Case Study: How Hyderabad Saved ₹2.1Cr with Reinvented Toilets

In 2022, the Greater Hyderabad Municipal Corporation (GHMC) faced a familiar problem: the city's 1,200+ public toilets were expensive to operate, frequently broken, and unpopular with citizens. Annual maintenance costs exceeded ₹145 crores, yet user satisfaction remained below 30%.

GHMC partnered with ReFlow Toilets to pilot zero-discharge sanitation systems at 15 high-traffic locations across the city. This case study presents real operational data from 18 months of deployment (July 2022 - December 2023), demonstrating how decentralized sanitation delivered ₹2.1 crores in measurable savings while improving service quality.

Project Background

The Challenge

Existing Infrastructure Performance:

GHMC operates 1,247 public toilet blocks serving an estimated 2.8 million daily users. A 2021 audit revealed:

Financial Issues:

• Annual operating cost: ₹145.2 crores (₹11.64 lakhs per toilet)
• Revenue collection: ₹8.3 crores (5.7% cost recovery)
• Subsidy requirement: ₹136.9 crores annually
• Escalating costs: 8-12% annual increase

Operational Issues:

• 287 toilets (23%) non-functional
• Average cleanliness rating: 2.1/5
• Frequent water shortages in summer months
• Sewage backup issues at 42% of facilities

User Experience:

• Daily usage: 2,247 users per toilet (average)
• User satisfaction: 28%
• 67% of women reported safety concerns
• 54% of users cited poor maintenance
• 48% complained of odor issues

Environmental Issues:

• Daily water consumption: 12.4 million liters
• Sewage treatment burden: 11.8 million liters/day
• Frequent groundwater contamination from leaking sewers
• Energy consumption: 2.1 million kWh annually

The Pilot Program

Objectives:

1. Reduce operational costs by 30%
2. Achieve 95%+ uptime
3. Improve user satisfaction to >70%
4. Eliminate water and sewerage dependency
5. Validate zero-discharge technology in real-world conditions

Scope:

• 15 B-CRT installations at high-traffic locations
• Locations selected for diversity: Transport hubs, parks, commercial areas, residential neighborhoods, tourist sites
• Capacity: 250-500 users per day per facility
• Duration: 18-month pilot + 6-month evaluation
• Investment: ₹2.7 crores capital expenditure

Site Selection Criteria:

1. High footfall: >300 daily users
2. Water stress: Areas with frequent supply interruptions
3. Sewerage issues: Locations with frequent backups or no sewage connection
4. Geographic diversity: Covering Old City, Hi-Tech City, suburbs, and periphery
5. Accessibility: High visibility, easy maintenance access

Installation Locations

#	Location	Type	Daily Users	Special Considerations
1	MGBS Bus Terminal	Transport	450-550	24/7 operation, high turnover
2	Hussain Sagar Lake (Necklace Road)	Tourist	350-450	Weekend peaks, scenic area
3	KBR National Park	Recreational	280-380	Morning/evening peaks, eco-sensitive
4	Kukatpally Metro Station	Transport	400-500	Commuter focused, peak hours
5	Charminar Heritage Area	Tourist	320-420	Cultural site, no sewerage
6	Gachibowli IT Park	Commercial	380-480	Office hours concentration
7	LB Nagar Market	Commercial	340-440	All-day traffic, vendor users
8	Mehdipatnam Junction	Commercial	360-460	High pedestrian traffic
9	Miyapur Residential Area	Residential	250-320	Family users, steady demand
10	Uppal Stadium	Recreational	290-400	Event-driven peaks
11	Shamshabad Airport Road	Transport	310-410	Tourist/traveler users
12	Tank Bund Promenade	Tourist	330-430	Evening peak, couples/families
13	Old City (Purani Haveli)	Residential	270-350	Dense population, narrow streets
14	Madhapur Cyber Towers	Commercial	390-490	Tech worker demographic
15	Patancheru Industrial Area	Industrial	320-420	Worker users, shift patterns

Financial Performance

Capital Expenditure

Per-Unit Costs:

Component	Cost (₹ Lakhs)	Notes
B-CRT System	16.5	Fully integrated treatment unit
Site Preparation	2.8	Civil works, foundation
Building/Superstructure	4.2	Toilet block, gender-separated
Solar Installation	3.1	3.5 kW panels + inverters
Water Storage	1.4	2,000L rainwater + 1,000L treated water tanks
Electrical/Plumbing	1.8	Integration, controls, sensors
Commissioning	0.9	Training, testing, certification
Total per Unit	30.7	Including all components

Program Total:

• 15 units × ₹30.7 lakhs = ₹4.6 crores
• Contingency (10%): ₹0.46 crores
• Project management: ₹0.31 crores
• Total capital cost: ₹5.37 crores

Comparison to Conventional:

• Conventional toilet block: ₹22-28 lakhs (building only)
• Sewerage connection: ₹4-8 lakhs
• Water connection: ₹2-4 lakhs
• Total conventional: ₹28-40 lakhs

B-CRT units cost 5-25% more upfront but eliminate sewerage/water connection costs and deliver substantial operating savings.

Operating Expenditure (18 Months)

Monthly Operating Costs per Unit:

Category	B-CRT (₹)	Conventional (₹)	Savings (₹)
Water	0	24,500	24,500
Electricity	0	8,200	8,200
Sewage Charges	0	6,800	6,800
Cleaning Staff (2 FTE)	38,000	38,000	0
Maintenance	6,200	12,400	6,200
Consumables	7,800	8,500	700
Security/Management	15,000	15,000	0
Total Monthly	67,000	113,400	46,400

Annual Operating Costs per Unit:

• B-CRT: ₹8.04 lakhs
• Conventional: ₹13.61 lakhs
• Savings: ₹5.57 lakhs per unit per year

18-Month Operating Costs (15 units):

• B-CRT: 15 units × ₹12.06 lakhs = ₹1.81 crores
• Conventional (theoretical): 15 units × ₹20.42 lakhs = ₹3.06 crores
• Operating savings: ₹1.25 crores

Revenue Performance

User Fee Structure:

• Standard use: ₹5 per person
• Children (under 10): ₹2
• Persons with disabilities: Free
• Average fee per use: ₹4.30

Revenue Data (18 months):

Average per unit:

• Daily users: 362 (average across all sites)
• Daily revenue: 362 × ₹4.30 = ₹1,557
• Monthly revenue: ₹46,700
• 18-month revenue: ₹70.05 lakhs

Total program (15 units):

• 18-month revenue: 15 × ₹70.05 lakhs = ₹10.51 lakhs

Cost Recovery:

• Operating costs: ₹1.81 crores
• Revenue: ₹10.51 lakhs
• Recovery rate: 5.8%

While low in absolute terms, this matches conventional toilet recovery rates (5-7%) and represents improvement over GHMC average (5.7%).

Revenue Optimization Opportunities:
Several sites showed potential for premium pricing:

• MGBS: Users willing to pay ₹10 for cleaner facilities
• IT Park locations: Could support ₹15 premium tier
• Tourist sites: ₹10-15 acceptable for better experience

If premium pricing implemented at 5 suitable sites:

• Additional revenue: ₹25-40 lakhs over 18 months
• Potential recovery rate: 7-9%

Total Cost Comparison

18-Month Total Cost of Ownership:

B-CRT System:

• Amortized capital (10-year depreciation): ₹80.55 lakhs
• Operating costs: ₹181.08 lakhs
• Less revenue: -₹105.08 lakhs
• Net cost: ₹156.55 lakhs
• Per unit: ₹10.44 lakhs

Conventional System (Theoretical):

• Amortized capital: ₹52.50 lakhs
• Operating costs: ₹306.30 lakhs
• Less revenue: -₹95.03 lakhs
• Net cost: ₹263.77 lakhs
• Per unit: ₹17.58 lakhs

Total savings: ₹107.22 lakhs over 18 months

Long-Term Financial Projections

20-Year Lifecycle Analysis (per unit):

Year	B-CRT Cost (₹ Lakhs)	Conventional Cost (₹ Lakhs)	Annual Savings
0 (Capital)	30.7	34.0	-3.3
1-5 (Operations)	40.2	68.0	27.8
6 (Major service)	12.1	10.2	-1.9
7-10 (Operations)	32.2	54.4	22.2
11 (Refurbishment)	15.8	22.0	6.2
12-20 (Operations)	72.5	122.4	49.9
20-Year Total	203.5	311.0	107.5

Savings per unit over 20 years: ₹107.5 lakhs

Total program (15 units) 20-year savings: ₹16.1 crores

Operational Performance

Uptime and Reliability

Availability Metrics:

Overall uptime: 97.3%

• Target: 95%
• Exceeded target by 2.3 percentage points

Downtime Analysis:

Cause	Incidents	Total Downtime (hours)	% of Total
Scheduled maintenance	45	180	67.2%
UV lamp replacement	9	36	13.4%
Pump failures	6	28	10.4%
Control system issues	4	15	5.6%
Membrane cleaning	3	9	3.4%
Total	67	268	100%

Facility-Level Performance:

• Best performer: KBR Park (99.1% uptime)
• Lowest performer: Old City location (94.8% uptime)
• 13 of 15 units exceeded 97% uptime
• No unit failed to meet 95% minimum target

Comparison to Conventional:

• Conventional toilet average uptime: 73.2%
• Common failures: Water supply interruptions (45%), sewage backups (23%), vandalism (18%)
• B-CRT improvement: +24.1 percentage points

Water Quality Monitoring

Testing Regime:

• Parameters tested: BOD₅, COD, TSS, coliforms, pH, turbidity
• Frequency: Weekly for first 6 months, biweekly thereafter
• Total samples: 1,170 (78 per unit)

Results (median values across all units):

Parameter	Measured	ISO 30500 Limit	Compliance Margin
BOD₅ (mg/L)	26.5	50	47% below limit
COD (mg/L)	89.0	150	41% below limit
TSS (mg/L)	15.2	50	70% below limit
Coliforms (CFU/100mL)	287	1,000	71% below limit
pH	7.2	6.5-8.5	Well within range
Turbidity (NTU)	1.8	Not specified	Crystal clear

Compliance Rate:

• 100% of samples met ISO 30500 standards
• 98.3% of samples exceeded standards by >30% margin
• Zero exceedances or violations

Water Reuse:

• Treated water used for toilet flushing: 86.3% recycling rate
• Remaining 13.7% lost to:
  • Evaporation: 7.2%
  • Solids moisture content: 4.8%
  • System maintenance: 1.7%

Energy Performance

Energy Self-Sufficiency:

Solar Generation:

• Installed capacity per unit: 3.5 kW
• Average daily generation: 14.2 kWh (across all sites)
• Annual generation: 5,183 kWh per unit

Energy Consumption:

• Daily consumption: 12.8 kWh per unit
• Annual consumption: 4,672 kWh per unit

Energy Balance:

• Generation: 5,183 kWh
• Consumption: 4,672 kWh
• Surplus: 511 kWh (10.9% excess)

Grid Independence: 92.3%

• Days operated 100% on solar: 311 (56.7%)
• Days requiring grid supplement: 237 (43.3%)
• Grid energy used: 358 kWh per unit over 18 months (7.7% of total)

Monsoon Performance:
Even during cloudy monsoon months (July-September):

• Solar generation: 8.9 kWh/day (38% reduction)
• Battery storage covered nighttime demand
• Grid backup used only 12 days total

Energy Cost Savings:

• Conventional toilet electricity cost: ₹8,200/month
• B-CRT grid electricity cost: ₹260/month (supplemental only)
• Monthly savings: ₹7,940
• 18-month savings per unit: ₹1.43 lakhs
• Total program: ₹21.45 lakhs

Water Consumption

Comparative Analysis:

Conventional Toilet (300 users/day):

• Flush volume: 9 liters (low-flow)
• Daily consumption: 2,700 liters
• Monthly consumption: 81,000 liters
• 18-month consumption: 1,458,000 liters

B-CRT Toilet (362 users/day average):

• Flush volume: 0.4 liters
• Daily consumption (new water): 145 liters
• Recycled water: 1,245 liters (internal loop)
• Monthly consumption (new water): 4,350 liters
• 18-month consumption: 78,300 liters

Water Savings per Unit:

• 1,458,000 - 78,300 = 1,379,700 liters (94.6% reduction)

Total Program Savings:

• 15 units × 1,379,700 = 20.7 million liters saved
• Equivalent to annual water supply for 1,130 people (WHO 50L/day standard)

Cost Savings:

• Water supply: ₹20/kL × 20,695 kL = ₹4.14 lakhs
• Sewage charges: ₹7/kL × 20,695 kL = ₹1.45 lakhs
• Total water-related savings: ₹5.59 lakhs

Solids Management

Collection and Processing:

Monthly Solids Removal (average per unit):

• Volume: 0.85 cubic meters
• Dry weight: 145 kg
• Removal frequency: Monthly (initially), quarterly (after stabilization)

Processing Method:

• On-site drying (60 days)
• Off-site composting (90 days)
• Final product: Pathogen-free biosolids suitable for landscaping

Costs:

• Monthly removal service: ₹3,200 per unit
• 18-month total: ₹48,000 per unit
• Program total: ₹7.2 lakhs

Comparison to Conventional:

• Septic tank emptying: ₹12,000 per event (every 6 months)
• 18-month cost: ₹36,000 per unit
• B-CRT premium: ₹12,000 per unit (33% higher)

However, B-CRT solids are stabilized and safe; septic waste requires treatment plant processing (additional cost borne by municipality).

User Experience

Satisfaction Survey Results

Survey Methodology:

• Random intercept surveys at all 15 locations
• Sample size: 4,247 respondents
• Survey periods: Month 3, Month 9, Month 15
• Demographics: 51% male, 47% female, 2% non-binary/prefer not to say

Overall Satisfaction:

Rating: 4.2/5 (84%)

• Extremely satisfied: 47%
• Satisfied: 37%
• Neutral: 11%
• Dissatisfied: 4%
• Extremely dissatisfied: 1%

Comparison to Conventional:

• GHMC conventional toilets average: 2.1/5 (42%)
• Improvement: +100% satisfaction score

Category-Specific Ratings

Category	Rating	Key Feedback
Cleanliness	4.4/5	"Cleanest public toilet I've used in India"
Odor Control	4.6/5	"No smell at all, very surprised"
Availability	4.7/5	"Always open, never water problem"
Safety	4.1/5	"Well-lit, feel safe using it"
Accessibility	3.8/5	"Good for wheelchair, but could improve"
Maintenance	4.3/5	"Always clean, staff attentive"

Gender-Specific Insights:

Women's Feedback:

• 89% felt safe using facilities (vs. 33% for conventional)
• Key factors: Better lighting, attended facilities, locked stalls
• Improvement requests: Baby changing stations, feminine hygiene disposal

Men's Feedback:

• 86% satisfaction (slightly lower than women's 91%)
• Appreciated urinal availability and quick turnover
• Some complaints about user fees (preferring free facilities)

Accessibility Feedback:

• 78% of wheelchair users rated accessibility as good/excellent
• Improvements suggested: Better ramps, grab bars, emergency call buttons

Behavioral Observations

Peak Usage Patterns:

Transport Hubs (MGBS, Metro stations):

• Morning peak: 7:00-9:30 AM (commuters)
• Evening peak: 5:30-8:00 PM (return commuters)
• Average visit duration: 3.8 minutes

Commercial Areas (Markets, IT parks):

• Steady all-day usage
• Lunch hour peak: 12:30-2:00 PM
• Average visit duration: 4.2 minutes

Recreational/Tourist Sites:

• Weekend peaks (Saturday-Sunday 2-3x weekday traffic)
• Evening concentration: 4:00-8:00 PM
• Longer visit duration: 5.1 minutes (families, changing, etc.)

Fee Acceptance:

• 82% of users found ₹5 fee acceptable for quality
• 11% would pay more (₹10-15) for premium facilities
• 7% objected to any fee (preference for free facilities)

Willingness to Travel:
Users willing to walk an average of 380 meters to use B-CRT facilities over closer conventional toilets—demonstrating strong preference for quality.

Lessons Learned

Technical Insights

1. Biological Treatment Resilience

MBBR systems proved highly resilient to variable loading:

• Handled daily fluctuations of 200-500 users without performance degradation
• Recovered quickly (24-48 hours) from weeklong shutdowns (Diwali, festivals)
• Temperature variations (15-42°C across seasons) had minimal impact

Recommendation: MBBR is well-suited to public toilet applications with variable demand.

2. UV Lamp Longevity

UV lamps lasted 11,000-13,000 hours (vs. manufacturer claim of 9,000):

• Replacement cost: ₹8,500 per lamp
• Replacement interval: 15-18 months (vs. projected 12 months)
• Cost savings: ₹3,000-5,000 per unit

Recommendation: Budget conservatively but expect better longevity with quality components.

3. Membrane Fouling

Membrane fouling occurred faster than expected in high-turbidity areas (Old City, industrial zones):

• Standard cleaning interval: 3 months
• High-turbidity sites: 6-8 weeks
• Chemical cleaning cost: ₹4,200 per event

Recommendation: Pre-filtration improvements for high-solids environments.

4. Solar Panel Soiling

Dust accumulation reduced solar efficiency 18-25% in dry months:

• Monthly cleaning improved efficiency 22% on average
• Cleaning cost: ₹800 per month
• ROI: 27.5:1 (cleaning pays for itself many times over)

Recommendation: Mandate monthly panel cleaning in dusty environments.

Operational Insights

1. Staff Training Critical

Initial staff turnover (first 6 months): 38%

• Improved after enhanced training: 12% annual turnover
• Key factors: Better understanding of system, pride in working with advanced technology

Recommendation: Invest in comprehensive training and ongoing support.

2. Preventive Maintenance ROI

Units with rigorous preventive maintenance schedules (monthly checklist):

• 24% fewer breakdowns
• 31% lower repair costs
• 2.8 percentage point higher uptime

Recommendation: Preventive maintenance saves 3-4x its cost in avoided repairs.

3. User Education Reduces Misuse

Sites with user education signage:

• 67% less toilet paper clogging
• 52% reduction in non-flushable items (sanitary pads, bottles, etc.)
• 19% lower maintenance costs

Recommendation: Clear, visual signage in multiple languages essential.

Policy Insights

1. Building Codes Need Updates

Current codes require sewerage connection, complicating zero-discharge approvals:

• Approval process took 6-8 months (vs. 2-3 for conventional)
• Required multiple exemptions and special permissions

Recommendation: Update building codes to recognize ISO 30500 certified systems as compliant alternative to sewerage.

2. Tariff Structure Impacts Viability

₹5 fee proved acceptable but limited revenue:

• Premium sites could support ₹10-15 fee structure
• Tiered pricing (standard/premium) could improve cost recovery

Recommendation: Allow flexible pricing based on facility quality and location.

3. Procurement Needs Lifecycle Costing

Traditional procurement favors lowest capital cost, disadvantaging B-CRT:

• B-CRT: Higher upfront, lower lifecycle cost
• Conventional: Lower upfront, higher lifecycle cost

Recommendation: Mandate 20-year lifecycle cost analysis in all sanitation procurement.

Scaling Strategy

Citywide Deployment Plan

Phase 1 (Years 1-2): 50 Units

• Focus on water-stressed areas
• Locations without sewerage access
• Tourist and commercial high-traffic sites
• Investment: ₹15.35 crores

Phase 2 (Years 3-5): 200 Units

• Expand to all municipal wards
• Replace worst-performing conventional toilets
• New development areas (satellite cities)
• Investment: ₹61.4 crores

Phase 3 (Years 6-10): 500 Units

• Target 40% of GHMC public toilets
• Full coverage of unsewered areas
• Retrofit high-value locations
• Investment: ₹153.5 crores

Total Program: 750 Units

• Represents 60% of current GHMC toilet inventory
• Investment: ₹230.25 crores
• Annual operating savings (at scale): ₹41.78 crores
• Payback period: 5.5 years

Return on Investment

Program-Level ROI (750 units over 20 years):

Costs:

• Capital: ₹230.25 crores
• Operations (20 years): ₹1,206 crores
• Total cost: ₹1,436.25 crores

Conventional Alternative:

• Capital: ₹255 crores
• Operations (20 years): ₹2,042 crores
• Total cost: ₹2,297 crores

Net Savings: ₹860.75 crores (37.5%)

Additional Benefits

Beyond financial savings:

Water Savings:

• Annual: 1.03 billion liters
• 20-year: 20.6 billion liters
• Equivalent to annual water supply for 1.13 million people

Energy Savings:

• Annual: 41.76 million kWh
• CO₂ avoided: 29,232 tons annually

Economic Impact:

• Jobs created: 1,500 (cleaning staff, maintenance technicians)
• Local procurement: ₹45 crores (parts, services)
• Tourism boost: Improved international perception of city cleanliness

Social Impact:

• Improved women's safety and dignity
• Reduced open defecation
• Better health outcomes (reduced diarrheal disease)
• Enhanced city livability

Conclusion

The Hyderabad pilot conclusively demonstrates that zero-discharge toilet technology is:

✅ Financially Viable: 31% lower lifecycle costs, ₹2.1Cr savings in 18 months

✅ Operationally Superior: 97.3% uptime vs. 73.2% conventional

✅ Environmentally Sustainable: 94.6% water savings, 92.3% energy self-sufficient

✅ User-Preferred: 4.2/5 satisfaction vs. 2.1/5 conventional

✅ Technically Proven: 100% ISO 30500 compliance, zero water quality violations

✅ Scalable: Performed consistently across 15 diverse locations

The data is clear: decentralized zero-discharge sanitation is not experimental technology—it's a mature, field-proven solution that outperforms conventional systems on every metric that matters.

For cities facing water scarcity, aging sewerage infrastructure, and budget constraints, the question is no longer whether to adopt zero-discharge technology, but how quickly it can be scaled.

Hyderabad's experience provides a roadmap. Other cities should follow.

---

Next Steps for Municipalities:

1. Request a Site Assessment: ReFlow will evaluate your locations and provide customized ROI analysis
2. Visit Operating Sites: See the technology in action at any of our 15 Hyderabad locations
3. Pilot Program: Start with 3-5 units to validate results in your local context
4. Scale: Develop a phased deployment plan to maximize savings

---

Related Resources:

• How Zero-Discharge Toilets Work
• Public Toilet Economics
• Calculate Your ROI
• Contact Us for Site Assessment

References:

1. GHMC (2021). "Public Toilet Infrastructure Audit."
2. ReFlow Toilets (2024). "Hyderabad Deployment: 18-Month Performance Report."
3. Hyderabad Smart City Development Corporation (2023). "Pilot Program Evaluation."
4. User satisfaction surveys conducted by independent agency (Q2 2023, Q4 2023, Q2 2024).