I.At the conceptual level: The conflict between the attribute of water resources and citizens’ rights
This is the most fundamental and also the most sensitive point of contention, touching upon the public product attribute of water resources.
1.”Water is a commodity” vs “Water is a basic human right”
Supporters (commodity theory): They believe that as a scarce resource, water can be effectively managed and regulated through market mechanisms (more use, more payment; pay first and use later), which can promote water conservation and is in line with the fair principle of “who uses, who pays”.
Opponents (human rights theory): They believe that access to clean drinking water is a basic human right and should not be completely commodified. The prepaid model links economic ability with basic survival rights, which may lead to low-income families being cut off from water supply during specific periods (such as unemployment, sudden economic difficulties), violating social fairness and humanistic care.
2.”User Responsibility” vs “Water Supplier Obligation” Transfer
Controversial point: Under the traditional post-payment model, water supply enterprises bear the costs and risks associated with meter reading, billing, and collection. Users are in a relatively passive position. In the prepaid model, the responsibility for water usage planning and payment is completely transferred to the users. Opponents argue that this is a behavior where public services shift their own management costs and risks to consumers.
3.Direction of Trust and Punishment
Controversial point: The post-payment model is based on a “trust” principle, meaning that users are assumed to pay on time. In contrast, the prepaid model implies a “disbelief” and “pre-punishment” logic – one must prove their payment capability before receiving services. This conceptual shift makes some users feel uncomfortable, perceiving themselves as being pre-defined as “defaulters”.
II. Technical Aspects: Reliability, Accuracy and Data Security
Technology is a means to achieve conceptual and management goals, but it also has its own set of controversies.
1.Reliability of Valves and Fault Risks
Key issue: The core control component of prepaid water meters is an electric or electromagnetic valve. In case of failure, there are mainly two risks:
False Shut-off: Even though the user’s account still has a balance, due to sensor failure, low battery voltage, signal interference, etc., the valve mistakenly closes, resulting in “unexplained water cut-off”, causing serious inconvenience and disputes in daily life.
Constantly Open Failure: Even more serious is that when the user is in arrears or needs to shut off the water, the valve cannot close due to rust, jamming, etc., preventing the implementation of prepaid management functions, making it virtually useless.
2.Battery Life and Replacement Issues
Controversial Points: Most prepaid water meters are powered by built-in batteries. When the battery life (typically 6-8 years) expires, is the entire water meter replaced or just the battery? Who bears the cost of replacement? Will the replacement process cause water supply to be interrupted for the user? These are difficult technical management issues encountered in practice.
3.Measurement Accuracy and “Slow Leakage” Sensitivity
Controversial Point: Some users have reported that prepaid water meters “run faster” than traditional mechanical meters. Although water meters undergo calibration before leaving the factory, they are more sensitive to small flow rates (such as slight water leakage in the pipe or continuous water inflow in the toilet tank), which may result in the meter measuring and deducting water usage without the user noticing it, causing a perception of “inaccurate” meter readings.
4.Data Security and Cyber Attacks
Controversial Points: For IC card water meters, there is a risk of card duplication and data tampering; for IoT (NB-IoT) water meters, there is a potential security threat where data may be stolen or tampered with during transmission, or even the server may be attacked, leading to large-scale water meter malfunctions (such as collective valve closure).
III. Management Level: Cost, Service and Emergency Response
This is the most concentrated manifestation of the controversy in practice.
1.Initial Investment and Long-Term Costs
Controversial Point: The unit price and installation cost of prepaid water meters (especially intelligent remote transmission water meters) are much higher than those of traditional mechanical meters. Who will bear this expensive initial investment? Is it the water company, the real estate developer, or will it be shared by users through water price? This is often the focus of debate during promotion.
2.Transformation of Service Model and the Brutality of “Water Cut-off”
Core Controversy: This is the most criticized management issue of prepaid water meters.
Lack of Buffer: In the post-payment model, after users fall behind on payments, they will go through a process of “notification – collection reminder”. There is a buffer period. However, the prepaid model is “water cut-off upon zero balance”, which is very direct and brutal. Especially when it comes to sudden water cut-off due to difficulties in making payments at night, it causes great inconvenience to users.
Lack of emergency response mechanism: For special groups such as elderly people living alone and the disabled, they may be at risk of water supply interruption due to mobility issues or lack of operational knowledge. Whether the management system has features like “overdraw limit” and “emergency water supply” is a key indicator of its management level.
3.Value and Ownership of User Data
Controversial point: Smart water meters can generate a large amount of detailed user water usage data. Who owns this data? Can water authorities use this data for commercial analysis? How can user water privacy be protected (for example, by water usage patterns, it can be inferred whether someone is at home or their daily routine)? Currently, relevant laws and regulations are not yet complete.
4.Dispute Resolution and Liability Definition
Controversial point: When there is a billing dispute (such as users believing the meter is inaccurate or the system deducts fees wrongly), who bears the burden of proof? Is it the user who hires a third party for testing on their own, or is it the water authority responsible? How are water fees handled during the testing period? Due to the asymmetry of technology and information, users are often in a disadvantaged position in such disputes.
Summary and Trends
Overall, the disputes regarding prepaid water meters are essentially a balance issue between efficiency, fairness, and human rights.
From the perspective of water supply enterprises, it significantly improves the recovery rate of water fees and reduces management costs, and is an efficient asset management tool.
From the perspective of some users, it provides consumer autonomy and enables better planning of water usage and expenditures.
However, from a social and ethical perspective, its “zero-tolerance” water cut-off mechanism and potential impact on economically disadvantaged groups make it full of moral controversies.
Future Development Trends may be:
1.More Humanized Technology: For example, setting “warning values” and “emergency water usage limits”, developing more convenient mobile payment and remote activation functions.
2.More Complete Policies: Clearly prohibiting the use of “one-size-fits-all” water cut-off measures for specific vulnerable groups, and establishing a fairer dispute resolution mechanism.
3.Diversified Models: Promote “mixed models”, that is, default to post-payment, but for users with long-term arrears or poor credit, after legal procedures, they can legally adopt prepaid management methods.
Therefore, when promoting prepaid water meters, they should not merely be regarded as a technical product, but should be treated as a comprehensive public service project involving society, law, and ethics with caution.