"The Commission proposal for the UWWTD addresses energy neutrality, not climate neutrality"

Can you tell us briefly about your career path and your current role at EurEau?

I’ve been working in the water sector for more than 15 years, in different areas. Since October 2022, I am the Senior Water Policy Advisor at EurEau (European Federation of National Associations of Water Services), dealing with mainly circular economy issues, including the Urban Waste Water Treatment and Sewage Sludge Directives; energy in the water sector and climate change, as well as sustainable financing (mainly Taxonomy), and other topics. Previously, for almost 8 years, I was Head of International Affairs at AEAS (Spanish Association of Water Supply and Sanitation). As part of this, I was a member of the Steering Committee of the OECD Water Governance Initiative; of the ISO/TC 224 WG 14 working group on the corporate governance of water services; and the AEAS representative at the IWA General Assembly. I was also co-Chair of the EurEau Committee on Legal and Economic Affairs. 

I have been involved in several water-related legislative processes (Drinking Water Directive and Water Reuse Regulation) and currently in the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive.

The European Council recently reached an agreement on a proposal to review the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive. What is EurEau’s reaction to this?

After the European Parliament (EP) having approved its Position on the UWWTD (recast) on the 5^th of October and the Council having adopted its General Approach on the 16^th of October, these two texts, together with the Commission’s Proposal for the UWWTD (recast), will be discussed during the trilogue among the three institutions to reach the final text of the future Directive.

Having said this, I will highlight EurEau’s reaction to both the EP and Council texts. EurEau welcomes the Council’s General Approach on the UWWTD (recast) adopted last 16th of October as well as the European Parliament’s Position adopted on the 5th of October, and recognises and appreciates the work on the file, given both texts include amendments that will facilitate the implementation of a paramount piece of legislation that will pave the way for a more sustainable and resilient wastewater sector. In particular, we celebrate the extension of the deadlines adopted by the Council. Nevertheless, we would have liked to see a broad control at source approach, a key strategy for an effective protection of water resources.

Regarding the European Parliament’s Position, we are especially glad to see the amendments introduced to the individual systems, realising the very local character of these systems; to the discharges of non-domestic wastewater, acknowledging the need for a further control at the source of these discharges to protect collecting systems and urban wastewater treatment plants; the introduction of a new provision addressing the impact of the Weser Ruling on UWWTPs, as well as the amendments to the article on energy neutrality, which I will develop later. However, we regret the amendments watering down the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR), as well as those setting more stringent requirements for tertiary and quaternary treatment and the shortening of the deadlines for quaternary treatment.

In relation to the Council’s General Approach, we appreciate the text in Article 9 on EPR and we are glad to see certain recognition of the sectors’ reality regarding energy neutrality. While welcoming the new provisions related to water reuse and those addressing the impact of the Weser Ruling on UWWTPs, as well as those further extending the deadlines for smaller UWWTPs and agglomerations, we regret the deletion of the possibility of using equivalent treatment to secondary treatment as a way of prioritising investments while ensuring health and environmental protection. Besides, we lament not seeing further control at source in relation to discharges of non-domestic wastewater and risk assessment and management, as well as a lack of consideration of the very local-based approach individual systems require.

We look forward to the trilogues, hoping for a final text that allows water operators across Europe to tackle remaining pollution sources, to better align with the SGDs and the European Green Deal, enhance the governance of the wastewater sector and facilitate access to sanitation.

The revised directive calls for the implementation of an Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) scheme to cover the costs of quaternary treatment. Could you explain what an EPR scheme is? And in your opinion, will it be a successful means to realise the Polluter Pays Principle in the water sector?

The Commission’s Proposal included for the first time in water-related legislation the Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR). EPR is one of the tools to implement the Polluter Pays Principle, one of the key principles underlying the European Union’s environmental policy. EPR sets the framework for producers of polluting substances to cover the costs related to the impact of these substances on the environment and human health, but EPR should ultimately incentivise a change in how such substances are produced, leading to less polluting substances.

We look forward to the trilogues, hoping for a final text that allows water operators across Europe to tackle remaining pollution sources

In this regard, we especially appreciate the amendments in the Council’s General Approach, calling for the full implementation of an EPR scheme to cover the costs of quaternary treatment, and setting a deadline (3 years after the entry into force of the Directive) to have all measures in place that will allow to implement EPR, as a means to realise the Polluter Pays Principle in the water sector. However, we find the changes included in Recital 13, stating that Member States should have the possibility to impose additional requirements to the EPR schemes, too ambiguous, as it is not clear if this means extending the list of sectors to be covered by the EPR or adding other financing means to cover the treatment of micro-pollutants.

Unfortunately, the European Parliament watered down the ambition of EPR and the implementation of the Polluter Pays Principle by including a co-financing model for the costs of quaternary treatment for the removal of micro-pollutants, which will lead to an increase in the water tariffs. Water services (including drinking and wastewater) are essential and critical services, as well as a human right, and their affordability must be ensured.

EurEau fully understands the concerns of Member States regarding the implementation of EPR schemes to cover the costs of quaternary treatment. Thus, we call for the development of EU guidelines and framework requirements for the implementation of such schemes.

Member States have recognised the potential of the urban wastewater treatment sector to significantly cut GHG emissions and aid the EU in reaching climate neutrality. In what ways does the directive address this goal?

The Commission proposal for the UWWTD (recast) addresses energy neutrality, not climate neutrality. And it addresses it in a way that doesn’t acknowledge the reality of the water sector, where energy neutrality with only on-site urban wastewater treatment plants (UWWTP) renewable energy production is extremely challenging for many of the UWWTPs. Achieving energy neutrality in the sector should be based on an assessment of the technical and economic viability of the different measures to be implemented considering local conditions, including climatic and geographic, and it should contribute to, not hamper, the achievement of the Green Deal objectives on climate neutrality and to the goals of the REPowerEU Plan.

We are glad to see the recognition (at least to a certain extent) of the sectors’ reality regarding energy neutrality in the Council’s General Approach and, in particular, in Parliament’s Position, where not only the on and off-site production of renewable energy by UWWTPs is considered but also how the sector contributes to the production of renewable energy, even if used outside the wastewater facilities.

Both texts include the possibility of purchasing energy from external sources, setting a maximum amount, which in the case of the Parliament position is also conditional on the energy audits. However, we regret the last-minute modification in the Council’s General Approach where the purchase of energy from external sources has been extended from renewable energy to any kind of energy.

Could the directive lead to an increase in water tariffs for water consumers across Europe?

Considering the extension of the scope to agglomerations of at least 1.000 p.e. (instead of 2.000 p.e. as in the current Directive 91/271), the new tertiary and quaternary treatment requirements, the increased monitoring frequencies and the energy targets, amongst others, tariff increases seem unavoidable (even according to the Commission’s Impact Assessment, in which we consider the cost increase to be somehow underestimated ), even more so if the EPR schemes do not fully cover the costs related to the treatment of micropollutants, unless Member States find other sources of finance.