There were arguments in Thailand about whether the waterworks infrastructure (ประปา) should be upgraded so that tap water in Thailand is safe to drink.
In the context of Thai waterworks, both the Metropolitan Waterworks Authority (MWA) and the Provincial Waterworks Authority (PWA) claim that the treated water leaving their plants meets drinkable standards. However, the issue itself comes from the very outdated distribution pipes, where contamination can occur.
Note: you can check for compare standard below.
WHO water drinkable standard: here
Canada Guideline: here
I cannot find the Guideline for Thai tap water safety so I cannot put any reference here, if you can provide more about this please.
One way that a former Thai political leader from the Future Forward Party suggested was using the Smart meters to measure contamination levels in the pipes. I think this is good for many reasons. One of the biggest is easier maintenance, because a lot of the water-pipe infrastructure in Thailand is very old and poorly maintained. Contamination levels are often very high. When you have good systems to detect leaks and contamination, this should improve quality of life and reduce losses in the system.
What other benefit?
If you don’t know, water pressure in Thailand’s pipe infrastructure is very low. This comes from long-standing infrastructure problems. For this reason, almost every household needs a water pump to make indoor water usable. If the pipe infrastructure were properly maintained, it could reduce this unreasonable need.
Another side effect is that many areas in Thailand now have sinkholes caused by water leakage, and proper maintenance can prevent this kind of issue. This protects life and property. Smart meters are also a good way to develop knowledge of automation, cloud infrastructure, and technology practice for the Thai workforce.
So the final question is: "Is this a smart investment?"
In my view, yes. Improving the system can raise quality of life, reduce unnecessary costs, and build real technical capability for the workforce. In the end, the simplest and most cost-efficient approach is usually the safest one too.