# From one pilot to a credible city proposal

Companion to the Karnataka presentation. Proposed evidence plan, not reported pilot results or a final procurement specification.

The pitch is stronger when we can answer three questions together: **Does the toilet stay usable? Does the treatment work? What does the complete service cost?**

## Start with the same site and reporting period

Record the unit ID, location, installed model, cubicles, commissioning date and reporting dates. Attach the matching equipment list and piping drawing. Keep observed results separate from nameplate ratings and manual examples.

The selected BCRT manual describes a 40-foot, seven-cubicle configuration. Its values must not be assigned to the Lumbini installation without a model match. The reported 400 people/day pre-launch is an activity account, not a flush count or measured treatment capacity.

## What to record

| Question | Evidence | Reporting unit | Interpretation |
|---|---|---|---|
| How much demand is served? | Separate visits, WC flushes and urinal events; record counting method | events/day, by type | Do not convert people directly into flushes. |
| How much water returns to flushing? | Dedicated reuse-to-flushing meter, opening/closing readings | litres over the period | Do not count internal treatment recirculation as reuse delivered. |
| How much new water is needed? | Separate makeup-to-flushing and other water uses | litres over the same period | Handwashing, cleaning and plant makeup can have different boundaries. |
| How much energy is used? | Treatment-system energy meter and treated volume | kWh and m³ | Keep site lighting/shop electricity separate, or disclose inclusion. |
| Does the treatment meet its intended reuse requirements? | Traceable laboratory reports with sample location, date, methods and applicable criteria | reported parameters and units | A dashboard status is not a water-quality result. |
| Is the public service available? | Scheduled hours, closure start/end, reason and affected facilities | hours and availability % | A registry label is not an uptime measurement. |
| Are faults resolved? | Report, assignment, action, completion and review timestamps | duration; unresolved count | Report open faults as well as closed-ticket turnaround. |
| What leaves the system? | Residual quantities and collection/disposal records; other discharge where applicable | litres or kg, with route | A reuse loop does not remove the need for residuals management. |
| Can the service sustain itself? | Actual operating costs, attributable retail/ad contribution and any support | ₹/site/reporting period | Sales revenue is not the same as money available for upkeep. |

## Calculations with explicit boundaries

**Flushing supply = reused water delivered to flushing + freshwater delivered to flushing.** State where each meter sits. If measuring tank inflows rather than delivery to fixtures, account separately for storage change and other withdrawals before describing the volume as water used for flushing.

**Reuse share of flushing supply = reused water delivered ÷ total flushing supply × 100%.** This describes supply substitution at that boundary. It is not a measured reduction in all site water consumption.

**Freshwater saving = comparable baseline freshwater demand − observed freshwater demand.** State the baseline, equivalent service/load, reporting period and water uses included. If a credible baseline is unavailable, report the measured reuse volume and makeup requirement instead of a saving percentage.

**Treatment energy intensity = treatment electricity (kWh) ÷ treated volume (m³).** Use the same time period and define whether pumps/disinfection are included. Report startup separately where useful.

**Service availability = available scheduled service hours ÷ scheduled service hours × 100%.** Define partial closures and minimum usable facilities before collecting data. Distinguish a toilet closure from a treatment alarm that did not interrupt service.

**Operating funding balance = attributable retail/ad contribution + committed service funding − agreed operating costs.** Include staff, cleaning, utilities, consumables, repairs and residuals handling. State separately whether capital replacement and financing are included.

Do not extrapolate one busy day to a year without seasonal demand, operating days, downtime and maintenance assumptions. A larger network needs site classes and maintenance coverage, not only multiplication of one unit’s best result.

## A useful pilot-to-network decision

Before adding sites, agree on the service and treatment criteria, review a representative reporting period, investigate exceptions, and establish who funds maintenance and responds to faults. Then compare suitable site classes: high-footfall parks, dense streets and sites with difficult sewer access may have different needs and economics.

This is a framework for discussion. The city, operator and relevant technical specialists should agree the actual acceptance criteria and monitoring plan for the chosen site.

## A speaking answer in Ved’s voice

“Okay, so how much impact can this have? I want to count the water we actually reuse, what it takes to keep the plant running, and whether the toilet stays usable. Then put that next to the cost of the whole service. Give me those numbers from a real site, over the same period, and we can have a serious conversation about the next hundred.”

## Source context

BCRT O&M manual, August 2024; LooCafe/Ixora recommendations document, sections on water-quality parameters, process documentation and operational records. Those documents describe requirements and operating guidance; this sheet does not present them as completed field tests. See the [slide source guide](https://loocafe-summit-2026.pages.dev/slide-sources) for the presentation’s evidence boundaries.