Abstract:Market studies in Ghana have revealed a potential for composted or cocomposted fecal matter as nutrient source inputs for agricultural production. To increase the marketability of such products, high nutrient value and easier handling/transporting options are among the significant factors which drive demand. Pelletization is seen as a potentially interesting option to address these challenges. To preserve form stability of the pellet products, the addition of a binding material during the pelletization process… Show more
“…Fortifer™ is a soil amendment certified by the Ministry of Food and Agriculture of Ghana. It is a matured compost produced from dewatered faecal sludge (DFS) and sawdust or market waste, and the nitrogen content enriched up to 3.0% (Adamtey et al, 2009) using composting and pelletization processes (Nikiema et al, 2014). Being an organo‐mineral (mixture of organic and inorganic fertilizer), Fortifer™ is rich in organic matter as well as micronutrients such as zinc, iron, copper and manganese (Adamtey et al, 2009).…”
We compare the effect of the wetting front detector on yield and water productivity with farmers' practices (FP) and irrigation requirements based on crop water requirement calculation (IRCWR). A field experiment was conducted to assess the effect of the wetting front detector, FP and IRCWR combined with six fertilizer rates. We also interviewed 50 farmers to understand their perception about the use and associated concerns with the wetting front detector. Analysis of variance and partial budget economic analysis were performed. The results show that the wetting front detector saved 16% of irrigation water compared to FP, which in turn led to 16% labour saving to irrigate pepper as compared to FP. Yield and water productivity of pepper were not significantly affected by the irrigation regimes. Regardless of irrigation regimes, yield of pepper was significantly influenced by fertilizer treatment in both years. Although the highest fresh fruit yield of pepper (8.6 t ha −1) was recorded from Fortifer granules, the highest marginal rate of return was obtained from application of inorganic fertilizer including 173 N, 36 P,18 K ha‾¹. The majority of farmers perceived the wetting front detector as low risk and compatible to use. The result also suggests that farmers are interested in buying and adopting the tool for future use. K E Y W O R D S farmers' perception, irrigation scheduling, pepper, water productivity, wetting front detector Résumé Nous comparons l'effet du détecteur de front de mouillage sur le rendement et la productivité de l'eau avec les pratiques des agriculteurs (FP) et les besoins d'irrigation sur la base du calcul des besoins en eau des cultures (IRCWR). Une expérience sur le terrain a été menée pour évaluer l'effet du détecteur de front de mouillage, FP et IRCWR combiné avec six taux d'engrais. Nous avons *Utilisation du détecteur frontal mouillant comme outil de programmation de l'irrigation pour la production de poivre dans la région du Haut-est du Ghana: preuve par expérience de terrain et par les perceptions des agriculteurs.
“…Fortifer™ is a soil amendment certified by the Ministry of Food and Agriculture of Ghana. It is a matured compost produced from dewatered faecal sludge (DFS) and sawdust or market waste, and the nitrogen content enriched up to 3.0% (Adamtey et al, 2009) using composting and pelletization processes (Nikiema et al, 2014). Being an organo‐mineral (mixture of organic and inorganic fertilizer), Fortifer™ is rich in organic matter as well as micronutrients such as zinc, iron, copper and manganese (Adamtey et al, 2009).…”
We compare the effect of the wetting front detector on yield and water productivity with farmers' practices (FP) and irrigation requirements based on crop water requirement calculation (IRCWR). A field experiment was conducted to assess the effect of the wetting front detector, FP and IRCWR combined with six fertilizer rates. We also interviewed 50 farmers to understand their perception about the use and associated concerns with the wetting front detector. Analysis of variance and partial budget economic analysis were performed. The results show that the wetting front detector saved 16% of irrigation water compared to FP, which in turn led to 16% labour saving to irrigate pepper as compared to FP. Yield and water productivity of pepper were not significantly affected by the irrigation regimes. Regardless of irrigation regimes, yield of pepper was significantly influenced by fertilizer treatment in both years. Although the highest fresh fruit yield of pepper (8.6 t ha −1) was recorded from Fortifer granules, the highest marginal rate of return was obtained from application of inorganic fertilizer including 173 N, 36 P,18 K ha‾¹. The majority of farmers perceived the wetting front detector as low risk and compatible to use. The result also suggests that farmers are interested in buying and adopting the tool for future use. K E Y W O R D S farmers' perception, irrigation scheduling, pepper, water productivity, wetting front detector Résumé Nous comparons l'effet du détecteur de front de mouillage sur le rendement et la productivité de l'eau avec les pratiques des agriculteurs (FP) et les besoins d'irrigation sur la base du calcul des besoins en eau des cultures (IRCWR). Une expérience sur le terrain a été menée pour évaluer l'effet du détecteur de front de mouillage, FP et IRCWR combiné avec six taux d'engrais. Nous avons *Utilisation du détecteur frontal mouillant comme outil de programmation de l'irrigation pour la production de poivre dans la région du Haut-est du Ghana: preuve par expérience de terrain et par les perceptions des agriculteurs.
“…FS that has undergone some degree of treatment and is no longer raw is called -treated sludge‖. Treated sludge, which is fully stabilised sludge, can be used for different purposes such as combustion as fuel (Werther & Ogada, 1999;Muspratt et al, 2014;Strande et al, 2014), char production (Rulkens, 2008), in building materials (Jordan et al, 2005;Lin et al, 2012) and as a soil conditioner (Nikiema et al, 2013;Diener et al, 2014). Use of treated or raw sludge as a soil conditioner and fertiliser is very popular.…”
Section: Benefits Of Treated Sludgementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Farmers of Dakar use, on average, 246 m 3 of FS per year as a soil conditioner. In Ghana, co-composting from FS has previously shown limited demand by farmers, but nitrogen enrichment is suggested to increase value and demand (Nikiema et al, 2013). The average price is US$4/tonne for FS that is generated from drying beds, in contrast to animal manure, which sells at twice as much due to its higher acceptance (Diener et al, 2014).…”
This article provides technology options for the treatment of Faecal Sludge (FS) in developing countries to minimise exposure to FS and assesses its benefits along with possible revenue generation from reuse. FS that is collected from septic tanks poses management challenges in urban areas of developing countries. Currently, FS is dumped into the urban and peri-urban environment, posing great risks to the soil, surface water and groundwater quality. FS treatment technology usually consists of (1) primary treatment for the separation of the solid and liquid parts, and (2) sludge treatment, which is the final stage of treatment that is generated from the primary treatment. A decision matrix was prepared on the basis of primary and sludge treatment technological options with respect to land requirement, energy requirement, skill requirement, capital cost (CAPEX), operating cost (OPEX) and groundwater level. These parameters strongly influence the decision-making about the selection of the FS treatment technology. The selection of a FS treatment technology for a city also depends on the local conditions and priorities of the region with regard to sanitation such as population coverage, environmental and health benefits, elimination of open defecation, etc. Techno economic feasibility of different combinations of primary and sludge treatment technologies was conducted to evaluate its viability. The analysis was conducted across different classes of cities with varying population size. The combination of primary treatment technologies with solar sludge oven emerged to be the most economically viable options for FS treatments across different population size in developing countries.
“…Criteria to be considered for selection of a binder include binding ability/strength (to avoid the use of high amounts of binder), availability of binder, its handling and storage requirements, ease of use during pelletization and cost as well as its impact on pellets; for example disaggregation rate, nutrient content, etc. (Nikiema Preliminary investigations revealed that cassava starch and clay were possible binding materials that can be used for pelletization in Ghana given their availability (Nikiema et al 2014). Comparing the performance of these two materials, i.e.…”
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
