h2go final report 041505 - stanford universitycbauburn/basecamp/d...h2go final report march 16, 2005...

Implementation PlanLarry Aller

Elise Gresch Jonathan KarpickJonathan Thomas

April 15, 2005

i

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ......................................................................................................1

Market ...........................................................................................................................2

Current Situation.....................................................................................................................6

The Opportunity: Portable Water Extraction Products .............................................................7

Composite Profiles ...................................................................................................................8

Product Description .................................................................................................... 10

Value to customer ..................................................................................................................10

Product Design ......................................................................................................................11

Manufacturing Decisions ........................................................................................................13

Positioning.............................................................................................................................13

Pricing & Social Impact..........................................................................................................14

Social Impact & Benefits for Customers ..................................................................................16

Implementation Plan................................................................................................... 18

Initial geographic focus on Maharashtra .................................................................................18

Target Markets......................................................................................................................20

Planned Financial Structure ...................................................................................................22

Business Structure .................................................................................................................24

Funding Needs .......................................................................................................................24

Pilot ......................................................................................................................................25

Partnerships ..........................................................................................................................26

Appendix A – Prototype Development .....................................................................A-1

Appendix B – Economic Model and Analysis .......................................................... B-1

Appendix C - International Development Enterprises (IDE)..................................C-1

Philosophy and Irrigation Products of IDE............................................................................C-1

Appendix D - Agriculture’s Importance in Rural India and the Issue of Water Scarcity ......................................................................................................................D-1

ii

List of Figures Figure 1 - Projected annual social impact compared with estimated required startup investment .................2 Figure 2 - 2002 Indian population..............................................................................................................3 Figure 3 - Water use in four different household wealth categories in good months ....................................3 Figure 4 - Water use in four different household wealth categories in summer months and drought.............3 Figure 5 - Distance traveled to fetch water by different household wealth categories in good months..........4 Figure 6 - Distance traveled to fetch water by different household wealth categories in summer months .....4 Figure 7 - Price sensitivity impact on treadle pump sales............................................................................5 Figure 8 - Current IDE storage and irrigation system .................................................................................6 Figure 9 - Product perception ....................................................................................................................7 Figure 10 - Product placement...................................................................................................................8 Figure 11 - Composite profile: Usha..........................................................................................................9 Figure 12 - Composite profile: Anil ...........................................................................................................9 Figure 13 - Composite profile: Raju and Narayni .....................................................................................10 Figure 14 - Exploded view of H2Go pump design ....................................................................................12 Figure 15 - H2Go one-way valve design...................................................................................................13 Figure 16 - Pump price comparison .........................................................................................................15 Figure 17 - Price savings with H2Go pump and siphon.............................................................................16 Figure 18 - Break even charts ..................................................................................................................17 Figure 19 - Annual rainfall in Maharashtra ..............................................................................................18 Figure 20 - Rainfall during the kharif (June-September) in Maharashtra ...................................................19 Figure 21 - Rainfall during rabi (October-March) in Maharashtra.............................................................19 Figure 22 - Maharashtra market size........................................................................................................21 Figure 23 - Sales by customer segment ....................................................................................................22 Figure 24 - Breakeven royalty .................................................................................................................23 Figure 25 - Breakeven portfolio size ........................................................................................................23 Figure 26 - Cost savings of integration with IDE......................................................................................24 Figure 27 - Displacement / water-lifting pump.......................................................................................A-1 Figure 28 - Displacement / water-lifting pump design ............................................................................A-2 Figure 29 - The assembled water-lifting pump .......................................................................................A-2 Figure 30 - The water-lifting pump easily lifts water over one meter ......................................................A-3 Figure 31 - Flexible seals on a water-lifting pump..................................................................................A-4 Figure 32 - Two one-way valves are fitted to a “T” junction...................................................................A-5 Figure 33 - 3-inch diameter pipe fitted with hose to test the various valve designs ..................................A-6 Figure 34 - Spring-loaded paper noise-maker valve................................................................................A-6 Figure 35 - Initial one-way valve prototypes ..........................................................................................A-7 Figure 36 - Intermediate one-way valve prototypes ................................................................................A-8 Figure 37 - Final one-way valve prototype.............................................................................................A-9 Figure 38 - Finished pump...................................................................................................................A-10 Figure 39 - Social impact analysis .........................................................................................................B-1 Figure 40 - H2Go product pricing overview ...........................................................................................B-2 Figure 41 - H2Go pump price detail .......................................................................................................B-3 Figure 42 - Price estimate for current pump ...........................................................................................B-4 Figure 43 - Product perception map.......................................................................................................B-5 Figure 44 - Product price sensitivity estimate.........................................................................................B-6 Figure 45 - Maharashtra market size......................................................................................................B-7 Figure 46 - Maharashtra penetration rate and unit sales projections ........................................................B-8 Figure 47 - Pilot financials ....................................................................................................................B-9 Figure 48 - Stand-alone financials ....................................................................................................... B-10 Figure 49 - Integrated financials .......................................................................................................... B-11 Figure 50 - Cultivators as a percentage of total workers, India 1991 .......................................................D-1

H2Go Final Report March 16, 2005

1

Executive Summary H2Go is an exciting opportunity to enhance the livelihood of the poorest families in India, with potential to create $100-$175M in social benefit each year. To achieve this benefit, H2Go is seeking $50,000 in first-round funding to pilot and roll out affordable and effective water movement tools for irrigation and farming use by rural smallholders.

Initially, H2Go will offer two products targeting different market segments: a pump that costs half the price of the current one used by International Development Enterprises (IDE), and a lowest-cost siphon kit targeting farmers with extremely limited funds. The H2Go pump is designed to replace the existing pump used in the IDE storage and irrigation system while costing half as much and improving functionality, portability, and convenience. The siphon replaces the current pump while sacrificing some effectiveness and convenience in order to provide extremely low cost. H2Go has chosen to work with IDE because the IDE system has a demonstrated capability to move rural farmers out of poverty, increasing annual income >20%, improving food security, and encouraging participation in markets. IDE also brings significant value to the table with its established distribution capabilities and existing relationships and brand in H2Go’s target geographies.

The social benefit yielded by H2Go is driven by the reduction in system cost and resulting expansion of IDE’s addressable market for smallholder irrigation. The 95M potential customers in poor rural households are extremely price sensitive and respond strongly to incremental cost reductions in attractive farming technology like the IDE system. Additional potential exists to meet water movement needs associated with other products, like the RADD Design Aquifer and the Water Drop Accumulus.

The affordability of the H2Go pump is based on innovations in low-cost valve design, local materials and manufacturing, and low overhead and distribution costs associated with operation as a part of IDE. Once funding is obtained, H2Go plans to use a six month pilot in the Indian state of Maharashtra to test the manufacturing, distribution, and acceptance of these water movement products while identifying potential improvements that can then be implemented throughout the state and other areas of need.


2

Startupinvestment

Social Impact(Annual)

$175M

0

50

100

150

$200M

Figure 1 - Projected Annual Social Impact Compared

with Estimated Required Startup Investment

Market

As of the 2001 census, 71% of India’s households (135 million) were rural.1 As can be seen in the graph below, rural households are struggling with the highest degree of poverty, with 42.7% of all rural households in the poorest bracket (income less than 90,000 rupees, 2001-02 prices).2 On average, households in India include approximately 5.5 people, so this group is struggling to support each member of their households on less than $165 each year.3

As the highlighted areas of Figure 2 show, there is an extremely large segment of families in need. These rural poor are highly dependent on water resources for their livelihood, given their almost complete dependence on agriculture and the associated wage labor. (Appendix B)

1 Oskar Goswami. “The Challenge of Rural India.”

http://fecolumnists.expressindia.com/full_column.php?content_id=53831 2 Suman Bery. “Why is India Shining?” http://www.rediff.com/money/2004/mar/09shining.htm 3 Maps of India, “Person per Household Map.” http://www.mapsofindia.com/maps/india/person-per-household.html

$50K


3

Medium/High

Poor

Very Poor

Medium/High

Poor

Very Poor

Rural Urban

135M 55M

0

20

40

60

80

100%

2002 Indian Population (HH)

Figure 2 - 2002 Indian Population

At the same time, they have an extremely limited ability to manage those water resources. Most of the monsoon rainfall is not stored or utilized, and 60% of the population lacks reliable access to water4 and limited money to invest in water storage or digging expensive wells. In the dry season, usage declines precipitously to less than 5 liters per day for the poorest individuals and less than 10 liters per day for the poor individuals.5

Figure 3 - Water use (liters/day) in the four

different household wealth categories in Vemula in good months (July/August to January)

Figure 4 - Water use (liters/day) in the four

different household wealth categories in Vemula in summer months (February to June/July) and

drought periods

This dramatic decline in water usage reflects the lack of a consistent water supply. In rural India, only 24% of households get their water from taps.6 Most households share community water resources, with the women of the households responsible for fetching water, often from up to

4 Paul Polak 5 Deepa Joshi. SecureWater – Whither Poverty? Livelihoods in the DRA: a case study of the Water Supply

Programme in India, pp.54-55. Overseas Development Institute, 2004. 6 Oskar Goswami. “The Challenge of Rural India.”

http://fecolumnists.expressindia.com/full_column.php?content_id=53831


4

several kilometers away. 43% of households access shared water resources through hand pumps and 22% from wells.7 Oftentimes, the wells dry up or the hand pumps needed to access them break. As a result, IDE estimates that 60% of its population lacks reliable, consistent access to water. The graphs below clearly illustrate families’ struggle to maintain water access, with the distance traveled to fetch water dramatically increasing between the wet winter months to the dry summer months.8

Figure 5 - Distance traveled (km) to fetch water

by the four different household wealth categories in Vemula in good months (July/August to

January)

Figure 6 - Distance traveled (km) to fetch water

by the four different household wealth categories in Vemula in summer months (February to

June/July) and drought periods

This dry season water scarcity particularly affects agriculture. During this time, the community water resources are restricted; with no withdrawals for irrigation allowed (all water usage is reserved for drinking and personal uses).9

Another important characteristic of this market is the price sensitivity of the consumers; IDE’s experience with treadle pumps has illustrated that a small reduction in price drives significant consumer response. An example of this shift in buying behavior is shown in Figure 7. This chart shows that farmers are willing to trade durability off against cost; it highlights the principles of “designing for the poor” pioneered by International Development Enterprises (IDE).

7 Oskar Goswami. “The Challenge of Rural India.”

http://fecolumnists.expressindia.com/full_column.php?content_id=53831 8 Deepa Joshi. SecureWater – Whither Poverty? Livelihoods in the DRA: a case study of the Water Supply

Programme in India, pp.54-55. Overseas Development Institute, 2004. 9 Intermediate Technology Consultants, “Low Cost Micro Irrigation Technologies for the Poor.”

http://www.itcltd.com/docs/amit%20final%20report.pdf, October 2003. page 9.


5

0

20

40

60

Treadle Pumps(Relative Sales Volume)

LifetimePrice

2 yrs$25

7 yrs$30

Figure 7 - Price Sensitivity Impact on Treadle Pump Sales

IDE is an innovative nonprofit focused on creating sustainable solutions to poverty through revolutions in technology, market access, etc. that help poor farmers enhance their food security and increase their income. At H2Go, our purpose is to provide the revolution in design and implementation to support these mechanisms for sustainable poverty reduction.

Our product design philosophy and business mission are based on the confluence of the two market characteristics outlined above. The number of people that can afford the IDE system and earn their way out of abject poverty is constrained by the cost of the system. By focusing on incremental cost reductions for the system, more people can be reached, and significant social value can be created. The social value created grows quickly; with ~100M poor rural households that are extremely price-sensitive, any reduction in cost for the IDE system is a powerful tool for social impact.


6

Figure 8 - Current IDE Storage and Irrigation System

In the current IDE storage and irrigation system (Figure 8), all elements except the pump have been optimized by IDE or by other new enterprises. Given this, H2Go has focused on the pump as the best area for incremental cost savings. However, it is important to remember that the pump itself is not the target. The need addressed by the pump is what our business is built to address. It is also important to remember that, while IDE irrigation users are an attractive core market, other farmers will have needs centered on moving water efficiently, conveniently, and cheaply. To realize the maximum social impact, our products and business address those needs as well. With this framework in mind, H2Go has developed and applied the following mission in creating our products and business:

Provide an affordable, portable water movement system for IDE and non-IDE farmers

Current Situation

Currently, IDE’s storage bag holds 10,000 liters of water. It is installed on a farmer’s property by digging a trench approximately 1-1.5m deep to hold and support the bag. The difficulty lies in extracting the water from the bag and transporting it into the gravity tank that feeds the drip irrigation system. IDE is using a small plastic hand pump that has not been designed for the specific needs of the IDE system. The current pump costs ~$7 (24% of the total cost of the storage bag system) and provides a flow rate of 10 L/min, but overall, many aspects of the user experience for this pump are unattractive for rural farmers. The current pump has poor ergonomics and is difficult to repair, and the water intake is difficult to adapt, limiting the number of uses for the pump. The pumping motion is difficult and asymmetric, using only the arm and shoulder muscles on one side of the body. Repair is practically impossible; failure of


7

parts or seals often requires the entire pump to be replaced. This lack of reparability is due to the complex design, which prevents the pump from being manufactured locally or understood and repaired by local resources. In addition, dirt and small rocks foul the seals and cause loss of function when the pump is used with systems like the RADD Design Aquifer.

The Opportunity: Portable Water Extraction Products

The high price and poor user experience of the current pump create a powerful opportunity for cost reduction. To address this need, H2Go has designed and prototyped two products: a low-cost pump and a very low-cost siphon kit (Figure 9). For comparison, Figure 9 also includes “jumping” as a method of removing water from a water storage bag, where the user applies pressure to the outside of the bag which forces water out of the bag. While jumping on the bag or otherwise manually squeezing the bag to force the water out is an inexpensive method, it would severely limit the life of the storage bag.

0 .0

4 .0

8 .0

Affordability

EffectivenessPortability

H2Go Siphon IDE Jumping

Figure 9 - Product Perception

Offering two products gives us the opportunity to address a larger market while providing efficiency and convenience to farmers who can afford it. The pump provides a very inexpensive way to move water quickly and conveniently, while the siphon sacrifices convenience and some effectiveness to reduce the system cost as much as possible. We see the siphon as an entry-level product; a farmer who cannot currently afford anything more can use it for a season to earn enough to afford the increased effectiveness and convenience of the pump.

The new affordable, flexible pump design may also create a new type of laborer, the “pump entrepreneur.” This person could buy an H2Go pump and go around to various farmers with


8

storage systems or other water transport needs, using the flexibility of the H2Go pump to meet the water movement needs of many different local farmers and families.

Delivery Pump

MaybeDrum kitPoorCultivable land, shared community water resource

Delivery Pump

YesDrum kitBorderline poor

Cultivable land, household well unreliable

Maybe

Maybe

Storage System User

Siphon KitBucket kitBorderline poor/very poor

Homestead plot, shared community water resource

Siphon KitNoVery PoorLandless, shared community water resource

Applicable Connection

Drip System User

Economic Status

Land/Water Resources

Delivery Pump

MaybeDrum kitPoorCultivable land, shared community water resource

Delivery Pump

YesDrum kitBorderline poor

Cultivable land, household well unreliable

Maybe

Maybe

Storage System User

Siphon KitBucket kitBorderline poor/very poor

Homestead plot, shared community water resource

Siphon KitNoVery PoorLandless, shared community water resource

Applicable Connection

Drip System User

Economic Status

Land/Water Resources

Figure 10 - Product Placement

Composite Profiles

Three composite profiles of people who are affected by water in India were developed to aid in our thoughts on design and marketing, as shown in Figures 11 through 13. Theses profiles are intended to capture many of the qualities that were found to be important from the investigation of the water space.

Usha (Figure 11) represents IDE’s typical current customer. He has a small (0.01 ha) farm with access to a well shared with his brothers every three days. Usha and his family are surviving on the subsistence crops that are grown on the farm, and making ends meet with help from Usha’s brothers, and odd jobs that Usha takes on throughout the year. Usha is interested in growing his farm, and has expressed interest in drip irrigation and water harvesting technologies. He’s extremely price sensitive, appreciating every rupee that he can save on a product, even if performance is sacrificed for that savings.


9

Figure 11 - Composite Profile: Usha

Anil (Figure 12) represents a local entrepreneur who has been successful with his farm, and moved into the water delivery business. His sons run the family farm, while Anil focuses on the water delivery business. Using his bullock and cart, Anil travels to the nearby village to get water, and then brings it to his village for resale.

Figure 12 - Composite Profile: Anil

Raju and Narayni (Figure 13) represent a household that does not own any land. They live in a village and survive by sharecropping and odd jobs. As a very poor family, they are looking for better solutions to supply their drinking water, and ways to move towards land ownership.


10

Figure 13 - Composite Profile: Raju and Narayni

Product Description

Value to customer

H2Go firmly believes in human-based design. We understand that all products must add value to the customer and must meet a number of criteria in order to be adopted. Preliminary design research taught us that convenience is immensely important to our customers; products intended to improve the quality of life must not inconvenience the user. For this reason, we designed a pump capable of generating a pressure head of 10 meters. With our pump, transporting water from a storage reservoir to an irrigation system requires no heavy lifting – the farmer no longer needs to haul buckets of water. In addition, the pump itself is portable and can be carried while walking or riding a bicycle. Portability prevents theft and increases the usefulness of the product.

While convenience must be considered in the design, the most critical component is cost. To address the need for an incredibly cheap solution to water transport, H2Go is offering a siphon kit. The siphon kit is essentially a hose that a farmer can use to extract water from a storage device. By positioning the storage device higher than the outlet of the siphon, the farmer can load a bucket with water and can carry it to his crops or irrigation system. This product is not the focus of the H2Go effort, but the inclusion of a very cheap solution is important in order to broaden the potential customer base.

Ergonomics were heavily factored into the pump design. We found that the bicycle pump design offered the best balance of cost and user comfort for a given performance. While the foot-operated treadle pump is more effective at moving water with less fatigue, the cost of the mechanism is far greater than an upper-body-operated design. Further, a user study conducted


11

by ApproTec found that cultural acceptance of hand-operated pumps is likely to be higher than that of treadle pumps.10

Our customers want a pump that is both technically simple and serviceable. With an extremely simple design, the customer can understand our pump and can replace worn-out parts when needed. For a farmer to spend his hard-earned money on our product, he must believe it is reliable and must be able to fix it at minimal cost. To illustrate this concept, consider the thought process behind the purchase of a car. In India, older cars are preferred because the computers and electronics present in most new cars make repair impossible. The prevalence of replacement parts combined with the skills of local mechanics makes an old car a much more attractive investment than the newer, more advanced models. Although the present discussion is of water pumps, the underlying psychology is the same: investing in an irreparable product is not practical.

The ability to easily repair the H2Go pump introduces the possibility for secondary markets to grow around our product. The pump’s valves and leather gasket are inexpensive replacement parts that will be affordable to the farmer; local entrepreneurs and pump distributors will be able to sell spare parts to these farmers.

Product Design

The H2Go pump gives impoverished farmers the ability to move water for a very low cost. The device resembles a bicycle pump and is composed of three main subsystems: the hose and valve assembly, the pump body, and the plunger. Water flows in through the inlet hose into the pump body as the plunger is pulled upwards. Similarly, as the plunger is pushed down, water is forced out of the pump body through the exit hose. Each of the subsystems is designed for inexpensive manufacture, durability, and modularity.

10 Jeffrey Spivak. “Targeted Product Design: Pumps for Prosperity.” ApproTec article available at

http://www.thinkcycle.org


12

Figure 14 - Exploded View of H2Go Pump Design

The plunger assembly includes the steel rod and handle as well as the leather gasket that is responsible for providing the seal within the pump. The leather disc is squeezed between two washers at the end of the rod. A durable seal is created between the leather and the pump body by slightly over-sizing the leather disc and allowing the leather to naturally conform to the pump cylinder. Because the leather swells when exposed to water, the seal is self-lubricating during operation of the pump.

The pump body is a length of 2-inch PVC pipe fitted with a base plate, a set of dowels to guide the plunger’s linear motion, and two short lengths of hose. The base plate seals the bottom end of the pump cylinder, and the user stands on the base plate when operating the pump. Four wooden dowels near the top of the pump cylinder guide the plunger rod and guarantee that the motion of the plunger is linear (this maintains the seal around the perimeter of the leather disc). The two short lengths of hose connected to pump cylinder allow water to flow in and out of the pump. Additional hose is optional. However, increasing the length of hose expands the functionality of the pump, allowing it to be used to transport water over greater distances.

The addition of two one-way valves makes the pump functional. One valve is placed in each of the pump’s protruding hoses such that water can flow in one hose and out the other. The valves include a length of plastic tubing (approximately two inches long), a flexible rubber cylinder (currently made of latex) with diameter close to that of the plastic tube, a short piece of stiff material (wood), and a metal mesh. The stiff length of wood is glued to the rubber cylinder, and the rubber is placed inside the plastic tube. One end of the rubber cylinder is curled back over the tube and covered with the metal screen. Placing the pump hose onto the plastic tube holds the valve together. Water can flow through the tube in the direction away from the mesh inlet, but when water begins to flow in the reverse direction through the cylinder, the flexible rubber collapses against the mesh and blocks the flow.


13

Figure 15 - H2Go One-Way Valve Design

Manufacturing Decisions

The H2Go pump is very inexpensive for the customer. The low cost is directly a result of financially-driven manufacturing decisions. The design of the pump revolves around locally available materials and pre-existing components. For example, the handle can be made of any appropriate scrap steel available at the time of manufacture, and the pump body is made by cutting existing PVC pipe to length. Further, the H2Go pump is designed with simplicity in mind; the complexity of the manufacturing and operation of the pump is low. Lastly, by designing the pump for an assembly process comprising primarily cutting, drilling, and welding operations, the pump manufacturing costs are substantially lower than the competition’s.

The current design reflects a change in how the tubing and base plate are attached to the pump body. Testing is required to determine if the product life is acceptable if these parts are glued to the pump body. If the prototypes indicate that the failure rate is unacceptable, the design would have to be changed. At worst case, pipe threading will be required to attach these parts to the pump body. The tooling required for the threading is currently expected to have a negligible impact on our current cost estimates.

Positioning

The H2Go pump is positioned well to address the needs of rural farmers in India, and to provide an attractive alternative to the current pump. The pump currently being used by IDE was


14

selected initially because of availability; IDE was spending its time and resources optimizing the irrigation system and designing the storage bag. The H2Go pump is designed specifically to provide similar pumping effectiveness while improving affordability, ease of use, reparability, flexibility, and portability. H2Go identified these metrics of performance as key drivers of consumer value and differentiation, based on IDE farmer interviews, conversations and feedback with IDE and other experts, and extensive secondary research on rural agriculture and water use in India.

A graphical representation of the relative performance of the H2Go pump can be found in Appendix B. There are few products focused on the specific area of non-well water transport; most pumps offered in rural areas are positioned to move water from the water table to the surface, or slightly above the surface. Such products include treadle pumps, rope-and-washer pumps, crank pumps, diesel pumps, and most other hand- and machine-powered pumps available in rural areas. Few products are specifically designed to move water around from 1-2 meters down in a storage bag over distances of 10-15m to another tank or use. This opportunity allows H2Go to create a unique and valuable positioning for the H2Go pump, one that highlights its affordability and effectiveness in a specific niche of agricultural water transport.

Pricing & Social Impact

The retail price of the H2Go Pump is determined using estimates of part and manufacturing costs from Myanmar, which were modified to match estimates of parts and manufacturing costs in India with qualitative feedback from sources in India.

The breakdown of the known retail price of the current pump was conducted by breaking down the known retail price ($7) into parts, margin, and distribution costs by estimating the manufacturing costs of each part and using the same margins as used to determine the H2Go pump’s cost.

The resulting price comparison is shown in Figure 16 and details can be found in Appendix B.


15

Pump Price Comparison

Materials and Parts

Materials and Parts

Labor

SG&A and Margin

SG&A and Margin

Distribution

Distribution

$0.00

$1.00

$2.00

$3.00

$4.00

$5.00

$6.00

$7.00

$8.00

1 2Current Pump H2go Pump

$7.00

$3.51

Figure 16 - Pump Price Comparison

The 50% savings over the current pump comes primarily from the fact that the pump is manufactured by cutting and gluing off-the-shelf parts, instead of using custom injection molded parts. This eliminates the costs of molding and machine time. As indicated in Figure 16, the current pump has nearly no labor cost for assembly since the majority of the labor is contained in the injection molding of each part.

By avoiding injection molding, H2Go can easily scale production to match needs. The production levels of the current pump is limited by the number and operating rate of the injection molding machines used to fabricate most of its parts. Assuming that the prevailing labor rate is cheaper than the injection molding machine rate, the H2Go pump is better positioned to increase production without incurring significant additional capital expenditures that would raise the unit cost of the pump.

The modularity of the design reduces the life cost of the pump to the farmer by allowing the farmer to replace parts as they fail, instead of needing to replace the whole pump. The development of the replacement parts market helps reassure potential buyers of the existence of a support network for their new pump, which is a major selling point in rural India.

As currently designed, the pump has a number of opportunities for further price reduction. The farmer can choose to reduce the amount of tubing that he buys with the pump. The $3.51 estimated cost of the H2Go pump includes 10 feet of tubing, which is not included in the $7 price of the pump currently used in the IDE system. Eliminating the tubing can reduce expected retail price of the pump to $2.84.

Additionally, there is the possibility of further reducing cost by reducing the currently over-specified steel handle with cheaper materials.


16

Social Impact & Benefits for Customers

H2Go products, integrated with storage and irrigation systems from IDE, RADD, and Water Drop, have the potential to create $175M in incremental social benefit every year. The mechanism of this impact is closely linked with product pricing. The social benefit is driven from the reduction in cost for the storage and irrigation system. This reduction in cost enables more farmers to afford the IDE system and realize the sustainable improvement in food security and income that the system supports. This increase in the market addressable by IDE rapidly creates social value, since each farmer realizes incremental income of ~$35 during the dry season, a 21% increase from the $165 annual income for the average poor rural household. Considering that there are ~95M rural agricultural households, a small percentage increase in the addressable market leads to millions of potential new customers for IDE, and hundreds of millions in incremental social benefit. The need for H2Go’s product as a way to reduce the system cost is illustrated by studies that show many of the poorest families are only able to afford such irrigation systems with subsidies from NGOs11. Specifically, the H2Go products reduce the hardware cost by 12%-23% for the IDE system (Figure 17).

Pump

Waterstorage bag

$29

$26

$22

0

5

10

15

20

25

$30

System Cost ($)

Pump Type Current H2Go Pump H2Go Siphon

Figure 17 - Price Savings with H2Go Pump and Siphon

Our estimates show that these lower costs reduce the crop yield or plot size necessary for system affordability12 by 2%-5%, and additional innovations from IDE and other teams can reduce these

11 Intermediate Technology Consultants, “Low Cost Micro Irrigation Technologies for the Poor.”

http://www.itcltd.com/docs/amit%20final%20report.pdf, October 2003. page 33. 12 “system affordability” is defined as ability to pay back the capital investment with incremental earnings within

one year


17

break-evens by up to 14% in combination with H2Go products (Figure 18). These small percentage changes in affordability bring millions of the 95M poor rural households to the point where they can afford the system. Our preliminary estimates indicate that the H2Go products and associated cost reductions will bring 3-5 million households into IDE’s addressable market, creating $100M-$175M in social benefit annually. These households will be able to purchase an IDE system and enjoy a >20% increase in income, better nutrition during the dry season, and less reliance on uncertain and exploitative wage labor as an alternative income.

Current H2GoPump

H2Go &5K Bag

100%98%

90%

Crop Yieldfor Break Even

Current H2GoPump

H2Go &5K Bag

100%98%

86%

Plot Sizefor Break-Even

Figure 18 - Break Even Charts

Additional social benefits are realized by farmers already able to afford the system; they save 50% of the pump cost and receive additional value from the increased ease of use and flexibility of the H2Go pump. Analysis indicates that these benefits are limited by the size of the current customer base (see Appendix B) to a few hundred thousand dollars, but these benefits will grow as IDE’s ability to meet existing demand grows. Other benefits may exist associated with increased flexibility (especially for non-IDE system users who could not use the current pump at all), improved ergonomics and less long-term injury associated with pump use, and longer pump lifetimes driven by improved reparability. These benefits are difficult to estimate, but we plan to gather more information on the existence and magnitude of these and any other benefits during the pilot testing and initial product introduction.


18

Implementation Plan

Initial geographic focus on Maharashtra

Due to the challenge represented by the geographic scale of India, our initial plan is to focus on the state of Maharashtra. This state still represents a sizable opportunity, with a population of over 100 million people, but, more importantly, over 10 million rural households dependent on agriculture for their livelihood. In addition, Maharashtra farmers have a reputation for being progressive and open to new technology. Drip irrigation has been around in this area since the 1980s, and IDE is well-known there, having already sold 35,000 drip kit systems. Also, drip irrigation is seen as the only option for irrigating in the dry season due to scarce water resources – in May and June, all drinking water is delivered via water tanker. 13 The maps below show the difference in rainfall levels between the monsoon and the dry seasons.14

Figure 19 - Annual rainfall in Maharashtra

13 Intermediate Technology Consultants, “Low Cost Micro Irrigation Technologies for the Poor.”

http://www.itcltd.com/docs/amit%20final%20report.pdf, October 2003. page 35 14 International Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics,

http://www.icrisat.org/text/research/nrmp/dfid/text/India/Maharashtra/Maharashtra-Imgs3.asp, http://www.icrisat.org/text/research/nrmp/dfid/text/India/Maharashtra/Maharashtra-Imgs6.asp, and http://www.icrisat.org/text/research/nrmp/dfid/text/India/Maharashtra/Maharashtra-Imgs9.asp


19

Figure 20 - Rainfall during the kharif (June-September) in Maharashtra

Figure 21 - Rainfall during rabi (October-March) in Maharashtra


20

Other reasons we chose Maharashtra include:

Larger than average plot size – the average size of land cultivated in Maharashtra is 0.32 hectares, v. the national average of 0.18 hectares. As a result of this larger size, farmers are more focused on methods of increasing their usage, seeing a larger opportunity cost of letting their land lay fallow each dry season.15

Higher than average literacy rate – According to the 2001 Census, 72-80% of the Maharashtra population is literate, the second highest rating across all the Indian states.16 This high level of literacy will make it easier to reach people, enabling the use of written marketing and technical materials.

High awareness of IDE – IDE is established in this area, and therefore working with them will enable a swifter adaptation of our products.

Target Markets

As explained earlier, our focus has been on developing water extraction devices to move water from the IDE storage system to the IDE drip irrigation system. As a result, our core market is farmers that currently own IDE drip kits. We believe a growing percentage of this market will purchase the IDE storage bag and require an accompanying product to extract the water and transport it to the drip system. To date, 85,000 IDE drip kit systems have been sold in India, with 35,000 of these sold in Maharashtra. IDE expects sales to grow 20% each year for the next several years.17 As such, we expect the drip kit user base to rise to 130,000 by 2010. Our base case assumes storage bag penetration of this market grows from 7.5% in 2006 to 45% in 2010, with unit sales of storage bags growing from approximately 4,000 to 21,000 during this time period.

In addition to IDE drip kit system users, we believe other agricultural households will purchase the IDE storage bag, even if they forego purchasing the drip system. Perhaps they will choose to continue manually irrigating their fields, or perhaps they will use the water from the storage bag for non-agricultural purposes. We expect these sales to be approximately half the volume of storage bag sales to drip kit system users.

In addition, there are several alternatives to the IDE storage bag currently in development, including RADD Design’s Aquifer and Water Drop’s Accumulus. These represent further sales opportunities as these systems will also require a water extraction product. For our base case, we have assumed volume sales of these products will approximate half of all IDE storage bag sales (to be conservative, this estimate is significantly below the forecasts of each of these teams).

Lastly, non-IDE agricultural households represent a possible, much larger target market. This would be less of a core focus for us, but we are planning to devote some resources in marketing the delivery pump to this group (we have decided not to allocate resources to marketing the siphon kit here).

15 Labour Bureau, Government of India, http://labourbureau.nic.in/RLE992k%20GenChar%20Chap%203.htm 16 Maps of India, “India Literacy Rate.” http://www.mapsofindia.com/census2001/literacyrate.htm 17 IDE website and Tapan, head of IDE India.


21

The numerical derivation of the market segments is detailed further in the table below:

Maharashtra Market Size2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1) IDE Users

Drip Kit Systems2004 Actual Drip Kit System Sales 8,000 Total Existing Base of Drip Kit System 35,000 Yearly Drip Kit System Sales 9,600 11,520 13,824 16,589 19,907 23,888

Annual Sales Growth 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0%Total Installed Base Drip Kit Systems 44,600 56,120 69,944 86,533 106,439 130,327

Storage Bag SystemsExpected penetration level of IDE Drip Kit System Users 7.5% 15.0% 25.0% 35.0% 45.0%IDE Drip Kit plus Storage Bag System Users (Cumulative Total) 4,209 10,492 21,633 37,254 58,647 Annual Sales to Drip Kit System Users 4,209 6,283 11,142 15,621 21,393

Annual Sales Growth 49.3% 77.3% 40.2% 37.0%

Storage Bag Only Purchasers (no Drip Kit Systems) 2,105 3,141 5,571 7,810 10,697

Total Annual IDE Storage Bag Sales 6,314 9,424 16,712 23,431 32,090

2) RADD Design Aquifer Customers 3,157 4,712 8,356 11,715 16,045

3) Water Drop Accumulus Customers 3,157 4,712 8,356 11,715 16,045

4) Non-IDE FarmersPopulation, 1991 census 78,937,187

Population growth, 1991-2001 22.6%Population, 2001 96,800,672

Annual growth rate 2.1%Projected population 105,191,668 107,400,693 109,656,108 111,958,886 114,310,023 116,710,533

% of population that works 43.5% 43.5% 43.5% 43.5% 43.5% 43.5%% of workers involved in agriculture 55.0% 55.0% 55.0% 55.0% 55.0% 55.0%

Population involved in agriculture 25,167,107 25,695,616 26,235,224 26,786,163 27,348,673 27,922,995 Working people per agricultural household 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 # of Agricultural households 10,066,843 10,278,246 10,494,090 10,714,465 10,939,469 11,169,198

(less IDE drip kit + storage bag system users) (44,600) (56,120) (69,944) (86,533) (106,439) (130,327) (less IDE storage bag only users) (2,105) (3,141) (5,571) (7,810) (10,697)

Non-IDE Agricultural Households 10,022,243 10,220,022 10,421,004 10,622,362 10,825,220 11,028,174

Figure 22 - Maharashtra Market Size

Unit Sales Assumptions

When examining these target market segments, our business planning has been conservative in terms of unit sales, to ensure that this business opportunity could support itself even at lower volumes. Supported by this ability to sustain itself, our business structure is capable of handling significant additional volume.

We have assumed that all purchasers of IDE’s storage bag system, RADD Design’s aquifer and Water Drop’s Accumulus will require a water extraction product. We further assumed that of these, 40% would choose the siphon kit and 60% would choose the pump. These assumptions, along with the delivery pump’s initial penetration of non-IDE agricultural households of 0.025%, drove our base case unit sales volume, shown graphically below.


22

Sales by Customer Segment

- 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000

2008

2007

2006

IDE Storage Bag

Non-IDE Farmers

RADD Aquifer

Water Drop

Accumulus

Figure 23 - Sales by Customer Segment

To put these sales targets in context, IDE’s cumulative sales goal for treadle pumps was 1 million units for Eastern India and the Nepal Terai over 3-5 years, with an estimated market potential of 10 million. 18 This implies a much greater market size than what we are targeting, as a treadle pump has wider appeal than the drip kit or storage bag systems. While this example shows greater volume potential for our product, we feel expectations of this size can only be established after field testing of the product in which its uses are closely monitored.

Planned Financial Structure

After considerable evaluation, we decided to integrate our product into the IDE portfolio. This decision was in part reached due to the constraints represented by our design criteria – we had a goal of halving the cost to the farmer of the current pump used by IDE. To keep to this goal, we can only charge a royalty of 10% per unit. With only two products and estimated initial sales at relatively low levels, the revenue generated by such a royalty level is simply not enough to cover the one-time start-up costs and continuing overhead costs of a stand-alone entity. In order to do so, we would either have to charge a royalty of over 40% to break even by year 3 or put together a larger portfolio of products serving similar needs and supported by the same distribution and marketing efforts. Charging an H2Go royalty of 40% would yield a price to the farmer of $4.40,

18 Tushaar Shah et al. “Pedaling Out of Poverty: Social Impact of a Manual Irrigation Technology in South Asia.”

International Water Management Institute Research Report 45. Sri Lanka. 2000.


23

far from our target of $3.50, a 50% reduction from the current pump. The graphical representations of these analyses are found in Figures 24 and 25.

Breakeven Royalty

($25,000)

($20,000)

($15,000)

($10,000)

($5,000)

$0

$5,000

$10,000

10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

Net

Inco

me

Figure 24 - Breakeven Royalty

Breakeven Portfolio Size

13.4

3.5

-

1.8

5.9

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Breakeven product portfolio

# of

Pro

duct

s

Figure 25 - Breakeven Portfolio Size

The savings resulting from pursuing such a strategy are shown below. Five years of savings total approximately $125,000 that we believe can be better spent on developing new products for the poor.


24

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

$40,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Stand-Alone Expenses

Revenue

Incremental Integrated Expenses

Figure 26 - Cost Savings of Integration with IDE

Business Structure

Having established the attractiveness of integrating with IDE, the startup financial needs of H2Go are relatively modest. As part of the existing IDE organization, no resources are needed for establishing a standalone entity in India, which can be slow, confusing, and expensive. Many proposed products and businesses have mentioned the possibility of utilizing the existing IDE business structure, but we believe that H2Go is the best enterprise for such assimilation, with our high level of integration with the existing IDE products and similar target markets going forward.

The H2Go products are designed to be outsourced to local Indian manufacturers, and to use the existing IDE distribution network. As mentioned in the “Product” section, the manufacturing requires little tooling and uses commonly available materials. Therefore, the business structure to support the piloting and rollout of this enterprise is focused primarily on field marketing and coordination with manufacturers.

To build IDE’s ability to offer the H2Go products, two full-time field sales and marketing staff will be needed, along with one full-time manufacturing liaison. Business expenditures are primarily for initial marketing ($2000) and office ($400) costs.

Funding Needs

To cover the startup costs detailed above, H2Go is seeking $50,000 in funding. Our financial analysis indicates that the first phase of business, the six-month pilot, will require ~$10,000. This $10,000 covers the necessary staff for the initial pilot. Our financial modeling indicates that this investment will help H2Go break even by 2008 (Figure 26). However, our experience and the experience of others, most notably Ignite Innovations, has demonstrated the unpredictability and unforeseeable delays and costs associated with operating in India. Given this uncertainty, we are confident that initial funding of $50,000 will enable H2Go to overcome such difficulties and create value for the rural poor. We believe that there is considerable upside potential for the


25

H2Go pump to satisfy latent demand and create significant social value, and we plan to use the remaining funds to build the business toward that goal.

These funding needs are sensitive to several variables, and our sensitivity analysis has highlighted distributor markup, marketing costs, and the manufacturing difficulties as the most important areas. The H2Go mission is to deliver this pump to the farmer at a price half that of the current pump. This price is significantly influenced by the markup taken by the distributor. Our analysis indicates that adding the H2Go pump to IDE’s current suite of products will increase the value IDE can offer the distributor and improve the terms of sale, lowering this markup. To the extent that this does not occur, H2Go will be forced to either lower its royalty, increasing our need for supporting capital and delaying break-even, or accept a higher price to the farmer, which would reduce the social impact of our products.

Marketing costs are the largest single expense in the pilot program financials, so a small percent increase in this area will have a large effect on the overall cost of the pilot. This being said, we believe we have conservatively budgeted these costs, and our funding request gives us ample financial flexibility to cover even a 50% increase in these expenses.

A final area of sensitivity is manufacturing. We have done extensive diligence on the availability and cost of materials, labor, and tooling in India. Our engineering team has developed an elegant product that uses simple materials, is easy to make, and requires little in the way of expensive fabrication machinery. However, it is important to recognize the potential for unforeseen delays or difficulties in establishing the manufacturing for the H2Go pump. We have gathered information and spoken to experienced manufacturing sources in India and Myanmar, and to experts in this area at Stanford. We believe our current milestones are realistic and achievable, and our request for $50,000 in funding will give us sufficient financial flexibility to deal with significant delays in manufacturing, even a doubling of the necessary pilot period.

Other areas of risk associated with H2Go include the lack of intellectual protection on the pump and concerns about knockoffs of lower quality damaging customer perceptions of our product. The low cost valves are the only component of the H2Go pump that may be patentable, and we are uncertain about the use of obtaining a US patent for this technology. Exploitation of this innovation would take place in India, where legal protection would be difficult and expensive. Furthermore, the primary reason for obtaining intellectual protection is not financial – H2Go, as part of IDE, is a nonprofit whose main concern is creating social value while covering costs. H2Go’s primary concern is the quality of the product being delivered to farmers. Given our social mission, H2Go would welcome competition on the basis of quality and affordability. We believe H2Go would perform strongly in such an environment, supported by the existing networks, experience, and customers of IDE. The risk also exists that ineffective knockoffs or replacement valves would damage the perception of the H2Go pump. We plan to reduce this risk in two ways: by marketing the H2Go pump as part of the IDE brand and integrated with the storage and irrigation system where appropriate, and by working with distributors to help them recognize the negative impact on their business of carrying inferior copies. Overall, the H2Go products are strongly positioned to provide social impact even without strong patent protection.

Pilot

We propose a 6-month pilot. During this time, we would distribute 100 products, 50 of the siphon kit and 50 of the delivery pump, to farmers in four villages in Maharashtra. They would


26

be asked to purchase the products at the long-term market price, so we expect to have to subsidize this initial manufacturing run due to the low volume and higher costs associated with establishing the supply chain and manufacturing.

Over the course of the six months, we would be observing and collecting data and customer feedback on the product, including perceptions of:

1. Flow rate 2. Force/Energy requirements 3. Pumping Motion 4. Additional uses 5. Ability to increase crops grown 6. Durability

We will also undertake cost/durability/performance sensitivity interviews.

Over this time, we will iterate the product’s design to incorporate the feedback received. Also during this time, we hope to do additional research on the materials available locally – perhaps the cost of the pump’s parts can be reduced even more. Finally, we hope to research potential partnerships. Two ideas we are currently considering are detailed below.

Partnerships

The first partnership we are considering is with local women’s water management associations. Women are traditionally the ones who fetch all drinking water for the family, often spending hours each day doing so. As their concern regarding water scarcity has risen over the years, Indian women have become more active in formulating water management associations that have taken action on several fronts, from establishing rules on allowed withdrawals per household from communal water resources, to collecting community funding to repair and maintain community well pump heads, to seeking out new technology to lower water requirements or ease the burden of women’s work. The Self-Employed Women’s Association (SEWA), an all-women trade union, has led many of these efforts, aided by the federal government’s declaration in 1999 of the need to involve women in rural water management schemes.19

Women are also heavily involved in agriculture. One study done in the Indian Himalayas showed that a pair of bullocks works 1,064 hours, a man 1,212 hours and a woman 3,485 hours in a year on a one-hectare farm, illustrating women’s significant contribution to agricultural production (Singh in Shiva, 1988). Meeting with such associations will allow us to efficiently reach large groups while also distributing information that may help ease the burden of work on this group.

The second partnership we would like to investigate is with corporations such as Coca-Cola and Pepsi. Both firms are struggling with local perceptions of their exploitation of scarce groundwater resources. Communities unhappy that “their” water is going into Pepsi and Coke products, whether they be cans of soda or bottles of water, are actively protesting. Some sample headlines from recent news articles include: “Coca Cola Parches Agricultural Lands in India,” “India protests against Coke and Pepsi,” “Indians surround Pepsi, Coke plants,” and “Cola

19 Aditi Kapoor, “Water, Work, and Women in Rural India.” World Resource Institute.

http://newsroom.wri.org/wrifeatures_text.cfm?ContentID=2074&NewsletterID=47. September 2003.


27

companies told to quit India.” We believe Coke and Pepsi may be willing to contribute either money or distribution assistance or both as part of a CSR effort to assuage local concerns.20

20 Nityanand Jayaraman. “Coca Cola Parches Agricultural Lands in India.” Global Policy Forum.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/globaliz/special/2002/0528india.htm and Nagraj Adve. “Rising Struggles, Falling Water.” India Resource Center. http://www.indiaresource.org/campaigns/coke/2004/risingstruggles.html


A-1

Appendix A – Prototype Development

At the beginning of the design process, we recognized that a simple pump could be made using two one-way valves connected to a variable-volume chamber. As the volume of the chamber is increased, a drop in pressure inside the device causes water to flow in through one of the valves. Reducing the volume inside the chamber forces water out through the other valve. Fluid flows through the device with continued volumetric variation. While this type of system is extremely simple (and potentially quite inexpensive), we believed that we could build a simple pump with only one valve. Figure 27 shows the principle behind the pump’s operation, and Figures 28 and 29 show the first prototype of the idea. A hollow tube (sealed at one end) is used as the piston to force water up between the two cylinders and out the exit hole. Variation of the two cylinder diameters allows for the desired water level rise. The beauty of this design lies in the lack of precise tolerances. The central piston can be any constant-volume object capable of displacing water – anything from spare piping to bamboo would work.

Figure 27 - Lowering the displacement cylinder into the water level forces the water level to rise within the

device


A-2

Figure 28 - The water-lifting pump consists of two concentric tubes and a one-way flapper valve

Figure 29 - The assembled water-lifting pump

The success of the small lift pump led our design team to investigate the scalability of the design. We were interested in making the pump larger and possibly using it to extract water from underground water sources. The two-foot pump quickly transitioned into a six-foot prototype, shown in Figure 30. With the larger prototype, we were able to test the limits of the design, such as lift height and ergonomic issues. We found that water could be easily lifted to a substantial height with minimal effort. Our testing showed that the pump was actually capable of generating


A-3

significant suction at the inlet (see Figure 27 for system schematic). Quickly withdrawing the inner cylinder from inside the volume of water causes significant velocity gradients to develop between the two cylinders. These gradients translate into large shear forces along the cylinder walls. The resistance to water flowing into the chamber through the inlet is lower than that present within the water stuck between the two cylinders. As a result, water flows into the bottom of the chamber before the water along the cylinder walls has a chance to return to the bottom. Essentially, the water level within the chamber climbs with each stroke of the inner cylinder. An exciting aspect of the water-lifting pump is the potential to tap into the resonant frequency of the water chamber. By oscillating the inner cylinder at the appropriate speed, energy will be added to the water column with very little loss. Tuning the pump in this way provides maximum water output.

Figure 30 - The water-lifting pump is shown easily lifting water over one meter

While the water-lifting pump is elegant in its design, we ultimately decided that a pressurized exit was necessary in order to provide maximum functionality for the pump. The first attempt at a pressure pump of this variety is shown in Figure 31. Plastic bags, duct tape, and rubber gloves provide the flexible seal between the two cylinders. The inlet valve is placed at the base of the


A-4

upper cylinder, and the exit valve lies at the bottom of the device. Both valves employ simple flapper designs – a disc of polypropylene taped at one point to the end of a protruding pipe. The ergonomics of this design proved to be poor -- locating the inlet on the upper cylinder made the pumping motion difficult and awkward. However, the simple flapper valves worked very well (this design was also employed on the lifting pumps discussed previously).

Figure 31 - Two concentric cylinders are flexibly sealed to allow for loose tolerances between the hardware

Although the lack of tight tolerances was very appealing, we ultimately decided to lean towards a design in which a sealed piston forces water in and out of a pump chamber with the help of two one-way valves. The first attempt at this technique is shown in Figure 32. A crude leather disc was cut to rough size, attached to the end of a rod, and forced inside of a plastic cylinder. The leather quickly conformed to the cylinder and proved to be an effective seal.

This early prototype employed store-bought one-way valves (far too expensive for our intended customers); we recognized that we would need to design inexpensive one-way valves in order to create an innovative suction pump.


A-5

Figure 32 - Two one-way valves are fitted to a “T” junction. The chamber (long gray tube) contains a plunger made of leather, which conforms to the cylinder walls and creates a seal inside the chamber

To experiment with simple valve designs, we quickly constructed a larger version of the suction pump shown in Figure 32, shown below in Figure 33. We decided that it would be beneficial to place the valves in line with two hoses permanently attached to the pump. This allows for both rapid prototyping of various valve designs (there is no need to rebuild the entire pump body to change the valves) as well as rapid replacement of valves during regular use.


A-6

Figure 33 - A 3-inch diameter pipe fitted with hose to test the various valve designs

A very exciting design epiphany occurred for our team when we realized that we could produce a very simple one-way valve by using a membrane that is flexible in one dimension yet stiffened in another. Essentially, we reinvented the heart valve. The initial insight came from the party-favor noise maker (Figure 34) and whoopee cushion valves. When pressurized on one side, the valves open. However, pressure in the opposite direction tightens the seal on the closed valve.

Figure 34 - The spring-loaded paper valve on many noise-makers is ideal for use in our pump

The first attempt at applying the party-favor valve to a pump is shown in Figure 35. Although a weight was added to the rubber membrane to give it a preferred relaxed orientation, the valve had a tendency to fully reverse itself inside the tube when low pressure was applied to the inside.


A-7

Fitting the valve inside of a chamber made from two plastic bottles was appealing from a recycling perspective, but the valves (shown top right in Figure 35) leaked badly.

Figure 35 - A finger cut from a rubber glove is taped to the end of a rigid tube (top left). A weight is added to the flexible rubber end to bias the membrane in one direction. On the top right is an attempt to enclose the

valve membrane inside a waterproof body made of plastic bottles

Moving on from the plastic bottle valve housing, we considered manufacturing valve bodies from plastic pipe – a large central chamber allows the valve to flex, while smaller end pieces house the rubber membrane and connect to hosing (see Figure 35). While the large valve body did not leak, the rubber membrane still collapsed upon itself and fully reversed inside the tube. Stepping back from the valve design, we realized that there was no need for an enlarged valve housing; placing the rubber membrane within the tubing itself would give us the desired effect.

Examining the failure mode of the valves, we realized that a stiffener attached to the rubber in the direction of the flow would prevent buckling of the membrane inside the tube. A length of stiff steel wire was glued to the rubber cylinder. The valve worked very well for a short time, but the rubber membrane soon ruptured. We observed the rubber membrane form a balloon when the valve was pressurized with counter-flow. This balloon, combined with the stress


A-8

concentration added by the stiffener, caused the membrane to tear. To reduce stress concentration on the rubber membrane, a plastic mesh was added to the inlet end of the valve. While this lengthened the lifetime of the valve, failure occurred within about ten cycles (see Figure 36).

Figure 36 - Adding a plastic mesh covering to the inlet of the valve reduced stress concentrations within the rubber membrane. However, the mesh was not strong enough to withstand the high pressure developed by

the pump

We replaced the plastic mesh with metal screen and added a blunt, wooden stiffener to the membrane in place of the steel wire. This combination proved to be successful. The final valve design is shown in Figure 37.


A-9

Figure 37 - Shown at top is an assembled valve. The individual components are shown directly above


A-10

Figure 38 - The finished pump incorporates the simple one-way valves as well as a robust and flexible pump body design


B-1

Appendix B – Economic Model and Analysis Social Impact Analysis

Social benefit to newly addressable customersBenefit of system Notes

Paprika Estimate $36.85 Based on IDE analysis of paprika irrigation on a 200 sq. m plotNet system benefit to farmer $35.00 Based on Chad & Yves' model of irrigation benefit from summer research

Addressable Market Population of India 191.8 million households

Rural Fraction 71%% of farmers on < 1 hectare 70%

Farmer HH on < 1 hectare 95.32 million households

% reduction necessary for break even:Low High

Yield 2% 10% From break-even analysisPlot size 2% 14% From break-even analysis

Increase in Addressable Market 2.3 11.4 million households

Social BenefitSocial Benefit per million HH $35,000,0003M incremental households $105,000,0005M incremental households $175,000,000

Incremental Social Benefit to Already-Addressed Customers

Siphon 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 NotesNumber of customers

IDE Storage Bag System Users 2525 3770 6685 9372 12836RADD Design Aquifer Customers 1263 1885 3342 4686 6418Water Drop Waterbed Customers 1263 1885 3342 4686 6418

Total 5051 7539 13370 18745 25672

Incremental benefitsLower cost $6.70 $6.70 $6.70 $6.70 $6.70

Greater flexibility $0.50 $0.50 $0.50 $0.50 $0.50 Assume $.50 in extra beneficial use per yearTotal $7.20 $7.20 $7.20 $7.20 $7.20

PumpNumber of customers

IDE Storage Bag System Users 3788 5654 10027 14059 19254RADD Design Aquifer Customers 1894 2827 5014 7029 9627Water Drop Waterbed Customers 1894 2827 5014 7029 9627

Total 7576 11309 20055 28117 38508

Incremental benefitsLower cost $3.39 $3.39 $3.39 $3.39 $3.39

Greater flexibility $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 $2.00 Assume $2 in extra beneficial use per yearTotal $5.39 $5.39 $5.39 $5.39 $5.39

Incremental Social Impact $77,201 $115,235 $204,359 $286,513 $392,399

Much smaller than benefit from newly-addressable segment, due to small size of current customer base

Figure 39 - Social Impact Analysis


B-2

Product Price Derivation

Siphon Kit PumpManufacturing cost

Raw MaterialsPump Body $0.46Pump Handle $0.67One Way Valves $0.05Miscellaneous $0.30 $0.63Materials $0.30 $1.81

LaborSkilled $0.55Unskilled $0.05Labor $0.00 $0.60

COGS Total $0.30 $2.41

Overhead (% of COGS) 10% 10%Overhead ($/unit) $0.03 $0.24COGS + Overhead $0.33 $2.66

Royalty to H2Go (% of COGS + Overh 10% 10%Royalty ($/unit) $0.03 $0.27Total Cost for Manufacturer $0.36 $2.92

Manufacturer's Margin 5% 5%Price from Manufacturer $0.38 $3.07

DistributionPump weight (kg) 0.5 2.0 Pump volume (m^3) 0.06 0.1 Transport distance (km) 40.0 40.0 Transport cost ($) $0.29 $0.29Price to Distributor $0.67 $3.35

Distributor margin % 5% 5%Price to farmer $0.70 $3.52

Figure 40 - H2Go Product Pricing Overview


B-3

Price Estimate for H2Go Pump

Spec UnitQuantity

Reqd Cost Per TotalPump BodyPump Body 2" PVC Pipe Ft 2 $0.17 $0.33End Cap 2" End Cap for PVC Pipe with legs Ea 1 $0.13 $0.13

$0.46

Pump HandlePump Handle Steel - approx 8" Ea 1 $0.25 $0.25Piston Rod 2 ft of 3/8", Washer welded on bottom, bottom tapped Ea 1 $0.27 $0.27Gasket 2" Dia 3/16" Leather Gasket Ea 1 $0.15 $0.15Bolt 3/8" x 16 Ea 1 $0.01 $0.01

$0.67

One Way ValvesValve Body 2x 1.5" of 5/8" PVC Pipe Ft 0.25 $0.06 $0.02Latex Valving 2.5" of 6 mil thick, 5/8" dia latex tube Ea 2 $0.01 $0.01Weight 2x 3/4" piece of wood (coffee stirrer) Ft 0.125 $0.01 $0.00Screen 2 x 3/4" square mesh screen sq in 1.125 $0.02 $0.02

$0.05

MiscellaneousTubing / Hose 5/8" ID, 3/4" OD Vinyl Tubing Feet 11 $0.05 $0.55Adhesives PVC Adhesive Oz 2 $0.02 $0.04Hose Clamps Hose Clamp 7/16" to 1" Ea 2 $0.02 $0.04

$0.63

TOTAL PARTS $1.81

LaborPump Body Cut to length, cut holes, attach cap Hours 0.2 $0.50 $0.10Pump Handle Weld Hours 0.5 $0.50 $0.25Gasket Cut to size, drill hole Hours 0.1 $0.50 $0.05Valves Cut pipe to size, glue together, glue weight to latex,

assemble valve bodyHours 0.3 $0.50 $0.15

Assembly Glue Tubing to Pump Body, attach to valves Hours 0.2 $0.25 $0.05TOTAL LABOR 1.3 $0.60

TOTAL MANUFACTURING COST $2.41

Retail Cost EstimateOverhead (% of COGS) 10%Overhead ($/unit) $0.24COGS + Overhead $2.66

Royalty to H2Go (% of COGS + Overhead) 10%Royalty ($/unit) $0.27Total Cost for Manufacturer $2.92

Manufacturer's Margin 5%Price from Manufacturer $3.07

DistributionPump weight (kg) 2.0 Pump volume (m^3) 0.1 Transport distance (km) 40.0 Transport cost ($) $0.29Price to Distributor $3.35

Distributor margin % 5%Price to farmer $3.52

Figure 41 - H2Go Pump Price Detail


B-4

Price Estimate for Current Pump Current Pump Pricing

Part Description Material Quantity Weight (g) Price Ea Total PricePump Body 3 in dia x 9 in cylinder, 3/16 in thick, threads on each end,

1.5 in dia x 1 in threaded outlet, 3/16 in thick, 6 ribsIM Plastic 1 195 $1.25 $1.25

Lower Cap 6 in dia x 0.4 in base with 4 holes, 3.5 in dia x 1.6 in, 3/16 in thick extrusion with threads, 1.5 in dia x 1 in threaded outlet, 3/16 in thick, valve guide

IM Plastic 1 185 $1.19 $1.19

Lower Valve 1.3 in dia x 0.3 in double tapered rubber stopper with embedded nut

Rubber/Steel 1 6 $0.05 $0.05

Lower Valve Screw 1.5 in steel flat head bolt Steel 1 2 $0.002 $0.00Lower Plunger 2.5 in dia x 1.25 in, max thickness = 0.6in, with external

threadsIM Plastic 1 46 $0.29 $0.29

Rubber Gasket 2.55 in dia x 0.7 in, 0.2 in thick rubber cylindrical gasket Rubber 1 10 $0.10 $0.10Upper Valve Body 1.25 in dia x 0.125 in disk with 0.75 in threaded post IM Plastic 1 46 $0.29 $0.29Upper Valve Gasket 1.5 in dia x 0.125 in disk with central hole Rubber 1 5 $0.05 $0.05Upper Valve Nut Fits Upper Valve Body Steel 1 3 $0.005 $0.01Piston Rod 8.75 in rod, threaded at both ends Aluminum 1 115 $0.10 $0.10Upper Rubber Gasket 3 in dia x 0.1 in rubber gasket with center extrusion and hole Rubber 1 20 $0.10 $0.10

Upper Rod Nut Steel Hex Nut Steel 1 7 $0.005 $0.01Upper Cap 3.75 in dia x 0.5 in cap with inner threads, two bosses,

center extrusion, attachment pointsIM Plastic 1 98 $0.63 $0.63

Upper Rod Cap U-shaped piece, 0.5 in max thickness IM Plastic 1 22 $0.14 $0.14Handle Link Two Upper Rod Caps joined by 1 in dia x 1.4 in cylinder IM Plastic 1 40 $0.26 $0.26Handle 17 in curved 1 in x 0.5 in handle IM Plastic 1 158 $1.01 $1.01Pins 1.5 in x 1/4 in dia pins Aluminum 3 46 $0.005 $0.02Fasteners 1 in clips Steel 3 4 $0.001 $0.00

TOTAL PARTS $5.49

LaborAssembly Hours 0.1 $0.25 $0.03

TOTAL LABOR 0.1 $0.03

TOTAL MANUFACTURING COST $5.52

Retail Cost EstimateOverhead (% of COGS) 10%Overhead ($/unit) $0.55COGS + Overhead $6.07Total Cost for Manufacturer $6.07

Manufacturer's Margin 5%Price from Manufacturer $6.37

DistributionPump weight (kg) 1.0 Pump volume (m^3) 0.1 Transport distance (km) 40.0 Transport cost ($) $0.29Price to Distributor $6.66

Distributor margin % 5%Price to farmer $7.00

Figure 42 - Price Estimate for Current Pump


B-5

Perceptual Map

Product Affordability Effectiveness PortabilityH2Go 6.0 7.0 7.0Siphon 8.0 4.0 7.0IDE 3.6 6.0 3.0Jumping 8.0 1.0 0.1

Prices ($)Diesel 70.00$ IDE 7.00$ H2Go 3.61$ Treadle 18.00$

0.0

4.0

8.0

Affordability

EffectivenessPortability

H2Go Siphon IDE Jumping

Figure 43 - Product Perception Map


B-6

Product Placement and Price Sensitivity Product Cost Flow Rate

(L/min)Pressure Head (m)

Siphon $0.50 1 0H2go $3.50 10 10Current "Gombi" Pump $7.00 10 10Approtec Handpump $20.00 15 13Approtec Moneymaker $55.00 25 0Approtec Super Moneymaker Plus $74.00 50 14Approtec Moneymaker Plus $38.00 38 21IDE Treadle Pump $9.00 60 0IDE Preasure Treadle Pump $13.00 60 15

Exponential Rate 0.3

Performance vs Cost

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

$0.00 $10.00 $20.00 $30.00 $40.00 $50.00 $60.00 $70.00 $80.00 $90.00

Price ($)

Flow

Rat

e (L

/min

)

Siphon

H2go Pump

Current Pump

IDE TreadleIDE PressureTreadle

ApprotecHandpump

ApprotecMoneymakerPlus

ApprotecMoneymaker

ApprotecSuperMoneymakerPlus

Price Sensitivity Curve

Figure 44 - Product Price Sensitivity Estimate


B-7

Maharashtra Market Size2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

1) IDE Users

Drip Kit Systems2004 Actual Drip Kit System Sales 8,000 Total Existing Base of Drip Kit Systems 35,000 Yearly Drip Kit System Sales 9,600 11,520 13,824 16,589 19,907 23,888

Annual Sales Growth 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0% 20.0%Total Installed Base Drip Kit Systems 44,600 56,120 69,944 86,533 106,439 130,327

Storage Bag SystemsExpected penetration level of IDE Drip Kit System Users 7.5% 15.0% 25.0% 35.0% 45.0%IDE Drip Kit plus Storage Bag System Users (Cumulative Total) 4,209 10,492 21,633 37,254 58,647 Annual Sales to Drip Kit System Users 4,209 6,283 11,142 15,621 21,393

Annual Sales Growth 49.3% 77.3% 40.2% 37.0%

Storage Bag Only Purchasers (no Drip Kit Systems) 2,105 3,141 5,571 7,810 10,697

Total Annual IDE Storage Bag Sales 6,314 9,424 16,712 23,431 32,090

2) RADD Design Aquifer Customers 3,157 4,712 8,356 11,715 16,045

3) Water Drop Accumulus Customers 3,157 4,712 8,356 11,715 16,045

4) Non-IDE FarmersPopulation, 1991 census 78,937,187

Population growth, 1991-2001 22.6%Population, 2001 96,800,672

Annual growth rate 2.1%Projected population 105,191,668 107,400,693 109,656,108 111,958,886 114,310,023 116,710,533

% of population that works 43.5% 43.5% 43.5% 43.5% 43.5% 43.5%% of workers involved in agriculture 55.0% 55.0% 55.0% 55.0% 55.0% 55.0%

Population involved in agriculture 25,167,107 25,695,616 26,235,224 26,786,163 27,348,673 27,922,995 Working people per agricultural household 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 # of Agricultural households 10,066,843 10,278,246 10,494,090 10,714,465 10,939,469 11,169,198

(less IDE drip kit + storage bag system users) (44,600) (56,120) (69,944) (86,533) (106,439) (130,327) (less IDE storage bag only users) (2,105) (3,141) (5,571) (7,810) (10,697)

Non-IDE Agricultural Households 10,022,243 10,220,022 10,421,004 10,622,362 10,825,220 11,028,174

Figure 45 - Maharashtra Market Size


B-8

Maharashtra Market Penetration Rates and Unit Sales2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Penetration Rates1) IDE Storage Bag System Users 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 60.0% 60.0% 60.0% 60.0% 60.0%

2) RADD Design Aquifer Customers 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 60.0% 60.0% 60.0% 60.0% 60.0%

3) Water Drop Accumulus Customers 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 40.0% 60.0% 60.0% 60.0% 60.0% 60.0%

4) Non-IDE Farmers 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.03% 0.03% 0.03% 0.04% 0.05%

Unit Sales1) IDE Storage Bag System Users 2,525 3,770 6,685 9,372 12,836 3,788 5,654 10,027 14,059 19,254 2) RADD Design Aquifer Customers 1,263 1,885 3,342 4,686 6,418 1,894 2,827 5,014 7,029 9,627 3) Water Drop Waterbed Customers 1,263 1,885 3,342 4,686 6,418 1,894 2,827 5,014 7,029 9,627 4) Non-IDE Farmers - - - - - 2,555 3,066 3,679 4,415 5,298

Total Unit Sales 5,051 7,539 13,370 18,745 25,672 10,131 14,375 23,734 32,532 43,806 Price per unit to the farmer $0.70 $0.73 $0.75 $0.78 $0.81 $3.52 $3.65 $3.78 $3.92 $4.06Inflation rate 3.6% 3.6% 3.6% 3.6% 3.6% 3.6% 3.6% 3.6%

Total Revenue $3,549 $5,488 $10,082 $14,644 $20,779 $35,686 $52,456 $89,729 $127,418 $177,752

Siphon Kit Delivery Pump

Figure 46 - Maharashtra Penetration Rate and Unit Sales Projections


B-9

H2Go Pilot Financials2H 2005

Units SoldSiphon Kit 50Delivery Pump 50

Royalty per UnitSiphon Kit $0.03Delivery Pump $0.27

Royalty Revenues to H2GoSiphon Kit $2Delivery Pump $13Total Revenue $15

Manufacturing Subsidy Required per Unit (due to low volume)Siphon Kit $0.30Delivery Pump $2.41

Total Manufacturing SubsidiesSiphon Kit $15Delivery Pump $121Total $136

Net Revenue ($121)

ExpensesOffice expenditures $400Salaries

0 Office Manager $3,000 $00 Office Administrative Employee $2,000 $01 Manufacturing Liaison $2,000 $1,0001 Marketing Programs Manager $2,000 $1,0002 Field Sales and Marketing $2,000 $2,000

$4,000Marketing $2,000

Total Expenses $6,400

Net Income (Loss) ($6,521)

Cash FlowBeginning Cash Balance $7,000Cash Inflows $15Cash Outflows ($6,536)Ending Cash Balance $7,000 $479

Figure 47 - Pilot Financials


B-10

Stand-Alone H2Go Financials2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Units SoldSiphon Kit 5,051 7,539 13,370 18,745 25,672

Growth Rate 49% 77% 40% 37%Delivery Pump 10,131 14,375 23,734 32,532 43,806

Growth Rate 42% 65% 37% 35%

Royalty per UnitSiphon Kit $0.03 $0.03 $0.04 $0.04 $0.04Delivery Pump $0.27 $0.28 $0.28 $0.30 $0.31

Royalty Revenues to H2GoSiphon Kit $167 $258 $474 $688 $976Delivery Pump $2,690 $3,954 $6,764 $9,605 $13,399Total Revenue $2,857 $4,212 $7,237 $10,292 $14,375

ExpensesStartup Costs $13,750 $0 $0 $0 $0Office rental $500 $518 $537 $556 $576Office expenditures $1,000 $1,036 $1,073 $1,112 $1,152Marketing $5,000 $6,000 $7,200 $8,640 $10,368Salaries

1 Office Manager $3,000 $3,000 $3,108 $3,220 $3,336 $3,4560 Office Administrative Employee $2,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

0.5 Manufacturing Liaison $2,000 $1,000 $1,036 $1,073 $1,112 $1,1520.5 Marketing Programs Manager $2,000 $1,000 $1,036 $1,073 $1,112 $1,152

5 6 7 8 95-9 Field Sales and Marketing $2,000 $10,000 $12,432 $14,504 $16,576 $18,648

$15,005 $17,618 $19,877 $22,144 $24,417

Total Expenses $35,255 $25,172 $28,687 $32,452 $36,513

Net Income (Loss) ($32,398) ($20,960) ($21,450) ($22,159) ($22,138)

Cash FlowBeginning Cash Balance $125,000 $92,602 $71,641 $50,191 $28,032Cash Inflows $2,857 $4,212 $7,237 $10,292 $14,375Cash Outflows ($35,255) ($25,172) ($28,687) ($32,452) ($36,513)Ending Cash Balance $125,000 $92,602 $71,641 $50,191 $28,032 $5,894

Figure 48 - Stand-Alone Financials


B-11

H2Go Financials - IDE Integration2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Units SoldSiphon Kit 5,051 7,539 13,370 18,745 25,672

Growth Rate 49% 77% 40% 37%Delivery Pump 10,131 14,375 23,734 32,532 43,806

Growth Rate 42% 65% 37% 35%

Royalty Revenues to H2GoSiphon Kit $167 $258 $474 $688 $976Delivery Pump $2,690 $3,954 $6,764 $9,605 $13,399Total Revenue $2,857 $4,212 $7,237 $10,292 $14,375

ExpensesStartup Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Office rental $0 $0 $0 $0 $0Office expenditures $180 $186 $193 $200 $207Marketing $1,000 $1,100 $1,210 $1,331 $1,464Payroll $3,001 $4,145 $5,256 $6,370 $7,486Total Expenses $4,181 $5,431 $6,659 $7,901 $9,158

Net Income (Loss) ($1,324) ($1,220) $578 $2,391 $5,217

Cash FlowBeginning Cash Balance $3,000 $1,676 $456 $1,034 $3,426Cash Inflows $2,857 $4,212 $7,237 $10,292 $14,375Cash Outflows ($4,181) ($5,431) ($6,659) ($7,901) ($9,158)Ending Cash Balance $3,000 $1,676 $456 $1,034 $3,426 $8,642

Figure 49 - Integrated Financials


C-1

Appendix C - International Development Enterprises (IDE)

Philosophy and Irrigation Products of IDE

IDE irrigation kits have been designed for a range of crops and are quite suitable for small and marginal farmers of the semi arid regions in India. Also, these kits are applicable in a wide range of plot sizes varying from 20 square meters to 1000 square meters, with prices ranging from Rs.250 to Rs.4000. Divisible and available in convenient packages (in the form of kits) which the farmers can install and maintain themselves, the farmers also have the option to begin with one unit and expand it later at their convenience.

More than 70% of Indian farmers are small scale operators cultivating plots less than one hectare. Erratic rainfall patterns play havoc into the livelihoods of the small farmers who do not have any alternate supply of water.

They are largely constrained due to the absence of simple and low cost irrigation technologies suited to small plots that can be managed by themselves. The present technologies are expensive and fit for use in large fields by big farmers.

IDE drip irrigation kits cost almost 80% cheaper than the conventional drip kits and thus bring about a shift from subsistence farming to higher value production farming doubling the income of the poor farmers, enhancing household food security in addition to improvement in nutritional status of farm families.

The drip irrigation technology frees the farmer from the limitations of rain fed farming, enabling him to grow wider variety of crops, cultivate all the year round, higher cropping intensity and do priority farming. Good irrigation technologies and agricultural practices coupled with enhanced participation of the poor in the markets is the key to income generation. Income dimension is important because it has the potential to buffer the poor communities against the stresses and shocks they encounter due to environmental changes. By putting the income generating technologies in the hands of the smallholders we tend to address the land and water constraints that have forced them to remain poor, and bring a significant and everlasting change into their lives.

• These technologies have been developed through rigorous R&D and field testing for small and marginal farmers

• These technologies are divisible and available in convenient packages (in the form of kits) which the farmers can install and maintain themselves; besides, the farmers have the option to begin with one unit and expand it later at their convenience

• These kits are easily assembled by local farmer groups with little training and back-up support;

• IDEI sources components from a large number of manufacturers and uses the most cost-effective ones; and

• IDEI also tests all the Drip Irrigation components developed and available all over the country and uses the ones most appropriate for small farmer's requirements.


C-2

Over 200 local development agencies involved in the field of watershed development, including NGOs, bilateral and multilateral projects, have used ADITI kits to demonstrate the benefits of Drip irrigation to the farmers in their project areas.


D-1

Appendix D - Agriculture’s Importance in Rural India and the Issue of Water Scarcity

As can be seen from the map overleaf, a large part of the Indian population is dependent on agriculture for its income.21

Figure 50 - Cultivators as a percentage of total workers, India 1991

Up to 67% of India’s work force is involved with agriculture.22 However, a lack of consistent water availability currently restricts crop earnings.

21 Maps of India. “Indian Cultivators Map.” http://www.mapsofindia.com/maps/india/cultivators.html 22 World 66. “India Economy.” http://www.world66.com/asia/southasia/india/economy


D-2

On average, Indian crops require approximately 100 liters per day for a 100 square meter plot.23 According to the Indian Labor Bureau, the average plot size is 0.32 hectares, or 3,200 square meters.24 This translates into an average agricultural water requirement of 3,200 liters per day.

In addition, families require water for personal use – drinking, washing, etc. Figures 3 and 4 showed the range of water requirements for the members of a rural village in India, varying according to the income bracket of the individual. During good months, the “poorest” individuals use a daily maximum of 50 liters for drinking/cooking and personal/household cleaning. One step up, “poor” individuals use a daily maximum of approximately 100 liters, with the most dramatic increase in water used for drinking and cooking. In the dry season, this usage declines precipitously to less than 5 liters per day for the poorest individuals and less than 10 liters per day for the poor individuals.25

This dramatic decline in water usage reflects the lack of a consistent water supply. In rural India, only 24% of households get their water from taps.26 Most households share community water resources, with the women of the households responsible for fetching water, often from up to several kilometers away. 43% of households access shared water resources through hand pumps and 22% from wells.27 Oftentimes, the wells dry up or the hand pumps needed to access them break. As a result, IDE estimates that 60% of its population lacks reliable, consistent access to water.28 Figures 5 and 6 illustrate families’ struggle to maintain water access, with the distance traveled to fetch water dramatically increasing between the wet winter months to the dry summer months.29

This dry season water scarcity particularly affects agriculture. During this time, community water resources are restricted; with no withdrawals for irrigation allowed (all water usage is reserved for drinking and personal uses).30

23 IDE – Paul Polak and Jack Keller. 24 Labour Bureau, Government of India, http://labourbureau.nic.in/RLE992k%20GenChar%20Chap%203.htm 25 Deepa Joshi. SecureWater – Whither Poverty? Livelihoods in the DRA: a case study of the Water Supply

Programme in India, pp.54-55. Overseas Development Institute, 2004. 26 Oskar Goswami. “The Challenge of Rural India.”

http://fecolumnists.expressindia.com/full_column.php?content_id=53831 27 Oskar Goswami. “The Challenge of Rural India.”

http://fecolumnists.expressindia.com/full_column.php?content_id=53831 28 Paul Polak. 29 Deepa Joshi. SecureWater – Whither Poverty? Livelihoods in the DRA: a case study of the Water Supply

Programme in India, pp.54-55. Overseas Development Institute, 2004. 30 Intermediate Technology Consultants, “Low Cost Micro Irrigation Technologies for the Poor.”

http://www.itcltd.com/docs/amit%20final%20report.pdf, October 2003. page 9.

h2go final report 041505 - stanford universitycbauburn/basecamp/d...h2go final report march 16, 2005...

Documents