1. E.A.R a quantum leap in leakage management

2. Leakage: Happens! Is not predicable other than most likely at times of climate changes – wet / dry, hot / cold etc. Most water lost is due to the time it takes to identify a leak. Therefore If a leak can be identified inside a few hours, not days or weeks, it is argued that the money saved from stopping wastage from that leak is actually paying for the apparatus to detect it.

3. Water company leakage stats - 2012/13Total leakage DistributionLeakageas % 'age of Distribution input Ml/d % Water Company Affinity87718922 Anglian Water1,08318917 Sembcorp Bournemouth Water1452114 Bristol Water2574216 Cambridge (South Staffordshire)721217 Dee Valley Water61915 Northumbrian Water1,08919017 Portsmouth Water1733420 Severn Trent Water1,76644125 South East Water5209318 South Staffordshire Water2846523 South West Water4168420 Southern Water5298115 Sutton & East Surrey Water1532416 Thames Water2,52664626 United Utilities1,71545727 Wessex Water3236921 Yorkshire Water1,20226522 Welsh Water79618523 England and Wales13,9893,09622 Notes 1. Data source - Water UK website - Waterfacts/Industry datashare 2012-13Using these simple tables it can be argued that the highlighted water companies are losing revenue Explanatory variables and volume measures - waterat the following (domestic retail) rates: 2. All data rounded to zero decimal places Anglian Water189Ml/d=0.30 £M per dayor about £ 108 M per annum Thames Water646Ml/d=0.89 £M per dayor about £ 324 M per annum Wessex Water 69Ml/d=0.15 £M per dayor about £ 56 M per annum Water resources, leakage and forward planning in the UK Is projecting leakage up to 2040 an admission of failure?

4. Paying for network improvements: Is dead end technology holding the water industry back? As said “To keep doing the same thing and expect a different result every time is madness....”

5. Delivering value: Previously, although systems were available to detect leaks, the cost of such installations was prohibitive, EAR resolves the issue and delivers increasing value. At about £2,000 per installation, EAR cuts the time taken to find and repair a leak – estimated as up to £1,000 a day! If for example, it takes 10 days to locate and repair a leak, there is therefore a point, beyond which, the system is self financing!!!!

6. Avoid wasting resources: Minimise waste. Improve turnover Improve revenue. Take the total expenditure view. Interface with current communication systems. Be SMART.

7. System Overview: Objective – To construct a water network to incorporate a smart and permanent monitoring system, to identify and locate leak paths quickly and efficiently. – To capture the SOUND that is transmitted by water. Eliminate the problems of multiple pipe materials and diameters. Guarantee quality, high level information for extensive coverage of a water network. Filter our peripheral sounds. – Use above ground water management systems as “broadcast point” Using existing assets – e.g. House connection point New or existing properties. A simple, non intrusive way of covering a water network.

8. How does work? Hydrophone in direct contact with water relays a signal to surface transmitter.

9. Above ground output: Interface with private water services. No additional street furniture. Extended range of transmitter. Easy access. Smarter solution.

10. Typical output: With two (or more) monitoring stations available, it is possible to triangulate the point of leakage more accurately than ever before, especially when working with “Google” maps. Clear, concise incident reporting as standard, even with PLASTIC pipes. Located at distances of about 300 m apart Or 3 No. per 1,000m run of water main (5 per 2,000m) EAR offers maximum coverage of the mains network at limited cost.

11. Water Connectivity Universal saddle clamp on ANY pipe material especially useful for plastic pipes. Universal saddle clamp on ANY pipe size. Output to new or existing surface box. Link to local area network. Interface with operator protocols. Smarter solutions