1 / 9

Viability of rural water supply systems: key factors for success

Viability of rural water supply systems: key factors for success. Presentation to Rural Water Workshop 6 th March 2012 Ian Palmer PDG Based on work done for the Water Research Commission. Methodology – three scenarios. Water consumption.

eris
Download Presentation

Viability of rural water supply systems: key factors for success

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Viability of rural water supply systems: key factors for success Presentation to Rural Water Workshop 6th March 2012 Ian Palmer PDG Based on work done for the Water Research Commission

  2. Methodology – three scenarios

  3. Water consumption Some new data: big schemes in Limpopo rural areas are having to provide bulk water at levels of over 100 l/cap/day some at 150 l/cap/day for what are supposed to be public standpipe systems

  4. Capital costs

  5. Operating cost of Distribution system

  6. Cost to revenue relationship (incl bulk) Cost of bulk water taken at R7/kl

  7. A look at district WSA budgets • On average expenditure by these DMs on ‘governance and administration’ amounts to 33% of total operating expenditure. • This ranges from 18% for uThungulu, which happens to be the best performing DM according to DCoG criteria, to 50% for Mopani which is in the bottom 25% in terms of performance. • 36% is spent on water supply which is the core activity for these DMs. • Some DMs with stronger urban cores, such as Ugu and Uthukela collect substantial revenue from water supply tariffs: 65% and 73% of total revenue respectively. • Others, such as Mopani, Sisonke and Greater Sekhukhune collect very little (0%, 8% and 5% respectively).

  8. Conclusions relating to finance (1) The primary conclusion from this analysis is that if service levels are limited to public standpipes and sound management arrangements are in place, rural water supply systems can be viable. However, this is related to an important associated conclusion: if yard connections occur, whether these be planned or unauthorised, it is not possible for the system to be viable unless a well developed management arrangement is put in place to limit water use to the free basic water limit and to meter and bill those who use above the free basic limit. Community based partners are shown to be a sound way to provide the necessary management.

  9. Technical capacity in 21 districts which are WSAs MDB capacity survey results: 13 of 21 DMs responding to date have 18 registered professional engineers between them. Extrapolating this optimistically to all 21 districts gives 29 registered professional engineers. As a comparison Ekurhuleni has 141. The value of water services infrastructure in these 21 districts is estimated at R80 billion. They are responsible for providing water to 15 million people.

More Related