UP | uncultured project

This is maybe my final week in Bangladesh.

Since I landed, I’ve been trying to complete projects related to Challenge Poverty. As you know, I’ve been working on building that Pond Sand Filter and repairing that school. It’s been nearly 6 months and I want to wrap everything up in the next 72 hours. Yeah…. that maybe a bit ambitious. Fingers crossed.

The good news is that the water quality of that Pond Sand Filter is now clear, clean, and deemed safe to drink by official tests conducted by the Department of Public Health here in Bangladesh. Here’s a photo. One is a glass of water from the Pond Sand Filter and the other is a glass of store bought mineral water. Can you tell which is which?

Mineral Water (Left), Pond Sand Filter Water (Right) has been tested by the Department of Public Health thanks to Save the Children

Getting to this point has been long. Since landing there was the BDR mutiny which stopped things, Cyclone Aila which stopped things, and normal bureaucracy and office meetings which come with trying to do something like this. Save the Children has been helping me navigate most of this as best they can and now we’re pulling out all the stops to get this done before I fly home.

The question is – am I going back for a break or for good? Back in January, I wrote that if I can’t sustain this project I’m gonna have to pack up in 12 months time. By “sustain” I want to do this in a way that doesn’t impoverish my parents. My savings are long gone – and I do this by borrowing from my parents. We’re not Rockefellers unfortunately – just regular Suburban Middle Class Canadians (basically like Americans… but we get free health care).

I also don’t want to start taking a cut from people’s donations. That still just doesn’t sit right with me.

I’ve decided to spend the next few months trying to figure ways to sustain this work. During this project, I’ve learned a lot about the world of charity work. One things that surprised me is that this field is a hell of a lot more competitive than I ever imagined. Many orgs prefer to copy & compete instead of collaborate & create. These orgs and charities like my approach – but want to replicate it internally instead of teaming up

Save the Children has really been the exception by being supportive, open, and collaborative (instead of competitive). Going forward, I’m hoping there are other exceptions out there…

P.S.

What’s going to happen with your donations? Don’t worry I’m not gonna run away with them! In my attempt to network with more charities and organizations that I’d like to team up with, it’s easier to propose to do certain projects and/or team up when you can assure them you already have the funds. So please, feel free to keep donating to either the project fund or the operating and equipment fund.

A few friends have been messaging me on facebook about this new video that just got released by TED:

My first reaction was “gee, that looks familiar”. In fact, 8 months prior to this TED talk I had done the exact same thing – but in a far less controlled situation in rural Kenya:

A ton of friends have been pushing me to apply for TED but I always told them no because I didn’t think I had anything “TED worthy”. If I knew something I already did 12 months ago would be the centerpiece of a TED global talk, I would have applied ages ago!

As someone who done this first hand, here’s what I wish Michael Pritchard could have done and/or created to set his product apart:

• Why not add salt? During a cyclone or flood, salt often mixes into drinking water. However, the LifeSaver does not filter salt.
• Why not add chemicals? Sometimes water gets contaminated from industrial run-off, but the LifeSaver doesn’t filter chemicals.
• Why not show a working family version? A large black jerry can was held up but, according to the official website, the LifeSaver doesn’t come in a family scale version.
• [see update below for more]
  

If it sounds like I’m bashing the LifeSaver in favor of the LifeStraw Family – please keep in mind that I have never been paid to endorse the LifeStraw Family. But it’s a moot point because, the LifeStraw Family has the exact same limitations as the LifeSaver. Both use nano-technology and both have the same limitations of a nanopore-based filter. The only difference is price.

The LifeStraw Family costs $35 and filters 18,000 litres of water. The LifeSaver costs well over $100 and only filters 6,000 litres of water. While it might be possible that one day in the future the LifeSaver could come down in cost, the LifeStraw Family is already at this price point and is already saving lives (also note the photos Michael Pritchard displayed are stock photos – none showed his product in action in the field).

For someone whose TED talk is (to a large extent) a replay of an old YouTube video of mine, this product brings nothing new to the table except a price tag 100 times more than existing (and technologically identical) solutions.

[UPDATE: I forgot to add this to the list, but the LifeSaver also doesn't show how it can handle highly turbid water. Turbid water basically means how much junk and how "liquidly" the water is. As you can see in "Cow Sh*t to Clean Water", I stressed tested the LifeStraw Family by using so much cow feces the water was more like a thick slop (i.e. extremely turbid water). But the LifeStraw Family handled it because it has a nano-tech hydrophobic surface that flushes the dirt away. The LifeSaver product, from what I can tell, uses a carbon pre-filter. Basically, technobabble aside, it seems like the LifeSaver can clog whereas the LifeStraw Family doesn't. You can replace the carbon pre-filter if it gets clogged - but the replacement filter alone costs about 1/3rd of what a brand new LifeStraw Family costs.]