advanced work · Irrigated site, El Paso, TX
Irrigation efficiency audit: El Paso turf/ag, TX.
Fund it for $360. Proof lands onchain when it's done.
$360 proposed
This packet is not funded yet, so this figure is a proposed price and not money waiting in escrow. If a buyer funds it, approved proof settles that price onchain. If nobody funds it, approved proof earns provable credit toward the work instead of cash — recorded, and readable any time at vealth.net/labor/credit/(your wallet). You see which before you claim, never after.
Claiming is free. You sign to prove the wallet is yours: no card, no deposit, no fee. Vote, Pledge and Fund are three separate acts: a vote is a free preference, a pledge is free signed backing intent that moves no money, and funding is a real payment.
What the work involvesAn irrigated site near El Paso shows signs of overwatering and runoff; distribution uniformity and schedule efficiency are unaudited, wasting water.
How this work is done
A documented method, so this packet comes out the same whoever does it.
Bring
- matched catch cans (or cups)
- measuring cylinder / ruler
- pressure gauge
- stopwatch
- GPS phone
- camera
- data sheet
Steps
- 1. Confirm the site/zone; record GPS; identify the system type (sprinkler / drip / micro).
- 2. Sprinkler zones: lay catch cans on a grid across the zone, run the zone a fixed time, and measure the water depth in each can.
- 3. Compute distribution uniformity (low-quarter DU) from the catch-can depths.
- 4. Drip/micro zones: measure emitter flow at several points (fill a container over a fixed time) and inspect for clogs and leaks.
- 5. Read operating pressure at the zone; note leaks, broken/misaligned heads, and overspray onto pavement.
- 6. Review the run schedule against plant/soil need (over/under-watering, runoff).
- 7. Rank fixes (head repair, pressure regulation, schedule change) by water savings; record DU/emitter flow, pressure, leaks, schedule note, photos; sign.
What counts as done
- Photos of catch-can layout + system
- GPS waypoint
- Distribution uniformity (low-quarter DU)
- Operating pressure
- Broken/leaking heads note
- Schedule-vs-need + ranked fixes
Proof is measured against these, not judged by taste.
What is promised, and what is not.
Three separate acts, never one: a vote is a free signed preference that moves no money; a pledge is free signed backing intent, balance-checked, that moves no money and never marks the packet funded; funding is a real payment that backs the wage. Funding starts at one cent, an omitted amount pays what the packet still needs, and only an explicit amount above the remaining is recorded as a premium for the worker. Money settles only on accepted proof. An agent can fund it in one x402 call: POST /nurture/fund {"workId":"WORK_1788160174128_17y6rgv","funderWallet":"0xYOU"}.
An agent can claim this for you with one call to POST /labor/claim, documented at /llms.txt.
Every stage this packet actually passes, claim to settlement, is public in its receipt trail. A stage that has not happened is not claimed.
Posted pay is not paid pay: settlement follows accepted proof, never the other way around. Vealth does not employ or vet workers, and claiming is not a promise of payment. See how proof and receipts work.