Can Sanitation Technology Play a Role in User Perceptions of Resource Recovery? An Evaluation of Composting Latrine Use in Developing World Communities in Panama

Naughton, Colleen C.; Akers, Patricia; Yoder, Danielle; Baer, Roberta D.; Mihelcic, James R.

doi:10.1021/acs.est.8b02431

Cited by 8 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Current social challenges (e.g. users' perception of excreta for resource recovery (Naughton et al, 2018)) and technical challenges (e.g. scaling up operations without increasing contamination risks) exist to its widespread implementation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Greenhouse gas fluxes from human waste management pathways in Haiti

Ryals

McNicol

Porder

et al. 2019

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The lack of safely managed sanitation services is a major global public health and ecological sustainability challenge. Ecological sanitation (EcoSan) technologies designed to close the "poop loop" through the capture, treatment, and beneficial reuse of human feces can meet this interconnected challenge. EcoSan has the potential to mitigate climate change through the reduction of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, yet the climate impacts of EcoSan are poorly understood. We measured GHG emissions (carbon dioxide, CO 2; methane, CH 4 ; and nitrous oxide, N 2 O) from two EcoSan operations in Haiti, as well as two anaerobic waste stabilization ponds and a grass field where sewage is known to be illegally deposited. Carbon dioxide was the major constituent of total GHG emissions from both EcoSan systems. Nitrous oxide emissions were similar across both EcoSan systems, however CH 4 emissions were significantly higher in the system with moister pile conditions. Highest CH 4 fluxes were observed during the first two months of composting in both EcoSan systems. In a paired-comparison, we found that piles with a soil lining had four-fold lower CH 4 emissions and three-fold lower N 2 O emissions compared to piles with a cement lining. Overall climate-forcing effects of emissions from EcoSan were favorable relative to waste stabilization ponds and unmanaged disposal on grass fields. In contrast to EcoSan, CH 4 emissions dominated net emissions from waste stabilization ponds, accounting for 94% of net emissions, and N 2 O emissions were negligible. Methane emissions from waste stabilization ponds were up to 250 times higher than those from EcoSan compost piles. The grass field had a significantly higher CH 4 flux than EcoSan, and the highest N 2 O flux rate observed. Our data suggest that EcoSan systems can contribute to climate change mitigation by reducing GHG emissions relative to alternative sanitation pathways, and EcoSan management conditions can be optimized to minimize emissions.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Greenhouse gas fluxes from human waste management pathways in Haiti

Ryals

McNicol

Porder

et al. 2019

Journal of Cleaner Production

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Composting toilets may also be associated with lower satisfaction, though this relationship is less definitive ( p = 0.094). Composting toilets are a type of ecological sanitation system designed to provide onsite treatment, and they may be common where soil conditions, shallow groundwater tables, and flooding hinder pit latrine construction and excreta containment. − Past installations of composting toilets in Bwaise were likely (partially) motivated by groundwater and flooding conditions, but there is now a perception among local officials and residents that such conditions increase moisture within composting chambers and impair treatment performance (perhaps due to imperfect sealing during construction, allowing water to enter) . Notably, these perceived issues informed our scenario modeling (discussed below).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Container-based toilets typically employ a urine-diverting design, − potentially suggesting similarities with composting latrines (which, as surveys showed, may be viewed negatively). Urine-diverting facilities can also place greater operation and maintenance responsibilities on users, face clogging issues in urine pipes, and generate odors if mismanaged, potentially reducing user satisfaction. ,, Moreover, container collection can entail risks for sanitation workers, while containers that go uncollected would accumulate and create health hazards, jeopardizing sustained system functionality. However, well-organized collection schemes may increase satisfaction by ensuring smooth operation and potentially employing local residents (workers familiar with settlement geography will likely improve transport efficiency).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Navigating Multidimensional Social–Ecological System Trade-Offs across Sanitation Alternatives in an Urban Informal Settlement

Trimmer

Lohman

Byrne

et al. 2020

Environ. Sci. Technol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Urban growth in low- and middle-income countries has intensified the need to expand sanitation infrastructure, especially in informal settlements. Sanitation approaches for these settings remain understudied, particularly regarding multidimensional social–ecological outcomes. Guided by a conceptual framework (developed in parallel with this study) re-envisioning sanitation as a human-derived resource system, here we characterize existing and alternative sanitation scenarios in an informal settlement in Kampala, Uganda. Combining two core research approaches (household survey analysis, process modeling), we elucidate factors associated with user satisfaction and evaluate each scenario’s resource recovery potential, economic implications, and environmental impacts. We find that existing user satisfaction is associated with factors including cleaning frequency, sharing, and type of toilets, and we demonstrate that alternative sanitation systems may offer multidimensional improvements over existing latrines, drying beds, and lagoons. Transitioning to anaerobic treatment could recover energy while reducing overall net costs by 26–65% and greenhouse gas emissions by 38–59%. Alternatively, replacing pit latrines with container-based facilities greatly improves recovery potential in most cases (e.g., a 2- to 4-fold increase for nitrogen) and reduces emissions by 46–79%, although costs increase. Overall, this work illustrates how our conceptual framework can guide empirical research, offering insight into sanitation for informal settlements and more sustainable resource systems.

show abstract

“…There are also extensive resources available at the Sustainable Sanitation Alliance Library (https://www.susana.org/en/knowledge-hub/resources-and-p ublications/library). A recent journal article evaluated how use of technologies discussed in this chapter and other demographic characteristics influences users' perceptions of excreta for optimum resource recovery (Naughton et al, 2018).…”

Section: Figure 1 Location Of Composting and Dry Desiccating Toiletsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…pathogen inactivation, urine and anal cleansing water may be diverted from the toilet for collection or conveyance to the subsurface (Naughton et al (2018) have reported that clogging of urine diversion tubing is a commonly reported issue so care needs to be made in maintenance and proper sizing of the tubing) toilet design and operation can be integrated with 3.…”

Section: Figure 1 Location Of Composting and Dry Desiccating Toiletsmentioning

confidence: 99%