[simon_weber]

Sure, everyone needs water. But, "there's no such thing as a free lunch", and this seems to be a reasonable way to get water to people who need it right now.

update, when I had a chance to look at some data: As for affordability, it seems 5% of monthly income is typically used as the threshold [1]. This would mean that someone would have to earn $2 dollars per day to have affordable water through this solution. You're right: for many below the poverty line in India, this does not meet the affordability standard [2].

However, I would argue that any way of increasing access is an improvement, simply judging by how available water currently is [3]. As was said earlier, you're not making people any poorer by giving them another option to attain water.

[1]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_... [2]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_India [3]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in_...

[pointyhat]

But when you make the most profitable way the preferred way, you shift the power from the people to a controlling party, at which point, the price goes up to suit the "investors".

It's an unfortunate part of human nature.