Page 1

 


Our team: We are a specialised team handpicked from the Imperial College Business School Executive MBA and Royal College of Art Service Design programmes, with the necessary skills-mix, expertise and experience, combined with a common purpose to succeed with this challenge.

Our product and sector: Our product is a UV-solar water purification system that harvests rainwater and solar energy through schools infrastructure, aiming to provide children in the developing World with access to clean, safe drinking water – with corresponding health, social and economic benefits. By 2017, we will be seeking to raise £1 million to reach 500,000 children at a cost, per child, per litre of 1p – better value, more secure, more efficient than any other available solutions.

How will we do this? We are at an early-revenue stage, funded by charitable organisations, proving the concept as we build a global, scalable social enterprise model in collaboration with senior members from the Royal College of Art and WASOT UK.  


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Lack of access to clean, drinkable water is recognised by the UN Millennium Development Goals as a global priority, given 3.4 million people die each year from water-related diseases; the equivalent of 1 child every 21 seconds. International development, despite noble objectives, has been insufficient to solve this global problem in a sustainable way. More innovative, creative, partner-led solutions are needed across developing markets and local communities. Our system solves this problem. Droplet is more effective than any competitor in the market place today. Our system is more efficient, more reliable, better value for money and more secure in delivering clean water to children in schools in the developing World. We have co-created our solution to this problem with local sector experts. Working with our local NGO partner in Kisumu – the OGRA Foundation – we conducted detailed ethnographic research to clarify our customer profile and proposition, and to elaborate the design of our system solution – Droplet – ultimately choosing to collaborate with local schools as our initial route to market, enabling us to leverage existing, positive community infrastructure, to reach significant unmet need at low-cost to deliver bigger social returns on investment. We have succeeded in raising grant funding and elaborating our business model to seeking to achieve global impact in partnership with the Royal College of Art, as we move from our first successful system trial in Kenya to our next phase of roll-out to five schools in October. This Plan includes our 5 year strategy, refined value proposition, analysis, benefits realisation plan and funding model as a Social Enterprise, currently operating as a charity. Droplet integrates innovative design, smart application of technology and community capacity-building to deliver clean, safe, drinkable water. By innovating water, we believe we can achieve a scalable, global impact, offsetting initial capital outlay with local revenue raising schemes – selling surplus solar energy and surplus clean water – and developing private household propositions to generate long-term revenue to secure sustainability. We believe our system has global potential, reflected in our further elaboration with the Royal College of Art’s Nick Leon and Nick Coutts. We have pitched to the WASOT-UK Trustee Board and been recently successful in securing £10,000 from a private donor, with additional private donations pledged for school systems. 2    


TABLE OF CONTENTS The team and executive summary ............................................................................................ 1 The opportunity and market ...................................................................................................... 4 Developing the solution ............................................................................................................ 7 The product and system ......................................................................................................... 11 The value proposition – social return on investment .............................................................. 13 The business model ................................................................................................................ 18 Financing, sustainability, the future road map – our five year vision ...................................... 19 Appendices ............................................................................................................................. 22 References ............................................................................................................................. 50

3    


1. THE OPPORTUNITY AND MARKET 1.1 A global problem “Dirty water kills more people than war and violence… it is an affront to our common humanity” (Ban Ki-moon, UN Secretary General – March 2010). Lack of access to clean, safe and drinkable water is a recognised global problem. There is a global opportunity to serve this market in a way that has not been done before.

1.2 Defining the market 3.4 million people die annually from water-related diseases; the equivalent of 1 child every 21 seconds or the population of Los Angeles. 780 million people still lack access to clean water. 1 in 10 of this global burden could be avoided through provision of a clean water supply.1 Droplet aims to help meet this global consumption need by designing and delivering an efficient, affordable and durable water purification unit for use in the developing world. The project supports the UN Millennium Development Goal (No. 7) to: “Halve, by 2015, the proportion of the population without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation.”2 Figure 1, global rainfall. These are also areas with limitations on access to clean water.

Source: Taken from Climate Charts, http://www.climate-charts.com/World-ClimateMaps.html, accessed 17th June 2013

                                                                                                                      1

2 2

th

Source: Water Org, http://water.org/, Accessed 19 January 2013. th  Source: UN, www.un.org/milleniumgoals, Accessed 7th June 2013.  

4    


Our chosen operating market has constant annual supply of natural resource to harvest. As Figures 2 and 3 show, the projected average rainfall in Kisumu naturally lends itself to a rain harvesting model/system, which is consistent with the expert advice received on the water treatment process and the desirability of rainwater in this regard. Our chosen design is therefore apposite to this environmental and geological context. Figure 2: Kisumu climate graph and average projected rainfall*

Source: Taken from World Climates, http://www.world-climates.com/city-climate-kisumukenya-africa/, accessed, 30th June 2013. * Average temperature throughout the year in degrees Celsius and average rainfall in millimetres.   Figure 3: Amount of rainfall (millimetres and inches) and number of rainy days in Kisumu across the year

Source: Taken from World Climates, http://www.world-climates.com/city-climate-kisumukenya-africa/, accessed, 30th June 2013.

5    


1.3 Competitive analysis Our research has identified the following projects/companies currently operating in Kenya, our initial chosen operating market: § § §

SODIS method – a solar water disinfection process using sunlight and clear PET bottles Chujio Ceramics – a ceramic water filter Lifestraw – a personal point-of-use microbiological water filter.

The cost of bottled water is $0.92 (0.70 to 1.28) per 1.5 litres in Kenya. Although each of these products has merits, none manage to address all of the elements necessary to address unmet needs: cost-efficiency, maintenance and sustainability. There is sufficient scope to target a cost-effective, low maintenance product using a UV purification system that harvests natural resources.

6    


2. DEVELOPING THE SOLUTION 2.1 Initial concepts From the outset, we knew success would be contingent on developing a solution based on existing stakeholder systems both at an organisation level and within local communities. As part of our initial scoping exercise, we therefore developed a detailed stakeholder map (Figure 4) to identify different market players and to consider potential systems/technologies already available. Our proposition is built on our capacity to leverage domestic partner assets to deliver our system into new markets – creating a global proposition that is attractive across multiple stakeholders. Figure 4: Stakeholder map

Local Residents The Gates Foundation

Charities & Pressure Groups

Local NGOs

International NGOs operating locally

NGOs

INNOVATING WATER

Academic Institutes National Governments

WHO UN Agencies

International NGOs with Experiences

Imperial College Research Group

Governments Agencies &Departments

2.2 Local partnership Through previous projects, JP had links with the OGRA Foundation, a Kenyan NGO based in Kisumu. This provided the opportuntity for local partnership on the ground in Kenya with links to the community we aimed to reach. OGRA's mission and strategic priorities also reflected the aims of our project, ensuring a mutually beneficial partnership for both parties. Their mission is to: “Improve and promote health by: disease prevention and control, promotion of maternal and child health, community empowerment, health systems strengthening and emergency preparedness and response through partnerships.” 7    


2.3 Developing different models A system has the potential to develop around community cooperation where individual homes each had a water purification unit, which was provided and maintained by a community-based team. A system can be developed around a local business opportunity where there is one water purification unit for a village or small community and purified water is provided from this outlet to individual homes. These models are illustrated in Figure 5. Figure 5: Illustrations of ‘community cooperation’ and ‘local business opportunity’ models

8    


2.4 Local market research – Defining the unmet need Through local market research and insight gathering in Kenya, we developed a better understanding of how local communities gain access to water and the degree of accessibility, purity and affordability. This involved both quantitative and qualitative research, including a problem definition survey and individual structured interviews (see Appendices 3 and 4) along with interviews with local NGOs and experts. From our quantitative research, we observed a number of issues affecting local residents in these communities: • • • • • • • •

Majority of people get water from boreholes or rivers/streams Limited healthcare provision Most people capture rainwater for drinking Significant local daily rainfall Most people do not pay for drinking water Over 50% of people do not boil water to remove impurities before drinking despite awareness of associated health risks Most people live a long distance from their nearest water sources The drinking water is not clean and is a source of local health problems.

Our interviews with local NGOs and experts accentuated the importance of behavioural change in developing our solution. The following quote from an experienced contact in the field in Sri Lanka helps to outline this challenge. “If behavioural change is required then it would take a long time for successful implementation. And this may also require cross sector influences. Hygiene practices, wellbeing, nutrient education etc. Build this into the plan. Most importantly...understand WHY they still don't have access to clean water... is this a social thing or lack of resources?” (Luca Perolino – Programme Manager – Cesvi – Tsunami 2004 Trincomalee, Sri Lanka).

9    


2.5 Local market research – Designing the system solution By synthesising our ideas and findings, we identified a scenario where we could collaborate with local schools to develop a potential solution that would both provide children with access to clean drinking water, but also help educate the local community on the importance of the health implications of water sanitation (Figure 7). We considered collaboration with a local health clinic, but following discussions with local experts agreed this may associate the design with negative connotations, e.g. death, disease and illness, compared to positive connotations associated with education, learning and academic attainment. Figure 6: Proposed system solution – the school model

The model is based on collaboration with a local school to use their roof to harvest rainwater. Most schools already have large rainwater storage units in place (although we know from our research that these are often dirty/contaminated) and guttering to feed the water from the roof to the tank. Before children drink, the stored water can be purified using UV technology, powered by solar energy (see Chapter 3). By doing this, pupils are not only getting clean drinking water, but they can learn the merits of hygiene practices and well-being. The children can then transfer this knowledge to their families and local communities. Eventually, we would hope to embed a social enterprise system whereby entire communities are funded and implement their own drinking water plants fostering a sustainable source of clean drinking water for local people.

10    


3. THE PRODUCT AND SYSTEM 3.1. The product – live prototype in Kenya Our product is a UV-solar water purification system that harvests rainwater and solar energy through schools infrastructure. We’ve built one system in Ringroad Primary School in Kisumu, Kenya on 3rd to 7th June, 2013. The system currently provides the local school children clean and affordable drinking water. The digital prototype in the following illustrations shows how the product works.

Figure 7: Digital prototype

This video is available on the following link. https://www.dropbox.com/s/h0pfysa4wqk1gm7/Droplet_Digital%20Prototyping.mp4

3.2. Existing technology A keystone of our approach to solving the problem definition was to systematically review all existing water purification systems and technologies currently available on the market and, where possible, insights on other systems in development. This ensured our basic design idea was original so as to confirm our initial hypothesis and all potential insights were captured to refine product design. Using our pool of contacts and experiences, our methodology comprised: 1) an extensive search of the websites of known stakeholders (Figure 4, Chapter 2) including a grey literature search; and 2) expert interviews to garner technical insights. 11    


3.2.1. Review of stakeholders Having systematically reviewed each stakeholder, we could not find any existing or proposed technology relevant to water purification that matched our initial design concept, particularly in the area of UV technology for the developing world. A number of technologies exist for water purification and filtration, but seemingly without affordable UV technology and our proposed application. This was subsequently confirmed by the OGRA Foundation for Africa and, in particular, Kenya. However, to cross-check our findings we engaged with a series of experts to validate this conclusion. 3.2.2. Expert interviews Appendix 1 details the profiles of the experts we engaged with. Specifically, they provided advice and critique on: 1) existing technologies and applications 2) the local environment and key imperatives 3) our design concept and proposed technical application of preferred technology. They also critiqued and evaluated the merits of our prototype suggesting modifications/improvements where appropriate. These areas of advised improvement are detailed below. 3.2.3. WaterAid Of particular note was our expert interaction with WaterAid. From our discussions, we were able to obtain a detailed breakdown of existing water technologies currently available and used for this purpose (Appendix 5). WaterAid confirmed that UV technology, and our intended application, was tried and tested, effective and marketable. According to WaterAid, it had just never been applied in the developing world context primarily because aid has tended to focus on basic models/technological applications given capacity, capability and affordability constraints. We were therefore advised to focus our design around tackling and leveraging local infrastructure, security and development funds to foster design feasibility and cost-effectiveness. This is another key reason informing our choice of the school model in Kisumu, particularly given the local apparatus and infrastructure to overcome these constraints and optimise outcomes. We were encouraged to focus on developing and innovating a high volume, secure UV system to harvest rainwater in the community-based setting. By utilising more developed infrastructure, we could leverage current assets including secure compounds, basic technology and maintenance, and continuous demands to foster system sustainability. Our research highlighted three key points: 1) the importance of cost-effectiveness and affordability for new innovations 2) the sparing use of low maintenance UV technology as means of purifying water 3) the relevance of size and scale (most existing technologies are for industrial use and not tailored/designed for more compact and focused settings).

 12    


4. THE VALUE PROPOSITION – Social Return on Investment 4.1 The opportunity As our problem observation and market research show, there remains a substantial global challenge around access to clean, drinkable and affordable water. Demand for clean, drinkable water is exponentially increasing and being magnified by global population growth and ageing demography. This demand-pull is largely concentrated in the developing world where prevention is essential. The cost-consequence of infectious disease (Table 2) through unclean water is far-reaching afflicting population health, health budgets, human capital and education, economic productivity and epidemiological contagion. Table unclean Table1:2:Epidemiology Epidemiologyofofinfectious infectiousand disease andwater unclean water Source of infectious Consequence disease

Waterborne disease

• •

Diarrhoea, rotavirus, cholera, typhoid, and dysentery from drinking water containing infectious viruses or bacteria. All particularly detrimental to individuals already HIVinfected.

Water-washed disease

Skin and eye infections caused by lack of clean water for washing.

Water-based diseases

Water-related insect vectors

Schistosomiasis spread by organisms that develop in water and then become human parasites. Spread by contaminated water. Mosquitoes, breed in or near water and spread diseases, including dengue and malaria.

Sources: UNICEF, http://www.unicef.org/wash/index_wes_related.html, Water Org, http://water.org/water-crisis/water-facts/disease, WHO, http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/diseases/en, Accessed 19th January 2013. This basic human need is therefore ripe for a disruptive technology to challenge the status quo and generate new sources of value creation through prevention and innovation.

4.2 Why technology and innovation? Attempts to solve our problem definition have largely revolved around aid and intervention. Despite its benevolent and well-intentioned objectives, the aid model has not been successful at tackling this entrenched global problem in an effective, sustainable and affordable way. The millions of people still lacking access to clean water affirms as much and ongoing economic austerity poses risks to future funding streams. Moreover, in the case of Kenya specifically, our local market research has highlighted this reality. Although these problems are a function of institutions and governance, they are also a consequence of a lack of technological innovation. Technology can improve global health, population well-being and educational attainment, not simply through the use of pharmaceuticals and vaccines, but also advances in delivery, improved sanitation, agriculture and access to clean water (Howitt et al, 2012). Research shows that technology for health and education largely focuses on the needs of the wealthy. More frugal technology specifically designed to help the world's poorest is required (Howitt et al, 2012). As detailed in Chapter 3, existing technologies tend to lack this essential frugality in terms of design, structure, scale and affordability. Our innovation has therefore been conceptually formulated to provide health, social and economic benefits from scalable, accessible drinking water improvements rather than an industrial and high-end product design. 13    


Of course, technology and innovation alone are not sufficient. Our problem definition intrinsically demands a more innovative use of existing processes and infrastructure to optimise the effectiveness of our design. Hence, the value of focusing on the school model where existing infrastructure in the form of water tanks, guttering and buildings exist. This allows us to combine cost-effective and smart application of existing technology through a knowledge-push model with a local apparatus that can confer deliverability in the local environment (Clarysse & Kiefer, 2011). 4.3 The economics of clean water Research shows clean water is the cost-effective form of health intervention (Ricciardi, 2008). According to the WHO, for every $1 invested in clean water and sanitation the return can be US$7– $12. The WHO has called for more investment in innovations that can help supply clean water to realise these returns. Table 3 provides a summary of the likely benefits of making only slight water improvements to facilitate access to clean water. Table 2: Possible benefits from clean, drinkable water improvements Table 3: Possible benefits from clean, drinkable water improvements

Effect of drinkable water

Socio-economic benefits

Increased water availability enhances natural wealth and economic development

Natural wealth available for greater and more sustainable use across population

Improved health status of economically active individuals

Increases social and economic activity leading to economic development

Less time spent caring for sick family members and transporting water

Enhanced time savings for productive, reproductive and social/economic activities

Fewer infant/child deaths

Gain of net lifetime earnings and cost offsets from treating illness and disease

Young people’s school attendance improved

Gains from improved educational standards

Nutritional gains: improved absorption of nutrients and/or additional food production

More time and energy available for a range of activities

Collective activity in planning and implementing improvements

Spin-offs to other local, collective projects

Source: Adapted from WHO, 2012. Moreover, the WHO has calculated that an annual total payback of US$ 84 billion could result from the US$ 11.3 billion yearly investment needed to meet the drinking water and sanitation target of the Millennium Development Goals. It is estimated for every $1 invested in clean water a return of $3-$34 is generated (WHO, 2005). It is from this perspective that the inimical consequences of water-related diseases, time spent walking miles to get water, child mortality rates and absenteeism from school present a compelling value proposition, particularly for our school model. We have therefore focused our value proposition around the wider benefits and social return on investment (SROI) our innovation could generate through access to clean water.

14    


4.4 Value creation Clean, drinkable water offers a distinct value proposition. The sources of opportunity from innovation align with our personas, market research and idea generation. We have tailored our design to accentuate these benefits to confer optimal value and SROI. Given our focus on the school model and our cross-over as a social enterprise model conferring a wider social return, our value proposition can best be understood in terms of an array of different benefits (Figure 16). Figure 8: Value Proposition

Each of these different sources of value are described in Table 3.

15    


Table 3: Sources of value

Figure 9: The value of innovation in the local setting

Source: Voss Foundation, http://www.vossfoundation.org/therippleeffect/the-economy-ofwater/, accessed 30th June 2013.

16    


4.5 Value capture To practically evidence our value proposition, and the different sources of value creation, we have identified the Health Start Programme Kenya as a vehicle to demonstrate value "on the ground". The Health Start Programme is a partnership initiative between the NGO Kenyan Orphan Project (KOP) and our partner the OGRA Foundation. The programme sits with the Ministries of Public Health & Sanitation and Education, and is a comprehensive school health and nutrition programme supporting the health and education of school children in Kenya. The programme is being piloted in two primary Schools (Rabuor and Ombeyi), reaching 2,000 school children. The initiatives so far have included the implementation of a community garden, new kitchens and stoves, rubbish pits, and water/washing points to reduce the risk of infection. The metrics for assessing value include: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Tracking the nutritional status of school children Collecting data on the incidence and prevalence of disease Assessing the use of washing points Measuring improvements in cognitive development, concentration, participation, enrolment and retention in schools 5. Recording absenteeism and improved academic performance. The basis of the initiative is improving the school environment and infrastructure combined with strengthening community structures and mechanisms to ensure sustainability in school health programmes across Kenya. Figure 18 shows some of the earlier benefits from this programme. Figure 10: Benefits from Health Start Programme

Source: Taken from KOP 2012, p. 7. Notably, the programme does not include clean water as part of its initiative. As a key next step, we have agreement in principle to partner with KOP, through the OGRA Foundation, to bolt on our innovation as part of the Health Start programme. This will afford us the data capture opportunities to proof the direct value of our clean water in the local setting and in turn then help us refine and solidify our SROI calculations. 17    


5. THE BUSINESS MODEL 5.1 Funding Grant funding – we managed to secure £1,200 of grant funding for our proof-of-concept trial, having articulated our vision and project to Damian Waite, Chairman of WASOT-UK. Our project chimed with their strategic aims and objectives, given their experience and relationships with the OGRA Foundation. All travel expenses associated with the trial (flights, accommodation and subsistence) were paid for by our IED team and were kept separate from the grant funding received. On 5th July 2013, we pitched to the WASOT-UK Board of trustees and have been successful in securing a further donation of £10,000 from a private donor. Following the next phase of our trials, we hope to be in a position to make funding applications to global grant investors including the Gates Foundation, Water Aid and UNICEF. 5.2 Financing, Sustainability, the future roadmap – our 5 year vision For the purposes of our prototyping and proof-of-concept trial, we developed a financing model based on capital expenditure and running costs (Appendix 11). From this, we established a prototype cost per unit of £920 and a cost per litre of water of 57 pence. This was based on the following assumptions: • • •

400 children receiving one litre of water per day (based on a school year of 200 days) UV light needing to be replaced on an annual basis Activated charcoal needing to be replaced every after every 1,000 litres of water.

5.3 Current business model Figure 19: Social Enterprise in the Charitable Sector

Figure 11: Social Enterprise in the charitable sector

TECHNOLOGY Smart technology into a new ecosystem. Matching innovative design with local capacity Building Programmes

CO-CREATION Seed-corn grant funding to prove the principle and test the proposition

BENEFITS Landed phase 1 trial unit cost 1,200 with benefits of clean water for 400 kids

Funding & SROI based on evidence

18    


6. Financing, sustainability, the future road map – our five year vision All calculations are based on local market research, local expert interviews and extensive unit cost analysis for our technical specification. All estimates have been refined following the on the ground prototyping and further research on potential suppliers. Appendix 10 provides a cost breakdown against the technical specification for us to perform the next phase of the trial and outlines the design improvements/objectives.

Our next phase of work will capture data and feedback from the expanding trial to inform future design and business model elaboration. Following the final IED workshop, we were invited by Nick Leon (Head of Service Design, RCA) to discuss developing our project further through an innovation incubation workshop. This is an exceptional opportunity, which we were delighted to accept. Figure 12: Droplet routes to value, the workshop with Nick Leon and Nick Coutts DROPLET ROUTES TO VALUE 10 JULY 2013 Evaluate kit options

Set up knowledge base

Identify data sources

Set up risk register

Draft IP strstegy

Select methods: - agile - QA

Perform value chain analysis

Run opportunity assessment

Draft policies and culture, practice and ethics

Cost bill of materials for kits

Design packaging

Devise system for testing water

Develop education programmes

Specify profile of suitable community

Devise health indicators

Analyse funding options

Calculate capability and capacity metrics

Write sponsor plan

Draft business case for WaterAid

Complete segmentation and competitive analysis

Set up governance process

OBJECTIVES

Capture behaviour changes

Platform tested PURPOSE Provide clean water to rural communities

Evidence base operating GOAL Establish a system that can scale to cover >50% of suitable communities by end of 2016

Design tests

Profile partners: development deployment

Plan routes to market

Design organisation

Design data presentation

Specify attributes of open platform

Investigate supply chain options

Invent community business model

Deployment model tested

VALUES Integrity Evidence Education Social enterprise Devise way of assessing readiness of community to engage

Draft headcount plan

Set up qualification criteria for site

Identify competences : local and central

Devise demand generation process

Go tp market plan validated

Draft roles local and central

Team recruited

WE WILL ALWAYS Caputure value locally Create value together Avoid duplication of resources WE WILL NEVER Go where we are not wanted Seek to maximise profits Create problems

Our next steps: • • •

Trial expansion, evaluation and development of our collaboration with WASOT-UK and the OGRA Foundation Further development of global stakeholder networks, including ongoing discussions with WaterAid Business model scrutiny and elaboration as part of the incubation process, as we combine our social enterprise principles with open platform strategies to enable partnerships, and development of commercial propositions

19    


Development of revenue-raising potential, including: Ø in-country flat-pack production, implementation and delivery (investigating a franchise model) Ø potential for raising revenue to secure sustainability for the social enterprise model. For example, selling surplus water, community-match funding programmes, and utilising additional solar energy to charge mobile phones and school electricity systems Ø development of a private household version which can be sold for profit to subsidise the social enterprise objectives, or recognised itself as a going concern commercial proposition. We have already had our first enquiry from a wealthy household in Kenya who wish to have a private system built.

Creating revenue-raising potential helps us secure sustainability and stakeholder-ownership in local communities. It also gives us critical opportunities to build a global proposition that could be costneutral and then profitable in net financial terms. By 2017, we would be seeking 1 million pounds to reach 500,000 children delivering total cost per child per litre of water of 1p. Figure 13: 5 year revenue model based on townships near and around Lake Victoria Kenya Yr 2013 Income Grant  funds

Location # units #  units  per  month Cost  of  materials  -­‐  UK  sourced Rainwater  collection  units  (80%  reqd) UV  water  purification  system

Yr 2014

Yr 2015

Yr 2016

Yr 2017

           21,000              215,510          526,781          737,100                  910,157  Kisumu  /    Kisumu    Kisumu    Kisumu   Homerbay    Siaya                                      6                                120                          360                          498                                  600                                    10                                30                                42                                        50              10,130                    4,896

Cost of  materials  -­‐  China  sourced Rainwater  collection  units  (80%  reqd) UV  water  purification  system

Kisumu

population 28% children

             1,000,000                      280,000

320 per school

                                     875

Homerbay population 28% children

                   125,000                            35,000

320 per school

                                     109

population 28% children

             1,080,000                      302,400

320 per school

                                     945

                 81,043          243,130          336,329                  405,216                    21,648              64,944              89,839                  108,240 Siaya

Local Project  Mgr labour  costs  l ocally  (104  per  unit) Direct  cost Maintenance  costs Cumulative  maintenance  cost Overheads  UK

                 4,800                          626              20,453                          547                          547                            -­‐

                     4,800                    12,528              120,019                    10,944                    11,491                    84,000

                 4,800              37,584          350,458              32,832              44,323          132,000

                 9,600              51,991          487,760              45,418              89,741          159,600

                         9,600                      62,640                  585,696                      54,720                  144,461                  180,000

Total cost  per  unit Total  cost  per  child  per  yr Total  cost  per  child  per  l tr

                 3,500                        1,796                    1,463                    1,480                            1,517 £10.94 £5.61 £4.57 £4.63 £4.74 £0.03 £0.01 £0.01 £0.01 £0.01

Cumulative #  of  children  accessing  clean  water

                 1,920                    40,320          155,520          314,880                  506,880

The roof  catchment  for  the  volume  of  water  required  is  250  s q  metres  given  a  rainfall  of  1.2  metres   annually(Kisumu)  and  could  be  achieved  with  two  125  s q  metre  roofs  of  5  by  25  metres  each  draining  into  a   10,000  litre  tank.

20    


Our 5 year vision is: "To design, build and deliver affordable, efficient and sustainable community-based UV-solar water purification systems, harvesting rainwater and solar energy to enable thousands of children in developing countries to access clean, safe drinking water - with corresponding health, social and economic benefits." Figure 14: Future roadmap

 21    


APPENDICES Appendix 1: Expert Bio-Sketches and Profiles Appendix 2: Models used for developing our system solution Appendix 3: Local market research in Kenya Appendix 4: Ethnographic research in Kenya Appendix 5: Existing technologies (WaterAid) Appendix 6: WHO guidelines for sources of domestic drinking water Appendix 7: Detailed description of prototype experimentation process Appendix 8: Technical specification and materials for prototyping in Kenya Appendix 9: Digital prototype and step-by-step guide to system and design Appendix 10: Second trial in Kenya Appendix 11: Costing model Appendix 12: IED workshop presentations and pitch video Appendix 13: Acronyms and abbreviations

22    


Appendix 1: Expert Bio-Sketches and Profiles We engaged with the following experts throughout our IED project. All experts provided detailed advice, commentary and critique on different aspects of our proposed design and problem definition. Dr Lyad Al-Attar – MBA Student Dr. Lyad Al-Attar is a contact made during the MBA international study tour in China. Dr. Lyad has commercial contacts in the Middle East and is currently involved in air purification, but thinks his customers would want a solution for the water purification using UV light. Dr. Lyad has provided provisional advise on broader commercial opportunities. Mr. Paul Grundy – Specialist water and electronic engineer in water systems Paul Grundy is a specialist with +40 years’ experience and qualifications in Engineering and Mathematics HNC. He also qualified in electrics and electronic engineering. He started his life working in an R&D department for Gardner engines designing and making prototype engines. From this position he moved to Brimar solutions where he was responsible for the machinery associate with water purification to aid the preparation and manufacture of defence systems. Paul travelled to Kisumu for the implementation of the first prototype. Mr. Trevor Honeyman – Specialist in Water Purification Systems (health protection experience) Trevor Honeyman is a specialist in water purification systems having spent all of his professional life in the pharmaceutical industry, initially spending seventeen years with GSK. During that time, Trevor experienced life as an Analyst in the Quality Control laboratories, as a Process Development Chemist in the optimisation of Vitamin B12 manufacture, and latterly, as a Technical Development Chemist specialising in all aspects of pharmaceutical water systems. Trevor has advised the UK Health Protection Agency (now Public Health England) on health protection issues relating to water and provided expert training to a number of regulatory bodies. For more information on Trevor, please visit http://www.honeyman.co.uk (Accessed 28th June 2013) Dr. Michael Marks MBE – Medical Specialist (expertise and experience in developing world) Mike has over thirty years' experience working in the primary healthcare market, and is considered a global expert in East African development. He is currently co-opted advisor to the Minister of Health at the States of Jersey Health and Social Services, and was formerly International Medical Advisor at Direct Relief International. He was awarded an MBE in the Queens’ Honours list in 2008 for services to establishing primary health care in Africa, and continues to work with indigenous NGOs and Government in East Africa to achieve this goal, focussing on health system reform. Mike provided expert advice and insights throughout the project. Luca Marten-Perolino – Programme Manager, Cesvi Luca Marten-Perolino is a consultant with over 10 years’ field experience working in water sanitation as a project manager, programme coordinator and emergency coordinator. Alex Nash – Principal consultant at Atkins Ltd (Water and Environment Department) Alex Nash is a principal consultant in the water and environment department of Atkins Ltd. With 15 years professional experience, he specialises in transaction advice, economic regulation and water and sanitation in developing countries. OGRA Foundation – Local Kenyan NGO (local partner for IED, Innovating Water project) OGRA Foundation is a Kenyan Non-governmental Organisation founded in 2000 as a youth development group. In 2005, it was elevated to a fully-fledged NGO to expand its reach in Kenya. The Foundation works hand-in-hand with Partners to improve health by combating HIV and AIDS, TB, Malaria and other preventable infections and diseases, through integrated socio-economic and cultural development in the fight against poverty. For our IED project, OGRA agreed to be our local partner to make Innovating Water and Droplet a practical reality on the ground in Kisumu.

23    


Mr. Darren Salt – Professional Graphics Designer (social enterprise experience) Darren Salt is a professional graphics designer specialising in animation design, prototyping and graphical simulations. He studied Architecture at the University of Bath and has over 8 years of experience as an architectural and graphics design consultant. Darren produced the digital prototype for this project. Richard Tully – Engineer (expertise and experience with design and innovation systems) Richard Tully is a colleague of Dr. Mike Marks, having worked his entire career as an engineer in developing markets. Richard has held the position of Head of Design and Development Engineering at Diamedica, a global medical manufacturing company producing and supplying specialised equipment for in challenging environments around the world. Richard provided conceptual advice on project initiation. Helen Qi – Country Coordinator for China – Splash International (Not for Profit Organisation) Helen Qi is Country Coordinator for China for Splash International a not for profit organisation specialising in institutional capacity building and filtration water systems. Their mission is to change the lives of vulnerable children in impoverished urban areas by providing clean, safe drinking water to orphanages, schools, children’s hospitals, street shelters, and rescue homes. Splash International operate in India, Nepal, China, USA, Ethiopia, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam. Damian Waite – Chairman of the Board of Trustees – WASOT-UK Damian Waite is Chairman of the Board of Trustees of WASOT-UK, and former Head of the GSK Pulse programme. Damian has expert personal experience of Kenyan development programmes, managing a number of operations with the OGRA Foundation, which is closely affiliated with WASOTUK having historically acted as the UK-based fundraising arm of the Kenyan NGO. Damian, on behalf of WASOT and the trustee board, enabled Innovating Water to access the grant funding for the first phase of our prototype field testing, and remains involved as we progress to phase 2. Wateraid UK – UK NGO (assisting with design advice) WaterAid UK is a UK based NGO specialising in water. Its stated aims include providing clean, drinkable water to developing countries and local communities. WaterAid UK has provided insights and expert advice on existing water purification technologies and specifically the viability and feasibility of our design using UV technology.

24    


Appendix 2: Models used for developing our system solution Model 1: The six step problem solving tool 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.

Seek and observe unsolved problems Explain and define problems Brainstorm ideas and solutions Organise and synthesise your ideas Evaluate and select ideas Plan how to implement selected ideas

Source: Clarysse B & Kiefer S (2011) Model 2: The ‘double diamond’ design process model

Source: Design Council (2005) – www.designcouncil.org.uk/designprocess  (Accessed 28th June 2013). Using the double diamond framework in our design process helped us to explore and address the actual issues in our target area. We started out researching the broader problem of access to clean drinking water in the Kisumu area using both qualitative and quantitative methods thanks to our local partner the OGRA Foundation. At the same time we tested our initial ideas and concepts against those insights and findings. This insight gathering helped us formulate a refined problem statement, making sure we addressed the actual problem. We then diverged from the problem statement using brainstorming and other ideation methods to explore potential solutions. After choosing a direction for our solution we diverged again into refining and prototyping.

25    


Appendix 3: Local market research in Kenya 1. Questionnaire for problem definition survey About you 1. Are you male or female? 2. How many people live in your house? 3. What is your household income per week / month? About where you live 4. Where do you live? 5. What is your house made of? 6. What is the height of your house? 7. Do you have access to electricity at your house? 8. Have you ever suffered from a flood or drought where you live? If yes, how often? 9. How far do you live from the nearest large water source? (e.g. river, lake, stream etc…) 10. Do you ever have to go without water? Water collection 11. How do you get drinking water for you and your family? 12. Do you capture rain water for drinking? If yes, how do you do this? How much water does this produce per week? 13. Do you collect water yourself? If yes, how often? How much do you collect? Where do you go to find water? How much do you pay? 14. Do you have water delivered to your house? If yes, how do you have water delivered? How do you store it? How much do you pay? Cost 15. How much money do you spend on water in total per week? 16. Do you buy bottled water for drinking? If yes, how much does it cost? 17. How much would you be prepared to pay (per week / month) for access to safe drinking water? Water purification 18. Do you worry about having to drink dirty water which might be unhealthy for you and/or your family? 19. Do you boil water to purify it for drinking? If yes, how often? How do you boil the water? How much does it cost to do this? 2. Full results data and analysis All data and analysis from the surveys can be accessed via the following link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/einx1oao64wxuyt/Innovating%20Water%20%20Report%20Quantitative%20Analysis%20Local%20Market%20Research%20%20Findings%20and%20Analysis.xls This link contains an Excel document with the quantitative analysis and descriptive statistics for each question.

26    


Appendix 4: Ethnographic research in Kenya 4.1 Questions for local insight gathering (sent to OGRA Foundation) The questions used for our local insight gathering can be accessed via the following link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/0n3o3ebi8n81qx9/Questions%20for%20local%20insight%20gathering.doc x This link contains a Word document which includes two sets of questions: ‘rural community household’ and ‘local community school’ 4.2 Data from local insight gathering The data from our local insight gathering can be accessed via the following link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/5r2egqu8yyyo5na/Innovating%20Water%20%20Data%20from%20local%20insight%20gathering%20-%20Kisumu%2C%20Kenya.xlsx This link contains an Excel document with two worksheets: ‘household’ data and ‘school’ data. 4.3 Personas Sylvester (age 73) He lives with his wife Jane and 7 other family members They live in a mud house with a corrugated iron roof and grow their own food to eat During the wet season they collect rain water from the roof in a jerry can In the dry season, Jane walks one hour to the borehole 3 times each day to collect water for the family It is hard work as the jerry can is heavy (20 litres) and she gets tired They boil water from the bore hole but still sometimes get ill from it

Pamela (age 38) She lives on a homestead with 7 houses (a total of ~50 people). It is a close community where everybody is taken care of. Pamela usually collects water from the borehole each day but sometimes pays somebody if she is ill or too tired. She thinks the water is clean but says it tastes salty . She finds it difficult to keep the water clean as her jerry cans are dirty and old. Pamela prays each day for clean, pure water that is close to her homestead.

27    


Gabriel (age 6) He is one of 500 pupils at Lisuka primary school in SW Kisumu. He walks to school each day with his five brothers and sisters. They get free lunch and water at school. During the wet season the school collects water in a big underground tank. In the dry season a man who works for the school collects water from a borehole 1km away. Gabriel’s mum, Yvonne, is a member of the school management committee She worries that the water from the borehole is not clean as Gabriel gets ill sometimes.

28    


Appendix 5: Existing technologies (WaterAid)

Source: WaterAid (2013). Obtained from expert meeting 26th March 2013.

29    


Appendix 6: WHO guidelines for sources of domestic drinking water The list contains a parameter guide value stipulating the maximum allowable, which should also be placed within the local context. • • •

pH 6.5 – 8.5 Suspended solids 30 (mg/L) Nitrate - NO3 10 (mg/L)

Ammonia – NH3 0.5 (mg/L)

Nitrite – NO2 3 (mg/L)

• • • • • • • • • • • •

Total Dissolved Solids 1200 (mg/L) Scientific name (E. Coli) Nil/100 ml Fluoride 1.5 (mg/L) Phenols Nil (mg/L) Arsenic 0.01 (mg/L) Cadmium 0.01 (mg/L) Lead 0.05 (mg/L) Selenium 0.01 (mg/L) Copper 0.05 (mg/L) Zinc 1.5 (mg/L) Alkyl benzyl sulphonates 0.5 (mg/L) Permanganate value (PV) 1.0 (mg/L).

Source: World Health Organization (WHO 2012), A Manual for Economic Assessment of DrinkingWater Assessments, WHO Publications 2012, ANNEX 1, Supporting documentation to the Guidelines.

30    


Appendix 7: Detailed description of prototype experimentation process Figure 15: WHO guidelines requirements for safe drinking water

Source: The World Health Organization (WHO), 2011. It is noteworthy that WHO regulations confer more robust and rigorous standards versus the NEMA regulations. However, the WHO advises that the application of its guidelines should account for: 1) socio-cultural, 2) environmental, and 3) economic circumstances pertinent to the national setting of individual countries. Given that we want our design to be internationally compliant and thereby facilitate a higher standard of water purification, we decided to focus our prototyping around meeting WHO regulations considering the local school setting. As part of future trialling and protocols, these guidelines will be utilised to inform water testing/purification. This also informed our "on the ground" prototyping and local research (see section 3.6), particularly water safety plans with a value proposition defining the health-based targets. It is our intention for independent surveillance to be conducted by local authorities, but in the first instance the OGRA Foundation. Critical next steps are discussed as part of our future roadmap (see Chapter 6). 7.1. Appropriate treatment process The following table provides a summary of the main causes of water contamination and some potential treatment processes for water purification.

 31    


Table 1: Causes of water contamination and treatment processes Contamination

Example

Treatment

Biological

Pathogens such as E. Coli

UV radiation, chorine, Bio-film settling filtration, distillation

Chemical

Arsenic, fertilizers

Varies (ex. ferric hydroxide)

Aesthetic

High turbidity, coloured, debris

Settling, coagulation or flocculation , simple sand filtration, distillation

Source: Fawell J & Nieuwenhuijsen, 2003. A key aspect to our innovation concerns the appropriate treatment process for water purification. Research shows this depends on the following key variables: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7)

source scale size safety standards cost/affordability maintenance.

Infrastructure and local context are also key considerations. These factors determine the suitability of a given treatment process, i.e. sedimentation/coagulation, filtration, ion exchange, adsorption or disinfection. Given our desire to have a natural source in the form of rainwater and a technology that would be scalable but smaller than current industrial technologies, pre-filtration and purification were deemed the most appropriate initial treatment processes. However, given that our innovation is intended to deliver clean drinking water, safety and standards are essential and hence the absolute need for a disinfection step using the UV technology. Thus, it was concluded that for the purposes of prototyping our design would amalgamate filtration and disinfection using a sequential, step-wise process. We also needed to consider continuous powering of the UV light. Kisumu is prone to regular power shortages. 7.2. Prototyping Having established existing technologies and minimum requirements for water purification, we started to advance our design specification focusing on water treatment, technological application and costeffectiveness. As a cornerstone of our methodology for "proof-of-concept", we utilised prototyping to: 1) demonstrate functionality and inform our design 2) gather additional expert feedback and insights 3) aid communication and presentation of our idea. Prototyping was sequenced into distinct phases; each of which is described below. 7.2.1. Paper prototyping Using the information from our insight gathering, evidence synthesis and problem observation, we started developing our prototype in "hand-sketched" form. This involved several iterations and utilised the opinions of our various experts, including WaterAid and our engineering advisers. The essence of the prototyping focused around securing a credible and innovative design utilising existing technology firmly within the context of local requirements pertinent to Kenya. Following expert advice, we sequenced our design into three key steps (Figure 9).

 32    


Figure 16: Initial prototype for proposed design

The first step would involve pre-filtering to remove sedimentation and large objects contaminating the water, i.e. an initial water screening phase. The second step would involve a more refined and precise filtration process using calcined diatomaceous earth through a gravity-fed filter. As a final step to ensure disinfection, the water would be passed through UV purification to remove 99.99% of bacteria. The water would then flow through a ‘controlled flow’ rate tap equivalent to the specifications of flow rate through the UV light tunnel. 7.2.2. Experimentation The primary objective of our innovation is to develop a water purification system that removes all bacteria, taste and colouration, at an affordable cost with relatively low maintenance. To this end, we conducted a series of real-life experiments to aid basic proof-of-concept and inform our "handsketched" prototyping (Figure 10). Appendix 7 includes a detailed description of each stage of the experimentation process.

33    


Figure 17: Photographs of the different stages from our experimentation process

7.2.3. Key conclusions The observations from our experiments confirmed the need to test a rainwater harvesting system utilising inactivated charcoal, which would neutralise taste in water and then pass the water through a controlled flow UV light to kill 99.99% bacteria5. Our research of existing technologies and expert interviews revealed that such a system would be relatively low cost when sourcing products in bulk and low maintenance – the activated charcoal would only need to be replaced after every 1000 litres6. 7.5. Design development Based on the experimentation phase and expert conversations, it was decided to augment the essence of the design from the fourth experiment. We worked up two specific designs as delineated in Figures 18 and 19. Figure 18: Design concept 1

External house    wall

                                                                                                                      5 6

th

Source: Water Aid (2013). Obtained from expert meeting 26 March 2013.    Source: Obtained from expert meetings (see Appendix 1) and local insight during proof-of-concept trial.  

34    


Figure 19: Design concept 2

Charcoal

Figure 18 depicts our chosen design concept. This approach is considered most appropriate to the Kenyan local climate, particularly Kisumu, given consistent rainfall projections. Indeed, the supply of regular rainwater is fundamental to our design. As Figures 20 and 21 show, the projected average rainfall in Kisumu naturally lends itself to a rain harvesting model/system, which is consistent with the expert advice received on the water treatment process and the desirability of rainwater in this regard. Our chosen design is therefore apposite to this environmental and geological context. Figure 20: Kisumu climate graph and average projected rainfall*

Source: Taken from World Climates, http://www.world-climates.com/city-climate-kisumukenya-africa/, accessed, 30th June 2013. * Average temperature throughout the year in degrees Celsius and average rainfall in millimetres.     35    


Figure 21: Amount of rainfall (millimetres and inches) and number of rainy days in Kisumu across the year

Source: Taken from World Climates, http://www.world-climates.com/city-climate-kisumukenya-africa/, accessed, 30th June 2013. 7.5.1. Design imperatives To tailor our design, we engaged in another round of expert interviews with our advisory team (Appendix 1). This was intended to highlight key design imperatives to adapt the prototyping from real-life experiments and to realise our preferred design within the local Kisumu context. Following this round of discussions, we identified the design considerations central to advancing our innovation: •

• • • • • • •

The need for the solar panels to be securely fastened to the roof to minimise theft. Thus, our system will need to be bolted down from inside the roof with the bolts being covered and inaccessible. All wiring will need to go from the solar panel to the battery. For safety reasons, this should preferably be stored in the roof. From the battery, wiring should come down the internal wall; to the wall mounted ring automotive 150watt inverter to convert the power source from 12volts to 240volts. From the inverter, wiring will need to go directly to the UV filter for power. The drum needs to be cylinder-shaped to minimise internal bacteria build-up. Otherwise, this will defeat the objective of our design. A removable draw needs to be situated in the bottom of the drum to hold 4kg inactivated carbon and be replaced every 1000 litres. UV light needs to be mounted to the bottom of the drum and secured to the wall such that there is no risk from overuse rendering the system obsolete or broken. Water from the roof will be stored externally from the house/school and an inflow pipe from the external water butt will need to fill the internal drum via gravity. This will require appropriate implementation/positioning. Stop valves should be fitted on all water butt outflow points for safety and maintenance when required

In addition, we conducted some power calculations for the purposes of the UV technology, which are detailed in Appendix 8. These practical imperatives informed our next key output: an "on the ground" prototype locally built and developed. 7.6. "On the ground" prototype Based on the experiments and technical design, it was decided to further proof our concept by building a local prototype "on the ground" in Kenya. A member of the team (Damien Grundy) and expert water engineer (Paul Grundy) travelled to Kisumu for a five day round trip to realise this objective (Figure 22). Two days were spent on site building the system and the remaining three days were utilised to test the system for technical verification and technological proof-of-concept. Appendix 8 provides a detailed technical specification of the different components used to build our prototype in Kenya and their associated cost. All materials were locally sourced by the OGRA Foundation.

36    


Figure 22: Damien and Paul Grundy in Kisumu building our “on the ground” prototype

7.6.1. Prototyping findings It was assumed that all prototype parts could be sourced locally, as this was communicated via Skype and email sessions with local people on the ground. Unfortunately, during the visit to Kisumu it was evident that standard British Standard Parts (BSP) were not available. Considerable time was used during the visit to adapt the parts to enable successful implementation. The key conclusion from this exercise is that during commercialisation of the project and future implementation, a flat pack designed product with variable length piping that can be cut to length will need to be made available to ship to the point of implementation. This will enable smooth adaptations depending on the varying conditions of site surroundings. It was also advised that initial safety assessments should be performed on site before implementation. Existing rainwater harvesting butts should be fitted with stop valves to ensure systems can be isolated if faults occur. 7.7. Digital prototype To aid communication of our design, and building on the outputs from our "on the ground" prototyping in Kenya, we commissioned a professional graphic designer with social enterprise experience to develop a digital prototype. See Appendix 9 for details including a step-by-step guide.

  37    


Appendix 8: Technical specification and materials for prototyping in Kenya Power Calculations for UV light To power the 15watt UV light, we calculated that we would require power from a sustainable source and hence the desirability of solar power. Small solar panels provide 16v to power a 12v car battery. To power the UV light, we needed to calculate the required Amps/Hr (I). Requirements Watts = Volts x Amps 15W(light) = 12v(Battery) x Amps 15/12 = 1.25 Amps / Hr. Solution A 16v Solar panel to charge a 12v battery will provide 0.87Amps/Hr at 100% efficiency. At 85% efficiency, 0.63Amps will be achievable for each hour of full sun. Therefore, in summary two 16v panels will be required to efficiently power the 15Watt UV bulb (1.25/0.63 = ~2). Where electricity is available, the power cable can be used to plug directly into the mains. 1. UV lighting Flow Rate: 1GPM drinking water Power ratings 220/240VAC 10W Dimension of chamber Length 260 x depth 50mm Max Pressure 10 BarG (140psi) Test Pressure 15 BarG Chamber Construction 304 Stainless Steel Standard Connection – 1/4" Male Thread with Adapter fitting for 1/4" flexible tube. UV replacement lamp for UV 3.9WL Replacement bulb for product UV3.9 compatible with EMWC 3.9 litre per minute UV filter system.   2. Inverter Ring automotive 150W power source Inverter with USB (Ring Automotive). Technical details • 150w Inverter • 12v DC to 240v AC • Includes 2amp USB • Lightweight durable ABS • Supplied with DC plug   TRIXES Car Battery Clip-on Cigarette Lighter Socket Adaptor 12v • Designed to add 12v/cigarette lighter socket to car, boat, caravan, or battery • Clamps directly onto your battery - Ideal for any accessory with a 12v cigarette lighter plug fitted • Power socket with short 40cm approximately lead with crocodile clips.     38    


3. Solar panel 80W AKT Solar Panel Kit with 10A charge controller and 5m wires – Complete kit for a 12V system.

Technical details • Complete 80 Watt Solar kit with AKT Solar panel, 5m cabling and advanced 10A charge controller to ensure your battery is not over-charged or over-discharged. • Easy for anyone to install with clear instructions (you just need wire cutters and a mediumsized screw driver) - you can either attach it on top of an existing system or in a new standalone system. • Designed for permanent outdoor use to power 12V systems (e.g. caravan, boat, motor home, outhouse, or in a garden). • Gives enough power in summer to run a small fridge and lighting or to power a laptop or small television for up to 11 hours a day. • Panel has high performance even in low light and superior efficiency means gives full 80W of power yet still fits within a 75 x 81 cm space.   4. Solar panel roof fixings Complete set of 4 solar panel brackets for mounting solar panels on motorhomes, caravans, boats, roofs or any flat surfaces.

• • • •

Complete set of 4 aluminium brackets with bolts, nuts and washers, for mounting solar panels on flat surfaces. Perfect fit for Photonic Universe solar panels and most other solar panels. Can be used for fixing solar panels to the roofs of motorhomes, caravans, camper vans, boats or other vehicles. Specially designed profile and double bolts at the bottom prevent brackets from rotating and getting loose. Made of aluminium alloy for strong and secure fitting of your solar panels.

• 5. Battery

Leisure Battery 12v-110Ah Lucas LX31MF

       

Brand: Lucas Item weight: 27Kg Product dimensions: 17.2 x 24.2 x 33cm Item model number: LX31MF Manufacturer part number: LX31MF Amperage: 110 Amps Voltage: 12.  

39    


6. Water butt and stand Sankey 210-Litre Water Butt and Lid 210-litre capacity Complete with lid and tap Made from a minimum of 75 per cent recycled materials Use with standard stand water butt stand.

Sankey Water Butt Stand (Black) Compatible with Sankey water butts and water store Curved section at front to allow space for a watering can or bottle/cup.

7. Water carrier UN Tested For Leak And Impact Very Strong Moulding Certified For Food Grade Storage And Transport 430mm High x 230mm Deep x 280mm Wide Suitable For Stacking With Unique Interlock Mould Visible Liquid Level.     8. Activated carbon

      9. Wiring

Airmax Eco Systems 110197 Activated Carbon – 9 lbs with Mesh Bag Activated carbon has the ability to support a denser bacterial population than sand or plastic beads. It's porosity, surface area, and surface roughness is unsurpassed for bacterial colonisation. Greater efficiency for the removal of biodegradable compounds. Faster response to variations in water quality, such as concentration in biodegradable compounds, concentration in toxic organics and temperature. Typically 4-6 lbs. will treat 1,000 gallons for 2-3 months. Each 9 lb bucket comes with one mesh bag. 20 metres of 3 x 1.5mm wiring to connect the solar panel to the 12v battery and then to the 150watt inverter and finally to power the UV light via 240volts

10. Piping 2 tubes of streamline Black Label EN 1057 Copper Tube X015L-3 15mm x 3m. 5tubes of FloPlast 2M X 40mm Abs Solvent Waste Pipe.  

Additional materials: • Copper and plastic elbows • Joints to connect piping • Brackets and screws

40  


11. Stop Valve

It is important from a safety aspect to include stop valves on the outlets of tanks, this enables quick shut off if needed.  

Itemised costs of all components used for "on the ground" prototyping* ITEMS

No. of Units

Unit Cost

Amount in Ksh

1

150W Inverter

1

8,000

8,000.00

2

80W AKT Solar Kit

1

18000

18,000.00

3

10A charger Controller

1

7500

7,500.00

4

Battery 12V 100Ah

1

16000

16,000.00

5

Accessories

1

20000

20,000.00

6

210Litres tank with lid and tap

1

3000

3,000.00

7

Solar Panel Mounting bracket

1

5000

5,000.00

8

Ultra Violet replacement (lamp for UV3.9WL

1

15000

15,000.00

9

Activated carbon pellets 9kg

1

6000

6,000.00

10

3/4 PVC Pipes 'D'

1

0

0.00

11

4' PVC Pipe H/D

1

0

0.00

12

7 Tonnes sand

1

0

0.00

13

Ballast 7Tonnes

1

0

0.00

14

Cement

1

0

0.00

15

Murram 7Tonnes

1

0

0.00

16

4' PVC Bend

1

0

0.00

17

PVC Gum

1

0

0.00

18

1' Longthread

1

0

0.00

19

1' Back Nuts

1

0

0.00

20

1' F/socket

1

0

0.00

21

Bosswhite 400gm

1

0

0.00

22

1' Gate valves

1

0

0.00

23

3/4 Garden taps

1

0

0.00

24

1'PPR Tee

1

0

0.00

25

1' PPR Pipes

0

0.00

26

1'3/4 R/Socket

250

1,500.00

6

100,000.00 Miscell cost

15,000.00

Labour Cost 15%

15,000.00

TOTAL COST in KES COST IN POUNDS

130,000.00 125 rate

£1,040.00

* All items sourced and procured by the OGRA Foundation. All items funded from Wasot grant funding.

  Source: All images and specification information taken from www.amazon.co.uk, Accessed 25th May 2013.     41    


Appendix 9: Digital prototype and step-by-step guide to system and design Figure 23: Digital prototype

This video is available on the following link. https://www.dropbox.com/s/h0pfysa4wqk1gm7/Droplet_Digital%20Prototyping.mp4

Step-by-step guide •

The rain falls on a corrugated roof and the water runs down the channels into the guttering, this flows down the gutter and into a meshed downspout to deter any foreign objects following the water flow. This needs to be checked regularly and cleaned.   The water flows into the top of a water butt (typically 100k litres) where the water is stored for later use. This should also be cleaned periodically; advisable every 6 months. The water outlet is situated at the bottom of the tank to enable gravitational flow at a per square inch (PSI) of about 5, i.e. reasonable pressure flow.

The outlet should be fitted with a stop valve for safety reasons and then have a 3 watt bar fitted directly after the tap. This enables us to have a home pipe fitted (if required) to fill other water containers used for toilet or general hand washing.

The other outlet is piped to a separate tank where water is transferred by piping into the top of a storage tank around 100-150 litres. This water has activated carbon inside to take away any unwanted taste from the water.

The water butt should also be fitted with a mesh at the top so that particles are removed from the flowing water from one tank to the other.

The outlet from this tank at the bottom, to enable gravitational flow, has a stop valve fitted for safety and then a control flow tap to make sure that the water flowing does not exceed the desired flow rate as it passes through the UV light. 42  


The UV light should be firmly fitted so that it cannot be moved or looked at, because it will damage eyes with continued viewing. A small view hole should be available to check that the light is still working although this bulb should be replaced every 12 months because the effectiveness of the bulb deteriorates over its estimated life expectancy.

Periodic testing of the water should be undertaken at a certain the levels of bacteria in the water – advisable every 3 months.

From the UV light, there is a pipe leading to a tap which can be turned on and off to draw the purified water for drinking.

For powering the UV light, the sun’s rays give heat to the solar panels on the roof, which are securely fastened to ensure they are protected from potential theft. A 1.5mm cable takes the energy through a flow controller into a 12v battery where the energy is stored. From the 12v battery, the energy is cabled and transferred through an inverter to transform the power into 240volts, which can then power the UV light up to 24 hours.

43    


Appendix 10: Second trial in Kenya 10.1 Proposed technical specification

Budget for  installation  of  UV  water  purification  unit  at  Rabuor  primary  school   Unit Cost

10

3/4 PVC Pipes 'D'

20

500

10,000.00

11

4' PVC Pipe H/D

10

1600

16,000.00

12

7 Tonnes sand

7

1000

7,000.00

13

Ballast 7Tonnes

7

1000

7,000.00

14

Cement

3

900

2,700.00

15

Murram 7Tonnes

7

1000

7,000.00

16

4' PVC Bend

8

450

3,600.00

17

PVC Gum

1

1300

1,300.00

18

1' Longthread

6

250

1,500.00

19

1' Back Nuts

6

200

1,200.00

20

1' F/socket

8

250

2,000.00

21

Bosswhite 400gm

2

700

1,400.00

22

1' Gate valves

3

1500

4,500.00

23

3/4 Garden taps

3

1500

4,500.00

24

1'PPR Tee

6

250

1,500.00

25

1' PPR Pipes

7

1250

8,750.00

                                                 

26

1'3/4 R/Socket

6

300

1,800.00

329,250.00

ITEMS

No. of Units

Amount in Ksh

1

150W Inverter

1

8,000

8,000.00

2

80W AKT Solar Kit

1

18000

18,000.00

3

10A charger Controller

1

7500

7,500.00

4

Battery 12V 100Ah

1

16000

16,000.00

5

Accessories

1

20000

20,000.00

6

210Litres tank with lid and tap

1

3000

3,000.00

7

Solar Panel Mounting bracket

1

5000

5,000.00

8

Ultra Violet replacement (lamp for UV3.9WL

1

50000

50,000.00

9

10,000Litres water tanks

1

120000

120,000.00

Labour Cost 30% TOTAL COST in KES COST IN POUNDS

428,025.00   3,424.20   98,775.00

44    


10.2 Design criteria The objective of this trial would be to augment the findings from our first trial in Kenya to better understand the application of the technology. Specifically, we want to embed the practicality and value of innovation as a deliverable, sustainable and impactful water purification system. This trial seeks to provide demonstrable evidence against the following criteria:

1. Feed-water • How our design aligns with local water source options combined with considerations for quality, reliability, abundance, ease of collection and location. 2. Rainwater • How our design optimises rainwater collection utilising local school infrastructure for storage and quality preservation, pre-treatment and bacteria reduction. 3. Final purification • How our design is a preferred method for removing 99.99% of bacteria and thus the desirability of applying UV technology to maintain accessible clean water. 4. Overall system • How our design accentuates the advantages of rainwater harvesting versus other applications and existing technologies. 5. Maintenance and system support • How our system would be easily maintained in the local environment and associated risk assessments to enhance sustainability and limit dysfunction. 6. Training and user familiarisation • How our system is user-friendly, accessible and easy to understand so local people can readily operate the system within the local environment. 7. Economics • How our design is economic and viable in the short, medium and long term and how this links directly to our value proposition and model around social return on investment.

45    


Appendix 11: Costing model

46    


Appendix 11b: 5 year revenue model based on townships near and around Lake Victoria Kenya. Yr 2013 Income Grant  funds

Location # units #  units  per  month Cost  of  materials  -­‐  UK  sourced Rainwater  collection  units  (80%  reqd) UV  water  purification  system

Yr 2014

Yr 2015

Yr 2016

Yr 2017

           21,000              215,510          526,781          737,100                  910,157  Kisumu  /    Kisumu    Kisumu    Kisumu   Homerbay    Siaya                                      6                                120                          360                          498                                  600                                    10                                30                                42                                        50              10,130                    4,896

Cost of  materials  -­‐  China  sourced Rainwater  collection  units  (80%  reqd) UV  water  purification  system

Kisumu

population 28% children

             1,000,000                      280,000

320 per school

                                     875

Homerbay population 28% children

                   125,000                            35,000

320 per school

                                     109

population 28% children

             1,080,000                      302,400

320 per school

                                     945

                 81,043          243,130          336,329                  405,216                    21,648              64,944              89,839                  108,240 Siaya

Local Project  Mgr labour  costs  l ocally  (104  per  unit) Direct  cost Maintenance  costs Cumulative  maintenance  cost Overheads  UK

                 4,800                          626              20,453                          547                          547                            -­‐

                     4,800                    12,528              120,019                    10,944                    11,491                    84,000

                 4,800              37,584          350,458              32,832              44,323          132,000

                 9,600              51,991          487,760              45,418              89,741          159,600

                         9,600                      62,640                  585,696                      54,720                  144,461                  180,000

Total cost  per  unit Total  cost  per  child  per  yr Total  cost  per  child  per  l tr

                 3,500                        1,796                    1,463                    1,480                            1,517 £10.94 £5.61 £4.57 £4.63 £4.74 £0.03 £0.01 £0.01 £0.01 £0.01

Cumulative #  of  children  accessing  clean  water

                 1,920                    40,320          155,520          314,880                  506,880

The roof  catchment  for  the  volume  of  water  required  is  250  s q  metres  given  a  rainfall  of  1.2  metres   annually(Kisumu)  and  could  be  achieved  with  two  125  s q  metre  roofs  of  5  by  25  metres  each  draining  into  a   10,000  litre  tank.

47    


Appendix 12: IED workshop presentations and pitch video 12.1 IED workshop presentations Our final presentation slides from the four IED workshops can be accessed via the following links. Workshop 1 – January 2013: https://www.dropbox.com/s/jvlb9a2nwbp19kj/Innovating%20Water%20-%20workshop%201%20%20January%202013.ppt Workshop 2 – March 2013: https://www.dropbox.com/s/39v54ynh6sdugz3/Innovating%20Water%20-%20workshop%202%20%20March%202013.pptx Workshop 3 – April 2013: https://www.dropbox.com/s/nzp4pyr4aq5g5le/Innvating%20Water%20-%20workshop%203%20%20April%202013.ppt Workshop 4 – June 2013: https://www.dropbox.com/s/xjb7ojd4our1yrz/Innovating%20Water%20-%20workshop%204%20%20June%202013.pptx

12.2 Pitch video Our pitch video can be accessed via the following link: https://www.dropbox.com/s/0pcnavcsihwrr8g/Droplet_Pitch.mp4 We used the content of this video to secure the funding for phase 1 of our proof of concept trial in Kisumu, Kenya.

48    


Appendix 13: ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS BSP

British Standard Parts

IED

Innovation, Entrepreneurship and Design

KOP

Kenyan Orphan Project

M&A

Mergers and acquisitions

NEMA

National Environment Management Authority

NGO

Non-governmental organisation

PSI

Per Square Inch

RCA

Royal College of Art

SROI

Social return on investment

WHO

World Health Organization

UN

United Nations

UNICEF

United Nations Children’s Fund

UV

Ultra Violet

49    


References Amazon, www.amazon.co.uk, Accessed 25th May 2013. Clarysse B & Kiefer S (2011), The Smart Entrepreneur: How to Build for a Successful Business', Elliot and Thompson Ltd. Fawell J & Nieuwenhuijsen MJ (2003), 'Contaminants in drinking water', British Medical Bulletin 2003; 68: 199–208, Vol. 68, The British Council 2003. Howitt P et al (2012), 'Technologies for global health', The Lancet, Vol. 380 August 4, 2012. Kenyan Orphan Project (KOP, 2012), 'Health Start Progress Report: April – September 2012, http://www.kopafrica.org/userfiles/files/HealthStart%20Results%20-%20March%202013.pdf, KOP 2012, Accessed 7th June 2013. OGRA Foundation, www.ografoundation.org, Accessed 26th March 2013. Ricciardi W (2008),'The old Edward Jenner and the new public health: the future of vaccines in Europe', European Journal of Public Health, Vol. 18, No. 4, 353. United Nations (UN, 2009), UN World Water Development Report 2009. WaterAid (2013), 'Rainwater Harvesting: Technical Brief', WaterAid Official Document, http://www.wateraid.org/~/media/Publications/rainwater-harvesting.pdf, Accessed 26th March 2013. World Climate, 'Kisumu Climate', http://www.world-climates.com/city-climate-kisumu-kenya-africa/, Accessed 30th June 2013. World Health Organization (WHO 2012), A Manual for Economic Assessment of Drinking-Water Assessments, WHO Publications 2012, ANNEX 1, Supporting documentation to the Guidelines. World Health Organization (WHO, 2011), Guidelines for drinking-water quality, 2011. World Health Organization (WHO, 2005), Water for Life: Making It Happen, 2005.

50    

Profile for Irene Shih

Droplet - Business Plan  

innovatingwater.com

Droplet - Business Plan  

innovatingwater.com

Profile for ireneshih
Advertisement