Bengaluru’s water security strategy is being expanded beyond the question of how much Cauvery water the city can bring in. In an interview with Deccan Herald, Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board (BWSSB) Chairperson Manjula N outlined a mix of new supply, wastewater reuse, rainwater harvesting, leak reduction and institutional coordination. Taken together, the measures show a city trying to manage both the limits of its water sources and the weaknesses in the systems that distribute and use water.
The approach follows one of Bengaluru’s most difficult recent water episodes. In 2024, the city faced severe scarcity even though Cauvery water continued to be supplied. The immediate pressure was worsened by poor monsoon rainfall in 2023, which depleted groundwater levels. Although the monsoon has since improved, the experience exposed the risks of depending on rainfall and groundwater as informal buffers for a growing urban system.
BWSSB’s response begins with augmentation. Cauvery Stage V has been rolled out to serve people on the city’s periphery and reduce dependence on groundwater. The board is also working on Cauvery Stage VI, while water from Yettinahole is identified as a longer-term addition to the supply base. The stated objective is to increase the quantity of water available to Bengaluru, but the interview also indicates that new supply is only one part of the plan.
The expansion of the supply system is expected to be expensive. Cauvery Stage VI has received Cabinet approval and clearance from the Central Government, according to the chairperson. The project is estimated to cost around Rs 7,000 crore, with BWSSB expecting a Rs 5,000-crore loan from the Japan International Cooperation Agency. The information provided does not establish the project’s construction schedule or commissioning date, but it places the proposed stage within a broader effort to address water needs in areas that have historically depended more heavily on groundwater.
That distinction matters because additional source water does not automatically resolve distribution losses, uneven access or wasteful use. BWSSB has reported unaccounted-for water at close to 30%. The board attributes most of these losses to leakages in the distribution network rather than the transmission system. It says there is almost no leakage at the transmission level, while ground-level reservoirs and local pipelines are being evaluated to identify problem areas.
The planned response is partly operational and partly technological. BWSSB is prioritising locations based on complaints and reported leakages and is using technology to identify failures. It is also expanding its District Metered Area network. DMAs divide the distribution system into measurable zones, allowing authorities to compare flows and identify areas where losses are higher. The board also plans to act against illegal connections, both to reduce unaccounted-for water and to bring more households into the billing system.
This focus shifts the water-security debate from source creation to system performance. Every additional supply project requires capital, approvals and time. Reducing losses within the existing network addresses a different problem: whether water already brought into the city reaches users efficiently and is recorded accurately. The interview does not provide a revised target for unaccounted-for water or a deadline for achieving one, so the eventual effect of the measures will depend on how consistently problem areas are identified, repaired and monitored.
Rainwater harvesting forms the most visible part of BWSSB’s short-term preparations for the next summer. Around 1,000 structures have already been installed, and the board plans to expand the programme across government properties and community spaces, including parks, schools and hospitals. At the household level, it is promoting water conservation and the use of aerators. The board says a large number of aerators have already been installed and that penalties have been imposed on people found using water irresponsibly for cleaning and other purposes.
These actions address demand and local capture, but the supplied material does not establish how much water the installed harvesting structures collect, how many public properties remain uncovered or how much demand has been reduced through aerators. Those gaps are important for assessing performance. The stated direction is clear, however: BWSSB is attempting to combine citywide infrastructure with smaller interventions at buildings, public spaces and households.
The second major component is treated wastewater. BWSSB is seeking to increase treatment capacity and persuade industries to use treated water, but uptake has remained limited. The chairperson said some industries are apprehensive about using secondary-treated water. In response, the board is examining models in which industries undertake additional treatment themselves or receive water treated further by BWSSB through dedicated pipelines.
The proposed arrangement would require more than treatment plants alone. BWSSB is identifying industrial clusters where co-investment or other models could be used, mapping existing sewage treatment plants against those clusters and upgrading plants to increase capacity. This approach treats wastewater reuse as a network and market problem: treatment capacity must be connected to a reliable group of users, and the quality of water supplied must meet their operational requirements.
The interview does not specify the volume of treated water currently available, the number of industrial clusters under consideration or the standards that would govern the additional treatment. It therefore cannot establish how quickly reuse can become a significant substitute for fresh water. It does show that the board recognises the difficulty of moving from treatment to actual uptake. A plant can produce treated water, but reuse depends on user confidence, quality control, pipelines, pricing and institutional responsibility.
Bengaluru’s water challenge is also an administrative coordination challenge. Utility works have frequently created conflict over road restoration, particularly when roads are opened for repairs or new infrastructure. BWSSB says it has agreed to reconstruct roads up to the wet-mix level so they remain motorable, while the Greater Bengaluru Authority will subsequently undertake complete restoration as part of its action plan.
The board also says that all agencies will soon be brought onto a common portal under development. Every work taken up in the city is expected to be mapped on the platform, with the stated aim of improving coordination and preventing duplication or unnecessary works. This proposal links water infrastructure to the wider governance of streets. A pipeline project affects not only water delivery but also traffic, road quality, construction sequencing and the responsibilities of multiple public agencies.
The planned portal could help create a shared record of works, but the supplied material does not yet establish when it will be operational, which agencies will be included or whether the information will be accessible to residents. Those implementation details will determine whether the platform becomes an administrative tool or merely another project register. For now, its inclusion in BWSSB’s response indicates that the board sees fragmented city works as part of the infrastructure problem.
The measures outlined by BWSSB therefore operate across different time horizons. Cauvery Stage V is already described as rolled out, while Stage VI is at the approved and cleared project stage. Yettinahole is presented as a longer-term source. Rainwater harvesting, aerators and enforcement are immediate conservation measures. Leak detection, DMA expansion and illegal-connection enforcement focus on the existing distribution network. Wastewater reuse and industrial connections require a more complex institutional and commercial model.
This layered strategy reflects the fact that Bengaluru’s water security cannot be measured only by the completion of a new supply project. It also depends on whether the distribution network loses less water, whether groundwater dependence declines, whether treated water gains users, whether buildings and public spaces capture rainfall, and whether agencies can coordinate works without repeated disruption. The source material confirms that BWSSB is pursuing all of these tracks, but it does not yet provide outcome data against which their combined effect can be judged.
The next stage of scrutiny will therefore concern implementation rather than intention. Cauvery Stage VI’s financing and construction milestones, the expansion of rainwater-harvesting structures, progress in reducing the reported 30% unaccounted-for water, the mapping of sewage treatment plants to industrial clusters and the launch of the common works portal will reveal how far the strategy has moved beyond planning. Bengaluru’s recent scarcity has made water security an immediate urban concern; the measures now being assembled will determine whether the city addresses it as a supply shortage alone or as a wider problem of infrastructure, demand and governance.
