Net-positive water frameworks
“Net-positive water” is not a single Australian statutory term, and it is not a promise that a project will generate more clean water than it consumes. We help you define a water-balance framework and then test how close the design can get.
Send us your drawings and what the brief means by net-positive water. We'll confirm the scope and the fee.
This page is part of Water Design.
Send the drawings, location, building use, and what the brief means by net-positive water — including any named framework.
If the brief is specifically the Living Building Challenge Water Petal, use Living Building Challenge Water Petal advisory. That is a certification pathway. This page is the wider design method.
Before the phrase appears in a report, the method needs to name:
Rainfall, stormwater, recycled greywater or blackwater, municipal top-up, groundwater or another named source.
Building, site, precinct or catchment, and which meters count.
Typically a stated typical year or climate sequence.
Drinking, irrigation, cooling, toilet flushing and any other use, each matched to a fit-for-purpose quality.
How inflows, reuse, losses, storage and discharges are counted.
For example remaining demand after reuse, or residual discharge compared with a stated baseline.
It does not mean the building manufactures water, or that it exports surplus drinking water. A municipal top-up can still form part of a defined method where the climate and the chosen framework allow it. We will not write “zero mains water in all climates” as a universal rule.
A modelled balance is not a certificate and not a health clearance.
A large tank without a defined method does not make the project net-positive. Storage only matters once sources, connected end uses and destination are named.
Climate, catchment area, water-intensive uses, soil, downstream infrastructure and regulation can all close off options. That is worth knowing in concept design, while roof area, plant-room space and irrigation area can still change.
Closed-loop describes how water is reused inside a defined boundary. Drinking-water quality, if it is proposed at all, remains a separate health, treatment and approval question for the specialist consultant team.
[Sound familiar]
The phrase needs a method before it goes in a report: sources, boundary, period, quality and end uses, balance method, and what “positive” means.
Not without a defined method. Storage only matters once sources, connected end uses and destination are named.
Not as a universal rule. A municipal top-up can still form part of a defined method where the climate and the chosen framework allow it.
Send the ambition and the site.
We set sources, boundary, period, quality and end uses for this project.
We test what is possible and record the residuals. Timeframes are confirmed at quote.
No. It is not a single Australian statutory term, and it is not a promise that a project will generate more clean water than it consumes.
Water sources, the system and spatial boundary, the time period, quality and end uses, the balance method, and what “positive” means in that method.
No. It does not mean the building manufactures water, or that it exports surplus drinking water.
No. A modelled balance is not a certificate and not a health clearance.
No. The Water Petal is a certification pathway with its own page. This page is the wider design method.
Closed-loop describes how water is reused inside a defined boundary. Drinking-water quality, if it is proposed at all, is a separate health, treatment and approval question for the specialist consultant team.
Send us your drawings, the project address, and what the brief means by net-positive water.
