## 3 Results  
Three of the four alternatives to supply the cluster of CMPs listed by the study are represented in Figure 3. The fourth alternative--based on the supply by conventional potable water distribution pipeline network (Alternative A)--was not represented since the public water supply network is infrastructure that has already been established in all the streets of the Caju neighborhood. Table 1 compiles general information and data concerning the CMPs, such as water consumption water consumption for concrete production rates, and the respective road distances from these CMPs to the Alegria WRP/WTP. The potable water consumption of the CMPs obtained based on information from CEDAE was considered unreliable, especially when compared to the information from \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & **Concrete** & **Monthly Water** & **Water-to-Concrete** & \multirow{2}{*}{**Water Costs**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Cost of Water per m\({}^{3}\) of**} \\  & **Production** & **Consumption** & **Consumption Ratio** & & & **Concrete** \\ \cline{2-7}
**CMP** & & & & & & **REL/m\({}^{3}\)** & **USD/m\({}^{3}\) of** & **BRL/m\({}^{3}\) of** & **USD/m\({}^{3}\) of** \\ \cline{2-7}  & **m\({}^{3}\)/month** & **m\({}^{3}\)/month** & **m\({}^{3}\)/m\({}^{3}\)** & **of Water** & **Water (*)** & **Concrete** & **Concrete (*)** \\ \hline SUPERMIX & 11,500 & 2500 & 0.22 & 30.26 & 6.15 & 11.71 & 2.38 \\ TOPMIX & 3500 & 650 & 0.19 & 35.33 & 7.18 & 11.68 & 2.37 \\ POLIMIX & 6000 & 1200 & 0.20 & 30.26 & 6.15 & 10.77 & 2.19 \\ CONCEVIT & 8000 & 1760 & 0.22 & 40.41 & 8.21 & 15.82 & 3.22 \\ Average & 7250 & 1527 & 0.21 & 33.68 & 6.85 & 11.44 & 2.32 \\ Total & 29,000 & 6110 & - & - & - & - & - \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: Data on the consumption and monthly production of drinking water and concrete production rates in the CMPs of the cluster identified around the Alegria WTP. Source: [PERSON] [20]. Figure 3: Water supply alternatives for the cluster of four CMPs located near the Alegria WRP/WTP, in Caju, except Alternative A.  
the field data survey conducted with the companies [20]. Thus, the values obtained by this author were adopted, inferring that the data from CEDAE refer only to pottable water consumption, thus they did not reflect the real total water demands for the entire industrial process of concrete production by the CMPs. The index of water consumption per m\({}^{3}\) of concrete observed is quite homogeneous, ranging from 0.19 to 0.22 m\({}^{3}\), therefore showing the existence of a degree of uniformity among the production processes of the different CMPs, despite the differences in terms of each concrete production volumes. In addition to the aspect of location and geographical proximity of these industries and the Alegria WRP/WTP, such uniformity reinforces their adoption as a cluster of potential consumers to analyze the feasibility of alternatives to supply their industrial water demands. Based on the current installed capacity of the Alegria WRP/WTP, 720 m\({}^{3}\)/day [1], it would be possible to supply about 16,000 m\({}^{3}\) of reclaimed water monthly, operating the system (WRP) only 22 days per month. Considering the total water consumption for concrete production of 6110 m\({}^{3}\) per month observed, it is possible to estimate that the Alegria WRP/WTP would be able to supply about 2.5 times the total estimated industrial demand for water of the four CMPs cluster, without improvements and/or expansions of the existing facilities, demonstrating the great potential already observed in previous researches [5; 6; 25]. The survey found that the average cost of water for the three CMPs supplied by water tank trucks was BRL 31.11/m\({}^{3}\) (USD 6.32/m\({}^{3}\)). On the other hand, BRL 40.41 (USD 8.21/m\({}^{3}\)), is the average cost of pottable water for CONCREVIT, the sole industry of the CMP's cluster supplied with water from the conventional distribution network [20], representing a cost difference of almost 25%.