Digital technologies could enable the Swiss water supply to be decentralised. And that would be a good thing, says Matthew Moy de Vitry from the Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology (Eawag), which is based in Dübendorf and part of the ETH Domain. | Image: Valérie Chételat

Urban infrastructure is being digitised. Where are we with water?

Static infrastructure data, such as location and pipe condition maps, have been largely digitised and are being used. Dynamic flow data are partly collected, but water utilities do not yet always know what to do with them. There are also differences between the fields. For example, we see the most reluctance to digitise in the supply of drinking water, for obvious safety reasons. In wastewater treatment, the introduction of connected systems is more advanced. For example, Eawag is working with the municipality of Fehraltorf (ZH) on a system that measures sewer overflows.

Wastewater can also provide sensitive data, such as regional consumption of drugs or medicines.

We can imagine hypothetical scenarios in which insurance companies or employers would disadvantage a particular urban area based on this information... We know that in several Chinese cities, the police use the quantity of drugs measured in wastewater to set arrest quotas. In this case, the data have a concrete impact on the population.

What about the risk of cyber attacks?

We have recently seen mainly ransomware attacks, in which malware encrypts system data to make it unreadable and then holds it in ransom. These attacks are expensive but do not necessarily represent a public health risk, as many water utilities maintain a manual control system in case the digital network should fail or be attacked. There have also been cyber attacks to take control of data or infrastructure. One such incident targeted the water distribution network in Ebikon (LU) in 2018, shortly after its switchover. Thanks to the protective measures in place, the attack was unsuccessful.

In your study, you mentioned a future where water services would adopt a less centralised model.

Digital technologies allow forms of decentralisation. In Switzerland, such a change is desirable, as the level of centralisation of water services is a little too high to be economically optimal. That being said, digital technology promotes the decentralisation of infrastructure, but also the centralisation of management, which is beneficial for risk prevention and management.

Is it risky to talk publicly about the dangers of digitising these services?

People working in the development of connected systems often have a technocratic tendency to see technology as a solution rather than a risk. We advocate a little public self-criticism on this subject, even if the media coverage of these questions is delicate because of the excessive reactions it can provoke. Whenever we talk about cyber attacks, our imagination kicks in and tends easily towards exaggeration. On the other hand, remaining vague on these issues is even worse, as a lack of information may fuel panic and block the debate. Water utilities should therefore be open and communicate both their successes and the problems encountered.