased from approximately 5% in 1900 to 125% by 1988. The number of paratyphoid cases in Karakalpakstan was as much as 23 times that of the average in the former Soviet Union. the World Bank has been involved in pilot projects for improving water distribution. particularly in Bazataus Rayon of Karakalpakstan. This had increased to 16. Since 1960. water meters and construction of a reservoir. 12. The people of Karakalpakstan also suffer from rising rates of thyroid and kidney disease. of tuberculosis by 6 times. pumping station. a significant increase of human morbidity and mortality has been recorded. 195 species of free-living invertebrates. 90% is accounted for by two rivers discharging into the Aral Sea. Current forecasts envisage the Aral Sea stabilising at between 8. Since 1980. Over the period 1981 to 1987.2 to 24. In Karakalpakstan the rate of hospitalisation increased from 20. child mortality exceeds 110 per 1000 births.2million people live in rural communities. 12 species of higher and 82 species of lower plants. with the long term aim of developing a sustainable agricultural system. In consequence. this had fallen to 2km 3. Crisis Study: Central Asia and the Aral Sea Of the 122km 3 pa of river flows in central Asia. the Aral Sea had a free flow of 46km 3 in 1966-70. some 97% are anaemic with haemoglobin levels in their blood well below the World Health Organisation's standard of 110 grams per litre. women are victims of a pandemic of anaemia that has hit the small republic in the past decade. a semi-independent republic of Uzbekistan. By 1992. The project envisages the replacement of existing water pumps.000 women living there. By 1980-85.600km 2 from its 69. and of throat cancer by 7-10 times. One reason may be that local women cannot absorb iron because of high levels of metals such as manganese and zinc in the water. 251 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . the installation of a water distribution unit. namely the Amu Darya (73km 3 pa) and the Syr Darya (37km 3 pa).UZBEKISTAN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS UZBEKISTAN 60% of the country’s 22.000km 2 of the country’s soil was salinated (36% of Uzbekistan’s surface area). By the mid 1980s. Many algae also disappeared. of cardiac and vascular diseases by 1. the Aral Sea had 20 species of fish. Since 1996. of gallstone disease by 5 times. Between 1992 and 1996. it is probably the highest rate in the world. and has only partially recovered since to 4km 3 pa. Over the period of 10 years there has been an increase of total mortality by 15 times. management and sanitation.500km 2 natural area. In 2003. it is estimated that liver cancers rose by 200%. Projects In 2004. valves and transformers.000 and 19. the Government spent US$650 million on water provision projects. 3% of water is used for domestic purposes. it involves the preparation and implementation of a Financial and Operational Performance Improvement Programme for the Tashkent Water Company. of which half reaches the Aral Sea under natural conditions. This pilot scheme is designed to be replicated on a broader basis. the surface area of the Aral Sea had shrunk to 33.

UZBEKISTAN Conflict Study: Avoiding Water Disputes in Central Asia PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS In terms of trade and the movement of natural resources. Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan.0 52.5 -6. the upstream countries. Klötzli.0 9. the main economic activity in Uzbekistan being cotton growing. The Water and Soil Crisis in Central Asia – A Source for Future Conflicts? ENCOP Occasional Paper No. P.5 29. 11. Uzbekistan cut water supplies to Kazakhstan. C.0 Afghanistan Iran Kazakhstan Kyrgytstan Tajikstan Turkmenistan Uzbekistan In 1998. 252 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . GWR. (1994). as defined by the Helsinki Convention in May 1997 and adopted by the International Law Commission.0 58. Uzbekistan has 1. have the largest amount of water surplus in the Aral Sea basin. Adding to Kazakhstan's problems is a proposed Chinese water diversion project involving the Ertis (Irtysh) River which is a source of drinking water in the country's industrial northeast. with Kazakhstan supplying Kyrgyzstan with coal and electricity in winter. (2000). London. FT Energy.0 -49. Royal Institute of International Affairs.5 4.0 12. S. Sources: Akmansoy S. Water flows (km3) 6. The downstream nations of Turkmenistan. there has been little progress in developing a common understanding as to the value of water resources. Uzbekistan depends on Kyrgyzstan for water. all five countries on the Aral Sea have equal rights to the Aral Sea waters. with 38 billion m 3 of this flowing into Uzbekistan.0 2. & McKinney D. and Uzbekistan are dependent on the Aral Sea basin for irrigation especially during the hot summer months. citing non-payment of debt. Aral Sea Water Rights CRWR Online Report 1998-3. the Governments of Kazakhstan. Managing water in Central Asia.0 11. Central Asia faces resource turmoil. The difficulty is that while fuel supplies are recognised as a commodity.0 -23. In 2000.5 million Ha.0 5. Practical problems remain.5 million Ha of land under irrigation.0 23. The upstream nations of Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan are dependent on the Aral Sea basin for hydroelectric power especially during the cold winter months.0 3.0 Surplus/defic it (km3) 5. Water flows and abstraction in the Aral Sea basin. Leads International Inc. Berne / Zurich. GWR (2000).0 Withdrawals (km3) 1. While Kyrgyzstan has less than 0. Micklin. Kyrgyzstan receives 50 billion m 3 of rainwater per annum. These conflicts are a legacy of the command economy left behind by the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. Kazakhstan asked Tajikistan to release more water to Uzbekistan. Aral Sea Case Study Website.0 1.0 64. 102 pp 4-5. Kyrgyzstan depends on Uzbekistan for fuel.5 24. Centre for Security Policy and Conflict & Swiss Peace Foundation. K azakhstan. (1997). Tajikistan agreed in exchange for a supply of Uzbek electricity. London. Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan agreed that Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan would buy hydroelectricity from Kyrgyzstan. (1998).0 0. In 1999 Kyrgyzstan succeeded in getting much needed coal from Kazakhstan after closing down water reservoirs. hoping that some of the extra water would flow its way. In terms of hydrology.

This entity has a number of affiliate companies.002 m ³ 4km 3 44% 10% 46% Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . but some of this work had to be scaled back due to economic perturbations. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage Hidroven Outside Caracas. International funds from oil reserves are being used to fund US$2 billion worth of public projects.000 people). Venezuela is moving steadily towards the award of a number of significant O&M and concession contracts. when FCC of Spain was awarded a two year extendable water provision concession to the city of Monagas (650. The country’s water services were split into 10 regional entities and Hidrocapital in 1989. including US$500 million for Caracas. Three privatisation contracts in Venezuela are currently under development. Comphania Hidrologicadel Lago (Hidrolago). The company has 340. 2015 Caracas and Hidrocapital Water and sewerage services for Caracas and the state of Miranda are provided by Hidrocapital. while there are some 200. The fund will allow the acceleration of some development projects already underway. The IADB provided US$102 million for water and sewerage upgrading work in 1998.760 US$5. 76% of the population receive piped water and the sewerage network covers 53% of the population. for example serves the state of Zulia. the government announced that it needed US$1 billion to upgrade water and sewerage services across the country.000 of whom pay their bills. In 1996.2 87% 90% 30% 88% 75% 846km 3 35. In 2004. 253 US$3. water is managed by the state’s Hidroven utility. 64.2 31. such as the US$58 million El Diluvio dam and the US$100 million Metro de Los Teques system in Miranda state.000 customers.000 illegal or unregistered connections.380 5% 36% 59% 25. In Caracas. Hidrocapital was corporatised in 1981. Hidrocapital has gained finance for a US$50 million upgrade that is to be linked to better billing. Venezuela intended to spend US$533 million on water and sewerage service upgrades in 1997. some 57% of water provided by Hidrocapital is unaccounted for. 91% of the country’s urban population has access to safe water and 97% have adequate sanitation. Venezuela announced that it has already met its potable water millennium goal of reducing by half the number of people (based on 1990 figures) who do not have access to potable water. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Annual withdrawal (1985) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) PSP in Venezuela Private sector involvement began in 1997. Problems in raising finance for capital projects in recent years have led the country to reconsider its position on private sector participation. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. The country aims to have 100% water coverage by 2015. The Caracas water system is to be rehabilitated under private sector management.VENEZUELA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS VENEZUELA While officially cool about PSP. In all. Officially. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services A late entrant Venezuela was opposed to the privatisation of its water and utility services long after it had become acceptable across much of Latin America. which are in time expected to extend to Caracas. and operates a 90km aqueduct serving part of the city of Caracas.

587.604. including Maracaibo.893.01million in 1995. Groundwater Annual availability (2000) Per capita Zulia state Tecnicas Valencianas del Agua and Colombia’s Triple A gained an O&M contract with Hidrolago for the state of Zulia.500.000 0 Total 650.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 2.000) worth US$20 million pa in 1999.500.000 2015 3.000 3. Aguas de Valencia gained a 4 year water management contract for Lara state (population 1. MAJOR CITIES City Caracas Maracaibo Valencia Maracay Barquisimeto Ciudad Guayana 227km 3 9.153.VENEZUELA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS The city had a population of 3.000 799.000 1.223.100. Venezuela’s second largest city.000 1.392m 3 2000 3.901. The contract is worth $40 million pa.000 0 Tecvasa Tecvasa (Spain) 3. Miranda state’s Fajardo water system is to be privatised and Margarita Island’s water and sewerage services are to be privatised through the award of a concession contract.000 923.948.500.000 Comments Privatisation under consideration O&M contract awarded N/A N/A N/A N/A Private sector contracts awarded (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Location Contract Company Monagas 30 year water provision concession Proactiva Zulia State Water O&M Tecvasa Private sector company operations (Please see the relevant company entry for details) Company Parent company (country) Population served Water Sewerage Proactiva VE (France)/FCC (Spain) 650.498.5million people. A total of 21 municipalities will be served.164. covering a population of 3.000 2.000 254 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 .

the withdrawal of Suez demonstrates the difficulty of operating in this market at present.5 million project to expand Hanoi’s water supplies (currently 100. Economics (2002) GDP per capita GDP per capita (PPP) GDP in Agriculture GDP in Industry GDP in Services Management The Ministry of Science. Technology and the Environment was created in 1992. The Ministry of Planning and Investment (created in 1995) has to approve all environment-related projects above a certain size. and the transfer of technology. and issued guidelines on how this should be achieved. Freshwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita 376. Water losses of 45-70% were identified. involving US$20 million of ODA from Finland. im proved material standards and quality. Population 2002 (million) 2015 (million) Urbanisation in 2002 Urbanisation by 2015 In urban agglomerations. 2015 Policies and priorities 21% of urban households have access to piped water. The MOSTE’s National Environmental Agency was set up in 1994.VIETNAM PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS VIETNAM The Vietnamese economy remains at an early stage of development after decades of political change.3 94. This resulted in a Country Programme for Clean Water Supply and Environmental Sanitation in 1995. 34% of households are either connected to the sewerage system or have septic tanks. along with US$5 million from the Vietnamese Government. meanwhile eliminating flat rate tariffs so as to encourage water conservation.000) has been underway since 1990. It is of interest to see the country turn to its old adversary for support in modernising its water services. The MUD has in consequence sought to ensure that all consumers are metered along with introducing organisational changes to improve the accountability of the meter readers. the Ministry of Urban Construction (MUC) with the assistance of the World Bank issued an order to water companies to reduce water loss by 50% by 2005. current projects are mainly aid related. in the early to mid 1990s. The World Bank is also active in Vietnam.000m 3 per day) through two new 30. In 1994. with 35% using wells and the rest taking water from rivers. The recent “open door” policy has increased the pace of change by exposing companies to new markets. The intention is to create a series of non-profit urban drainage public service corporations. While SAUR has made progress in this market.000m 3 per day water treatment works along with allied water distribution systems.300 25% 34% 41% 80. In March 1999. with 90-100% coverage in Hanoi. The Government expects this to be self-funded through payments from the public and industry. the focus will be on developing storm sewerage systems for Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City. Between 1999 and 2005. Urban Data Served by piped water Access to sewerage With sewage treatment Private sector involvement With the exception of Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City. 80% of households have access to piped water or private wells.5 million for a US$48. and from consumer meter under-registration. Other households either share facilities or use latrines.0km 3 4. In the major cities. Average urban water consumption is 50-70L per capita per day. a 10 year bulk water supply project for Hai Phong (population 570. The main source of water loss is from illegal connections or illegal use. with the framework Law on Environmental Protection passed in 1993 and in effect since 1994. This project was extended in 1999 with a US$29 million project to expand the city’s water provision network between 1999 and 2002. Ho Chi Minh City and other major cities and industrial zones.7 25% 32% 14% 53% 43% 0% Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . a decree was passed seeking to have 60-80% of urban sewage and storm waters connected to a sewerage network by 2020. For example.827m 3 255 US$436 US$2. having provided a loan of US$32. identify the loss components and calculate the cost of control. The MUC proposed that water entities review losses.

000 Status Bulk water provision privatised Privatisation under consideration N/A 256 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . Currently. the Asian Development Bank has indicated that it was not happy with Ho Chi Minh City’s decision to seek new bids solely from Vietnamese companies for the 300. Consumer studies are seen as an immediate requirement to identify or address consumer waste.751. 69% of people within the city area were served with water for an average of 12 hours per day. Suez withdrew from its Ho Chi Minh BOT.705 household connections. whose business aims are to have 100% of cons umers registered. Then in 2003. It is therefore assumed that the rate of increase of illegal connections is greater than the rate of leak repair.000m 3/day) while the source is being depleted .3km 3 4% 10% 86% 84. illegal connections.0km 3 1.VIETNAM Annual withdrawal (1992) Domestic (1987) Industrial (1987) Agriculture (1987) Groundwater Annual availability (1998) Per capita Setbacks for the private sector 54.000 customers have contracts for revenue payment. supported by a 24 hour service level. the Government announced that no foreign investment would be allowed in Hanoi.the groundwater level is dropping by 1. The 68% of water unaccounted for comprised 43% typically referred to as distribution losses. In Hanoi. The volume of billed water is currently decreasing. 20% identified leakage. tariff charges .269. 50% of Hanoi’s 200. 32% of total production was billed. Subsequently.251. The Hanoi water sector was reorganised in early 1994 into a new company the Hanoi Water Business Company. 2000 4. 620. water loss is increasing (currently 160. all with meters and at least 85% of water costs recovered through tariff collection. Leakage was estimated at 53% in 1991 and drinking water was typically boiled before use. while no further foreign BOT contracts would be awarded. and 5% for the water company’s own use.000m 3 per day Thu Duc water treatment BOT.227.000 2015 6.000 being served by public taps at an average ratio of one tap per 170 people.000 people were served by 51.679. and consumer contracts.000 2. with a further 238.000 1.619. despite the repair of 1000 leaks/year and disconnection of 2000 illegal connections each year. MAJOR CITIES City Ho Chi Minh City Hanoi Hai Phong City study: Hanoi The Hanoi Water Supply Company was set up in 1954 by Hanoi’s Department of Transport and Public Works. as part of a corporate retreat from riskier markets.078m 3 PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS In August 2000.000 3.0m/year.000 5. By 1994. In 1991.

equivalent to 140m 3 per person pa. the project will increase water supplies and provide affordable sewerage facilities. meaning that total water availability in the Lusaka Basin would be then limited essentially to the estimated annual natural recharge of 30-50million m 3 which is equivalent to the present level of domestic and industrial water use In 2002. In 2003.YEMEN PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS YEMEN Annual renewable water resources are estimated at 2. Cost recovery mechanisms will be introduced. Yemen’s Water and Sanitation Corporation has invited contractors to pre-qualify for a contract to design and build a 10. The work will be financed by Germany’s KfW and the Government. The uneven nature of water resources means that 90% of the population has under 90m 3 annually for domestic use.42billion m 3 pa. which will enable wastewater to be reused for agriculture.250. compared with the Middle East and North Africa average of 1. According to the UNDP and other donors.000m 3 per day extension to the existing Ibb sewage treatment plant. In the Sana’a basin. Through improved operation and reduction of water losses. 257 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . where 10% of the population live. consumer demand in the country is expected to rise to 3. By 2005. a shortfall of 920million m 3 pa. it was estimated in the mid 1990s that water extraction (224million m3) exceeded the level of recharge (42million cm³) by over 400%. Also in 2002. some 10% below the worldwide norm. 44% of the population have access to mains water supply and only 12% to safe sanitation. This is to be linked to creating opportunities for PSP in the longer term.5billion m3 pa. the World Bank and IDA announced that it was inviting prequalification bids for a lease contract for the provision of water and wastewater services for Sana'a’s Water Supply and Wastewater Services Local Corporation (SWSWSLC). the World Bank approved €$134 million (US$130 million) loan to upgrade water supply and sanitation services in urban communities. the exhaustion of the usable non-renewable groundwater stock (estimated at about 3billion m 3) will occur by 2010-2020. In Amran water levels have dropped 60m during the last twenty years and by 30 metres between 1995 and 2000.

The process will encourage the engagement of policymakers and public-private sector discussions. Lease and concession models were considered to be the most appropriate for the city. aims to develop a new institutional and legal framework to manage the water resources of the country. The WHO’s 2000 estimate is for 88% urban access to safe drinking water and 99% access to improved sanitation. the LWSC needs the following: • • • • • Up-dating of the water right holder data base. According to the WHO. and are manned by a member of the community who fills the residents’ containers with water. The Kafubu municipality’s Water and Sewerage Company (KWSC) has instigated water kiosks for the 13. and Regular adjustments of tariffs to ensure that the real value of revenues is not being eroded. these could have totalled up to K1. An efficient billing system.5 billion for recurrent expenditures alone. In order to cover capital expenditure. Zambia embarked on water resources reform through the Water Resources Action Program (WRAP) under the Ministry of Energy and Water Development (MEWD). If all potential revenues were collected under the current pricing regime.23 billion in 1998 and K5. Rural coverage is estimated at 48% and 64% respectively.01). In 2002.09 billion in 1999. Functioning revenue collection system. The program. 95% of the urban population had access to safe drinking water in 1996. indicating that new sources of finance are required for capital expenditure work.ZAMBIA PART 2: COUNTRY ANALYSIS ZAMBIA During 2002. where residents can buy water at a nominal fee of ZMK2 (€0. Nkana Water and Sewerage Company became first company to issue a municipal bond on the Lusaka Stock Exchange (LuSE). promoting poverty alleviation and sustainable development. 258 Masons Water Y earbook 2004 – 2005 . In Lusaka. The 19 kiosks will include a tap connected to the municipality's water pipeline.52 billion in 1999. Capital spending was K5.000 people in Kaloko community. supported by the Water and Sanitation Program's (WSP) Zambian office. along with 95% having improved sanitation. The bond is intended for a water provision project in which the company would be building a pipeline from Kitwe to Kalulushi. the water sector estimated generated revenues of K260 million in 1999 through billing with expenditure requirements of K1. In 2003. a PSP workshop was held to consider options for the LWSC (Lusaka Water and Sewerage Authority). Inclusion of ground water tariffs.

PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS 259 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .

191 US$11.161 US$83.8million people have been gained to date.ar www. The company is the largest privately held Latin American owned water company.641 US$41.7 million Aguas de Salta 97% 239.ar Dr. with 36% of the population originally having inadequate water and wastewater service coverage.aguasdelarioja. gained in 1991 was the first water and wastewater concession awarded in Argentina. Peru.414 186.836. From 1999-2002. monthly collection of bills rose from billing revenues rose 27% to 70% resulting in revenues improving by 40% without any tariff increases. a US$44 million five year investment plan was agreed with the regulator in return for a Peso 48 (US$15.076 473.com. Projects have also been carried out in Brazil. Argentina Tel: +54 3783 430017 Fax: +56 3783 23989 Web: www.198) was awarded to Aguas de La Rioja SA in 1999. Aguas de Corrientes This concession.586 NA 297.233 NA 110.329 US$30. who specialise in construction work in north east Argentina.015. It covers 100 municipalities.414.com.aguasdesalta. Aguas de Salta The 30 year concession for water and wastewater services to Salta province was awarded Aguas de Salta in 1998.500 customers in 10 cities of the province of Corrientes. Jorge Chamas (President) 260 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .015 1. Three concessions serving 1. through service enhancement and improved billing. Aguas de Corrientes SA covers 147. Dominican Republic and Ecuador. In 2004.6) per annum increase in water bills for all but the poorest 20% of its customers. Aguas de Salta is a joint venture between Latin Aguas and JCR. The company was the first water operator to gain the ISO9002 certification for customer service.539 59% 29.5 million Total NA 430.latinaguas.com Web: www.270.739 674.908 1. Customer numbers have been increased by 31%. Aguas de La Rioja The contract for the Province of La Rioja (population 280. while operational costs were reduced by 40%.814 66% 158. Nicaragua. Aguas de La Rioja 89% 44.500 634.000 people have been removed to date along with a capital investment of $32. through enlarging service coverage improved tariff collection.0 million Aguas de Corrientes NA 147. Latin Aguas is owned by the Chamas family. Revenues have been increased by 65% without a rate rise.7 million.ARGENTINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS ARGENTINA LATIN AGUAS Latin Aguas was founded in 1990 and in 1991 it became the first company to gain a water concession in Argentina.2 million Water coverage Customers People served Sewerage coverage Customers People served Revenues Contact Details Name: Latin Aguas SA Address: Buenos Aries 766 (W3400BMH) – Corrientes.929 1.952 to 44. Restrictions on water supply to 160.093 122. From 1999-2002 customer connections increased by 27% from 34.

1 7.8 18. NSW2060 Australia Tel: (61 2) 9492 8888 Fax: (61 2) 9492 8844 Web: www.9 10. North Sydney. industrial maintenance and engineering construction.5 2002 724. The Group’s total water and wastewater order book is over $250 million. United Group aims to develop the division to concentrate on the direct management of water and wastewater treatment assets. the acquisition includes TW’s industrial water outsourcing project in Victoria.6 million contract is for an industrial water treatment facility in the state of Victoria.8 28. the United Kingdom and Southeast Asia. ahead of schedule in July 2004.4 33.com. The company dates back to as water treatment chemicals company operating in Australia in the 1920s which was acquired by Thames when it bought PW Worldwide in 1989.1 18. Thames Water Projects has a turnover of A$50 million and employs 110 staff.6 24.7 10.3 19. New Zealand. In June 2004. 60 in Melbourne.5 2003 860. Malaysia and Singapore. manufacturing. mining and mineral processing.8 39. water and waste management. reservoirs and main distribution system in west Bangkok.unitedgroup. commercial property management services. While most of Thames Water Project’s activities are for third parties.7 9. United KG gained contracts with Western Water Services and Sydney Water worth a total of A$150 million. facilities management. The business was part of Thames Water’s international operations and is now called United KG Water Projects.AUSTRALIA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS AUSTRALIA UNITED GROUP LIMITED United Group specialises in industrial maintenance. United Group paid A$15 million for Thames Water Projects. Thailand.9 24. 2 Elizabeth Plaza.au Ivan Deveson (Chairman) Richard Leupen (Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer) David Irvine (Chief Financial Officer) 261 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . oil.8 2000 761. Y/E 31/03 (A$ million) Turnover Operating profits Net income Earnings per share (A$ cents) 1999 501.9 21.au Web: www. In 2002-03.ukgwaterprojects. The project was completed.7 2001 681. The company is active in Australia. Its United KG subsidiary is involved in integrated facilities management. fabrication and c onstruction for the power supply and distribution. a company covering Thames’ process engineering activities in Australia. 2000 Maffra 10 year BOT Water treatment The US$10. Projects being managed for other clients include the US$240 million contract for a major water treatment works and associated trunk mains.3 30. gas and LNG and telecommunications sectors. 20 in Kuala Lumpur and 30 in Singapore.5 16.0 Contact Details Name: United Group Limited Address: Level 10.com.

it gained the first sewage treatment BOT in Lower Austria.aquaplus. construction) and Österreichische Bundesforeste (33%.000 at a later date. Aquasystems Aquasystems DOO was founded for the M aribor wastewater treatment concession project in Slovenia.AUSTRIA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS AUSTRIA AQUAPLUS Aquaplus is jointly held by Vienna Water (33%. There is an EBRD loan attached to the project. with the pretreatment phase completed in June 2002 and the facility became fully operational in February 2004.at Web: www. with Porr Infrastruktur being one of the main shareholders in Aquasystems. Hat year. €30 million investment is needed and the concession project will generate a turnover of €8 million. 2001 and the facility entered service at the end of 2002. Construction was begun on September 21. The sewage treatment plant has a capacity of 16. serving the city of Waidhofen an der Thaya. This concession operated by Suez. with the municipality commencing payments in March 2003. Construction started in June 2000. The operational contract runs from 2004. Rainer Wiedemann (General Manager) Bernhard Elsinger (Manager) Dr. Slovenia 1997 Maribor 25 year concession 190. It has been developed to allow Vienna Water to operate in the private sector for BOT contracts in Austria and Central and Eastern Europe.000 wastewater treatment Suez was the preferred bidder for the Maribor concession in 1997 and subsequently joined with Aquasystems. Aquaplus has two subsidiaries. Porr Infrastruktur GmbH (33%. owned by the city of Vienna). Robert Nusser (Manager) Gerald Loew (Manager) 262 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Contact Details Name: Aquaplus Address: Absberggasse 47 A-1103 Vienna Austria Tel: Tel: + 43 (0)1 603 10 12 . Maribor is Slovenia’s second largest city. Ariwa Ariwa was founded in 2001 for developing water and sewage treatment BOT contracts in Austria. the Federal forestry company). This was the first BOT wastewater treatment contract to be awarded in Central and Eastern Europe.at Dr.000PE with a capital cost of €4 million and an operational period of at least 25 years. Ariwa Abwasserreinigung im Waldviertel GmbH (Ariwa) and Aquasystems.3917 Fax: Fax: + 43 (0)1 603 10 12 .ariwa. The population equivalent for the plant is 190.000 (equivalent to €29 per capita pa) and can be expanded to 285.3920 Web: www.

73 Windeck is in North Rhine Westphalia.3% pa over the past 35 years.000 Sewerage 0 10.7 million.000 650.5 2. EVN acquired WTE Wassertechnik (WTEW) from Berlinwasser.500 1. Bosnia.4 -301.0 21. 131 industrial customers are also supplied. By 2002. populations served Country Austria Hungary Germany Slovenia Croatia Russia Total . The contract involves managing and operating the municipality’s water and sewerage services.78 2001 1. serving 8.000 10. At present.8 2.5million people. Ludweis -Aigen. ENV now provides water and wastewater services to 1. The company was renamed EVN Wasser GmbH in 2001. including the construction of a new WWTW. Russia. Austria and Denmark along with Poland. 24million m3 of water was supplied and has increased by an average of 14. In January 2001.000 0 0 0 467.500 1. With the acquisition of WTE in 2003.390km supply network.082.5 2001 23.0 87.000 people) in six municipalities in the Dunavarsány region of Hungary.113.000m³.6 2. or around one-third of the Lower Austrian population. two more municipalities have joined and negotiations are underway with a further six.1 17. Croatia.000 10.international Grand Total WTE In July 2003. WTE has a turnover of €62. DTV Rt.000 inhabitants.961.000 3. profit and loss account Y/E 30/09 (€million) Revenues Pre-tax profits Net profits Earnings per share (€) EVN. The company has 16 supply areas and 75 reservoirs.000 650.500 750.000 3.50 2000 948.9 16. 263 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .0 2000 24. WTE seeks to operate a BOOT model for construction contracts. Lithuania. Slovenia and the Ukraine.7 121. along with a planned entry into the end customer market. In the longer term.39 2003 1.000 81. or some 467. 51% is owned by the state government. 69 sewage treatment plants had been constructed. with a storage volume of 197.000 31.000.500 1999 902.0 -5.1 -187.500 Total 467. WTEW has built wastewater treatment plants in Germany.1 127. EVN acquired 50 of Wiental-Sammelkanal (WISAK).494.home markets Total . water & sewerage Water 467.7 2003 26.4 94.014. with a pre-tax profit of €6. Nösiwag is the second largest Austrian water supplier behind the Vienna waterworks.000 1. its international strategy is being limited to central and eastern Europe. as well as a 1.7 2002 24.000 498. which operates WWTWs in Wiental. Since the original contract was signed in 2001. €37 million will be spent on capital projects. EVN aims to expand EVN Wasser across Lower Austria (water supply). Großmugl and Niederhollabrunn in lower Austria.000 21.58 2002 1.5 2.AUSTRIA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS AUSTRIA EVN Energie-Versorgung Niderösterreich (EVN) is the regional power utility serving the province of Lower Austria.1 145. In 2002. The operational contract started in January 2003 and the construction phase runs to the end of 2005.4 102. other markets in Austria and internationally will be sought. providing water and wastewater services for 3.100 households (c10. It is also anticipated that the sewerage and wastewater treatment markets will be addressed. (51% held with Resonáor Kft of Hungary). handing over the facilities to a local partner after its construction.9 137.6 million.2million people in six countries. Germany 2002 Windeck 25 year BOOT 21.6 89.4 17. In June 2002.0 18.494.500 750. EVN has one contract outside Austria.000 81.4 EVN Wasser provides water services to 552 municipalities.494.000 467.000 0 1. Y/E 30/09 (€million) Water sales (million m 3) Water revenues 1999 21. EVN. EVN acquired Nösiwag from the state government for €87 million.

which accommodated 258.o. This contract was renewed for another 10 years in 2003. construction and operation of the wastewater treatment plant (1million PE) and the administration facilities.wte. sewerage The city’s WWTW was constructed in two phases between 1993 and 1995.de Rudolph Gruber (CEO) Peter Layr (Director) 264 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Russian Federation 1998 Moscow 11 year Build. The contract covers the construction of the facility and its operation until 2011. Croatia 2000 Zagreb 28 year BOT 0. Construction began in July 2002 and will be completed between 2004 (mechanical treatment) and 2006 (biological treatment). is formed by RWE Aqua (48. Zagrebacke otpadne vode d. involving €270 million in capital spending. The project scope includes design. On completion.000m³ per day WWTW for the Zelenograd area of Moscow. The concession covers the complete sewerage system.5%) and the City of Zagreb (3%). The concession company. construction of the main collecting pipeline (9. Contact Details Name: EVN AG Address: EVN Plazt.000. BOT contracts for sewerage were gained for the municipalities of Komenda and Bled.5 year Build. Slovenia 1998 Kranjska Gora 15 year Concession 3.75million sewage treatment This is the largest sewage treatment concession award in central and eastern Europe to date.5%). reducing its COD loading by 91%. Tel: + 43 2366 200-0 Fax: + 43 2366 200-2030 Web: www. Austria.5km).500 sewage treatment This is a tourist area.o (ZOV). O&M 0. with a BOOT contract running to 2003. In 2002. including a new WWTW. 2000 Moscow 12. A-2344 Maria Enzersdorf. 2003 Langnese-Iglo 14 + 7 year O&M Industrial wastewater Langnese-Iglo GmbH Europe’s largest ice cream facility in Heppenheim.evn.at Web: www. The WWTW handles 1.8km) and coverage of main drainage canal (5.5million.25million sewage treatment A WWTW covering new housing estates in the district of South Butowo.AUSTRIA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS 1993 Altenburg 10 + 10 year BOOT 60.000 visitors in 1999. the facility will have a PE of 1. The O&M element of the contract runs until 2013.600m 3 of effluent per day. WTE Wassertechnik GmbH (48.40million sewage treatment A 140. O&M 0.

Between 2003 and 2015 €1. project development profile.8 billion needs to be spend on the sewerage and storm sewerage infrastructure during this period.7 66.6 11. and for 3.803 Projects. but this is seen as unlikely under present conditions. along with upgrading and extending extant plant by 2015. 2002-03 (€ million) Completed In progress In preparation Total Projects. €11.BELGIUM PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS BELGIUM AQUAFIN NV Aquafin NV was founded in 1990 as a vehicle for developing a modern sewerage network for the Flanders region. Approximately 95% of the effluents received were subject to biological treatment.212 Cost.5 11. By using private finance and taking on its own debt. 791 pumping stations and 3. The total treatment capacity of the plants was 4. with an actual treatment of 3. Aquaplus NV. Aquafin. Sewage treatment performance (million m 3/year) Pumped discharge 2o/3 o treatment 1996 360 339 1998 594 523 1999 591 537 2000 659 598 2001 731 652 2002 720 649 2003 579 548 A dry summer in 2003 materially decreased the liquid flows into the sewerage system. The company may seek to obtain a market listing.5 77.275 Cost. 2003 1. with the balance being held by a variety of institutional investors. 2002 1.8 billion in capital spending has been passed on to the region.6 2002 272.44 billion will need to be spent on new sewage treatment works. 8 plants with a PE of more than 10.000-10. on behalf of VFM the regional environment ministry).000). Aquafin was responsible for the operation of 199 wastewater treatment plants. For the Flanders region as a whole. In addition.7 In 1990. the Czech Republic. it is estimated that a further €7. 35% sewerage coverage was reached in 1995. is working on projects in Chile. 2003 1. with 57% coverage in 2002 and 60% by 2003.000).1 11.5 2003 281. Sewerage treatment works programme Sewage treatment works Compliant Derogated Non-compliant Total 1994 82 15 20 117 1998 135 8 7 150 2000 168 5 3 176 2002 173 15 1 193 2003 177 13 9 199 Aquafin’s consulting arm.846km of sewerage pipes.000PE.2 74.000 are to be built by 2008 (total PE237. including extending sewage treatment to a further 237.9million PE. Hungary and Poland and seeks to enter the market for BOT contracts in North Africa as well as central and eastern Europe.0 77. Aquafin.480 534 759 2.454 223 598 2.2 2001 261.0 10.000 to be built by 2008 (total PE135.3million people. 265 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . less than 15% of the company’s €2.868 million has been budgeted for stormwater handling (40%) and domestic sewerage and treatment (60%). 20% by Severn Trent Plc.0 59. while increasing the concentration of effluents by more than 20%.3 2000 245.853 Projects worth €184 million were delivered during 2003. 29% of the region’s effluent was treated. In 2003. mainly due to planning delays.666 420 767 2. The 2008 timetable means that the urban wastewater treatment directive target date of 2005 will not be met.2 11. 2002 1. Aquafin is 51% held by VMW (the Flemish Regional Government). at facilities that failed to comply with their effluent discharge consents.8million PE. typically. along with 26 plants with a PE of 2. The corporate aim is for 73% treatment coverage by 2005 and 85% by 2015.330 304 578 2. profit and loss account Y/E 31/12 (€ million) Turnover Operating profit Net profit 1999 224.

2630 Aartselaar.aquafin.be Ivo van Vaerenbergh (President) Luc Bossyns (MD) 266 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .BELGIUM PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS Contact Details Name: Aquafin NV Address: Dijkstraat 8 B . Belgium Tel: +32 3 450 45 11 Fax: +32 3 458 30 20 Web: www.

058 2000 1.770 2003 932 487 * 346 1.015 230 1.586 131 3.BRAZIL PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS BRAZIL SABESP In 1877.058 2000 722 266 82 1.397 128 3. This has made a material impact on water usage. Water and sewerage volumes (million m 3 per annum) Water provision Residential Commercial Industrial Municipal Other Total Sewerage Residential Commercial Industrial Municipal Total Water provision.365 125 3.784 184 1.070 2001 704 266 84 1. the Province assumed responsibility for the provision of water and sewage services and formed the Reparticao de´Agua e Esgotos (Office of Water and Sewers).105 2003 741 387 * 1.756 98 4.308 267 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .765 2003 919 126 29 36 1.070 2001 1. In 1893.544 2002 2.054 2002 1.790 2000 933 315 165 318 1.054 2002 734 282 89 1.699 2001 868 122 27 37 1.458 2001 1.5% of SABESP’s equity.731 2001 903 310 163 322 1. billed by region Y/E 31/12 (million m 3) Sao Paulo Metropolitan Region Interior Region Coastal Region Total 1999 719 259 80 1.765 1999 1.205 147 31 48 339 1.156 157 34 49 394 1.962 2003 2.105 2003 1.157 141 31 47 322 1. R$ million Water – Retail Water – Wholesale Sewerage Water & sewerage services Total 2000 1. The sale took place both on the Sao Paulo Bourse and the NYSE.815 204 1.110 1999 924 307 165 394 1.731 2000 873 129 30 38 1.790 1999 862 131 28 37 1. billed by region Y/E 31/12 (million m 3) Sao Paulo Metropolitan Region Interior Region Coastal Region Wholesale Total Sewage collection.770 2002 914 127 28 36 1.110 * Interior and Coastal regions have been combined from 2003 Since 2004. the Province of Sao Paulo granted a concession for the provision of water and sewage services to Companhia Cantareira de Agua e Esgotos.698 2002 936 327 168 339 1. Companhia de Saneamento Basico do Estado de Sao Paulo (SABESP) was founded in 1973.199 143 31 46 346 1. The state water and sewerage company for San Paulo was partly floated on the Soma in November 1996 and promoted to the Bovespa exchange in June 1997. a Governmental agency. a bonus scheme has been implemented to encourage domestic and commercial customers to minimize water consumption.177 154 34 50 317 1. The Sao Paulo Government sold a further 19% of SABESP’s equity for BR 507 million (US$204 million) in May 2002 and now holds 71.190 262 1.

Pinheiros. or 61% of the sewage collected by SABESP in the state. It is understood that distribution losses within the company’s service area are appreciably below the national average of 50% for urban areas. 21.5 2001 1.26 The company provides water and sewerage services to 368 of the 645 municipalities in the state.8 via bulk water sales.105 16.32 2001 3.767 1. During 2003.431 25.0million water connections and 4.4million people. accounting for 78% of all the sewage produced compared with 76% in 2002. was treated at their treatment facilities and discharged to inland waters and the Atlantic Ocean.1million out of the state’s 36. along with six bulk water supply contracts.110 17.br Mauro Guilherme Jardim Arce (Chairman) Fernando Carvalho Braga (Vice Chairman) Dalmo Do Valle Nogeuira Filho (President/CEO) 268 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .BRAZIL PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS SABESP – service coverage 1999 Water Billed Volume (million m 3) People served (million) Sewerage Volume (million m 3) People served (million) 1.59 2002 3.1 1.419 25.477 833 29.058 15.110 1.054 N/A 2002 1.0 2000 1. SABESP’s service area covers 25.2 SABESP has 6. Sau Paulo SP 05488-900 Brazil Tel: +55 11 3388 8000 Fax: +55 11 3813 0254 Web: www.413 N/A 1.309 216 7. Contact Details: Name: Companhia de Saneamento Basico do Estado de Sao Paulo Address: Rua Costa Carvalho.435 1. profit and loss account Y/E 31/12 (R$ million) Turnover Operating profits Net income Earnings per share (R$) 1999 3.0 1. 300. For 2003 approximately 60% and 65% of the sewage collected by SABESP in these regions.sabesp.306 -651 -22.356 1.1 1.5million sewerage connections. SABESP serves 31 cities in the area.396 19. R$4. SABESP.3 directly served and 3.8 2003 1.376 21.070 15.236 NA -235 -8.37 2000 3.84 2003 4.1 1.3 billion is being spent between 2004 and 2008 on service extension. The company operates 428 sewage treatment facilities and seven ocean outfalls.com.412 521 18. and has added 34 more municipalities since 1997. SABESP collected 81% and 73% of all the sewage produced in the municipalities in which they operate in the Sao Paulo Metropolitan Region and the Regional Systems respectively.

. In 2000.666.000m 3 per day. a separate entity from Aquatech International Corp of Pennsylvania. with a capacity of 680. The company served 768. Administration and Finance) 269 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Bailargeon Ltd of Canada) has operated the sewerage and wastewater treatment services of Saint-Jean-Sur-Richelieu since 1998. Aquatech operated 25 wastewater treatment works.500 for water provision.aquatech-inc. along with 13 drinking water plants with a total capacity of 74. USA) was founded as SAUR’s Canadian subsidiary in 1981. SAUR sold the company to its management and private investors in 2002. Aquatech had water and wastewater revenues of CAN$7 million. At the time.200m 3 per day. Some 65% of the private water sector in Canada is controlled by the company.000 people for wastewater and 88. sewerage pumping and wastewater treatment) Contact Details Name: Aquatech Water Management Services Address: 101. Gestion Eaux-Richlieu (jointly operated with P.266.com Jean-Guy Cadorette (General Manager) Jean Pierre Azzopardi (President) Yves HF Bélanger (Director. Suite 110 Longueuil Québec J4H 4B9 Canada Tel: +1 48 (450) 646-5270 Fax: +1 48 (450) 646-7977 Web: www. Contracts gained and retained since 2002 include: Régie d'Assainissement de Boischatel (sewerage pumping and wastewater treatment) City of Lévis (sewerage pumping and wastewater treatment for the city of Saint-Nicolas) City of Longueuil (sewerage pumping and wastewater treatment) Creg Quay Corporation (sewerage pumping and wastewater treatment) Municipality of Compton (water. or a PE of 2. Roland-Therrien blvd. The company has two principal operating subsidiaries: • • Aquacers (jointly operated with Simo Management and Gest Eau of Canada) has operated the sewerage and wastewater treatment services for Longueuil since 1993.CANADA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS CANADA AQUATECH WATER MANAG EMENT SERVICES INC Aquatech Water Management Services (AWMS.

The distribution network has been increased from 11.2% 71. Santiago had an estimated population of 6.363. AA serves 5million people via 1. Water services to Santiago were formally organised in 1861 with the first capital works starting in 1865.180. Suez-Lyonnaise and Aguas de Barcelona) for US$957 million.004 2003 1.8 6.6 Treatment coverage 23.2% for US$178 million.000 1. is Santiago’s water supply and sewerage company. 2000-03 CLP million Aguas Andinas Aguas Cordillera Aguas Manquehue Total 2000 32.130km to 12. compared with CLP85 billion in 19951999. At present its charges are amongst the lowest fees in Latin America. The average drinking water tariff is CLP208 per m 3 and sewerage is CLP118 per m 3. which is increasing by CLP47 per m 3 due to the expansion of sewage treatment.331.800 connections were added in 2003 through the award of six new concessions Investment in facilities.457 2002 1.085 0 93.1% of IAM to Agbar in July 2004 for €139 million.590 During 2003. After a poorly received flotation in 1999. Aguas Andinas. 71% of capital spending was for sewage treatment and 11% for sewerage. The sewerage network increased from 8. 35.600 2000 1.296. Investment programme (US$ million) Water treatment Water distribution Sewerage Sewage treatment Other services Total 2001-05 98 110 38 563 23 832 CLP325 billion was spent on capital spending between 2000 and 2004.013 0 0 31.400 1.612 5.851 1.102million. placing it amongst the five largest WWTWs in the world.513 4. service development Revenues are expected to double in the next ten years because of service expansion.880 1.327. Currently.824 42.0% of the equity of AA was sold to Inversiones Aguas Metropolitana Ldta (IAM. AA was founded in 1977 and turned into a limited company in 1989.760 1.8% 100.CHILE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS CHILE AGUAS ANDINAS Aguas Andinas (AA). Aguas Andinas. valuing the company at US$2. In June 2000. The Farfana sewage treatment works handles sewage from 3.548 896 97.330 4.607 1.0% of the equity currently remains in government hands.600 2001 1.15million customer connections. Service expansion in recent years has concentrated on adding new connections as Santiago’s population has risen.0% 270 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .4 8.180 million. Water distribution accounted for 8% and bulk water treatment 4% with 6% going on information technology and monitoring.3million people. Suez sold 30.152. which is currently planning to sell this to institutional inves tors for US$400 million.906km to 9.013 2001 88. a second share sale in 2002 has resulted in 13% of the equity now being held by outside investors. 100% of the population is served with piped water and 99% by mains sewerage and 72% of sewage effluents are treated. and a further 9.720km during the same period.830 87.268. 7.120.697 2002 92.149. formerly EMOS.303. Number of Connections Water Sewerage 1999 1. compared with 3% in 2000. Sewage treatment works Facility El Trebal La Farfana Los Nogales Completion date 2001 2003 2009 Cost (US$ million) 150 315 210 Capacity (m 3/s) 4.033km since 2000.774 2003 72.

850 13.211 20.79 2002 150.049 41. Presidente Balmaceda 1398.000 people) in the Vitacura.398 71.000.863 53.000. Aguas Cordillera serves 88.113 8.870 62. Contact Details Name: Aguas Andinas SA Adress: Av.199 59.CHILE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS The US$700 million sewage treatment programme involves the construction of 13 smaller WWTWs for 610.258 2.485 54.40 2000 106.659 9.aguasandinas.75 2001 123. 2000 Santiago Aguas Manquehue 13.320 6.cl Ruque Gistau Gistau (Chairman) Jean-Carlos Fontana (Vice Chairman) Jose Bague Prats (CEO and General Manager) 271 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . water & sewerage 50% of Aguas Manquehue was acquired in 2000 and the remaining 50% in 2003. 1537. Chile Tel: +56 2 694 2001 Fax: +56 2 694 2641 Web: ww. Aguas Andinas. Casilla No.emos. profit and loss account Y/E 31/12 (CLP million) Turnover Operating profits Net income Earnings per share (CLP) 1999 74.000Ha of farmland.000 customers (280.052 45. Las Condes and Lo Barnechea districts of Santiago.000 people in outlying areas.051 47. Santiago 420. The second highest bidder was Biwater at US$179 million. water & sewerage Enersis sold Aguas Cordeillera to AA for US$193 million in June 2000.84 2003 168.cl Web: www.639 7.75 2000 Santiago Aguas Cordeillera 280. The water recovered from these facilities will be used to irrigate 130.

aminerals.2 70. profit and loss account YE 31/12 (US$ million) Turnover Pre-tax profit Net profit 2002 39.6 billion (US$193.7 Distribution losses are currently in the region of 25% and are being targeted for reduction.2 180.antofagasta. Antofagasta gained a 30 year concession to operate the water rights and facilities in the Antofagasta Region of Chile previously controlled by Empresa de Servicios Sanitarios de Antofagasta SA (ESSAN).5 The concession contract was signed and control of the assets was transferred on 29 December 2003 by Aguas de Antofagasta SA. Aguas Antofagasta consists of two businesses.0 20. The concession is intended to complement Antofagasta’s existing transport and mining activities in the region.8 49. certain assets and liabilities were transferred to Aguas de Antofagasta by way of a US$27 million sale.uk A A Luksic (Chairman) J-P Luksic (Deputy Chairman) P J Adeane (Managing Director) Alejandro Rivera (Chief Financial Officer) 272 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . profit and loss account YE 31/12 (US$ million) Turnover Operating Profit Net profit EPS (US cents) 2000 766.2 357. the company’s newly created water management subsidiary.6 17. with 100% drinking water coverage. including the water distribution business already operated by the Railway.7 91. Aguas Antofagasta’s ESSAN serves some 454. In November 2003. an unregulated business supplying mines and other industrial users and a regulated business supplying domestic customers.0 62.0 2003 1.8 million).4 2003 41.4 2002 863.4 19. Other assets (mainly water rights and infrastructure) were transferred by way of concession and will devolve to ESSAN at the end of the 30 year period.076. Antofagasta Plc.1 176. For Antofagasta.CHILE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS ANTOFAGASTA PLC Antofagasta PLC/Antofagasta Minerals SA is a Chilean company. Contact Details Name: Antofagasta PLC Address: 5 Princes Gate.co.1 31.1 219. the company will focus both on the future development of mining operations in the region and the expected increased demand in domestic consumption.2 138. Non-regulated services are being expanded with plans to supply mining water to BHP’s Spence project near El Tesoro and to Falconbridge’s Collahuasi project in Ujina.8 17. London SW7 1QJ. listed on the London Stock Exchange that specialises in mineral extraction (especially copper and molybdenum) and road and rail logistics.8 96. United Kingdom Tel: + 44 20 7808 0988 + 562 377 5145 Web: www.0 2001 769.000 residents.cl Web: www. The cost of the concession was C$ 116. Under the concession contract.5 110. near the border with Bolivia. ESSAN. 99% sewerage coverage and 99% wastewater treatment.

7 5. annuities. The company offers life insurance. Consorcio Financiero is privately held by Juan Hurtado and Eduardo Fernandez.cl Juan Bilbao Hormaeche (Chairman) Patricio Parodi (Chief Executive Officer) Gustavo Gonzalez (General Manager.400. including US$134 million on wastewater collection and treatment and US$126 million for improving drinking water treatment and distribution. La Calera. In May 2004. which currently discharge 80 meters and 40m.CHILE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS CONSORCIO FINANCIERO SA Consorcio Financiero is one of the largest non-banking financial services conglomerate in Chile and the largest insurer in the market.5 Region People served Coverage – water Coverage – Sewerage Coverage – Sewage treatment CP (billion) 2003 Revenues 2003 Operating Profit 2003 Net Profit Esval has invested US$260 million in developing its assets since it was privatised. investments. respectively.4 4. ESVAL) 273 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Essco will invest US$15 million on wastewater treatment. with a further US$25 million to be invested in Aguas del Valle in the same period.consorcio. In July 2001 AWG bought out Enersis’s 72% stake in the Aguas Puerto joint venture for US$131 million.000 99% 91% 94% 56. In November 2003. Las Condes Santiago Tel: + 230 40 00 Fax: + 230 40 50 Web: www. This has included developing sewage treatment plants located in the area of the Aconcagua Valley (La Ligua. ESVAL was the first Chilean water company to be privatised when AWG and Chile’s Enersis acquired a controlling stake in the company in 1998. El Bosque Sur 180. The projects to be carried out in the next few years are designed to anticipate Region V's population growth for the next 20 years. Esval’s Aguas del Valle gained a 30 year concession to operate Essco through a US$89. The group currently manages assets of more than US$3 billion. bringing its total investment in ESVAL’s equity to £142 million.7% stake in Esval was acquired by Consorcio Financiero for US$82 million. stock brokering and consumer loans.04% stake in Esval to investment fund administrator Moneda Asset Management. In 2003. home loans.4 12. San Felipe.3 24. US$68 million on increasing drinking water capacity and US$52 million towards wastewater treatment works. ESVAL V 1. the company became Chile’s third largest water operator through two acquisitions. Limache. Works will include extending sewage underwater outlet pipes farther out to sea in Coquimbo and Los Vilos. US$25 million will be invested in Aguas de Valle between 2004 and 2006.000 100% 95% 95% 15. from the shore. 10% of ESVAL is traded on the Santiago Stock Exchange. The company serves the city of Valparaiso and the adjacent coastal region. In October 2003. Esval plans to invest US$120 million between 2004 and 2006. and Los Andes). Contact Details Name: Consorcio Financiero SA Address: Av.7 million bid. and US$10 million on water treatment and distribution.8 ESSCO IV 512. Aguas Puerto transferred its final 5. general insurance. AWG’s 44. Quillota.

The Solari interests bid US$172 million for the three concessions. compared with US$160 million by JP Morgan (USA) the only other final bidder. IX and XII were the smallest and most rural of the concession areas.6 36% 100% 96% 100% ESSAR IX 61. This will also apply for the more rural ESMAG.839 14. María Luisa Solari (Director) 1999 628. ESSAR and ESMAG: Company characteristics Company Region Purchase price (US$ million) Population Customers Revenues (CHP billion) Drinking water production (million m 3 pa) Distribution losses Water coverage Sewerage coverage Wastewater treatment coverage Flabella.2 2002 857.falabella.3 581. Aguas Nuevas is owned by various members of the Solari Family including 33% by Falabella’s Inversione Megeve.7 48. the final three 30 year concessions for Chile’s 12 water and wastewater regions .000 41.790 5.8 37. In the case of ESSAR. Regions I. It is 88.2 147. Santiago. ESSAR (Araucania region) and ESMAG (Magallanes region). ESSAT and ESSAR also need significant capital spending in order to upgrade their water distribution systems.9 100.063.8 70. it is known that US$75 million in capital spending will be needed.com Sr. ESSAT.8 2001 802. Pablo Turner Gonzales (CEO) Sra.1 54.900 18. profit and loss account Y/E 31/12 (CHP billion) Turnover Operating profits Net profit Contact Details Name: SACI Falabella Address: Rosas 1665.CHILE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS SACI FALABELLA SACI Falabella is the leading chain of department stores in Chile that has diversified into areas such as financial services. Chile Tel: (56 2) 380 2000 Web: www.000 106.6 78.8 13% 100% 100% 13% 274 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Reinaldo Solari (Chairman) Sr.6 2003 1.2 409. In June 2004.8 NA 52.7% held by businesses associated with the Solari family.1 116.9 10.9 98. Aguas Nuevas gained ESSAT Tarapaca region).8 2000 675.4 ESSAT I 74.4 38% 100% 90% 13% ESMAG XII 35. This is the first time the family has operated outside business areas directly related to their retail-related activities.6 NA 49.000 157. because of the poorly developed sewage treatment services.

Xinhui had a population of 255.67 ( 0.CHINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS CHINA ANHUI GUOZHEN GROUP The Anhui Guozhen Environmental Protection Energy-Saving Technology Company is owned by the Anhui Guozhen Group Ltd.com.07) for each tonne of sewage treated. The municipality had estimated that the 80. compared with € RMB1.2 (€0. The district invested RMB 36 million (€4 million) for the land and a supporting network of sewage pipelines.13) it would have spent if it had conducted its own investing and management. The city will only have to pay RMB0. This is a privately held company based in Anhui Province that has net assets of RMB400 million.ahgze.000 in 1994. Contact Details Name: Anhui Guozhen Group Address: 441 Huangshan Road Hefi. Anhui China Tel: 0551-364 2422 Fax: 0551-3643547 Web: www. Co. Anhui Guozhen Environmental Protection is responsible for the WWTW’s RMB42 million investment and operation.000m³ per day WWTW would have cost RMB280 million to develop and finance.cn Jian Xingchao (Chief Engineer) Wu Hao (Vice President) Ms Dvan (Manager) 275 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . The wastewater treatment plant serving the Xinhui District of Jiangmen (Guangdong Province) opened in October 2003.

which has invested RMB90 million and holds 60% of the equity.6 512. In 1999..672million m3 per day. Chaoyang District. A joint venture established in 2002 by Beijing Urban Drainage Group (51%) and Beijing Capital Co. Beisanhuan Road East. Ltd (49%)..3 413. accounting for 81% of sewage handling capacity in Beijing.8 56. It’s 72.5 billion flotation in the medium term. Contact details Name: Beijing Capital Group Address: 3rd Floor. Zhejiang and Anhui.5 418. It was partly floated on the Shanghai Stock Exchange in 2000. Established by Beijing Capital Co.9 394.6% held subsidiary Beijing Capital Corporation (BCC) was listed on the Shanghai Stock Exchange in 2000.02 billion.37 Three joint ventures have been signed to date: Beijing Water Co. Beijing Water Co.44 2002 191. Ltd. Since 1989. 93% of Shenzhen City’s drinking water. Gaobeidian Sewage Treatment factory and Jiuxianqiao Sewage Treatment Factory. Jinguan Centre. its property arm Beijing Capital Land was partially floated on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and the company aims for a £1.082million m 3 per day.0 463. accounting for 95% of the City’s total. ranking first in China.41 2003 222. Jiangsu.0 -7.3 403.com www. along with a sewage treatment capacity of 1. This com pany was founded in 2003 following a strategic agreement signed in 2001 and has a registered capital of US$30 million. BCC has invested in a series of water joint ventures and has started to operate its own water contracts.5 0. Its registered capital is RMB4.. 100028 China Tel: 86-010-6468-3366 Fax: 86-010-6468-9020 Web: www. Ltd.6 0.21million m3 per day. have a capacity of 2. Nine water contracts had been signed during the first four months of 2004 and this is expected to increase to at least 12 by the year end. In 2003.4 0.3 38.0 0.9 45. the JV announced that it was paying RMB2. Beijing Capital VW Investment Co. the company entered the water sector when it acquired the Gao Bei Dian Water Treatment Plant from the Beijing Municipal Water Treatment Company. Beijing Capital Co. The company is developing water treatment works in eastern China: Shandong... generating revenues of MB14. No 8.45million m3 per day and the current capacity is 0. Ltd (51%) and Veolia Water invested (49%).capitalgroup. Ltd. the Group has invested over RMB6 billion in urban infrastructure development and has average returns of 9-12% on its water activities.cn Lin Bao (Chairman) Liu Xiaoguang (General Manager and Deputy Chairman) Cao Gui Jie (Deputy General Manager) 276 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . In December 2003..com. raising funds for water and wastewater projects amongst others.8 million in 2003. The total capacity of the joint venture is 0.2 460. Ltd is focuses on city sewage treatment. This was the first Sino-Foreign investment company in this sector.4 482.94 billion for a 40% stake in the Shenzhen Water Group (SWG). Ma'anshan Capital Water Co. Its two subsidiary factories. Beijing Capital Co YE 31/12 (RMB million) Turnover Operating profits Other profits Net profits Earnings Per Share (RMB) 2000 157.CHINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS BEIJING CAPITAL GROUP The Beijing Capital Group was founded in 1995 through the amalgamation of 17 state owned enterprises in Beijing. SWG treats 1. Ltd. Beijing.beijingcapital.1million m 3 per day.42 2001 168.

In total. where currently 80% of urban wastewater is untreated. The eleven sewage treatment plants will have a combined daily handling capacity of more than 1. In June 2001. P. The company expects the facilities to pay off the project financing after ten years. Sound Group signed agreements to build sewage treatment plants in 11 Chinese cities.15 Building 4 Block. Jinshan District (of the Shanghai Municipality). These will be the first privately operated sewage treatment facilities in China. the eleven facilities will require a total investment of about RMB2 billion (US$240 million).R.soundgroup. Jianyin and Huanggang and Xiangtan in Hubei Province. This is equivalent to serving approximately 5million people. Anhuili Chaoyang District. These include Golmud in Qinghai Province.com Wen Yibo (President) 277 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Currently the company is developing activities for municipal water supply and municipal sewage treatment contracts and for industrial clients. Beijing. It was founded in 1994 and had a turnover of RMB200 million in 2000. Jianzhou. Contact Details: Name: Beijing Sound Environmental Industry Group Address: No. Sound Group started as an engineering company specialising in water and waste treatment hardware. The BOT contracts signed are to last for 25 years. China Tel: +86 (10) 6491 6666 2209 Fax: +86 (10) 60 50 4766 Web: www. employing 180 senior engineering staff.7million tonnes.CHINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS BEIJING SOUND ENVIRONMENTAL INDUSTRY GROUP Beijing Sound Environmental Industry Group (Sound Group) is a privately owned company.

It specialises in hotels. Cathay International Water's shareholders include the Santander Group (since 1991).000 m 3/day Cathay International Group. Brookdale House. UBS (Switzerland. Profit and loss account YE 31/12 (US$ million) Revenues Pre-tax Profits EPS (p) 2001 34. Nomura/Jafco (since April 1996). STIC (now part of Sembcorp of Singapore) acquired a 18% stake in Cathay International’s water activities for US$45 million. Stonehill Business Park.1 -2. This stake was sold back to CIW and Cathay International (Overseas) Holdings for US$44.000 m 3/day 2 water treatment plants in Binzhou City with a total capacity of 80.2 2002 32.0 -11. since May 1997) and JP Morgan Securities Asia (since May 1998).8 million in June 2003. In 1996.2 2003 9.CHINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS CATHAY INTERNATIONAL GROUP Cathay International Holdings (CIH) is a Hong Kong and UK based company founded in 1991. toll roads.000 m 3/day 7 water treatment plants in Jinan City with a total capacity of 800.000 m 3/day 2 water plants in Jiangmen City with a total capacity of 500.3 -0. power plants and through its minority held subsidiary Cathay International Water (CIW) it has diversified into a number of water treatment plant operation contracts.9 Contact Details Name: Cathay International Holdings Limited Address: Angel Road. Cathay International Water Contracts in China : 4 water plants in Guangzhou City with a total capacity of over 2.000. London N18 3LD United Kingdom Tel: +44 20 8 8071020 Fax: +44 20 8 8843528 James Buchanan (Chairman) Wu Zhen Tao (CEO) Patrick Sung (FD) 278 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .1 -12.6 -64.9 -4.

349 1. Cheung Kong Infrastructure.43 2001 2. Cheung Kong Infrastructure (CKI) is 85% held by Hutchinson Whampooa Limited and was partly floated on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange in 1996. profit and loss account YE 31/12 (HK$ million) Turnover Operating profits Other profits Net profits Earnings Per Share (HK$) Australia: AquaTower AquaTower was formed in 2002 to provide potable water to 50.49 Cambridge Water supplies water to 298.00 4. CKI was one of the two original investors in the 25 year BOT project and in 2004 acquired the outstanding 50% held by Abigroup of Australia. CKI acquired Cambridge Water Plc of the UK from Spain’s Union Fenosa for £51.53 2002 14.57 3.cki.316 346 3.81 4.CHINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS CHEUNG KONG INFRASTRUCTURE HOLDINGS LTD.4 million.567 1.77 2000 15.99 2.48 2003 1.09 9.700 customers) in the city of Cambridge and certain surrounding districts.uk Michael Halstead (Chairman) Stephen Kay (Managing Director) Contact Details Name: Cheung Kong Infrastructure Address: Cheung Kong Centre. 60% of customers have water meters.hk Victor Li Tzar Kuoi (Chairman) Kam Hing Lam (MD) 279 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Cambridge Water.579 3.043 3. CKI’s CK Life Sciences has developed a series of bioremediation product applications. CKI invested HK$69 million in the HS$140 million Yueyang water treatment works project serving Yueyang City (Hunan Province) in 1998.co. The water and gas and electricity activities were spun off into separate companies and the latter activities were sold to Scottish and Southern Electricity in 2003 for £4 million.84 3.326 1.cambridge-water.323 1.116 3.893 3.20 1. for treatment of municipal wastewater.000 people in four regional towns in Victoria.51 2003 14. WonderTreat™.613 1. Cambridge CB1 3QS Tel: +44 1223 706050 Fax: +44 1223 214052 Web: www.74 4. Hong Kong Tel: 852 2122 3986 Fax: 852 2501 4550 Web: www. Contact Details Name: Cambridge Water Plc Address: 41 Rustat Road. profit and loss account Y/E 31/12 (£million) Turnover Operating profit Pre-tax profit 1999 16.228 1.80 2000 2.000 people (119.57 2001 13. United Kingdom: Cambridge Water The Cambridge University and Town Waterworks was founded in 1853 and was floated as Cambridge Water Plc in 1996. contaminated surface water and industrial wastewater. compared with 51% in 2002 and demand for metering is rising by 4% pa. In addition. CKI acquired the entire equity of AquaTower of Australia in March 2004. The population in the service area has increased by 17. This stake was sold for a HK$11 million profit in 2003. In April 2004. Central. 2 Queen’s Road.644 3. Union Fenosa had in turn acquired Cambridge Water for £57 million in 1999.000 since 1995.25 2.64 3.872 958 3. with sewerage services being provided by Anglian Water Plc.com.006 3.47 2002 1.

It was floated on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange in 1996. Cathay International Group.481 2.044 2.). Contact Details Name: Citic Pacific Limited Address: Citic Tower. with CDGE (Veolia) holding the remaining 25% and 75% respectively. Zunyi is in Guizhou Province.56 2001 17.583 2.citicpacific.307 3.251 2. Citic anticipates a 15% return on its investment in the project.000m 3 per day.60 Citic expects to be involved in five water and waste management projects in Shanghai. 1 Tim Mei Avenue.96 2002 22.207 2. Hangzhou. 50.5% by the management.316 2.110 0.190 1.CHINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS CITIC PACFIC LTD CITIC Pacific is the Hong Kong arm of CITIC. Profit and loss account YE 31/12 (HK$ million) Turnover Operating profits Other profits Net profits Earnings Per Share (HK$) 2000 16. Central. 29% by CITIC’s CITIC Hong Kong and 20. Hong Kong Tel: 852 2820 2111 Fax: 852 2877 2771 Web: www.058 2. The asset company is to pay the operational company a set of fees up to an annual cap of RMB51 million. It is anticipated that the Jiangsu project will involve a total investment of HK$1 billion.291 1. China’s leading investment company.5% of the equity is held by private and institutional investors. each having a capacity of 100.411 3.132 1. Guangzhou and Jiangsu by the end of 2004.com Larry Yung Ghi Kin (Chairman) Henry Fan Hung Ling (Managing Director) Peter Lee (Deputy Managing Director) 280 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Zunyi 2004 Zunyi 35 year concession Water treatment Citic Pacific holds 75% of the asset and the 25% of the operational companies (CGE (Zunyi) Water Treatment Co Ltd. These consist of the Nanjiao and Beijiao water treatment works.77 2003 26.875 1.305 0. The contract involves acquiring the extant facilities for RMB152 million and has a total cost of RMB200 million.180 1.

HK$100 million was earmarked for expanding the plant in 2002.54 27.73 54.00 2002 674. sales and installation of environmental protection equipments other than wastewater treatment.T.59 92. GGTG and Golden Idea are to acquire from Guangxi Liuzhou City Investment the rights for the development and operation of two sewage treatment plants at Liuzhou in China. The two plants will serve over 800. Hong Kong Tel: +852 2522-2811 Fax: +852 2973-0033 Jim Lau (Chairman) Henry Chan (CFO) 281 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .84 0.0 % of Golden Idea. profit and loss account FY 31/12 (HK$000) Turnover Net profit Earnings per share (HK$) Dividend per share (HK$) 1999 106.00 2003 633.55 27.24 18. Global Success Properties Ltd. In September 2002. Golden Idea is a private biotechnology company in China engaged in the research and development of wastewater treatment systems as well as the design.07 144.41 4. 21-33 Tai Lin Pai Road Kwai Chung.88 5. GGTG signed a letter of intent with Golden Idea Bio-technology Engineering Group Ltd and Guangxi Liuzhou City Investment and Construction Development Co Ltd for a joint investment in two sewage treatment plants. The total project will cost HK$480 million. N. Global Green Tech Group.000 commercial and residential users in the city of Liuzhou.35 million. The technology development and construction of these two plants are expected to take two years and the plants are scheduled for the commencement of operations by the end of 2004.00 2001 341.00 Contact Details Name: Global Green Tech Group Address: Unit 13 5/F Vanta Industrial Centre.CHINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS GLOBAL GREEN TECH GROUP Global Green Tech Group (GGTG) is a Hong Kong listed company specialising in a range of cosmetic and surfacant products for domestic and industrial use. a unit of GGTG.04 83. currently owns 8. development.18 30.03 0.00 2000 188. with a proposed investment of US$61.75 5.68 13.63 28. The development and operation rights will last not less than 25 years.

GH Holdings owns 99% of WaterCo.com.gdi.995 -985 -1.hk Li Wenyue (Chairman) Zhang Hui (MD) Paul Wang Man Kwan (CFO) 282 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . profit and loss account Y/E 31/12 (HK$ million) Turnover from water supply Group turnover Group operating profits Pre-tax profit Net profits from water supply Net income Earnings per share (HK$) 1999 0 4.194 1999-2002 figures have been restated. the company has been restructured to concentrate on utilities. Huang Huahua. water used was 61million m3 below the agreed volume. In return for an interest free loan granted by Hong Kong to Guangdong Province in 1998. increasing by 30million m3 per annum to the designed maximum capacity of 1.423million m3 at the start of 2004 at a cost of RMB4.673 829 1. Under the original agreement.96 billion as part of a refinancing exercise. 148 Connaught Road.100million m3 pa by 2008.164 2.) This is equivalent to serving 5million people.7 billion.19 million in 2001 and HK$172.8% in 2003.737 1. The latter contract accounts for 90% of WaterCo’s revenues. A water piping project (Phase IV renovation project) increased the system’s capacity from 1. GDI is pressing for the tariffs to be increased. due to changes in internal accounting policy procedures and the refocusing of the company’s activities. infrastructure and property. Hong Kong SAR. The traditional utility activities were in power generation.947 -373 -1. Contact Details Name: Guangdong Investment Ltd Address: 27-29/F Guangdong Investment Tower. the Governor of Guangdong Province is considering imposing a package of a tariff cut of 20% and more flexible supply arrangements in response to the continued weakness of the Hong Kong economy. the agreed supply for 1995 was 690million m3. Following heavy losses in 1998 and 1999.958 5.272 2.832 6.76 million in 2002 for water that it did not use.145 -6 -1. negotiations were resumed over the Water Project’s tariff structure. In December 2000. Million m 3 pa Water to Guangdong Water to Hong Kong Total Water Sales 2001 608 790 1398 2002 718 800 1518 2003 940 810 1740 The volume of water sold to Dongguan rose by 79. In 2001. a company that operates the assets for the transfer of treated bulk water to Hong Kong. falling to 56million m3 below the agreed volume in 2002.107 0.CHINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS GUANGDONG INVESTMENT LTD Guangdong Investment Ltd (GDI) is a property and investment company controlled by the municipality of Guangdong’s GDH Limited (58%) and Guandong Trust (11%).728 7. reducing the overall volume provided between 1998 and 2004 by 560million m 3. the agreed increase in water supply was cut from 30million m3 per annum to 10million m3 per annum from 1998.743million m3 pa to 2.561 0 -2. Despite the lowered rate of growth in water deliveries since 1998. This meant that the Water Supplies Department had to pay HK$188. China Tel: +852 2860 4368 Fax: +852 2528 4386 Web: www.043 2002 2. A refinancing of the water operations in 2003 reduced financing costs by approximately HK$800 million pa. demand has continued to be significantly lower than the agreed volume. In August 2003. GDI acquired 81% of GH Holdings for HK$3.957 2000 4 4. Guangdong Investment Ltd. Central District.851 530 114 194 0.023 2003 2.356 -0. WaterCo was corporatised in April 2000 and supplies water to parts of Shenzen and Donnguan in Guangdong Province along with supplying 75% of Hong Kong’s drinking water under a 30 year non-exclusive contract (from August 2000. Year.544 2001 2.170 1.129 650 317 286 0.377 -0.

2million m 3 per day by 2007.CHINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS JIANGXI HONGCHENG WATERWORKS CO The Jiangxi Hongcheng Waterworks Co was partly floated on the Shanghai Stock Exchange in June 2004. with limited scope for further increases. Electricity accounted for 38% of its production costs in 2003.9 24.5 0.553 per m3 and has been fixed at this level for two years. RMB256 million of which is to be used in expanding the water supply network through three projects designed to expand supply capacity from 900. The IPO raised RMB264 million.25 43.21 44. The company is responsible for 85% of Nanchang’s water supplies.000m 3 per day to 1.281 2003 127. Water is charged at RMB0.273 2002 116.9 25.5 0. Jiangxi Hongcheng Waterworks Co.283 Contact Details Name: Jiangxi Hongcheng Waterworks Co Address: 292 Yanjiang Road South Nanchang Jiangxi 330001 China Tel: 86 791 523 5057 Fax: 86 791 522 6672 Zheng Mingtan (Chairman) Lui Zhoing (President) Kou Jianguo (CFO) 283 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . profit and loss account Y/E 31/12/(RMB million) Turnover Operating Profit Net Profit EPS (RMB) 2001 108.3 0.0 25.17 41.

1 0. The company seeks to raise water supply to 1. Nanhai District. profit and loss account Y/E 31/12 (RMB million) Turnover – Water supply Total turnover Operating profit Net profit EPS (RMB) DPS (RMB) 1999 9. Foshan.0 0.10million people.32million m3 per day.8 32.2 0.3 72.9 62.13 0. 36.1 96.20 2003 253.20 2002 232. Nanhai Development Company Limited.35 0.35 0.4 30.CHINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS NANHAI DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LIMITED Nanhai Development Company Limited (NDC) supplies drinking water and designs and installs water supply systems in Nanhai and surrounding areas in Guangdong Province. The municipality of Nanhai has 1.31 0.5 130.5% of its equity is held by the Nanhai Water Supply Group. The company was listed on the Shanghai Stock Exchange in December 2000.2 0.4 99. 52820 China Tel: +86-757-8628-0996 Fax: +86-757-8623-8565 Xie Yuzhi (Chairman) Ye Er (Vice President) Feng Chenggui (President) Chen Huixia (Financial Controller) 284 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .0 217. Nanhai Avenue.20 Contact Details Name: Nanhai Development Company Limited Address: 22F Jianhang Building.2 73.0 4.00 2000 123.1 0.0 64.8 19. Guangding.4 232.7 115.25 2001 208.7 253.22 0.

50 2003 5.95million m 3 per day.CHINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS NWS HOLDINGS LTD NWS is the Hong Kong Stock Exchange listed services arm of the New World Development Company. Total water treatment capacity at the start of 2004 was 3. NWS Holdings Ltd.26 2001 134 -51 397 276 0.213 1.316 1. a micro-filtration equipment manufacturing plant and a wastewater treatment plant in Mainland China.000 water The Sanya Sino French Water Supply Company is to invest RMB320 million in the construction and management of a 310. The contract will enter service in the second half of 2004 and will be immediately cash generative. a city in Hainan province. Hong Kong Tel: 852 2131 0600 Fax: 852 2131 0611 Web: www.39 Tianjin Tanggu Sino French Water Supply Co Ltd is a 50-50 joint venture between the Tianjin municipality and SFHD.hk Henry Cheng Kar Shun (Chairfman) William Doo Wai-Hoi (Deputy Chairman) 285 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . The company was listed on the HKSE in 1997. profit and loss account YE 31/06 (HK$ million) Turnover Operating profits Other profits Net profits Earnings Per Share (HK$) Tianjin 2004 Tanggu District 35 year concession 850.69 2002 125 -22 238 144 0.770 257 1.com.nwsh. 18 Queen’s Road. NWS’s Water Treatment and Waste Management segment holds stakes in a water treatment plant in Macau. The concession was announced in April 2004 and will involve an investment of RMB470 million for the handling a total of 310. Central. Contact Details Name: NWS Holdings Ltd Address: New World Tower 2.000m 3 of water per day water treatment plant serving Sanya. The joint venture is held by SFH and the city’s Hainan Tianya Water Industry Holding Company. NWS has been involved in then water sector in China since 1993 through Sino French Holdings (Hong Kong) its 50-50 joint venture with Suez Ondeo.000 water 2000 150 -70 138 66 0. 19 water treatment plants in 15 cities. Sanya 2004 Sanya 35 year concession 300.000m 3 of water per day.

452 1.0million m3 per day and a sewage treatment capacity of 514. The joint venture’s China Water and Sewage Treatment Company and Zhong Huan Water Treatment Construction Limited Corporation started operations in November 2003. and a sewerage network project for water supply and sewage collection in the Zhanjiang New Area.301 1.199 1. The company plans to invest a total of RMB10 billion by 2006 in operating water supply.14 2000 2. In 2003.com.380 1. Address: Harcourt House.259 1. a 60. Total investment in the two projects will exceed RMB1 billion.011 1.490 1.34 2002 3. logistics and technology company.27 2001 3.hk Cai Lai Xing (Chairman) Lu Ming Fang (CEO) Lu Da Yong (Deputy CEO) 286 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . China Water and Sewage Treatment is expected to invest by 2006 a total of RMB250 million in a 100.961 1. This operation of contract is currently subject to a competitive tender. sewage treatment and sewerage networks.315 1.203 1.000m 3 per day sewage treatment plant TOT (Transfer-Operate-Transfer) and BOT project.000m 3 per day water treatment plant serving Nanjing and a 400.000m 3 per day waterworks BOT project. In April 2004. China Water and Sewage Treatment has in turn set up a joint venture with the Xiamen Water Services Group to operate the principal water supply and sewage treatment facilities in Xiamen.000m 3 per day water treatment plant serving the cities of Zhenjiang and Zhangjiang.126 1. Hong Kong.647 1.000m 3 per day.CHINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS SHANGHAI INDUSTRIAL HOLDINGS Shanghai Industrial Holdings Limited (SIHL) is a broadly based infrastructure. The company was partly floated on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange in 1996.sihl.130 1. which is 58% held by the Shanghai municipal government. Shanghai Industrial Holdings.826 1. SIHL gained contracts to develop a 300. HK Tel: 00852 86 21 6356 4899 Fax: 00852 86 21 6356 4880 Web: www. The city is one of China’s four Special Economic Zones and contract covers a water supply capacity of 1.22 2003 2. Contact Details Name: Shanghai Industrial Holdings Ltd. profit and loss account YE 31/12 (HK$ million) Total turnover Operating profits Net income Earnings per share (HK$) 1999 3. with the objective of becoming one of the top three water services companies in the Chinese market. 39 Gloucester Road. China Water and Sewage Treatment subsequently signed heads of agreements with Xiamen Water Services Group and Zhenjiang New Area Administrative Commission in Jiangsu province for water services investment projects. A second joint venture has been formed with the Zhangjiang New Area Administrative Commission in Jiangsu Province for the exclusive right to operate water supply and sewage treatment facilities in Zhenjiang New Area.135 1. the company decided to enter the Chinese water and sewage treatment BOT market. SIHL formed a RMB500 million 50:50 joint venture with the s tate-held China Energy Conservation Investment Corporation (CECIC).34 In August 2003.

220 2001 745.7 450. profit and loss account YE 31/12 (RMB million) Water supply turnover Water treatment turnover Total turnover Operating profits Net income Earnings per share (RMB) 1999 N/A N/A 910. Address: 5/F.4 0.257 2000 800.4 N/A 750. Shanghai Municipal Raw Water Co.4 429. China. canals and reservoirs necessary for the bulk water provision to the city. The company builds and operates the pumping stations.1 0.228 Contact Details Name: Shanghai Municipal Raw Water Co.2 387.5 393.210 2002 695.3 371.0 240. Shanghai.7 440.213 2003 713. SMRW supplies bulk water to Veolia Water’s 2002 Shanghai Pudong contract.9 464. Ltd.4 80.3 780. Ltd.9 400. 52% of SMRW's shares are held by the Shanghai State Assets Management Bureau.7 0.4 N/A 808.8 0..1 969.7 494. 812 Sichuan Road North.CHINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS SHANGHAI MUNICIPAL RAW WATER CO LTD The Shanghai Municipal Raw Water Co. 200085. In addition. (SMRW) abstracts water from the Yangtze and Huangpu rivers for treatment at the Shanghai municipality’s water treatment stations. Tel: +86 21 6356 4899 Fax: +86 21 6356 4880 Liu Qiang (Chairman) Shoupei Wu (President) Bai Lei (Financial Controller) Gu Yuliang (Chief Engineer) 287 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .1 0.9 406.

Jiangsu Province 215011. Address: 6/F Jinshi Building. There are 400 facilities and 100. providing 150.0 149.7 million in 2002.7 0. 24.5% of its shares were floated in August 1996. Non-real-estate turnover fell from RMB57..6 94. Ltd. New District.3 million in 2000 to RMB28.cn Wu Youming (Chairman) Liang Jianhua (Vice Chairman) Wei Hua (President) Zhuang Liangbao (Finance Director) 288 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Suzhou.2 0. The dedicated Suzhou Xinning Water Works was opened in 2000.6 84. provided by the city.189 2002 737.238 Contact Details Name: Suzhou New District Hi-Tech Industrial Co.sndht. (SNDHT) is responsible for the development and operation of water.1 0. gas and power services for Suzhou's Hi-Tech Industrial Development Zone.8 140.CHINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS SUZHOU NEW DISTRICT HI-TECH INDUSTRIAL CO LTD Suzhou New District Hi-Tech Industrial Co.8 million in 2001 and RMB62.9 0.353 2000 438.000 residents in the area.206 2003 771. Suzhou New District Hi-Tech Industrial Co. and the company is currently 48.2 194. Ltd. Demand for water is currently in excess of 300. which can be doubled at a later date.7 198.6% held by Suzhou New District Economic Development Group.5 116.000m 3 per day.8 157.260 2001 540.2 108. China Tel: +86 512 809 6283 Fax: +86 512 809 9281 Web: www. profit and loss account Y/E 31/12 (RMB million) Turnover Operating profits Net income Earnings per share (RMB) 1999 536. 12 Sishan Road.com. Ltd.000m 3 per day.1 0. road.8 108.

1 127. Ltd.6 170.9 44.1 0. 71% being held by the Wuhan Water Business Group Co.301 2002 169. Wuhan Sanzheng Industry Holding Co.417 2000 183.0 159. Ltd.0 147.2 51.2 30. Ltd. Fazan Avenue. 25% of the company’s shares were floated in April 1998.355 2001 180. Donfang Commercial Building. Ltd.1 241.7 0.9 78. Address: 5th Floor. treatment and distribution of drinking water to the city of Wuhan and the surrounding area.0 51.4 52.9 321. Hubei.1 0.2 119.5 227.0 56.ch Chen Lqian (Chairman) Zheng Yaoguang (President) Zhou Xianwen (VC) 289 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . profit and loss account Y/E 31/12 (RMB million) Water supply Drainage Turnover Operating profits Net income Earnings per share (RMB) 1999 185.6 119.4 0.7 132.4 0.9 211.CHINA PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS WUHAN SANZHENG INDUSTRY HOLDING CO LTD Wuhan Sanzheng Industry Holding Co.. China Tel: +86 27 8560 0546 Fax: +86 27 8587 7108 Web: www.whkg. (WSI) is responsible for the abstraction. Wuhan 430023.4 90.178 2003 159.7 0.com.070 Contact Details Name: Wuhan Sanzheng Industry Holding Co.

900. which in many cases.000 350.000 6. Gobain.058 666 0.34 0.239.000 27.247 1.000.000 1.000 300.000 300.000 1.000.93 0.000 0 0 0 400. SAUR continues to have a relatively low profile in most international markets.800. Bouygues’ holding in SAUR increased to 83%.000. Bouygues decreased its stake in SAUR to 73% and in January 2001.822 1. the company decided to stop trying to compete against Suez and VE in France outside the southern and western areas where it has established a significant presence.300.000.000 0 3.60 0.975.210.000 60.100.210. In 1999. SAUR.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS FRANCE BOUYGUES Société d’Aménagement Urbain et Rural (SAUR) is part of the Bouygues Group.719 209 30 469 0 0 18 2.500.000 2.500.060 812 215 0.000 Total 6. being impacted by the 2003 sale of SAUR’s activities in England.500. one of the leading French construction companies. Until 1997.000 2.000 510. In 1994.000 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 290 .500.000 300.8 billion). Bouygues announced that it was considering selling SAUR.682 279 33 516 6 0 2 2.000 3. However.473 876 344 0. making it the last of the major French water companies and SAUR has always been associated more with small towns and rural municipalities than either Suez or Veolia Environment SA (VE).36 2002 22.000 1.494 85 2002 1.95 0.300.300.200. profit and loss account Y/E 31/12 (€million) Turnover Operating profit Net profit Earnings per share (€) Dividend per share (€) SAUR Revenue Breakdown SAUR (€million) France Western Europe Eastern Europe Africa Asia/Pacific USA & Canada Rest Of World Total turnover Operating profit 2000 1.238 450 1.000 0 56.000 130. Bouygues acquired SAUR in 1984.000 3. following the 1997 acquisition of Cise from St.000 23. population served Country France Argentina Central African Republic China Côte d’Ivoire French Overseas Territories Guinea Italy Mali Mozambique Poland Scotland Senegal South Africa Spain Zambia Total – Outside France Water 6.36 2003 21. especially when compared with VE and Suez-Lyonnaise. In contrast to Suez and VE.000 2. SAUR was founded in 1933.000 0 0 1.50 75% of SAUR’s 2003 turnover was in water activities (€1.000 510. it hopes will evolve into full concessions.36 2001 20.448 88 2000 19.388 116 2001 1.500.525.000 0 0 2.400.900. Bouygues assumed 100% ownership of SAUR.000 2.000 1. This is not the first time such an announcement has been made. Instead the company is seeking to gain international water contracts.000 400.531 347 45 442 5 9 2 2. Outside Africa.000 3.000 115.607 329 54 481 6 13 2 2.000 6. Bouygues SA. SAUR has to date found most of its success in Africa and has been mainly winning operations and management contracts (O&M).000 Sewerage 6.000 1.000 130.800.514 108 2003 1.500.000 883.000 60. In 2004. SAUR was 45% held by Bouygues.000 6.000 700.000 1.000 3.000 115.

Turnover increased from €21 million in 1999 to €48 million in 2000 and €58 million in 2001. STWs now operate at secondary level and are to be upgraded to tertiary level standard in line with the UWWTD.5% and prices by 1. The concession is to be operated through SAUR’s Siza Water subsidiary. Water quality has moved from 8% EU compliant in 1992 to 87% by 2000.3million water & sewerage 291 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS Country Global total France Water 29. Stereau will be paid €21 million for hardware and SAUR will receive €3 million pa for the operational life of the contract.975. which provides water to a total of 420.5% in 2000. Gestagua (€29 million turnover in 2003) and AgVal serve water to 2.5% of Umbria Acque the ATO serving 460. The contract generated sales of €30 million in 2003. SAUR France provides 7. In September 2000.35 0.239. It has been in operation since 1904 and covers 780. The new Dalmuir facility will offer an increased effluent handling capacity and an appreciably higher degree of treatment. SAUR's EMALSA (€46 million unconsolidated turnover in 2003). UK .525.40 The new group serves a total of 2.162) per m³ for sewerage services to 470. The venture is charging Zl3.0million people. In 2003. SAUR Neptune Gdansk. AgVal’s water provision contract for Valencia was renewed for 50 years in 2002. SAUR acquired 26. SAUR provides water and sewerage services to 6.2million people and sewerage to 700. Population served (million) Water Wastewater Sigesa 0. SAUR's Sigesa acquired 71% of Crea in February 2000 with the remaining 29% being held by Italmobiliare SpA. Cise was renamed SAUR France. Taylor Woodrow.SAUR Water Services Plc SAUR Water Services (Great Britain) Plc was sold to MacQuarie Bank of Australia in September 2003. US$172 million of investments are to be made during the life of the concession. EMALSA and Gestagua had a consolidated turnover of €45 million in 2003.000 people in the city of Perugia. mainly for water alone and contributed F3.000 people overall.184) per m³ for drinking water and Zl3.45 (US$0.000 Total 33.45 Crea 0. started in late 1992 and runs until 2010.000 people (see separate entry for AgVal).000 people.000 people.000 communities with water supply and sewerage services through 3. The acquisition values Crea at €67 million. Unlike VE and Suez. South Africa 1999 Dolphin Coast 30 year concession 56. Brainon and Nimes during 1996-97. Argentina 1998 Mendoza 95 year BOT 1. Crea supplies water to 13 regions.8million people. Glasgow 25 year PFI BOT 600.200 water and sewage treatment works. Spain In Spain.20 2. Innisfree. while distribution losses have fallen from approximately 55% in 1992 to 10% in 1999. Stereau (SAUR). Aix les Bains. Poland. The gas activities have been divested.000 In France.95 (US$0. PE sewage treatment Scotia Water (SAUR UK.000 people in the city and 510.000 water & sewerage The Borough of Dolphin Coast in Ballito is one of the main tourist resorts in South Africa and is experiencing rapid growth both in its population and its tourism development. SAUR holds 32% of Aguas de Valencia (AgVal).9 million in 2001. with water consumption falling by 43%. a water and sewerage management JV with the municipality of Gdansk. SAUR holds 50.000. Barr & Halcrow) are to construct the replacement of Glasgow West’s sewage treatment works built in 1904.85 1. Gdansk.99% of the company. EMALSA is a JV run between SAUR. Customer numbers rose by 1.0million people. 1999 Dalmuir. Turnover was €1. SAUR enjoyed contract gains in Brive.2 billion in 1996.85 Combined 1. Italy SIGESA acquired the water services activities of Fiat SpA in 1998. Endesa of Spain and the Las Palmas municipality. The increase in fees has been 36% below the rate of inflation. Cise served approximately 3.000 Sewerage 12. the company has not been subjected to allegations about its pricing and contract procurement policies in France.

the capital city. EdM had a €36 million turnover in 2003. In the longer term.000 water management Operations and management for water provision to all cities through SEEG (jointly held with VE).8million water management Operations and management for water provision services to 54 towns and cities (1.000 connections to the sewerage network serving 883.000 new connections have been made to date. West Indies and Reunion Island Water provision to 130. a figure which will be increased to 24% by 2020. SAUR holds 38.000 people.000 customers.1million water management Operations and management of all water services in urban areas through SODECA. Enron sold its stake to South Water SA of Argentina in 2004. Zambia 2000 Copper belt O&M 300. Currently 8% of the population is connected to the water network. and 210. 15.000 water provision A JV between SAUR International (39%) and IPS (Aga Khan Fund for Economic Development. This is a renewal of the original 1959 concession.9% of SODECI.6million inhabitants with 291. both former French territories. It also commercialises water services in Maputo's neighbouring industrial city of Matola and Beira's neighbouring city of Dondo. Nampula and Pemba. Enron (32%) and Italgas (4. the billing collection rate improved from 80% to 90% as the consortium introduced more professional operations management procedures. Central African Republic 1991 Urban areas 15 year concession 1.7 million. SAUR holds 48.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS Bouygues (32%). Senegal 1996 Urban areas 10 year lease 3. During 1998.000 clients in total and generated a €68 million turnover in 2001 against US$55 million in 1997.83% stake in Senegalaise Des Eaux. Côte d’Ivoire 1987 Abidjan 20 year concession 6.9million water & sewerage SODECI has the O&M contract for water and sewerage services for Abidjan. Mali 2000 Urban areas 20 year concession 115.000 people.8million outside Dakar) through its 62.5million water provision A concession linked to US$117 million of donor funding. 292 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .5million for sewerage. the contract will cover some 5million people. the country's second city of Beira and major provincial capitals of Quelimane. €610 million is to be invested in EdM.000 water & sewerage The copper belt covers industrial towns in the north of Zambia. with the Government holding the remaining 40% has been awarded the concession to operate Energie de Mali (EdM). The concession covers water provision services to the Mozambique capital of Maputo. along with 1.000 people in Guadeloupe and Martinique. compared with €96 million in 2001 and is responsible for water distribution (€26 million in 2001) to 68.000 water connections serving 1. Turnover was €66 million in 2003. Capital spending of US$180 million to 2015 will concentrate on service expansion and the upgrading and expansion of water and sewage treatment facilities. 21%). Turnover was €74 million in 2003. Guinea 1989 Conakry 10 year lease 350.5%) acquired Obras Sanitarias de Mendoza from Mendoza municipality for US$132.5%) and the Mazi-Mozambique consortium holds the remaining 30%. Because of the Pes o crisis revenues fell to €20 million in 2002 and €18 million in 2003. Mozambique 1999 Major cities 5 + 15 year BOT 2. The contract will serve 280. Mendoza has 1.3million people. The contract will eventually cover 800. 6.9million people are provided with water services.5% of Aguas de Mozambique. along with IPE-Aguas de Portugal (31.

av. Under current conditions. Other Operation and Management contracts In Central and Eastern Europe.000 water provision Shanghai Fengxian is a district to the south-west of Shanghai. held by SAUR International (51%) and Mosvodokanal (49%). Moscow. which runs a state-of-the-art water quality laboratory for the public utilities of Moscow and other towns in Russia. In 1999. 78061 St-Quentin-Yvelines Cedex.saur.000 water provision 3 This is a 0. the 28-year contract has aggregate sales of approximately €84 million and generated sales of €7 million pa.225 million M per day water treatment plant construction plus management project. where O&M and management contracts have been awarded.bouygues. SAUR is gaining a reputation for working with Governments and municipalities on consulting projects. in charge of supplying water and wastewater services to greater Moscow (12million inhabitants served). Eugène Freyssinet. Harbin SAUR Water was the first company in the Chinese water sector to be awarded ISO 9000 certification by an international organisation.000m 3 per day and supplies drinking water to 700. France Tel: Web: +33 1 44 30 60 32 11 www.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS China SAUR’s subsidiary Shanghai Fengxian SAUR Water (SFSW) is responsible for the company’s activities in China. Contact Details Name: Bouygues SA Challenger. Moscow's state-owned water company. SAUR) Philippe Marien (CEO. which have led to market breakthroughs in Poland and Bulgaria. and is involved in leakage loss detection across the district's distribution network. SAUR) Herve Le Bouc (COO. which is being operated jointly with the Harbin Water Company. as well as for industry. 1 av Eugene Freyssinet. In 1994 Rossa was created.8million. 2001 Shanghai Fengxian 28 year concession 700.fr Martin Bouygues (Chairman and CEO) Michel Derbesse (COO) Olivier Poupart-Lafarge (CFO) Contact Details Name: SAUR Address: Atlantis. SFSW is equally owned by SAUR International and a local investment company. 1996 Harbin 28 year BOT and O&M 2. has a production capacity of 100.com Oliver Bouygues (Chairman.000 people. The plant. SAUR aims to gain full concessions in these countries when market conditions allow. France Tel: +33 1 30 60 22 60 Web: www. operated by SFSW. 78061 Address: St-Quentin-Yvelines Cedex. SAUR) 293 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Harbin has a total population of 2. 1.800. Russia: SAUR International has for many years maintained close relations with Mosvodokanal.

making it the third oldest private sector water company in France. buy back of Browning Ferris’s stake in SITA Lyonnaise des Eaux organised into three divisions S-LDE renamed Suez. the company served 40million customers (25. Lyonnaise des Eaux had some 860 subsidiaries. the former with Dumez SA of France (construction) and the latter with Compagnie Financiere Suez SA of Belgium (power and waste management).18 0. Major contract gains at the outset included Cannes (1880). Some small contracts. In turnover terms. By 1993. the acquisition of Aquas Andinas in Chile and acquisitions in the USA.087 2.4 billion Buys out Eau et Force SA Merger with Compagnie Suez Buys out Degrémont SA Acquisition of Browning Ferris International Acquisition of Nalco and Calgon. The company has gained many of its contracts via contacts made through the water and sewerage engineering design and build projects carried out by its Degrémont subsidiary. Prior to the merger with Suez. The former was to ensure that La Lyonnaise was too large for Bouygues SA to bid for and the latter to create a multi-utility at least equal to VE.462 2. Congo & New Caledonia Electricity activities in France nationalised 300.453 1.000 subscribers in France Acquisition of Degrémont Enters Spain. profit and loss account Y/E 31/12 (€million) Turnover Operating income Net income Earnings per share (€) Dividends per share (€) 1999 31. Suez . The table below outlines Suez’s breakdown of the global population served and its main contract gains since 1984.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS SUEZ SA Suez SA is the second largest water and wastewater company in France. 294 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .71 2003 39. Tunisia. Suez believes that 1billion people receive drinking water from its treatment plants.87 0.89 0.71 Société Lyonnaise des Eaux et de l’Eclairage was founded in 1880. 2003 has been marked by a reversal of this expansion strategy as part of a debt reduction strategy. along with the acquisition of SDI in France in 1991.01 0.919 2.66 2001 42. Togo. This has been changed by the mergers carried out in 1990 and 1997.5million outside France). the company was traditionally one of the smaller French multi-utility service and construction companies. Contracts and acquisitions were gained in Spain. reflecting the complexity of operating a utility via a large number of local contracts built up through contract awards and acquisitions. Degrémont is currently operating in 40 countries and has worked in 70 countries over the past 30 years.60 2000 34. through major contract gains.622 3.359 4. Since then. Tunisia.71 2002 46. but is the world’s leading international player in terms of the number of people served through its water and wastewater operations. its traditional rival. Puerto Rico contract handed back From 1914 to 1946. the 1996 acquisition of Northumbrian Water Plc. Dunkirk (1902) and Casablanca (1914).000 people have been integrated into Suez’s portfolio of international contracts.Highlights 1880: 1914-46: 1947: 1958: 1972: 1980-90: 1990: 1991: 1996: 1996: 1997: 1997: 1998: 1999: 2000: 2001: 2002: 2003: 2004: Société Lyonnaise des Eaux et de l’Eclairage founded Activities in Morocco. Compagnie Financiere Suez SA has been of more strategic importance with regard to power (Tractabel & Electrabel) and waste management (Watco) than the water markets. Barcelona (1881). LDE renamed Ondeo Creation of Environmental Division (Ondeo and SITA) Partial divestment of Northumbrian. Suez increased its international activities fourfold.064 2. resulting in the end of six major contracts to date.205 -2.708 -863 -0. UK & USA for water provision Merger with Dumez SA Acquisition of SDI Acquisition of Northumbrian Water Plc for F7. other contracts handed back Partial divestment of EMOS. These were nationalised in 1946. In 1972 the company sought to re-enter the international market through the acquisition of Degrémont.784 3.932 1. Société Lyonnaise provided water services in Morocco. the UK and USA between 1980 and 1990.778 1. supplying water to 300. Congo and New Caledonia.617 3. Togo. The acquisitions of Nalco and Calgon of the USA in 1999 were designed to build upon this strategy and to expand its industrial services activities.12 0.165 -2. Suez.

Argentina. Bolivia.100 6. the exceptions being in 2001 and 2002. USA.932. Colombia.000 2.629.087.6 2000 2. Hungary. China. the table above shows that a year of consolidation can produce real progress in the performance of continuing contracts. Hungary. International activities have contributed at least 75% of the water services’ net earnings in recent years. USA. Germany & Malaysia 11 USA. In 2002. Germany. China.492 77 2. Mexico. Brazil.300 4.116. Uruguay. China.400 N/A 800 7. Germany. China.0 9.063. Ireland 25+ Taiwan.5 543. Turkey. rising to 65% by 2001. Germany. Argentina.000 5.6 2. water activities profit and loss account Y/E 31/12 (€million) Services – France Services – International Services – Total Conditioning & treatment Engineering Total turnover 1999 2. Chile.7 6. Russia International water and wastewater services accounted for 30% of consolidated water services turnover in 1994 and 1995.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS Year 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Million 33 34 34 34 36 36 36 36 37 47 53 55 57 82 89 100 108 110 131 121 117 Contract gains 0 France & Spain only 1 Macao 1 Natal (South Africa. Colombia.200 2003 2. Morocco. Italy. USA 3+ Italy 3+ Mexico. municipalities) and Suez Environment Industrial Services (SEIS.8 2.500 The 2002 figures are net of Northumbrian Water (UK) and Nalco.5 3.000 3.967.202. China. Slovakia & Italy 10+ Chile.6 5.1 911.000 Location Bogota Puerto Rico Contract Wastewater BOT Water & wastewater O&M 295 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Germany & Korea 5+ Korea. Indonesia & Australia 16 USA.863.000. Indonesia & Philippines 16 USA.946. Canada. China & Malaysia 10 South Africa (O&M).900.396 93% 78% 81% In terms of developing its infrastructure and services. UK. due to the Argentinean Peso crisis. O&M) 2 Warsaw (USA) 1 Essex & Suffolk Water Plc (UK) 2 Montecatini Terme (Italy) & Taiping.000 9.296. China.3 863.500 N/A 900 7. Gibraltar & Edmonton (Canada) 11 South Africa (O&M). Norway.7 2002 2. water and sewage services Service Water provided Process water Sewage & effluent treatment Water coverage Sewerage coverage Water network efficiency Measure Million m 3 pa Million m 3 pa Million m 3 pa People within contract area People within contract area Water reaching customers 2002 7.900 6. Me xico & Hungary 9 Czech Republic. (Malaysia) 0 There were no contract gains this year 4 Fiestole (Italy).660. Cameroon.600 3.230.400.293.7 3. Suez. Puerto Rico.4 2001 2.000 Population served 1.298.000.1 6. 2003 & 2004’s years of consolidation: activities ceased 2003 Canada UK USA Vietnam Total 2004 Colombia Puerto Rico Total Location Halifax England Atlanta Thu Duc Contract Wastewater O&M Northumbrian Water Plc Water O&M Bulk water BOT Population served 380. Australia 17 USA.500.4 782.7 4.000 1. Mexico. Chile.3 2. Jordan.480 89% 79% 71% 2003 10.676. the water and waste management activities were regrouped into Suez Environment Local Services (SELS.849 47 2. Brazil & Colombia 16 USA. Ondeo.000 6.0 10. Mexico. Czech Republic.850. industrial services outsourcing). Colombia.

000 900.800.000 1.650. 296 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Suez Environment Local Services (SELS) Water’s European return on capital employed has increased from 9% to 13.000 5.000 35.550.000 3.000 10.740.000 9.255.300.000 280. Buenos Aries and Manila contracts continue to be operated by Suez.000 535.800.000. After the partial divestment of Northumbrian Water.000.000 535.000 642.000 100.000 4.000 4.000 190.000 13.35 billion.000 535.000 5.157 million and US$406 million respectively in 1999.000 90.900.000 2.000 5.000 0 0 0 500.800.500.1 billion net debt.250.000.000 5.000 4.300.6 billion.000 3.000 190.420.000 7.000 2.000 2.000 0 2. In September 2003.000 0 0 2.650.740.035.000.272. exit strategies have differed.000. Suez Ondeo sold Ondeo Nalco to a US based consortium of the Blackstone Group.500.P.000 850. Suez sold 75% of its holding in Northumbrian Water (Ondeo Services UK) in order to deconsolidate NWL’s €3.000 642.900.165.000 150.400.5%.165.000 1.000 3.000 10.000 0 11.000 220.330.000 300.000 150. Apollo Management L.702. Marketing vehicle for gaining the bulk water supply contract for Greater Sydney in 1993.650.360.367.000 0 150.500.900.000 2. populations served by country Country Europe Belgium Czech Republic France Germany Hungary Ireland Italy Russian Federation Slovakia Slovenia Spain * The Americas Argentina ** Bolivia Brazil Chile Colombia Mexico United States Asia Pacific/Pacific Rim Australia *** China & Macao *** Indonesia Malaysia Philippines South Korea Taiwan Rest of the World Cameroon Jordan Morocco South Africa Turkey Total outside France Global total Water 300.000 2. and Goldman Sachs Capital Partners for US$4.000 Total 300. The Halifax contract was handed back to the municipality and subsequently re-emerged in a different form..000 12.000.000 17.000 1.000 3.000 5.000 107. Despite various problems.000 1.000 2.530. via Aguas de Barcelona ** Via Aguas Argentinas and allied consortia *** Figures revised to take into account bulk water projects only serving part of each city Alliances and JVs Ondeo .740.300.000 2.000.000 1.000 272.000 15. Nalco and Calgon were acquired for US$4.300.000 700. with a 2002 pro-forma turnover of €3.000 1.000 2.000 17.000.000 117.272.000 0 5. However.165.000 2.800. the figures are not strictly comparable due to the capital-intensive nature of the sector in England and Wales and the deconsolidation of Northumbrian Water’s debt. In Europe.000 900.Lend-Lease Pty: Australian JV (with an unnamed third partner) formed in 1991. The Vietnam contract ended after a perceived change in strategy by the Government.000 2.850.000 0 2. the emphasis is currently on organic growth and gaining contracts in Central and Eastern Europe (where EU subsidies can be mobilised). Bogota unilaterally ended the Saltire contract.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS Overall.500.000 220.000 255.440.000 45.000 Sewerage 0 2.000 0 3.000 12.000 * Except where stated.367. The JV has been extended into South East Asia.400.000 54. the Jakarta.350.000.420.000 3. Hungary and Slovakia.000 1.900.000 1.000 3.565.000 1.000 0 7. while in Puerto Rico and Atlanta the contract was terminated by mutual consent.300. The three priority markets are the Central and Eastern European Czech Republic.565.000 700.702.255.000 7. Suez.

The 1972 acquisition of Degrémont SA saw the company move from straightforward service provision to a more broadly based design. The consortium is contributing €60 million towards the €150 capital increase.3 million. 7million people have been connected to piped water supplies through service extensions by Suez. along with its direct 1.000 water & wastewater A 40% equity stake in the Acquedotto de Fiora was acquired by the ACEA led consortium for €19. Agbar’s activities are described in a separate entry. 2003 Siena/Grosetto ATO privatisation 350.7 million in 2000 before falling back to €40. TESCA: A JV with Bufete International and Bancomer serving Mexico. 1999 Arezzo 25 year concession 350. Ondeo and poverty reduction In 2003 Ondeo provided water to 46.5million people. The concession will generate €1. with two exceptions. By 2001. Suez provided 17million people with water and 9million with sewerage services. Suez has not made appreciable progress in gaining new contracts in France. Suez acquired all the outstanding shares in Degrémont SA. The contract was formally signed in June 1999.660 contracts with various municipalities and communes in France. build. the holder of the 20 year concession to operate water and wastewater services for 50 communes in Tuscany’s ATO-3. operate and transfer contract approach. Turnover rose from €29. a company that is also actively involved in waste management projects in Hong Kong. Since the ending of Droit d’entrée in 1995. In 1997.000 subscribers in France. representing 21% of the water and 14% of the sewerage market.000 water and sewerage Suez holds 100% of Aqua Toscane.5million people in developing economies.7million people below the poverty line worldwide.000 water & wastewater A 45% stake in Acque SpA was acquired by the ACEA led consortium for €19. It is likely that there may be increased pressure for the market to be seen to open up in the future. France Suez has been VE’s chief competitor in France (and globally) more or less since 1880.2 million. Acque is Tuscany’s ATO2.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS Sino F rench Holdings: A 50/50 JV with Hong Kong’s New World Development Corporation. The company currently has 2. 2003 Pisa ATO privatisation 800. including 8.5million in South Africa.5% holding in the company. Suez’s consortium holds 46% of the Nuove Acque. 297 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . via its 51% holding of Hisusa SA.200.6 million in 1998 to €47.000 water and sewerage In January 1999. which in turn holds 47% of Agbar.5 million in 2001.000 water & wastewater The ACEA led consortium has acquired 40% of Publiacqua SpA. The ATO-6 covers 56 communes and required some €433 million in capital spending. Suez had 300. with a concession life of 25 years. The sewerage market is growing at an appreciably faster rate than the water market. In conjunction with the privatisation. which concentrates on water provision for Fiezole. Publiacqua had a turnover of €104 million in 2002 and net profits of €8 million. This includes 2. a Suez-led consortium gained the first international tender award for a water and sewerage concession following the belated liberalisation of the market in the wake of the 1994 Galli law. Suez acquired SDI in 1991. with 54% being held by public entities. Italy 1998 Aqua Toscane 30 year concession 40. Spain Suez’s main involvement in Spain is through its 25. By 1958. where is has since remained. Montecatini and Ponte Buggianes. Belgium Suez’s Watco provides water to some 300.8% stake in Aguas de Barcelona’s (Agbar) equity. €300 million of Publiacqua’s revenues were securitised in order to pay for the capital increase and retire mature debt.2 billion in revenues. gaining 3% of the French water market or some 1. no contracts of material significance have been lost and most of its main contracts are not due for renewal until 2005. serving 57 communes. where they are within 200m of a standpipe. 2003 Florence ATO privatisation 1. The concession will in turn form a JV with the 37 communes involved. with the municipalities paying the remaining €90 million. At the same time. SFH is used for all of Suez’s contracts in China and Macao. Florence in Tuscany.000 people in Belgium.

0million.000 wastewater treatment In February 1997 Suez became the preferred bidder for the Maribor concession.000 (equivalent to €29 per capita pa).5million people living in Tuscany. Suez holds 50% of VAK.000 water & sewerage 35% of the operating company’s equity is held by Suez.000.000 water & sewerage 350. Suez built a water treatment plant in Kopper in 1995.000 water & sewerage Suez holds 48% of the operating company. Suez’s total water services turnover in Hungary is now in excess of €85 million pa. a rationalisation of these concessions is planned.000 water & sewerage Karloy Vary is based in North Moravia. There is an EBRD loan attached to the project.000m 3 capacity with a PE of 440. This is the first water services privatisation in the country. 1995 Kaposvar 25 year lease 75. Czech Republic 1993 1994 1996 Brno (BVK) Ostrava South Moravia 25 year concession 30 year concession 25 year concession 420.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS With ACEA and Ondeo controlling services for 2. The contracts serving Pecs and Kaposvar have a total turnover of €18 million pa. including Degrémont as the constructor).200 staff. which is due to be completed in 2004. 1999 Ostrava area 15 year concession 0. FV has a €65 million turnover and employs 2.7million out of the 3. 298 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . The management company formed by Suez (51%) and RWE Aqua (49%) has a 25% stake in Fövarosi Vizmuvek (FV) for US$82 million. Suez has set up a holding company for all its Hungarian water activities. Suez is the largest shareholder in the consortium (40% stake.75million water & sewerage AWG and Suez acquired approximately 76% of the equity of Severomoravske Vodovody a Kanalizace AS (SmVAK) from the municipalities and small shareholders in the region during 1999. 1997 Budapest 25 year water dis tribution 2.000 water & sewerage 330. Suez thus holds 13% of the asset company. including construction of a new sewage treatment works. 1994 Karlovy Vary 25 year concession 120. Slovenia 1997 Maribor 25 year concession 190.000 water & sewerage Suez holds 46% of BVK. The concession was extended for a 25 year period in October 1999 (starting from 2000). with the municipality holding the remaining 52%. The population equivalent for the plant is 200.000 water & wastewater Suez’s TVS was awarded the concession for 50 local authorities in October 1999. the operating company’s equity. The STW will have a 270. This was the first BOT wastewater treatment contract to be awarded in Central and Eastern Europe.000 wastewater treatment The €70 million contract is part of a €270 million drainage and effluent treatment scheme for the city. half being for industrial clients. The contract requires €40 million in Capex. The new concession involves upgrading the wastewater treatment plant to meet the EU’s UWWTD criteria. with €5 million pa in turnover at the outset.2million water Suez and RWE Aqua controls all the shares of the management company and 25% of the equity of the asset management company. Suez holds 44% of SmVAK. Maribor is Slovenia’s second largest city. with the municipality holding the remaining 65%. €30 million investment is needed and the concession project will generate a turnover of €8 million. Ireland 2002 Cork 22 year BOT 220. The population currently served is 2. Slovakia 1999 Trencin 20 year lease 150. 1995 Pecs 25 year lease 180. the operating company in Brno. Hungary With the gaining of the Budapest water provision contract.

signed in April 2000. along with sewerage services for 117.000 water & sewerage Suez will participate in up to 49% of the water company following a two year transition period (called a ‘silent participation’) in the city’s multi-utility.000 water & wastewater Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . water treatment EVN’s WTE awarded the BOOT contract to Degrémont in June 2004.000 water & sewerage 37.9 m illion in water supply and €15. 2000 2000 N E Germany Gustrow 25 year concession 25 year BOT 70. Ondeo serves 2. a concession was signed for services to the city of Kriensen. 2001 Schwerin Participation 100. The Gustrow contract.000 people in Cottbus and 45. along with 9% of Anglian Water Plc’s equity. The town of Cottbus retains 50. Great Britain Suez’s sold 72.7 million in wastewater. It forms part of the 1991 Baltic Action Plan for reducing effluent discharges into the Baltic Sea. From 1988 to 1996.000 in surrounding areas.000 water & wastewater 82% of Sumperska Provozni Vodohospoda Ska Spole Nost (SPVS) has been acquired by Ondeo Services.000 people. 1994 Goslar 25 year concession 55. The facility will treat 98. 2004 Cottbus 25 year partnership 147. 1992 Rostock 25 year concession 302.000 people.000 people. In 2002. The 275.7 million in 2002. 43.000m 3 per day plant will provide potable water to South West Moscow from 2007 and be operated by Degrémont and WTE until 2017. For example. 25 year concession 12.000 water & wastewater 35.000 water & sewerage Rostock was the first major concession awarded to a private sector consortium in Germany. Eurawasser’s work on the first phase of the Rostock wastewater treatment facility was completed for €130 million in 1995. including €11. Water will be supplied to 102.5% of its 100% stake in Ondeo Services UK in May 2002 (see separate entry for Northumbrian Water).4 million m 3 per year. construction and management of a wastewater plant to treat 2.000.000 inhabitants and involves the provision of 4 million m 3 of water and the treatment of 1. Turkey 1997 Antalya 10 year O&M 299 535. controlling stakes in Essex Water and Suffolk Water were bought in 1988 (and the companies subsequently integrated) and Newcastle & Gateshead Water and Sunderland & South Shields Water were acquired in 1989.3million people in the Czech Republic and had a 2000 turnover of €138 million.000 for industry. 302.000 people in the Mecklenburg-Pomerania region of north east Germany. is for the design.000 for water. Suez operates via Eurawasser.9% of Lausitzer Wasser in February 2004.3 million m 3 of wastewater pa. Eurawasser controls a holding of 100% of the management and 49% of assets in terms of equity stakes. Total capital spending over the life of the contract will be approximately €460 million. 55.1% of the company with the balance being held by local municipalities. Russian Federation 2004 Moscow 13 year BOOT 1million. Revenues were €33.000 people equivalents.000 water & sewerage 120. Eurawasser had a turnover of €75 million in 2001 and serves 600.000 wastewater The two contracts signed in April 2000 serve a total of 105.000 water and sewerage In February 2000. 2000 Kriensen. Suez bought out Thyssen AG’s 5 1% stake in the JV. Suez’s UK strategy has been acquisition led. Germany In Germany.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS 2000 2000 2001 Benesov Davle Sumperk Concession 38. SPVS serves 40 towns and districts in the North East with a total turnover of €6 million pa. The stake in AWG was sold in 1994 in order to offset losses from the Suez’s construction activities and to raise funds for other acquisitions.000 water & sewerage Eurawasser acquired 28.000 served for sewerage and 262. The concession contract is with an association of communes with 70. sewerage Eurawasser has gained a 25 year sewerage contract for Goslar (Lower Saxony) from April 1996.

covering 4. which account for 43% of Cameroon’s population. 90% in 10 years and 100% in 20 years.6million people) there is a chronic shortage of water resources and less than 20% of the city is equipped with a sewer system. 300 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . The Khirbet as -Samra treatment facility will replace an existing waste stabilisation pond treatment system.000 by 2005.16 billion (US$1. Cameroon 2000 SNEC 20 year concession 5. North America United Water Resources (UWR) was founded in 1869 and was floated in 1986.000km 2 area and 23 urban communities covered. This represents 25% of the Moroccan market. The facility will handle 268. The water contract is worth DH. with price rises in years 2 and 3. Texas. Suez signed a contract with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to oversee a €10 billion 10 year investment programme for the development of water and wastewater in Mecca Province. with a 1.0million people. is designed to bring new water resources into the north of the country.2million m 3 pa have been dealt with since 1997. 5% of the population is connected to the sewerage network. the second largest city in the country (2.3million water provision A 51% stake in SNEC (Société National d'Eau du Cameroon) was acquired in May 2000 as part of a concession award.6 billion). equivalent to 5% of water delivered. The contract involves customer billing and wastewater treatment.000 people. Saudi Arabia In June 2002. Morocco 1997 Casablanca 30 year management 3. It represents an evolution of the 1999 O&M contract for Greater Amman. EDF International 18%. which will increase to 85% in 5 years. In 2002. covering 190. The city’s population is forecast to grow to 960. Mecca Province has 7. €30. 2000 Oum Er Rbia 30 year concession Bulk water provision The bulk water supply concession for one third of Casablanca was awarded to Elyo and Ondeo Services. Jeddah and Taif.5 billion (US$517 million) for the expansion and upgrading of water distribution and treatment.5million inhabitants and three major urban areas: the Holy City. The company currently serves 7. generating €305 million over the concession’s life. Endessa 18% and Agbar 5%.5million water & wastewater The contract.3% of LYDEC’s equity. 60% of the US$154 million capital spending will come from US AID as a grant. announced in July 2002. The wastewater contract is worth DH. including Douala and Yaounde. Suez’s USA arm.000 customers or some 700. Construction started in December 2003 with the consortium operating the plant for 22 years after it comes into service in 2006. a US$46 million water and sewerage contract was awarded by Laredo. serving about 2. Over 80% of the population is currently connected.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS This is a delegated management contract for the Antalya Water and Sewerage Authority. ANTSU will be a 50/50 joint stock company with ENKA.5 million will be spent on the rehabilitation and upgrading of bulk water supplies delivering 55million m 3 of water to the city. including recovery systems and the creation and extension of the sewerage network in development zones of western Casablanca. Leakages of 0. Turnover will be €24 million pa. In Jeddah. it was the second largest listed water services company in the US. and had a turnover of €499 million in 2000 and €542 million in 2001. giving Suez a 30% holding in UWR.2million people through 45 regulated utilities in 17 states in the USA. Until it was acquired by Suez. United Utilities/Bechtel and SAUR for the contract. Jordan 2002 Northern Jordan 25 year BOT 2. It involves the construction of three WWTWs. Ondeo Services will be responsible for water and sewerage and Elyo for electricity.108 million. Lyonnaise American Holdings acquired the remaining 67% of UWR’s equity that it did not hold in 2000 and its 50% holding in United Water Services (UWS) for €1. Currently.000m 3 per day of wastewater and the contract will generate revenues of US$15 million per annum. Suez holds 60.5million residents in Amman and surrounding towns.5million water & sewerage Lyonnaise des Eaux de Casablanca (LYDEC) manages the Urban Community of Casablanca contract. In 1994 UWR merged with Suez’s General Waterworks Company. The contract includes the upgrading and rehabilitation of water distribution systems in a number of towns and cities. with total investments of €300 million. Suez beat Thames.

214.600 301 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .000 NA 0 2.000 275. WWTW O&M.300 150. US Water gained its first water and wastewater operating contract in 1982 with the New Jersey Highway Authority.869. These activities are concentrated in Illinois.500 0 0 87.000 5. US Water operates contracts for 70 water and sewage treatment plants in 32 municipalities in the USA serving an estimated 1.100 1. WTW 10 Year O&M.000 14.000 NA 239. approximately 300.450 350. WTW 20 Year O&M WTW O&M.200 Sewerage 3.000 1. WWTW 5 Year O&M.900 0 4.000 people are served by smaller owned activities in eight other states. WTW Water 3. WW collection 5 Year O&M. WTW 5 Year O&M. WTW & WWTW 10 Year O&M. 2002-03) Regulated markets O&M outsourcing Consumer products Industrial clients Mexico 360 175 55 1.000 16. WTW O&M. WWTW 20 Year O&M.100 4.250 180.000 1. WTW & WWTW 20 Year O&M.500 70 UWR.000 200.000 0 35.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS Current and recently gained activities (US$ million pa. WWTW 5 Year O&M.600 700. Rhode Island and New Jersey.000 105. WW 5 Year O&M.900 1. In total.000 0 3.000 403.000 15. WWTW O&M.000 0 NA 239.200. WTW 20 Year O&M.000 25. WTW & WWTW 20 Year O&M.000 0 0 275.500 0 0 28. Location (state) Allamuchy (NJ) Atlanta (GA) Avalon (CA) Banning (CA) Bedminster (NJ) Big Canoe (GA) Boone County (IA) Burbank (CA) Camden (NJ) Cumberland (IA) El Segundo (CA) Freeport (IL) Gary (IA) Hoboken (NJ) Indianapolis (IA) Jacksonville (FA) Jersey City (NJ) Killingly (CT) Laredo (TX) Manalapan (NJ) Manchester (NJ) Milwaukee (WI) North Adams (MA) Pekin (IL) Phillipsburg (NJ) Pittsburgh (PA) Plainfield (IA) Rahway (NJ) Reidsville (NC) San Antonio (TX) Springfield (MA) Stonington (CT) Total Contract O&M.400 25.000 150 28.000 3.000 800.000 4.250 In addition.500 34.000 180.900 1.450 350.000 25.500 4.000 25. WTW 10 Year O&M.500. WTW & WWTW 5 Year O&M.000 87.100 4.700 Combined 3.8 million.500 100.000 180. WWTW 8 Year O&M.000 1. WTW 10 Year O&M. WWTW 20 Year O&M.000 7.000 7. WWTW 5 Year O&M.000 14. WWTW 10 Year O&M.500 6.500 100.000 150 28.000 19.200. WTW & WWTW 5 Year O&M. WWTW 5 Year O&M.851.600 31. WTW 20 Year O&M.000 35.000 865.400 25.000 190. WWTW 5 Year O&M.000 19. non-regulated activities UWS was formed in 1997 through the merger of LDE/UWR and JMM-OSI. UWS has 75 contracts and currently serves some 5.000 0 800. regional breakdown of people served by regulated activities in 2003 Arkansas Connecticut Delaware Florida Idaho New Jersey New York Pennsylvania Rhode Island Total utility operations 65. 2001 turnover was US$174.000 25. The Bechtel/United Utilities O&M outsourcing company US Water was acquired for US$40 million in 2002.400 0 25. WWTW 20 Year O&M.000 19.600 700.300 150.000 0 16.500. W & WW 20 Year O&M.4million people via a series of O&M contracts. North Carolina.600 31.000 0 34.000 87. UWS.500 6.000 0 700. WWTW 5 Year O&M.500 0 0 350.884. WTW 5 Year O&M.000 0 0 1.000 2.0million people.000 0 0 0 4.100 0 15.000 14.500 4.

In 2004.000 water and sewerage The Cancun resort area has a population of 430. By 2003.600 sewage treatment One O&M contract. billing and collections and water mains maintenance for the central federal district of Mexico City. 302 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . US$465 million was to be invested prior to the Peso crisis but this sum is now being renegotiated.1million sewage treatment 1. Azurix acquired a 49% holding in Industrias del Agua de la Cuidad de Mexico (IACMEX) from Severn Trent in 1999. operated by UWS. Azurix acquired its stake in the in Desarollos Hidraulicos de Cancun (DHC) concession in 1999.000 connections. including the above contracts. a €80 million construction contract for Halifax was signed. a 50:50 JV with Peñoles (BAL Group). There are currently 78.000 to the sewerage network in the medium term.000m 3 per day of wastewater will be subject to primary treatment and used as agricultural water. 2004 San Luis Potosi 18 year BOT 400. In April 2004. 65% of the concession’s revenues currently come from hotels (with US dollar denominated revenues). The concession generates revenues of US$50 million pa and is profitable. 97% of the population is to be connected to the mains water supply network in 10 years and 660.5million along with US$70 million pa in revenues.000. with 27% from residential water provision and 8% from wastewater. 4.000.1million water systems In 1993. The contract was awarded to Degrémont. Canada 1998 Banff. The Culiacan facility is situated in Sinaloa state and has a capacity of 6. The five contracts acquired bring Suez’s population served in Mexico to 7.000m 3 of effluents each hour. gained in 2002 was rescinded in 2003. as well as making 330. Agbar (17%) and five Argentinean companies. Mexico Suez operates in Mexico through ASIM. Ondeo acquired Azurix’s Mexican operations through ASIM for US$93 million.3million tourists visit the resort each year. 1999 2000 Puebla Culiacan 20 year concession 20 year concession Sewage treatment Sewage treatment Ondeo Degrémont operates six sewage BOTs in Mexico. Sumitomo (Japan) and Prodin (Mexico) in June 2004. There are also 3 BOT contracts previously operated by Azurix: 1999 1999 1999 Argentina 1997 Cordoba 30 year concession 1. IACMEX was awarded a 10 year O&M contract for water metering.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS Puerto Rico This contract had been gained from VE in 2002. 57% of the 80.8million water systems 2. In July 2002. The Halifax contract.000 by 2002 and is forecast to grow at 3% per annum to 2015. sewage treatment This contract has a total value of €263 million. There are two other municipal BOTs serving Juarez and Torreon. This is for the development of metering and water supply systems.0million sewage handling Industrial sewage treatment The Aguas Cordobesa consortium consists of Ondeo Services (39%). the O&M contract was terminated by mutual consent between Ondeo de Puerto Rico and the water authority’s PRASA. 1993 1999 Mexico City Mexico City 10 year O&M 5 year O&M 2.000 new connections.160m 3 per hour.27million water & sewerage León Torreón Matamoros BOT BOT BOT 1. with a two year construction and 18 year operational phases. 1993 Cancun 30 year concession 520. which had grown to 520. The Puebla concession announced in October 1999 is for a sewage treatment works capable of handling 13. with the municipality operating three wastewater treatment plants which will enter service between 2006 and 2008. and two industrial BOTs based in Santa Cruz and Altamira. 91% of the population was connected to water services after an investment of US$120 million. The other 43% will be subjected to tertiary treatment and used for cooling a power station. €241 million in revenues were generated in 2002. Turnover in 2001 was US$69 million pa. Alberta 5 year O&M 7.

US$11 million was spent on improving drinking water quality in 2001. The consortium was to invest US$785 million prior to the Peso crisis.125. the municipality of Quilmes was incorporated into AA's operating mandate.000 people to water and 250.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS 1995 Santa Fe 30 year concession 1. which had revenues of US$70 million in 2001. In July 2004. which have risen from 4% in 2000 to 10% of connections in 2002. 2000 Manaus 30 year concession 1. 96% of the population is connected to the mains. By 2001. along with cutting distribution and illegal abstraction losses from 77% in 2001 to 70% in 2003. Suez holds 100% of Aguas do Amazonas. with 2.8million water & sewerage Aguas Argentinas (AASA) is the world’s largest single water and wastewater privatisation to date and (until the 2001-02 Peso Crisis) arguably the most successful.6 billion has been invested in AA. The shareholders are Suez (55%). Between 1993 and 2001. Suez’s consortium won the bidding for the concession in April 1993 and took over the management of a run-down network with 45% distribution losses. During 2001. providing water to 70% and sewerage for 58% of the city’s 9million inhabitants. an interim debt restructuring agreement was drawn up to create the basis for a normalisation of the contract in 2005. with distribution losses falling from 40% to 17% from 1995 to 2001.4million water & sewerage The contract to manage the water concession of the city of Manaus. It is described in detail in the country entry for Argentina. Investments are concentrating on improving drinking water services. Turnover in 2001 was US$104 million.8million for sewerage.000 people have been connected to water and sewerage services (100%). 87% of whom are served with water and 53% with sewerage. the capital of A mazonia in Brazil was awarded in June 2000. To date US$1. all services are being maintained while the company seeks to adapt these contracts to the new circumstances. This involves US$360 million in investments over the contract period. against 83% for water and 50% for sewerage in 1997. Service coverage has increased by 350.000 people. Banco Mercantil (20%). which is also to be renegotiated. Buenos Aires 1993 Buenos Aires 30 year concession 7. Turnover in 2001 was US$608 million. Currently 250.0million in 1993 to 7. Suez holds 46% of the concession’s equity and Agbar a further 25%.000 since the concession began. Capital spending for AA in 2001 was US$140 million. The company recorded a €80 million loss on currency translations for the year.000 people and El Alto 700.4million water & wastewater Aguas de Illimani is the consortium operating the concession. expanding them to peri-urban areas and developing wastewater treatment services. Ingineniere Connal (5%) and other Argentinean investors who hold the remaining 20%. Suez will undertake a Peso 242million capital spending programme in 2004-05 including connecting 110.000. The municipality has 530.9million to 5. Bolivia 1997 La Paz & El Alto 30 year concession 1.7million living in the city.000 were connected to the sewerage network. All performance criteria targets have been significantly exceeded on a consistent basis. 303 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .500 people and 1. This is the largest private water contract awarded in Brazil.707.000 people to sanitation services. In 1995. giving Suez effective control. La Paz has 750. water was being supplied to 1.000 water & sewerage This is a landmark concession in Brazil. The concession started in July 1997. Suez had €480 million in hard currency debt in Argentina at the end of 2001.5million people through the US$135 million Saavedra-Moron pipeline. Brazil 1995 Limeira 30 year concession 256. the great majority relating to water investments.8million water & sewerage Aguas Provinciales de Santa Fe is majority held by Ondeo Services (52%) and Agbar (26%). along with releasing €118 million in provisions. The population connected to water has increased from 6.8million in 2001 and from 4. water supply was extended to 1. Despite the Peso crisis. water production was increased by 37% and the number of connections by 30%. with the priority upon low cost water and sewerage connections for poorer neighbourhoods. A further write-down of €500 million (net of minorities and tax) was made in June 2002.

Ondeo manages €800 million pa of operations in China in 2003. Suez now serves approximately 12. The Sanya contract started in 2004. Colombia In January 2004. of Hong Kong.4 million. Santiago’s water supply company for a total of US$1. The system will be 50% held by S-FH and 50% by the municipality’s Hainan Tianya Water Industry Holding Co.000m 3 of water a day and can be expanded by a further 100. Las Condes and Lo Barnechea districts of Santiago. 2000 2000 Zhengzhou Baoding 30 year BMO. now called Aguas Andinas). along with the long-term development of its wastewater services. with US$62 million being spent on capital works for facilities delivering 560. S-FH Bulk water supply Bulk water supply The contracts for Zhengzhou (Henan) and Baoding (Hebei) were announced in March 2000.5million bulk water supply 1.000m 3/day. S-FH 20 year BMO.The second highest bidder was Biwater at US$179 million.135million in 1999 and 2001. Degrémont has completed 132 water and sewage treatment construction contracts in China. The two plants can handle 275. operate three water treatment works in Hainan delivering a total of 230. which had served ity 1. up from €300 million in 2000. with Suez holding 19.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS Chile 1999 Santiago Privatisation of EMOS 5.000 water Two WTWs in Chongqing are to be refurbished and expanded for a total cost of €150 million.000 bulk water 135. Likewise. Ltd. Aguas Andinas generated €215 million in consolidated revenues for 2003.000 water Suez and New World Group.000 bulk water 300.9% of IAM.000m 3 of water per day and generating a turnover of US$500 million over the contracts’ life.300. S-FH 22 year BMO.9million people in China via Sino-French Holdings (S-FH). while 75% of sewage effluents are treated. and involve a total of US$35 million in capital spending. two WTWs in Qingdao are to be refurbished and expanded for a total cost of €430 million. S-FH 0.000m 3 of water per day. 1999 1999 1998 Changtu Wanzhou Zongshan 30 year BMO.000 people. These contracts will generate US$400 million in 304 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Currently. the c of Bogota unilaterally ended the 1997 Saltire WWTW contract.000m 3 per day. The two plants treat 540.7million people. The facility will have a treatment capacity of 310. IAM holds 51% of Aguas Andinas.7million bulk water supply The contracts for the provinces of Changtu (Chongqing) and Wanzhou (Liaoning) were formally awarded in April 2000.3million bulk water supply 0. The deal reduced Suez’s net debt by €220 million. Revenues are expected to double in the next ten years because of wastewater expansion. and is responsible for 20% of China’s water and wastewater treatment facilities. via S -FH. China Suez has a total of 16 major contracts for rehabilitating and expanding current water treatment works.1% of Suez’s holding in Inversiones Aguas Metropolitanas Limitada (IAM) for €139. They will serve a total of 1.000 water & sewerage Enersis sold Aguas Cordillera to EMOS for US$193 million in June 2000.000 customers in the Vitacura.000 water 2.85million bulk water supply The RMB470 million (€57 million) water treatment plant is to serve part of the city of Tianjin. S-FH 30 year BMO. Aguas Cordillera serves 88. All 44 districts of the city are to be covered.000m 3/day of water for €36 million and managing them on behalf of the city. 2004 Tianjin 35 year O&M. S-FH 0. In July 2004.500. The Tianjin Tanggu Sino-French Water Supply (S-FH) is a 50:50 joint venture between the city and S-FH.1million water & sewerage Suez and Agbar acquired 51% of Empressa Metropolitana de Obras Sanitarias (EMOS. having been operating in China since 1975. 2001 2001 2004 Panjin Xinchang Sanya 30 year BOT 30 year BOT 30 year O&M 267. 2002 2002 Chongqing Qingdao 50 year concession 25 year BOT 700. 2000 NE Santiago Aguas Cordillera 315. 100% of the population is served with piped water and 97% by mains sewerage. (see separate company entry for Aguas Andinas ). which it operates jointly with New World Development Co. Agbar bought 30.

S-FH 30 year BOT.9million bulk water supply The Guangzhou contract will account for 25% of the city’s current needs. with the remainder in municipal hands.000 bulk water supply 0.3million inhabitants.000. 40%) became the preferred bidder for a contract to design. Although Maynilad gave notice to halt the concession in March 2003. Pusan has a total population of 4million.3million m3 per day. S-FH 0. (MWSI) was awarded the western half of the Metro Manila water distribution concession in August 1997. 1992 1994 1996 1996 Tanzhou Gaozhou Nanchang. While Manila Water had a difficult start due to its low original tariffs. a subsidiary of China Steel.000 sewage treatment Suez and Ondeo Degrémont (60%) and Hanwha (Korea. Maynilad has suffered from a mid concession-life crisis. with the contract generating US$490 million over its lifetime. 1994 Guangzhou 30 year BMO. Korea 2000 Yangju 24 year BOT 100. Taiwan 2002 Kaoshing 17 year BOT 3. 1997 Lianjiang 30 year O&M. Ondeo holds 65% of the consortium. The contract is to seek to provide water by expanding the current capacity of the two extant plants from 0.7million m3 per day to 1. S-FH 25 year concession Bulk water supply 170. 70% of whom are currently served with potable water. Jiangxi Macao 35 year BOT.000 customers. The population currently stands at 100. S-FH 28 year BOT. along with Samsung Engineering (20%) and Khumo Industrial (15%). Turnover will be of €185 million over the duration of the contract.9million bulk water supply 540. a new court ruling has meant that the entire arbitration process probably needs to be restarted. which is being built by Degrémont. with 1. which between 1997 and 2000 doubled in Peso terms from P20 billion to P40 billion due to the Peso’s weakness.2 billion in equity and P629 million in debt) and the loss of control in Maynilad. 2001 Pusan 18 year BOT 800.000m³ and an 85km collecting network in the county of Yangju. continuing arbitration and associated legal processes have meant that it continues to run under its current structure. see the Benpres (Philippines) company entry. Suez/New World Holdings (NWH) holds 85% of the concession.5million people.000 inhabitants in 2016 due to urban development. The project involves US$15 million in Capex for the upgraded potable water treatment plant. for the overhaul and operation of a drinking water plant in Kaohsiung. 305 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . The town and surrounding areas has 1. 1995 Chongqing 30 year BMO. including 140.000 people. S-FH 0. S-FH 0.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS turnover during their lives.000 gallon per day facility and 24km of collecting sewerage pipes will cost US$160 million to build. The contract is worth €200 million.000 habitants but is predicted to reach 400. The problems arose when Maynilad took on 90% (US$800 million) of MWSS’ foreign debt. The November 2003 and April 2004 agreement would have resulted in a write-off of P3. of which Ondeo Degrémont’s share is €90 million or €6 million pa over the 15 year O&M stage.3million water & sewerage Maynilad Water Services. The new facility will produce 450.000 water supply This is a renewal of the SAAM contract awarded in 1988 for water provision to 540.4million bulk water supply A US$25 million build and manage contract in Sichuan province. As of July 2004. Maynilad Water is meant to supply potable water 24 hours a day to approximately six million people in the western zone by 2007. Philippines 1997 West Manila 25 year concession 4.8 billion (P3.000m 3 of drinking water per day by March 2004. 66% of the Zongshan contract is held by Sino-French Holdings.3million bulk water supply Lianjiang is in Guangdong Province.000 sewage treatment The 135. based upon enlarging a water treatment facility that now supplies 20% of the city’s 2million population. For further details. build and manage three sewage plants for a total daily volume of 75. Degrémont carried out the engineering work and the extended facility entered service in 1999. in the province of Kyonggi. Zongshan is in Guangdong province. Revenues will be in the region of F100 million pa.000 sewage treatment Taiwan Water Supply Corporation awarded a reconstruction and O&M contract to Ondeo Degrémont and Ecotek. Inc.

Coca-Cola (France. Queensland was gained in 1996. In addition. rising to €168 million in 2003.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS Indonesia 1997 West Jakarta 25 year concession 3. This contract covers water conveyance services and effluent treatment for eight BOC sites in England.5million people in the city.000m 3 per day by 2000.L.5million to 12. BOC Gases.000 wastewater Australian Water Services (AWS) is a JV between Suez and Lend Lease Pty formed by Suez in 1991. Water customers include Yoplait. with a 20% share in this global market.5million water West Jakarta has an estimated 4.5% of the holding company Equiventures Sdn. Perak 20 year BOT contract 350. 1995 Kota-Kinabalu 20 year BOT contract 500. Nalco has industrial outsourcing revenues of US$200 million from 72 clients in 2002 against outsourcing revenues of US$158 million from 62 clients in 2001. 306 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Suez owns 95% of the Jakarta concession’s equity.2% Suez) serves 0. signed a five-year framework agreement with Ondeo Industrial Solutions.S.000 water supply Johor-Barhu involves the lease of a water provision facility generating 0. with the West Zone population rising to 6.5million by 2020.11million m³ per day water treatment plant was commissioned in 1995. The initial investment period was extended from 5 to 10 years in 2000 so as to prevent price rises after a 24% tariff rise in 1999. Suez has 60. Water Sdn.5million people in total.000 water and wastewater customers.5million). Pemex Salina Cruz (Mexico). This has been developed along divisional lines: Tractabel Industrial Solutions (energy). and Scotland. Bht. according to Public Works Finance (PWF) (March 2003).5million people was granted to Jetama Sdn. which is expected to seek a market listing in due course.. Malaysia 1993 Johor-Barhu 20 year BOT contract 715. IBM. Suez has operated a water contract in the industrial zone of Cilegon. Australia 1993 1996 Sydney Noosa 25 year BOO 25 year BOT 3million water treatment 35. The water supply for Phase 1 will be 170. A BOT concession for Noosa. There are currently 2. This is a FF200 million 25 year BOT for a wastewater treatment works. Sabah’s water systems were to be completely upgraded. Jakarta’s population is expected to rise from 9. Ondeo Industrial Solutions (water and wastewater) and Sita One (Waste management). increasing to 260. Turnover will be US$2 billion over the contract’s life.63million m³ of potable water per day. 35% of which was held by Suez in 1995. Medan’s population is expected to grow to 8million+ by 2015 (currently. Java since 1993. Eridania Beghin Say. with an organic growth of 19%. 1999) and Scottish Courage (1999). In 2001. Bhd. (34.000 water supply In Perak. The Sydney water provision BOT signed in 1993 saw the US$200 million facility enter service in October 1996. 50% of residents are currently connected. with 80% paying.5million bulk water US$85 million BOT for drinking water supply plant for Medan.24million m³ of water per day to 0. it is predicted this will rise to 100% by 2022. mainly for hardware or chemicals.35million people via a 20 year BOT contract signed in 1988 and started in 1989. or US$80 million pa. It is 85% held by Suez. G. Suez holds 25. the city has a population of 2. 1989/95 Taiping. AWS has now entered the 25 year operating concession phase.000 water supply In Kota Kinabalu (province of Sabah) a 20 year bulk supply concession for 0. 1997 Medan 25 year BOT 2. Bhd.7million. Ondeo Industrial Solutions had a turnover of €157 million in 2002. After its privatisation in 1995. BSN. one of the world's largest producers of industrial natural gas.000m 3 per day. Suez Environment Industrial Services – Industrial water outsourcing Suez has developed SEIS (Suez Environment Industrial Solutions) for its industrial services activities. Wales. The contract was extended when a 0.

process water and wastewater. The Shanghai Chemical Industrial Park includes BP. In 2002.0 1. 2002 Pudong. BASF.com / www. The contract also caters for the treatment of 50. a company specialising in crude oil extraction from oil sands deposits in north-eastern Alberta.5 0. Canada.0 1. In February 2004.5 0.suez.lyonnaise-des -eaux. Siemens in Spain and M -Real in Germany.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS Industrial contracts gained in 2001 (€million pa) Client Aticorta Danone Vitapole Infineon ISI Pontelongo Osram SEPR Sant Gobain Siemens Siemens Country Italy Belgium Australia Italy Germany France Taiwan Ireland Activities WWTW WWTW Process water WWTW Process W & WWTW WWTW Process water Process water Revenues DB O&M 2. providing 100. Suez Environnement) Yves-Thibault de Silguy (International Affairs) 307 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . Shanghai 50 year water management Industrial water provision This contract is a 50:50 JV between Sino French Holdings and Shanghai Pudong Spark Development Zone United. The deal is worth US$10 million in revenues.0 1.0 Contract duration N/A 10 years N/A N/A N/A 5 years N/A N/A In 2002.000m 3 of effluent a day via a new €50 million facility and may be extended to cover the entire water cycle. bottled water. serving the Shanghai Spark Industrial Zone ( 0.1 0. Other contracts gained by Ondeo IS in 2003 included STMicroelectronics and Ascometal in France. Bayer.suez-env.0 2. biscuits and cereals. This includes cooling water. Danone offered a series of five year integrated industrial services outsourcing contracts for all facilities covering dairy products. BIWS) gained a €10 million 10 year contract with Degussa’s Antwerp plant in November 2003.000 4 customers).fr Web: www.0 3.com Web: www. BIWS will manage the facility’s condensate treatment and supply it with demineralised water. Huntsman and China’s Gao Qiao.0 0. The contract is worth €600 million and is the first industrial water contract in China.0 2.000m 3 of industrial water per day.5 0. Ondeo gained a 20 year €120 million water management contract for the BP Grangemouth complex in Scotland. 75008 Paris France Tel: +331 40 06 64 00 Fax: +331 40 06 66 44 Web: www.com Gerard Mestrallet (CEO and Chairman) Gerard Lamarche (Chief Financial Officer) Jean-Pierre Hansen (Chief Operations Officer) Jean-Louis Chaussade (CEO.0 0.0 2. effluent waste and energy.0 3.unitedwater. This covers the management of water. Scottish Courage Brewing and Bairds Malt. Enichem in Italy. Ondeo Nalco gained an eight year contract for oil and water treatment service from Suncor Energy. A joint venture with Antwerpse Waterwerken (Brabo Industrial Water Solutions. The contract will have a turnover of €100-150 million pa and seeks a 30% reduction in industrial water consumption from 2000 levels by 2010. Other clients in the UK include Chevron Texaco.5 1. Contact Details Name: Suez SA Address: 16 Rue de la Ville l’Eveque.

VE has been renamed Veolia Environnement (VE) so as to differentiate between the two companies.57 339. the Générale des Eaux name was revived to become the holding company for Veolia Water’s activities.122 11.930. In 1884 GDE secured the first wastewater treatment concession. VE has diversified. The company set up Compagnie des Eaux de Constantinople for water supply to Istanbul in 1879. then energy and more recently into construction. 308 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . By 1995.126.9 -2.024 11.0 961. The company’s domestic market strength has meant that until recently.13 Générale des Eaux (GDE) was founded in 1853 and started the privatisation of France’s water sector by winning a concession for water supply to Lyon and gaining the first of a series of concessions serving Paris in 1860.201 655 1.378 400 500 360 240 N/A 13. VE had 2.7 1. Bergamo.200 700 1. after a recapitalisation exercise.078.300 operating contracts serving 4. Professional Services Group of the USA was acquired in 1981 to address the American market and General Utilities Plc was set up in 1986 in anticipation of the privatisation of Britain’s water services. the company sold a further 43% of VE’s equity to a series of French institutions and as a result. In 2004. VE entered the Spanish water market in competition with FCC and Aguas de Barcelona. Since the 1930s. As a result. serving the Reims municipality and pioneering the use of ozone to sterilise water at Nice in 1909.893 315 621 391 NA NA 11.9 -42. Since 1967. Since 1992.3 614.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS VEOLIA ENVIRONNEMENT SA Compagnie Générale des Eaux was renamed Vivendi in May 1998. profit and loss account Y/E 31/12 (€million) Turnover Operating profit Net profit Earnings per share (€) Water Turnover Operating profit 10.200 300 3. In July 2000.8 2.768 1. first into waste management.289.021 13.054.641 1.251.93 2003 28.600 2002 6. Vivendi Universal sold 28% of its holding in Vivendi Environnement (VE) via a listing on the Paris Bourse and a further 9% in 2001.2 2001 29. La Spezia and Naples.7 1. VE decided to restrict its contracts to France.4 -2.467 763 12. and in 1882.155 784 1999 20. contracts were either wound up or nationalised during the inter-war years. property and media and telecommunications. CEE took over the water supply concession for Venice in 1880 and further contracts were gained in Verona.288 1. After the First World War.3 N/A 2000 26.116 655 1.587.2 0.340 The decrease in revenues primarily reflects the selling off of the engineering activities associated with USFilter since 2002.7 -5.2 -6.980 220 N/A N/A N/A 1.7 -946.100 245 1. the French water sector has gradually been privatised with VE being the dominant player in the market. Following VU’s financial problems in 2002. CEE gained the water supply concession for Lausanne in Switzerland and Oporto in Portugal. VE reduced the number of subsidiaries in France from 40 to one. Water activities were grouped under Veolia Water. it could take a more relaxed attitude towards the international water markets than Suez.300 2003 6. while retaining its former name for water and wastewater activities.000 13. Approximate breakdown of revenues by region €million France UK Rest of Europe – Euro zone Rest of Europe – Non-Euro zone USA Rest of Americas Africa and Middle East Asia Australia and New Zealand Rest of World Total 2001 6. Vivendi has in turn been renamed Vivendi Universal (VU) and is concentrating upon the telecommunications and media sectors.393. VE’s results (and debt) are no longer consolidated into VU’s. VE developed its presence in water engineering through the acquisition of SADE in 1918 and Tuyaux Bonna in 1924.0 -766. Its subsidiary Compagnie des Eaux pour l’Etranger (CEE) was set up in 1879 for international water contracts. VE is also a pioneer in the development of the international water market. Veolia Environnement.000 municipalities in France.100 550 3. the company has been gaining water and sewerage concessions on a global basis.063.6 2002 30.

000 4.300.300. formation of Vivendi Water Partial flotation of Vivendi Environnement (VE) from Veolia Universal Deconsolidation of VE and VU VE renamed Veolia Environnement Veolia Water becomes a subsidiary of Générale des Eaux Water activities (excluding Proactiva) VE: overall water and wastewater activities Industrial wastewater treatment capacity (million m 3/day) Municipal wastewater treatment capacity (million PE) Treatment efficiency of wastewater treatment plants Water provided (billion m 3/pa) Efficiency of water systems – Worldwide Efficiency of water systems – Europe * Figures restated for 2002 91% of VE’s customers had metering systems in 2003.000 4.000 0 2.000 3.000.000.000 0 70.800.000 7.000 Sewerage 550.000 7.000 7.000 0 3.000 2.273.800.000 200.273.000 2.315.000 1.000 290.000 1.125.000 1.033.000 4.700.000 50.000.000 3.800.000 1.000 13.000 995.000.000 6.000 NA 50.801 71% 82% 2002 * 259 49 86% 5.000 60.000 NA 50.000 175.000 290.000.125.780.000 70.000 0 2.000 3.000 2001 377 60 84% 5.400 75% 82% 2003 NA NA 92% 6.000 2.883.000 70.000 1. Water efficiency in Europe in 2003 for its ongoing activities was 83%.000 7.112 77% 80% 309 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .000 26.000 2.000 7.700.315.000 0 0 4.000 185.250.000 0 17.000 200.000 290.000 0 NA 50.645.000 60.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS VE – Highlights 1853: 1880-82: 1884: 1967: 1972: 1980: 1981: 1986: 1987: 1987-88: 1993: 1995: 1998: 1999: 2000: 2002: 2003: 2003: Compagnie Générale des Eaux (GDE) wins concession for water supply to Lyons Water supply concessions to Venice and other cities Wastewater treatment concession for Reims Waste-to-energy projects Water activities in Spain Acquires CGEA (waste management and transport) Acquires Professional Services Group of the USA General Utilities Plc formed for UK operations Licence for France’s second cellular telecoms system Acquires construction and property companies Buys out Eau et Ozone GDE’s first loss – due to property & construction Générale des Eaux renamed Vivendi Acquires US Filter and Berliner Wasser.250. Population served in each country Country Europe Albania Belgium Czech Republic Denmark France Germany Great Britain Hungary Italy Malta Netherlands Poland Portugal Romania Spain Sweden The Americas Argentina * Brazil * Canada Colombia * Mexico USA Water 550.300.700.000 2.300.000 110. The difference is accounted for by newly acquired concessions operating more run down water assets.000 1.000.100.000 185.000 Total 550.100.750.000 26.883.000 3.000 50.

000 2. Company Bristol Water Mid Kent South Staffordshire Group Philadelphia Suburban Country UK UK UK USA Holding % 25 21 32 17 Date March 2002 April 2001 October 2002 September 2002 Value (million) £23 £22 £85 US$200 In addition.000 240. Purchasers have been a combination of companies active in water systems engineering and private equity houses.328.000 94.200.000 100.5 million between 2000 and 2004.000 The table excludes VE’s 8% holding in Aguas Argentinas. Stake divestments Approximately US$390 million has been raised since 2001 through the selling off of non-strategic minority stakes in asset owning water companies in England and the USA.998.000 240. Division Surface Preparation Waterworks distribution Plymouth Products Filtration and Separation Johnson Screens Culligan Everpure Systems & Services Vendor International Surface Preparation JP Morgan Partners / TH Lee Partners Pentair Pall Weatherford International Clayton.000 10.000.000 0 0 450.000 5. 310 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 .000 10. this is also related to preparing for VE’s partial bid for Southern Water (First Aqua).998.000 2.8million people in the country.153. serving 7.000 105. Dubilier & Rice Pentair Siemens Date July 2003 September 2002 September 2002 February 2002 October 2001 June 2004 December 2003 May 2004 Value (US$ million) 130 620 125 360 140 610 215 993 These sales involved a total write-down of US$4.600. The number served in France has remained effectively constant in recent years. Its first success was the Adelaide.328.000 1. The table also excludes VE’s continuing activities in Spain.000 12.400.000 1.200.000 10.000 Total 552.000 50.000 700. In the former case.000 68.000 700. some US$3.000 600.500.000 3.000 25.200. South Australia contract in 1995.000 240.400.000 82.000 2.153. since Suez and Agbar are the majority shareholder.600. VE’s water revenues in the USA will be US$700 million pa post these divestments.000.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS Country Venezuela * Asia and Pacific Rim Australia China Indonesia Malaysia New Zealand Philippines South Korea Africa and The Middle East Azerbaijan Chad Gabon Israel Morocco Namibia Niger Total outside France Global total * Proactiva activities Water 552.000 0 50.000 Sewerage 0 1.000 0 44.000 100.000 450.800.000 3. International alliances and JVs United Water: The JV between VE and Thames Water.000 3. OMSA: A JV in Mexico with ICA.000 108.000 0 200.000 600. This alliance is for all bids by the two companies in Australasia.500.000 5.000 61.000 450.000 0 0 105.000 0 2.000.193 million has been raised from the sale of peripheral activities in the US Filter group since 2001.400.

Veolia sold its 49% stake in B 1998 to a company controlled by Mrs. VE (50%) will lead a JV.8million people and sewerage to 6.FRANCE PART 3: COMPANY ANALYSIS FCC / Proactiva: Proactiva Medio Ambiente is a 50:50 JV between VE and FCC for all water and waste management contracts in Latin America. Générale des Eaux is replacing Suez for these contracts. which in turn holds 56. Denmark One contract for water provision to 60. Générale des Eaux was awarded two 12 year water treatment contracts for the management of two wastewater treatment works in Tougas and Petite Californie serving 21 urban communes centred in Nantes.000 sewage treatment The €1. Veolia Environnement acquired its stake in FCC from Vivendi in 2000 for a total consideration of €691 million. A €115 million cost cutting programme from 1996-2000 was 70% achieved by the end of 1999. At the start of 1997. In October 1998. Total revenues for the 211 contracts regained and 35 new contracts in 2003 are approximately €90 million per annum. As part of the company’s responses to these challenges. VE has retained the Générale des Eaux name for its operations in France. The Netherlands 2002 Delftland 30 year DBFO 1. with a total cash payment to Veolia Environnement of €916 million. Currently. which dominates the municipal waste collection market. VE acquired 49% of B1998. Rabobank (10%).000 people via VE’s I Krüger AS.9million. Krüger specialises in the manufacture of advanced sewage treatment systems and engineering consultancy. The sewerage market is seen as growing at an appreciably faster rate than the water market.000 water & sewerage 311 Masons Water Yearbook 2004 – 2005 . In July 2004. but 35 new contracts were gained. along with Delta Water (25%) and Waterbedrijf Europoort (25%) for operating the facilities and 90km of sewerage network.5 billion contract was won by the Delfluent Consortium.700. Spain: the FCC-VE alliance FCC is a Spanish construction and utility company.5% of the company. the company has to concentrate on consolidating its water contracts in an unprecedented competitive and critical atmosphere. with all customers in France being covered by 1999. customer service charters for 10million people were issued by the end of 1996.000 contracts with 8. it water to 19. 16million of whom have their sewage effluents treated. led by VE (40%). France Générale des Eaux started operating in France in 1853. The Proactiva joint venture in Latin America is to continue for the time being. The transaction will reduce Veolia Environnement's net indebtedness by €1. Heijmans Betonen Waterbouw (5%) and Strukton (5%). Portugal 1995 Mafra 25 year concession 45. 53 contracts were lost in 2003. RWE / Berliner Wasser Betriebe: A joint bid gained the Budapest sewerage concession in 1997. the holding company for the Koplowitz sisters’ interests in FCC. Delftland serves The Hague and surrounding areas. The contract will start in 2003 and involves operating the working plant at Houtrust and developing the new €258 million plant at Harnaschpolder. Major contracts have recently been gained with Citic Pacific and Beijing Capital Group. it has been used on a number of occasions. the figure is 26million water customers and 17million sewerage customers. China: VE has a number of local partners in China. For example. a notable event in a country which has previously been characterised by consensual competition. In France. the company provided water to 8million people and by 1980. two Dutch publicly owned water distribution companies. because of the low penetration of sewerage networks and sewage treatment in France at a time when the country must comply with the EU’s Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive’s obligations between 2000 and 2005. Générale des Eaux: Contract renewal rate 2000 90% 2001 77% 2002 92% 2003 80% New contracts gained in each year have at least cancelled out contract losses in each of these years. The average weighted time before the expiration of long term contracts is 12 years.000 municipalities in France. Since 2000. VE’s has retained Gruppo General des Aguas (water and sewerage) which in 1997 served 3million people in Spain and had net sales of F1 billion. Delta Water (20%) and Waterbedrijf Europoort (20%). which currently has 4.1 billion. Esther Koplowitz. By 1953.

000 water & sewerage In June 2004 Veolia signed a 30 year contract with Vodovbody a Kanalizace Zlin (VAK Zlin) the water public authority for the eastern part of Moravia in the Czech Republic. Construction started in March 1996 for a F280 million facility. 2000 Valongo 30 year concession 80. The municipality intends to invest Esc4-5 billion on improved sewerage systems over the length of the contract.07million of the inhabitants are connec