International symposium on

Faecal Sludge Management (FSM) Policy

Dakar May 9-12th 2006

Low-cost
Options for
Treating Faecal
Sludges (FS) in
Developing
Countries

Martin Strauss
EAWAG / SANDEC
www.sandec.eawag.ch
Tel.+41 44 823 5020 / 5553 1
 Contents

Sanitation infrastructure and urban growth

FS characteristics

Research approach

Results

Open research questions

2
 Sanitation infrastructure and urban growth

e.g. Bangkok, Manila, Accra

Percent of population served by

on-site sanitation e.g. London, Paris, Berlin

Latin America
Tanzania
Ghana
Philippines
Manila
Bangkok
0 20 40 60 80 100

2-2.5 billion urban dwellers on on-site

sanitation !
Number and share growing ! 3
Sanitation infrastructure and
urban growth

4
 Challenges: how to shift our mind set?

Engineers thrusts How to empty this pit ?

and beliefs What happens next ?

5
 FS characteristics in selected
cities in developing countries

Accra
Accra Alcorta Ouagadougou Bangkok
Location (Ghana)
(Ghana
(Argentina) (Burkina Faso.) (Thailand)
)

Public toilet
Type of FS sludge
Septage Septage

15,350
(6,000 35,000
TS (mg/L) 52,500 12,000
SS)
19,000 (2,200 67,200)

15,700
COD (mg/L) 49,000 7,800 4,200 13,500 (1,200 76,000)

415
NH4-N (mg/L) 3,300 330 150 - (120 1,200)

6
Developing FS treatment options
in partnership

Thailand/Vietnam
Burkina Faso/Ghana

Argentina
7
Appropriate FS treatment options
in developing countries

8
 Selected FS treatment options

Constructed wetlands Settling/thickening tank

Drying bed Co-composting

9
 Design criteria and removal
performances of selected low-cost
options for faecal sludge treatment

Treatment goal / achievable removal

Treatment
process or Design criteria
Solids-liquid Organic pollutants Parasites
option
separation in liquid fraction (helminth eggs)

100-200 kg To be treated for

TS/m2/year SS : 60-80 % further
100 % retained
Drying/dewat 0.05 COD: 70-90 % improvement in
on top of the
ering beds m2/cap(Accra) NH4+-N : 40-60 ponds or
filtering media
% constructed
wetlands
250 kg To be treated for
Constructed TS/m2/year further
SS > 80 % 100% retained
wetlands SAR: 20 improvement in
SAR: 20 on top of the
(planted cm/year ponds or
cm/year filtering media
drying beds) (Bangkok) constructed
wetlands 10
 Design criteria and removal
performances of selected low-cost
options for faecal sludge treatment

Treatment goal / achievable removal

Treatment
process or Design criteria
Solids-liquid Organic pollutants Parasites
option
separation in liquid fraction (helminth eggs)

SAR*: 0.13 To be treated for

m3/m3 of raw FS further
Settling / SS: 60-70 % Concentrated in
HRT: 4 h improvement in
thickening COD: 30-50 the settled and
S: 0.006 m2/cap ponds or
tank % floating solids
Accra constructed
wetlands
Facultative 350 kg
BOD5/ha/d Not for this > 60 % removal of Removed by
stabilization
purpose BOD5 settlement
ponds

11
 Removal efficiency and challenges

Removal efficiency (%)

TS COD N-NH4
Settling/Thickening Tank
(septage+public toilet, 1:1) 60 40 50

Constructed wetlands
(septage) 85 97 75

Drying beds
80 70 50
(septage+public toilet, 1:1)

12
 Removal efficiency and challenges

Effluent concentration
TS COD N-NH4 EC
(mg/l) (mg/l) (mg/l) (ms/cm)
Settling/Thickening Tank
(septage+public toilet, 1:1) 9,000-14,000 7,000-12,000 1,000-2,000 20-25

Constructed wetlands
(septage) 1,000-6,000 300-500 50-150 3.0-3.5

Drying beds
500-1000 4000-600 300-1500 11-20
(septage+public toilet, 1:1)

13
 Removal efficiency and challenges

Variable Effects and expected problems

SS - Potential difficulties in solids removal from deep ponds;

- Short-circuiting due to sludge settling
- Sludge drying beds to be devised as a separate treatment

NH4 / NH3 - Ammonia toxicity due to high concentration in undigested FS

Inhibition to the development of facultative and maturation
pond conditions;
- Eye irritation

Colouration - Dark colour of FS supernatants prevents light penetration

- Algal growth and hence facultative or maturation pond
conditions may not evolve

Even though the organic load can be adjusted for a polishing

treatment in stabilisation ponds, the high concentrations of
salinity and NH4/NH3 hinder the biochemical degradation (Strauss
et al., 2004) 14
 Open research questions

Seeking collaboration !

a) Nitrification/denitrification in vertical flow constructed

wetlands treating faecal sludge: influence of bed
configuration
b) Organic matter and N removal mechanism in floating
macrophytes-based system treating FS effluent/percolate
c) Enhancing FS dewaterability with bulking organic material:
design and operation criteria
d) Helminth eggs stabilisation in biosolids generated by FS
treatment plant
e) Anaerobic digestion cum biogas: off-site decentralised
low-cost reactors reactor development
15
Faecal sludge management -
A bridge to reach the MDGs

1 liter of FS = 100 liters of

wastewater!!!

1 truck load discharge in the

environment = 5000 people
defecating in the open!!!

Eawag/Sandec Switzerland
www.sandec.eawag.ch
Tel.+41 44 823 5020 16