Take it away: the need for designing fecal sludge disposal services for single-pit latrines

Abstract

3The Government of Bangladesh is increasingly paying attention to the safe collection and disposal of 4 fecal sludge from pit latrines in rural areas. In this paper, we report on current sludge disposal 5 practices from single-pit latrines, by conducting a survey of 1,091 households with pit latrines in a 6 rural subdistrict of Bangladesh. Almost all households were using their pits, and 90% reported that 7 hiring pit emptiers to empty the pit for reuse was the dominant pit management practice. However, 8 90% of households also reported that the sludge from these pits would be disposed in the vicinity of 9 their homes, by digging wide and shallow troughs in the soil to absorb the sludge. These results 10 indicate an urgent need to design an organized service that safely transports fecal sludge away for 11 treatment. The National Committee for Fecal Sludge Management, constituted by the Government of 12 Bangladesh, is using these results to design policy for sludge management. 13

Towards sustainable sanitation management: Establishing the costs and willingness to pay for emptying and transporting sludge in rural districts with high rates of access to latrines

“…The high water tables characteristic of large parts of Bangladesh also mean that aerobic treatment potential inside pit latrines may be rather limited. Previous fieldwork suggested that pit contents retained high levels of pathogens, particularly helminth eggs, for a long period [ 7 ].…”

“…The total volume of sludge which needs to be moved to meet 100% of demand for emptying also needs to be estimated. In this paper, the volumes of fecal sludge to be transported in Bhaluka were estimated based on earlier studies reported in [ 7 ].…”

“…One immediate source of monies for financing this cost could be contributions from private households who privately benefit from having sludge removed from their premises (private avoidance benefits) [ 6 ]. Households currently make payments to have their pits emptied for continued use, but the sludge is disposed locally [ 7 ]. These households might be willing to pay for the costs of collection and transport of fecal sludge for treatment; but this is not well understood.…”

An evaluation of different provision strategies for scaled-up container-based sanitation

“…This is a critical issue for CBS providers because regular neighbourhood visits are necessary for the safe and hygienic collection of waste. This reflects wider recognition in the literature that the operational efficiency of transport arrangements is a major barrier for road-based faecal sludge management (FSM) systems (Kennedy-Walker et al 2016;Balasubramanya et al 2017). It is worth noting also that regular visits by a CBS provider are beneficial for fostering positive relationships with the community being served (Moya et al 2019).…”

Perception management of non-sewered sanitation systems towards scheduled faecal sludge emptying behaviour change intervention

“…Also, even though some studies have suggested that it is best to desludge septic tanks (for example) every 2-5 years depending on number of users (Gill et al, 2016;Mehta et al, 2019), some systems are not emptied for up to 20 years and end-up with solidified sludge that are really difficult to remove (ISF-UTS and SNV 2019;Mehta et al, 2019). This practice is prevalent in most developing countries due to considerable technological and social obstacles (Mills, 2013;Peal et al, 2014, Kirsch andHammersley-Mather, 2017;Balasubramanya et al, 2017) where sanitation facilities such as latrines/ toilets are mostly constructed poorly with sub-standard materials and limited spaces. Also, desludging vehicles and equipment are hindered due to poor accessibility, high exposure to faecal matter during collection and transportation, as well as blockages from the use of bulk materials from anal cleansing, menstrual hygiene and solid waste disposal (Thye et al, 2011;Nakagiri et al, 2016;Kirsch and Hammersley-Mather, 2017).…”