Sanitation Definitions Arno Rosemarin EcoSanRes Programme Stockholm Environment Institute SACOSAN Workshop, SL, April 27, 2009 partner of.

Sanitation Definitions

Arno RosemarinEcoSanRes ProgrammeStockholm Environment Institute

SACOSAN Workshop, SL, April 27, 2009

partner of

Improved Sanitation (UN)

flush or pour-flush toilet/latrine to: piped sewer system septic tank pit latrine

ventilated improved pit (VIP) latrine pit latrine with slab composting toilet (ecosan)

Unimproved Sanitation Facilities

Flush or pour-flush to street, yard, plot, open sewer, ditch or drainage way

Pit latrine without slab Open pit Bucket Hanging toilet or latrine No facilities, bush, field (open

defecation)

Improved sanitation coverage in 2006 (JMP -WHO/Unicef, 2008)

Unimproved Sanitation - Total - Rural - Urban

0 10 20 30 40 50

Afghanistan

Bangladesh

Bhutan

India

Nepal

Pakistan

Sri Lanka

%

total unimproved

rural unimproved

urban unimproved

JMP, 2008

Prevalence of Unimproved Sanitation in South Asia

Open Defecation - Total - Rural - Urban

0 20 40 60 80

Afghanistan

Bangladesh

Bhutan

India

Nepal

Pakistan

Sri Lanka

%

total open defecation

rural open defecation

urban open defecation

JMP, 2008

Prevalence of Open Defecation in South Asia

Where the pipes are: Sewage sludge production from public sewerage systems mapped in terms of relative proportion of the global total for 1999. (Worldmapper)

Diarrhoea-caused mortality mapped in terms of relative proportion of the global total for 2002 (Worldmapper)

Sustainable Sanitation

Sustainable sanitation goes beyond ”improved” and focuses on systems that protect and promote human health by

providing a clean environment and breaking the cycle of disease

are economically viable, socially acceptable, and technically and institutionally appropriate

protect the environment and natural resources

can involve a wide selection of technologies

Components of Sustainable Sanitation

Ecological Sanitation

source separation of urine & faeces and even greywater

containment of each product sanitisation and treatment recycling of the nutrients, humus

and water to soil and agricultural systems

Opportunities for Alternative Solutions

Humans produce only 50 L of faeces and 500 L of urine per year per person

A normal flush toilet uses an additional 15,000 L of drinking water per person per year

The greywater from kitchens and bathrooms adds an additional 35,000 L per person per year

Mixing the above and adding storm water makes centralised sewage systems often unaffordable for poor cities

Source separation allows for the development of new sustainable alternatives

These are being tested in small towns at present within the EcoSanRes Programme and other international programmes

Complete household-based urine–diversion ecosan and eco-water use, closing the nutrient and water cycles (exp from Otterwasser)

Toilet & collection technologiesCistern-flush toiletLow-flush toiletPour-flush toiletUrine-diversion toilet

-Flush toilet -Waterless toilet

Urinal-Waterless urinals-Low-flush urinals

Dry toilet squatting slabSimple pit latrineVentilated improved pit latrine (VIP)Double pit latrineDouble vault latrineComposting toilet

-shallow pit-vault-Arborloo latrine-Fossa alterna

Transport technologiesGravity sewersSmall bore sewersSimplified sewerageVacuum sewerageOpen drains Urine pipesManual urine transportTrucked urine transportManual or suction truck faecal sludge emptying and transport

Off-site treatment technologiesRelated to wastewaterPre-treatmentWaste stabilization pondsAdvanced Integrated Pond SystemsFloating macrophyte pondsConstructed wetlandsUASB technologiesConventional activated sludge systemsIntegrated Fixed-film Activated SludgeMembrane biological reactors

Related to urine Off-site urine storage tankUrine MAP-dissipation

Reuse technologiesUrine direct applicationUrine on-site reuseUrine mechanized off-site reuseFaecal sludge & excreta use in agricultureEffluent (wastewater) application in agricultureEffluent (wastewater) and faecal sludge (excreta) use in aquaculture

Disposal technologiesSoakaway pitInfiltration trench/field

On-site storage and treatment technologiesRelated to wastewaterSeptic tankCesspitAnaerobic baffled reactorAnaerobic digesterTrickling filterUASB reactor (Upflow Anaerobic Sludge Blanket)

Related to urineUrine long-term storage

-in different types of containers-in large storage tank

Urine can, bucket or container storageUrine desiccation

Related to excreta and faecal sludgeFaecal sludge co-compostingFaecal sludge treatment by

-constructed wetlands (humification)-unplanted drying beds-settling ponds-anaerobic digestion

Related to greywater Greywater pre-treatment (screens, seals, filters)Flotation – grease trapSlow sand filtrationHorizontal subsurface flow constructed wetlandHorizontal free flow constructed wetland system Vertical flow constructed wetland systemGreywater garden (mulch trench)Green walls/Tower gardenSubsurface wastewater infiltration systemAnaerobic filtration

Sanitation Technologies (modified from NETSSAF, 2008)

10

675

10 12

260

50

600

15001500

400

40 404035

75

400

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

flush toiletconnected to sewer

or septic tank

urban urinediverting dry or wet

toilets

flush or pour flushtoilet with septic

tank connected tocondominial sewers

urine diverting drytoilet (UDDT)

ventilated improvedpit latrine or withpour flush toilet

(VIP)

basic pit latrine withslab

soil compostingtoilet (Arboloo;Fossa alterna)

communaltoilet/latrine (50

persons per seat)

type of provision of sanitation

loc

al c

ap

tia

l co

st

for

ins

talla

tio

n (

US

$)

(UNDP, 2006; Satterthwaite and McGranahan, 2007; Water and Sanitation Fund of Namibia, 2008; UNICEF-SEI India, 2008; WESnet India, 2008; SEI, 2005)

General cost ladder for various sanitation options

$0

$1

$2

$3

$4

$5

$6

$7

$8

$9

$10

East Asia Eurasia LatinAmericaand the

Caribbean

NorthAfrica

Oceania SE Asia SouthernAsia

Sub-Saharan

Africa

West Asia

Cost

(B

illio

ns

US

$)

0.1% GDP 0.2% GDP 0.5% GDP Sanitation Cost

Sanitation cost (red horizontal bars) as annual expenditures (Y-axis). The blue, green and yellow bars are the GDP expenditure levels of the regions also identified as 0.1, 0.2 and 0.5% of the GDP respectively. (Source: SEI, 2005)

Annual Cost to meet the MDG Sanitation Target by 2015 - is well under 0.5% GDP

Double-vault urine-diverting dry ecotoiletused in e.g. China, Vietnam, Mexico, Bolivia, India, Sri Lanka, W. Africa, S. Africa, Ethiopia, Uganda, Kenya, etc…..

Lin Jiang, Guangxi

SARAR,Mexico

Guangxi ProvinceSouthern China

Double vault urine-diverting toilet

ca 1,000,000 installationsin villages in China

ca 500,000 installationsin Vietnam

Kvarnström et al 2006

Mexico - Tepoztlan

100 peri-urbanhouseholds completed

double vault urine-diverting toilets & waterless urinals

Burkina Faso

Double vault urine-diverting toilet

Zimbabwe - Harare

The Fossa Alterna – soil composting pit toilet

Urine diversion toilets for washers

Dan Lapid, Philippines

Kannan, Sri Lanka

Paul Calvert, Kerala, India

India – Trichy, TN (Scope)

Well-functioning dry vault

Sweden Urine-diverting Toilets, Gebers

South Africa - Kimberley

Urine-diverting dry toilets100 households completed – 2000 planned

China-Sweden

Erdos Ecotown Project

832 apartments completed

4-5 story bldgs

greywater storage pond for reuse

urine diverting dry toilets

faecal collection

BraunchsweigGermany

Call for Action – Some Key Questions

is there a national sanitation policy? are national targets in line with the MDG target? what weighting is given to sanitation in the PRSP? is there a sector investment plan? is there a single body to coordinate action? are donors coordinating their support to sanitation? is there sufficient budget allocation to meet

targets? is there a single budget line for sanitation? is there a performance monitoring mechanism?

(WaterAid, 2008)

Planning Tools

PHAST (Wood et al. 1998) Open Planning of

Sanitation (Ridderstolpe, 2000)

Strategic Choice Approach (Friend, 1992; Wright, 1997)

HCES (EAWAG, 2005) Sanitation 21 (IWA, 2006) MCDSS (Wiwe, 2005) Guidelines for Municipal

Wastewater Management (UNEP et al 2004)

CLTS (Kar, 2005) NETSSAF (2008)

Generic steps: problem identification define objectives identify options selection process action plan for

implementation monitoring and

evaluation

Lack of Capacity – Top Concern

Limited absorptive capacity, i.e. inability to make use of available resources

Poor service delivery and performance

Limited transfer of knowledge Construction of infrastructures

without consultation with end-users

Sustainable Sanitation Alliance

Thematic working groups capacity development costs & economics renewable energy/groundwater/ climate change technology

options/hygiene/health food security cities & planning community & rural sanitation emergency & reconstruction sanitation as a business public awareness & marketing operations & maintenance

100 partners organisations

Conclusions

Size of the Problem is Underestimated

the UN definition of improved sanitation does not strictly take into account dysfunction and contamination of the environment

the UN coverage data may be providing an unrealistic picture

if a definition including sustainability criteria were to be used, the global sanitation crisis would be even larger than it is perceived to be today

Not Given High Enough Priority

the health burden (e.g. diarrhoeal diseases & worm infestations) imposed by dysfunctional or non-existent hygiene & sanitation should be given as high a priority as other diseases like malaria, HIV/AIDS & tuberculosis

informal settlements such as slums and peri-urban areas require special added attention in terms of provision of safe water and sanitation systems

Sustainability Criteria Are Not Yet Being Used

the introduction of sustainability criteria into the definition, planning and implementation of sanitation systems will have long-term positive impacts and make the investments even more cost-effective

more appropriate, affordable and resilient sanitation systems are available than those currently being chosen and that professionals need to be better informed and trained about these

Public Dialogue and Demand is Lacking

sanitation pays for itself several times over in improved health and livelihoods

there are many active institutional players involved but lack of public dialogue and awareness prevents large

strides in progress sanitation must be seen as an interplay between human

behaviour (cultural attitudes and norms) appropriate technologies needed stakeholder and gender-sensitive planning and

implementation needed scaling up needs planning systems, public ownership,

local political leadership and stable financing

financing of sanitation systems needs to be predictable and reliable

based on the local ability to pay not entirely on external subsidies the costing out must also include operations

and maintenance innovative financing can be developed e.g. with

micro-credit loans also involving inclusive financial sectors not before linked to sanitation

Local Financing the Key

sanitation products e.g. water and nutrients are not waste products but valuable resources

sanitation systems should be designed around possible reuse options

this will have significant impacts on nutrition and food security

productive sanitation can significantly substitute the use of chemical fertilisers in developing countries

capacity building at the individual and institutional levels is needed globally to lift the sanitation sector into the era of sustainable development

Sanitation Value Chain

www.ecosanres.org