Navigation

AquaFund case study

last updated: 10th June 2011

AquaFund Case Study.doc

64KB

The Aquafund scheme set out to provide public sector organisations with the funding to reduce water costs and consumption without any upfront payment. They are an EU compliant supplier who is recommended by the OGC. They will survey our site and bills. They will ensure that our bills are both fair and accurate. They will monitor any leaks and ensure we have the optimal water saving devices in place. Our only obligation is 50% of any cashable saving that is made. One percent of the money we pay to them is passed on to Wateraid, who provide sanitation and drinking water to the poorest countries in the world.

Rating:
0

Comments Comments

  • Thumbnail Placeholder

    The figure of 50% is a common one for this type of work, but care needs to be taken to differentiate between the various Suppliers in the Market.

    Aquafund, Cadantis and others carry out recovery audit, site surveys and install water management and monitoring equipment , etc. usually without charge to the organisation. The 50% of recovered monies and savings identified allows them to recover their costs as well as realise a suitable margin.

    Meridian and others provide a recovery audit function only which does not involve such a high 'fee' - charges for this type of work can be on the basis of perhaps 16% of any monies recovered as a result of the audit.

    James Durcan 24th January 2013

  • Thumbnail Placeholder

    Is this too good to be true?  I have heard that the 50% of savings is based on savings identified not actually realised, some of the actions required to make the savings may not be cost effective.  Does anyone have any real, personal experience to share?

    Sue Smith 15th January 2013

  • Thumbnail Placeholder

    At Stafford College we thought so. Having looked into this offer we decided not to proceed due to the ongoing commitment.

    We worked with another company who reviewed all our water accounts and checked that they were definitiely ours and we were paying the correct amount. They identified some incorrect charging and negotiated refunds for these with the water company. We then had ongoing savings going forward.

    As I recall we paid the company 50% of the refund and 40% of the saving in the following year.

    Hope this helps.

    Pat Eagle 23rd January 2013