Choose a sewage treatment plant for the water entering it, the standard it must achieve and the people who will look after it—not just the smallest footprint or lowest purchase price.
The short answer
Compare actual flow, wastewater characteristics, available space, required reuse quality and whole-life costs. Aquatron’s separation-first approach is one option to assess against those site requirements.
Start with expected daily sewage flow, occupancy and use patterns, peak variation and future demand. Have the designer confirm the basis rather than choosing capacity from a generic rule. India Water Systems offers site-specific Aquatron solutions from 1 KLD up to several MLD.
The described Aquatron process separates toilet solids from flushing water and urine, with separated liquids joining grey water for further treatment. An industrial site may also produce process effluent with different characteristics. Do not assume domestic-sewage treatment covers industrial effluent: ask for an assessment of your actual incoming wastewater.
Solid-liquid separation reduces the need for sludge-handling equipment. The published comparison claims about 60% less built-up space than a conventional STP of the same capacity. The separator’s dimensions are not the footprint of the complete plant; obtain a site layout covering all treatment stages, access and service requirements.
Compare capacity and treatment targets on the same basis. Review complete-system footprint, electricity, sludge handling, staffing, maintenance, resilience and capital plus recurring costs. Aquatron separates solids first; conventional alternatives use different biological and separation arrangements. No technology is universally best for every site.
The described Aquatron system includes filtration and UV disinfection, with output intended for gardening, flushing and chiller make-up. Suitability depends on the required water quality and actual performance. Specify the intended reuse and applicable requirements in the design brief, and request testing rather than relying on appearance alone.
Review the full process layout, written design basis, equipment and service scope, and relevant project examples. The Technology page reports BOD falling from 77 to 7.3 mg/l and TSS from 97 to 5.2 mg/l in a 50 KLD retrofit example. These are project-specific results, not a guarantee for every future plant.
Compare like-for-like capital cost alongside electricity, maintenance, consumables, staffing and residual handling over a stated period. The published 1 MLD comparison lists indicative CAPEX of ₹5.14 crore for Aquatron, ₹7.61 crore for MBR, ₹8.24 crore for SBR and ₹9.15 crore for MBBR. Use the cost guide as context and request a sized, site-specific quotation.
Based on the product process, specifications, service scope and indicative comparisons already published by India Water Systems. Product claims and example results are not independent certification or a substitute for a site assessment.
Share your location, expected flow, requirements and phone number. Head office in Hyderabad; projects served across India.
Request a site assessment