5 Cities That Proved Smart Sewers Pay for Themselves
The single most common question about smart sewer technology: does it actually save money?
The answer, backed by data from real deployments across the United States, is an unequivocal yes. Smart sewer systems don't just save money — they save orders of magnitude more than they cost.
Here are five cities that prove it.
1. South Bend, IN — $500M Saved
Population: 103,000 · Technology: EmNet RTC, 120 sensors · Started: 2012
South Bend faced an $800M+ consent decree for CSO control. Instead of building deep tunnels, they deployed 120 sensors and a real-time control platform that redistributes flow across the existing pipe network.
- Cost of smart system: ~$300M (including some targeted gray infrastructure)
- Cost of traditional approach: $800M+
- Net savings: $500M+
- Overflow reduction: 70% (1 billion gallons/year)
- Cost per gallon of prevented overflow: Approximately $0.005
Read the full South Bend case study →
2. Grand Rapids, MI — 97% Cost Reduction
Population: 198,000 · Technology: 90 flow meters, RTDSS · Started: 2016
Grand Rapids faced a $1 billion inflow and infiltration (I&I) problem. Engineering consultants recommended the traditional approach: dig up and replace pipes across the entire system.
Instead, the city deployed 90 flow meters and a real-time decision support system that identified exactly where I&I was occurring and prioritized repairs. The result:
- Cost of smart approach: $30-50M
- Cost of traditional approach: $1B
- Cost reduction: 97%
- Key insight: Data-driven prioritization is dramatically more efficient than system-wide rehabilitation
3. Evansville, IN — 95% Cheaper Per Gallon
Population: 117,000 · Technology: AI-powered RTDSS · Started: 2018
Evansville compared the per-gallon cost of smart sewer technology against traditional gray infrastructure for CSO reduction:
- Smart technology cost: $0.01 per gallon of prevented overflow
- Traditional infrastructure cost: $0.23 per gallon
- Cost reduction: 95% per gallon
- Annual overflow reduction: 100M+ gallons
The AI-powered decision support system analyzes real-time sensor data, weather forecasts, and historical patterns to optimize the timing of flow through the treatment system.
4. Louisville, KY — $117M Saved
Population: 630,000 · Technology: System-wide RTC · Started: 2014
Louisville's long-term control plan originally budgeted $200M for CSO reduction. System-wide real-time controls achieved the required overflow reductions for $83M — saving $117M.
- Original budget: $200M
- Actual cost with RTC: $83M
- Savings: $117M (58%)
- Overflow reduction: 1 billion gallons per year
Read the full Louisville case study →
5. Beckley, WV — Small Town, Big Savings
Population: 17,000 · Technology: Smart flow controls · Started: 2019
Beckley proves that smart sewers aren't just for big cities. This small West Virginia town deployed smart flow controls and achieved:
- Cost savings: 94% compared to traditional infrastructure
- Key lesson: The per-capita savings are often even more dramatic for small utilities with tight budgets
The Pattern Is Clear
Across all five cities — ranging from 17,000 to 630,000 people — the pattern is consistent:
Smart sewer technology costs 50-97% less than traditional infrastructure while achieving equal or better overflow reduction. Payback periods are typically 2-5 years. Every dollar not spent on tunnels and tanks can go to other critical infrastructure needs.
The question is no longer whether smart sewers work. It's why any city would choose to spend 10-30x more on traditional approaches when proven alternatives exist.
See all tracked deployments on our City Tracker with interactive map.