Sunday, June 24, 2018
ACE18 Wrap - Viva Las Vegas!
Las Vegas turned out to be a great venue for ACE18. Attendance numbers were up and while some skeptics doubted people would actually go to the conference events, exhibit hall traffic seemed busy to me. Unfortunately I had a bid during the show so couldn't go to any papers for the first time in 20 years.... so I can't comment on how well these were attended. I read through the technical program on the flight home to see what I had missed and there were some very interesting sessions on membrane technology and water reuse and overall I think a better balance of technical and management sessions.
One criticism of conferences at Vegas is that delegates disappear down the strip and there are less networking opportunities, but I thought the opposite for ACE18. Because the Mandalay Bay and adjoining Delano Hotel are so big, most functions were held there or at the nearby Luxor, so it was easy to walk from the show to your hotel and back to the functions and even go to a more than one. So for me it was one of the best networking ACE's I have been to. My only criticism of the Mandalay Bay Convention Center was you could not get food in the exhibit hall and lines were very long to get lunch in the Mandalay Bay, so the exhibit Hall was dead during lunchtime when you would hope to get some traffic. That needs to be addressed next time.
I heard a few companies didn't exhibit because they thought attendance would be down due to some city's not being allowed to attend. That may have been the case for some city's but I heard attendance was well up on recent years so it does not seem that too many were restricted from coming. I think it is over 20 years since ACE was at Las Vegas but after the success of ACE18 I am sure it will be a lot sooner before ACE returns. Viva Las Vegas!
Monday, April 16, 2018
2018 Membrane Technology Conference and CA WateReuse Conference Wraps
March was a
busy month for conferences so I am combining my summary of the 2018 MTC in West Palm Beach and CA
Annual WateReuse Conference in Monterey. There were may of the same West Coast engineers at
both shows, which is an indication of the high use of membranes in wastewater
recycling projects.
AMTA/AWWA Membrane Technology Conference
Attendance
was similar to the past few years at just over 1000 delegates. It felt a little
down to me based on exhibit hall traffic, but the quality of delegates was very
good as usual, with a lot of interesting membrane projects in the works. The
technical program was excellent, and I found myself torn between sessions many
times when papers I wanted to see were being presented simultaneously.
There were quite a
few sessions on potable reuse including studies directed at proving pathogen
removal credits for MBRs and Reverse Osmosis for indirect and direct potable
reuse of wastewater and the results look pretty conclusive with regulations to follow in the near future.
In terms on
new technology, it looks like Metawater has some real competition now on the ceramic
membrane front, with Nanostone recently completing some drinking water plant retrofits
in the Dakotas. I think this a pretty good strategy for Nanostone where retrofitting
will allow them to get some quick references for their ceramic membrane. The
current target for the retrofits is cold water filtration applications where the
capacity of systems with polymeric membranes is reduced in winter while the flux
reduction for ceramic membranes is significantly less.
There were
also a number of presentations on the use of Desalitech’s Closed Circuit
Desalination (CCD) process for concentrating brine and improving recovery at
wastewater reuse and brackish water applications. It looks like there will be
some decent sized CCD systems in municipal applications on the West Cost in the
near future.
WateReuse California Annual Conference
This was my
first time at this show and I was very impressed with the number of delegates, around
600, which is about half of what is at the national WateReuse Symposium. A
large percentage of those attending were water utilities, indicative of all the
reuse activity in California. Since this was in Monterey, the Monterey One
Water reuse demonstration plant and full-scale reuse system under construction
were featured, including a tasting of beer made from the demonstration plant, a
frequent and popular event at the WateReuse shows. I must say that Monterey One
Water has done an excellent job with their demonstration plant that is set up
for tours for all sectors of the community. I believe Pure Water San Diego probably
had the first long term demonstration plant followed by Monterey and now many
more water utilities are following suit to gain public acceptance of direct and
indirect potable reuse.
![]() |
| Monterey One Water Demonstration Plant |
I did hear
in one presentation that the State of California is about to award pathogen log
removal credits for MBRs and in anticipation of this, a number of future reuse
projects are already removing UF from the Full Advanced Treatment (FAT) train
and feeding RO directly from a MBR. Some of these full-scale projects are
currently or about to bid. If you ask me, I am OK with MBRs as a barrier for
indirect reuse, but I am not ready for MBRs without a subsequent UF filtration step
as a pathogen barrier for direct potable reuse.
The
organizers of this conference did a great job in planning every detail,
including presentations and entertainment at lunches and breakfast (the
WateReuse Family Feud was hilarious!) and I can see why the attendance at this
show was so good.
Tuesday, January 23, 2018
Why do we Sell Water Treatment Equipment?
When I was hectic
bidding several projects the week before Christmas while trying to fit in a few
out-of-state sales visits before the end of 2017 and barely finding time to get
into the holiday spirit I thought to myself, “Why do we sell water treatment
equipment”? I talk to a lot of people in sales in my industry at conferences
and it seems like we all have a similar hectic life of travelling every other
week, frantically catching up when we are in the office and nearly always in
that reactive fire-fighting mode.
I think the
only other profession that may travel as much as sales people are professional
sportspeople. If we got paid as much as sports stars, maybe that would make the
travel more worthwhile. But it isn’t just the travel… If you are selling
process technology, you have to put in a lot of work educating the engineers
and end users on how the technology works, how to design a process
incorporating the technology and then helping to pull together specifications.
Then after all of this work that may take place over a few years, the engineer
lists all your competitors in the bid spec! Then it is just a race to the
bottom to see who will bear the lowest margin….
All the
sales consultants will tell you to sell on value provided and not the equipment
price, but they should look at selling into the municipal capital equipment
market where the government entity is required to have a number of bidders and select
the lowest priced responsive bidder… In some cases you can get a bid evaluated
on lifecycle cost and in some cases the engineer you have helped with the
design will let you have input on the competitors listed in the specs, which is
great, but if you work in the muni-marketplace, most projects don’t go this
way, unless you want to be really selective and as a salesperson in this market, if you do that
you may not be in a job too long…
So let me be
more specific. "Why do we sell process equipment into the municipal water
treatment market when we have to be travelling for most of the time, our life
is in a continual frantic state and there is no money to be made"?
Here is my
attempt to justify why I stay in this profession:
- There are a lot of great people in the industry, sales reps, engineers, fellow manufacturers and operators who are a pleasure to work with. Some of these people I have known for almost 20 years and consider good friends.
- I started my career as a consultant and didn’t get a lot of satisfaction designing a small part of a project and not seeing the end result. Granted I was only a junior engineer, but I wanted to work for a manufacturer who makes a product that solves a problem. It is very satisfying to me to visit a water treatment plant where my company has provided a treatment system that is helping the end user to meet a water quality objective. At that point the installing contractor is gone and possibly the engineer is done with the project but our equipment is there treating the water for many years to come.
- I have this competitive instinct in me and I do get a rush from bidding and winning projects (and the opposite from losing them) which probably comes from my track days.
Being a Municipal Salesperson is like being an Amateur Athlete...
I ran track for years and I think selling in our industry is a bit like being an amateur athlete. Why do you do it when the financial gain is minimal compared to the effort you put in? As my dad used to say when I was training 2-3 hours a day, 6-7 days a week, “You can’t eat gold medals” (he thought I should put my efforts into playing Australia Rules football or another sport where I could get paid). But if you love running, you get your reward from improving your times, winning a race or two, comradery with fellow athletes (many who are still good friends), getting ranked, making national championships, etc, even if you don’t make it to the highest level and make any money. Over the years I trained with a number of Olympic athletes and got a lot of satisfaction thinking that in some way I helped them achieve their goals.
In sales we
are proud of the projects we win, the size of the plants sold, the number of
installations using our products, the introduction of a new technology to solve
a new problem and we value the friendships made. The personal financial gain
(or company’s financial gain for that matter) may not be great, but there is a
lot of personal satisfaction from playing a part in the improvement in the
infrastructure for a community.
So after all
of that rambling, I think I have justified to myself why I have been selling
water treatment equipment in the municipal market for over 20 years…heck, if I
could be an amateur track athlete for almost 20 years, this is a piece of cake!
Monday, November 13, 2017
Sippin' the I Pee A
Arizona Pure Water Brew
Challenge puts some fun into Water Reuse
Over 25
craft brewers from around Arizona competed in the Arizona Pure Water Brew
Challenge for the honor of making the best beer from purified wastewater at the
17th Annual WateReuse Symposium in Phoenix AZ on September 12. Most
of the approx. 480 conference delegates enthusiastically sampled beers and
voted for their favorites. This event
was the climax of a 10-month project to build a trailer with high-tech
treatment processes and then tour the state treating wastewater to drinking water standards and provide this to breweries to make beer for the Arizona Pure Water
Brew Challenge. And while the final tasting competition was a fitting finale to
the project the journey to the finale was certainly the highlight.
The Water
Innovation Challenge was conceived by the Arizona Community Foundation in partnership
with Republic Media and Morrison Institute for Public Policy who host
philanthropic prize competitions to attract innovative ideas. Pima County’s
Southwest Water Campus team was recognized for developing the most innovative
and inventive market-based, technological or entrepreneurial solution to
enhancing the sustainability of its water future. The Southwest Water Campus
team consisted of Pima County Regional Wastewater Reclamation Department,
Tucson Water, Town of Marana, University of Arizona, CH2M, Carollo Engineers,
Clean Water Services and WaterReuse. In addition to the $250,000 grand prize,
the team also received $50,000 in technical assistance from the WaterNowAlliance to advance the implementation of the project which included an
extensive marketing and social media campaign.
![]() |
| The AZ Pure Water Brew Challenge Trailer Touring Arizona |
The
treatment in the trailer consisted of Ultrafiltration, Reverse Osmosis,
UV/Advanced Oxidation, GAC and Chlorination. The actual cost of the trailer was
well above $250K, probably around $500K, and could only have happened through
generous donations and at-cost contributions from equipment vendors and
engineering firms. The schedule was also very challenging requiring the trailer
to be designed, built and permitted by the State (remember this was making a
product to be consumed by the public) in about 5 months, essentially building
and permitting a drinking water facility, while allowing time to tour the local
wastewater facilities to treat water so that breweries could brew their beers in time for the Brew Challenge on September 12. Having had a little involvement in the
provision of the membrane equipment, I know it took an amazing team effort
between vendors, the engineering firms and Pima County’s team to pull this off.
The trailer was
not only created to produce purified water for the beer challenge, but was also
used as a PR tool to educate the public on the safety and benefits of
wastewater reuse. Great attention to detail was put into the layout of the
trailer and the educational signage and videos for schools, local
residents, public officials and the media who would tour the facility when it was
stationed at wastewater facilities and beer tasting events. This helped the Project
get a lot of exposure in local newspapers and TV reports.
| Launch of the Trailer at the AZ Water Conference in May 2017 |
After the
Brew Challenge the trailer even made a trip to Colorado to CH2M’s Englewood Headquarters
for a Reusefest where CH2M clients could taste beer from three local breweries made
from recycled water from the trailer, as well as one CH2M employee brewer who came
up with the clever name ‘I Pee A’.
| Reusefest at CH2M, Englewood, CO |
The Arizona
Pure Water Brew Challenge was definitely a huge success in helping the public
in Arizona understand how reclaimed water can be used to meet future water
needs and the Award sponsors, the winning team led by Pima County and all the volunteers
who contributed in some way should be congratulated for making this fun
project happen.
Most photos from http://www.azpurewaterbrew.org/.
Tuesday, August 15, 2017
2017 IWA International Conference on Water Reuse and Reclamation Recap
I am not trying to turn this into a conference review blog but I just happen to have been at quite a few conferences this summer. The most recent was the 11th IWA International Conference on Water Reclamation and Reuse held at Long Beach, CA July 23-27. The attendance seemed pretty good considering a lot of local forums for Water Reuse this year, with the pre-show registration list showing 540 attendees, 420 of these from the United States. I was impressed with the number and quality of attendees from the US which shows that despite recent rains on the West Coast, water reuse still has a lot of interest. Although I did hear from one engineer from Northern CA that some of the reuse projects in that region have gone from urgent to a slower schedule.
The
technical presentations were very good and I really liked the 20 minute limit
which kept the sessions moving and interesting. Each session had a 15-20 minute
question period at the end if there was no time left after a specific
presentation. My only criticism of the format was some moderators let speakers
overrun by 5 minutes because there was the 15-20 minute questions session at the
end to make up that time, but if you wanted to jump across to another parallel
session, you missed a good part of that presentation.
Horses for Courses for Technology Selection
Without
counting papers, it seemed like the majority of current research is on advanced
oxidation and biofiltration treatment while the case studies for full-scale
reuse projects were mostly around low and high pressure membrane processes. I don’t
know if this means that we will see more AOP and biofiltration projects
implemented on the full scale in the future at the expense of membrane projects
or if there is just more research money for AOP/biofiltration where membranes
are seen as a more mature technology with less areas left to research. I
suspect a bit of both.
While I mostly
went to the membrane related presentations, skimming the abstracts (I was very
impressed with the Conference App that allowed you to easily review abstracts)
there is certainly a horses for courses approach, with focus on
AOP/biofiltration focused mostly on inland areas where disposal of membrane
concentrates is difficult while membrane solutions are predominantly on the
coasts with access to outfalls for waste disposal.
If you went
to the conference to see the exhibits, you would have been disappointed. There
were only 20 or so exhibitors and no booths really popped with anything new. Even
so, the breaks in the exhibit area were very well attended and a great
opportunity to mingle and network with attendees. Most people who go to this
sort of conference aren’t really there for the exhibits anyway.
Overall I am
very glad I attended to get the chance to see a lot of interesting
presentations and do some great networking. Next conference is the 2017 Annual WateReuseSymposium in Phoenix AZ, September 10-13. I will be interested to see if the IWA
Conference lowers the attendance this year or if there is enough momentum in
Water Reuse to allow people to go to both shows.
Friday, July 21, 2017
ACE17 Wrap
Here is my
belated and brief wrap up of the 2017 AWWA Annual Conference and Exposition. I
didn’t have high expectations for ACE17 in Philadelphia being a memorable
conference because the location didn’t excite me and I thought attendance would
be down, but I was pleasantly surprised. With the conference hotels close to
the convention center it was easy to get around and the market and downtown
restaurants were also conveniently close by.
In the
exhibit hall the traffic seemed pretty good although I can’t quantify if it was
better or worse than recent years. There were a few more larger exhibitors
missing this year but I like the way the AWWA has moved the bookstore into the
hall and made a stage area for presentations, etc, perhaps because of the room
left by a few less large exhibitors, so that you can browse these areas as you
go through the hall.
I attended a
few of the wastewater reuse sessions as these presentations were of specific
interest to me, and they were lightly attended overall – I am not sure if this
was indicative of other sessions or if wastewater reuse has been flogged a lot lately
with sessions at the Membrane Technology Conference earlier in the year and
separate WateReuse conferences dedicated to the subject. Unfortunately I did
not get to other presentations as I was tied up in the exhibit hall.
Overall I
thought it was a pretty good ACE with a strong technical program and a pretty
large exhibition despite a few larger players missing. There was certainly some
buzz about ACE18 in Vegas next year, and I heard a few of the prodigal sons
will be back exhibiting (hopefully they have dropped down the site selection
pecking order as punishment for their absence). I am sure ACE18 will be one of
the biggest ACE’s in some time!
Monday, May 22, 2017
Taking the Easy Road and Wasting Ratepayers' Money

Just when I thought the Big Three mindset in the MF/UF
market was finally dead I see a Statement of Qualifications Request that gets
my blood boiling….
This SOQ request for MF/UF suppliers for a drinking water system
less than 10 MGD has a minimum qualification requirement of 200 MGD of
installed capacity of pressurized municipal membrane systems. Give me a break!
If this engineer just wants to install a Pall system, why not sole source them
and stop wasting everyone’s time…. How would any other company qualify? Is the
engineer trying to create a façade that he is providing a competitive bidding
situation for the client to get good pricing? I don’t know how he can do that
if he only gets one bidder….
If the owner really only wants a Pall system why can’t they sole source them? The premium they will pay from sole sourcing is probably less than the engineering costs to run through the SOQ process, then conduct some pilots if there is more than one qualified (which can only happen if they don’t stick to the minimum requirements), then have a bidding process between those who piloted, then pick Pall anyway. Or is it the engineer who feels safe using a Pall system due to its track record and from having worked with Pall on projects in the past – and don’t get me wrong, Pall’s MF systems have a great record and looked really good against GE/Zenon and Siemens/Evoqua several years ago when they had all their membrane integrity issues.
If the owner really only wants a Pall system why can’t they sole source them? The premium they will pay from sole sourcing is probably less than the engineering costs to run through the SOQ process, then conduct some pilots if there is more than one qualified (which can only happen if they don’t stick to the minimum requirements), then have a bidding process between those who piloted, then pick Pall anyway. Or is it the engineer who feels safe using a Pall system due to its track record and from having worked with Pall on projects in the past – and don’t get me wrong, Pall’s MF systems have a great record and looked really good against GE/Zenon and Siemens/Evoqua several years ago when they had all their membrane integrity issues.
Granted this is a small engineering firm who may not have a
lot of membrane experience and feels safer working with a company like Pall,
but the specific engineer in question previously worked with a large national
firm and should know better… The SOQ is all about membrane integrity which
suggests to me somebody is stuck in the pre-2010 years when Pall was the only
show in town without integrity issues.
This engineer owes it to his client, to keep up with the times
and realize that there are new membranes on the market with over 6-7 years of
continuous operating data showing minimal membrane fiber breakages, to ensure
his client makes the best use of its ratepayers’ money. Do some homework before
putting out such a farcical SOQ and see if there are alternative OEMs to Pall
in the past 7 years that have good performing MF/UF systems and provide some
more realistic qualification requirements to allow a competitive bid for the client.
That is the least I would expect of a consultant that is getting paid good
money to help a City put its ratepayers' heard earned money to the best use.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)











