SuSanA - Forum Kunena Site Syndication http://forum.susana.org/ Thu, 23 May 2013 13:50:20 +0000 Kunena 1.6 http://forum.susana.org/components/com_kunena/template/default/images/icons/rss.png SuSanA - Forum http://forum.susana.org/ en-gb Movie on UDDT by WECF and partners - by: CWendland http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/4455-movie-on-uddt-by-wecf-and-partners#4455 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/4455-movie-on-uddt-by-wecf-and-partners#4455
The movie shows the principles of a UDDT in households and schools in 5 minutes with examples from Romania, Bulgaria, Ukraine and Tajikistan:
www.wecf.eu/english/articles/2013/05/uddt_movie.php

Enjoy watching
Claudia]]> Urine diversion systems (includes UDDT and UD flush toilet) Tue, 21 May 2013 18:24:46 +0000 Re: New "Technology review of UDDTs" by GIZ now published - by: jacquesru1 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3688-new-qtechnology-review-of-uddtsq-by-giz-now-published?limit=12&start=24#4435 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3688-new-qtechnology-review-of-uddtsq-by-giz-now-published?limit=12&start=24#4435
Elisabeth von Muench has requested that I post some answers to the Municipalities that have and still is using UDDT sanitation systems in South Africa.

The main municipality is eThekwini Municipality in Durban South Africa with more than 80000 double chamber UDDT units constructed from 2001 to date (past 12 years).

Other mentionable Municipalities include Umhlatuzi Municipality (Richardsbay area) with more than 30000 double chamber UDDT units completed with more to follow.

Buffalo City Municipality (East London area) who has completed about 20000+ single chamber UDDT units, with additional work currently in progress.

Winterveld Municipality with approximately 10000 'flushing' UDDT units (this is where the hand washing water is used to flush out the urine separation part only).

The balance across the Free State Province in different smaller communities, which included Kimberly and other areas. I do not have the exact figures for these areas, but it is expected to exceed 5000 units.

I hope that this answers some of the question and I will gladly forward any additional information and/or answer more questions.

Jacques Rust]]> Urine diversion systems (includes UDDT and UD flush toilet) Mon, 20 May 2013 13:24:39 +0000 Re: Looking for a mould for producing UDDT locally in Moldova - by: wecf http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/4120-looking-for-a-mould-for-producing-uddt-locally-in-moldova#4410 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/4120-looking-for-a-mould-for-producing-uddt-locally-in-moldova#4410 The moldavian partner Oleg Rotari will call your colleague Jonathan Hecke.
Kind regards]]> Urine diversion systems (includes UDDT and UD flush toilet) Thu, 16 May 2013 12:46:37 +0000 Re: Looking for a mould for producing UDDT locally in Moldova - by: Florian http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/4120-looking-for-a-mould-for-producing-uddt-locally-in-moldova#4392 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/4120-looking-for-a-mould-for-producing-uddt-locally-in-moldova#4392
I checked with my colleagues: they work with a local company that produce cement toilet seats using moulds from Mexico.
So definitly your colleagues should get in contact with us. I am sure that besides the toilet seats there are many more issues where experiences can be exchanged.

Best, Florian]]> Urine diversion systems (includes UDDT and UD flush toilet) Tue, 14 May 2013 14:25:06 +0000 Re: Looking for a mould for producing UDDT locally in Moldova - by: wecf http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/4120-looking-for-a-mould-for-producing-uddt-locally-in-moldova#4380 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/4120-looking-for-a-mould-for-producing-uddt-locally-in-moldova#4380 Thank you very much for your reply: two years ago, when Ormax constructed the school toilet in Hasnasenii Mari, we could manage to buy the plastic squatting pans locally by contacting the Swiss Agency in Moldova. But there is no more local production of cement seats, the company who was doing them is not existing anymore and the mould that our partners from Wisdom gave to them disappeared. It was the information we obtained last year from some local partners. But if you or your colleagues have other information about it, Oleg Rotari from Ormax will be happy to meet and exchange his experience and impressions with you.
And our research for a mould is still not achieved!
Kind regards]]> Urine diversion systems (includes UDDT and UD flush toilet) Mon, 13 May 2013 13:57:40 +0000 Flush UD and waterless urinal: breakdown costs - by: ambaya http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/4353-flush-ud-and-waterless-urinal-breakdown-costs#4353 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/4353-flush-ud-and-waterless-urinal-breakdown-costs#4353
I am a PhD student at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
(HKUST) seeking information on the detail cost breakdown for the installation
and running of flush urine diversion toilets and waterless urinals, in an urban setting. Could you please assist me in that regard? Our group is working on the
treatment of source-separated urine.

Thank you
Best regards

Andr]]> Urine diversion systems (includes UDDT and UD flush toilet) Wed, 08 May 2013 12:21:26 +0000 Re: The oldest and biggest ecosan project in East Africa is still expanding, but slowly!!! - by: HAPitot http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3397-the-oldest-and-biggest-ecosan-project-in-east-africa-is-still-expanding-but-slowly#4322 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3397-the-oldest-and-biggest-ecosan-project-in-east-africa-is-still-expanding-but-slowly#4322
sorry it again took me such a long time to respond! Here in Northern Uganda, the Ministry doesn't match the toilet design to the users - they seem to have only one model for family use, the well built (brick and mortar, and steel for the slab) design I was mentioning.

Thanks for sending the pictures - what are your experiences with such a design which seems to rely heavily on wood. In our area termites are a real problem and any wood that is in contact with the soil will very probably be attacked.

For the replacement of fittings, I think it is a point well taken. It is something we haven't really thought about. Our thrust so far has been on the promotion of the construction of the ecosan toilets, where, as explained, people do invest most of money themselves.

Kind regards, Hanns-Andre]]> Urine diversion systems (includes UDDT and UD flush toilet) Sun, 05 May 2013 21:28:28 +0000 Functionality Analysis of Ecosan Latrines in Rural Areas of Bangladesh Based on Environment and Health Aspects - by: md_ali_881 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/4319-functionality-analysis-of-ecosan-latrines-in-rural-areas-of-bangladesh-based-on-environment-and-health-aspects#4319 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/4319-functionality-analysis-of-ecosan-latrines-in-rural-areas-of-bangladesh-based-on-environment-and-health-aspects#4319 Please find my M.Sc. Thesis "Functionality Analysis of Ecosan Latrines in Rural Areas of Bangladesh Based on Environment and Health Aspects"; September 2012; BANGLADESH UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING AND TECHNOLOGY (BUET)

www.scribd.com/doc/138903959/Functionali...t-and-Health-Aspects]]> Urine diversion systems (includes UDDT and UD flush toilet) Sun, 05 May 2013 13:57:03 +0000 Re: Roediger NoMix toilets - good or bad? And SANIRESCH final report (urine diversion project with UD flush toilets and treatment reactors in Eschborn, Germany) - by: Dena Fam http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3406-roediger-nomix-toilets-good-or-bad-and-saniresch-final-report-urine-diversion-project-with-ud-flush-toilets-and-treatment-reactors-in-eschborn-germany?limit=12&start=12#4289 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3406-roediger-nomix-toilets-good-or-bad-and-saniresch-final-report-urine-diversion-project-with-ud-flush-toilets-and-treatment-reactors-in-eschborn-germany?limit=12&start=12#4289
Thanks for your email, its great to hear about other's experiences

We had an Australian toilet manufacturer involved in our project and while
they did all the Australian standards testing of the UD toilets. We all came
to the conclusion pretty quickly that UD toilets would be problematic in
public settings and waterless urinals would provided more potential for
collection of urine.

We trialled Dubbletten and Wostman and had similar experiences to you in that there were problems with toilet paper getting stuck on the barrier and the toilets being dirtier than conventional toilets requiring more work for cleaners. But what was fascinating was that within a month of the toilets being installed we actually had significantly less problems (almost non-existent) with cross contamination from faeces and miss-placed toilet paper as people learned how to use the toilets

For further details see: www.isf.uts.edu.au/publications/Mitchell...unny-dunny-pilot.pdf


Kind Regards
Dena]]> Urine diversion systems (includes UDDT and UD flush toilet) Wed, 01 May 2013 21:07:39 +0000 Assessment of Roediger toilets - by: kudert http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3406-roediger-nomix-toilets-good-or-bad-and-saniresch-final-report-urine-diversion-project-with-ud-flush-toilets-and-treatment-reactors-in-eschborn-germany?limit=12&start=12#4286 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3406-roediger-nomix-toilets-good-or-bad-and-saniresch-final-report-urine-diversion-project-with-ud-flush-toilets-and-treatment-reactors-in-eschborn-germany?limit=12&start=12#4286
There has been a lot of discussion about NoMix toilets recently and I would like to share our experience with the Roediger toilets at Eawag.

Our first Roediger NoMix toilets were installed in the main building of Eawag (Forum Chriesbach, www.forumchriesbach.eawag.ch) in 2006 and have been operational since then. Later Roediger NoMix toilets have also been installed in the second office building in Dubendorf. The main difference between the two sets of installations is the flushing water: in Forum Chriesbach, the toilets are flushed with rain water, while in the other office building, tap water is used.

A first report on our experiences with the NoMix system in Forum Chriesbach has been published in 2009, unfortunately only in German: Goosse, P., Steiner, M., Udert, K.M. and Neuenschwander, W. (2009) NoMix-Toilettensystem: Erste Monitoringergebnisse im Forum Chriesbach. Gas Wasser Abwasser (7), 567-574.

Since then, we have gained more experience, especially with the toilets that are flushed with tap water. Here are some of the challenges we have encountered: The main problem is the flushing: the toilet paper often gets stuck on the dividing wall between urine and feces outlet, so that the toilets have to be flushed more than once. Furthermore, it seems that the toilets get dirtier than conventional toilets due to the insufficient flushing. This causes more work for the cleaning staff. Another minor problem are incrustrations on the valves, which close the pipe leading to the urine tank. This problem mainly occurs with the tap water flushed toilets due to its content of calcium and magnesium. It can be solved by regular soaking and flushing with citric acid (20%). At Eawag this is done once a month. In the toilets flushed with rainwater, this problem is less prominent. Some of the valves broke and had to be replaced, but this did not happen very frequently. One problem, we did NOT encounter was malodor.

To summarize: The Roediger is a good choice, if you have committed caretakers. If not, you might not want to use any of the current NoMix toilets. Furthermore, I strongly recommend (a) to use rainwater for flushing, (b) to inform the customers about the purpose and goals of the system, (c) to do regular cleaning to ensure customer acceptance and (d) to flush the valves regularly with diluted citric acid (10% with rain water, 20% with tap water flushing) in order to prevent the build-up of crusts.


++++++++++
Note by moderator (EvM): see also related discussion about urine diversion flush toilets at a trial in Sydney, Australia:
forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-uri...-in-sydney-australia]]> Urine diversion systems (includes UDDT and UD flush toilet) Wed, 01 May 2013 16:18:52 +0000 Re: New "Technology review of UDDTs" by GIZ now published - by: hoffma http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3688-new-qtechnology-review-of-uddtsq-by-giz-now-published?limit=12&start=24#4265 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3688-new-qtechnology-review-of-uddtsq-by-giz-now-published?limit=12&start=24#4265
first of all thank you for bringing us back “to the roots” – in the review we resumed knowledge about “UDD” solution(s) with the aim to show the possible impact for more holistic sanitation approaches, where we see the UDD-toilets “not instead of”- but “in addition to” other technologies. Certainly the different approaches can be confusing; on one side we have to decide for or against sewer network and centralized or decentralized wastewater treatment plants (WWTP) and on the other side about how to realize fecal sludge transport and treatment and always about disposal or reuse. And in addition there are new technologies, as UDD-Toilets. And yes, UDD solutions have been proven in the last 20 years in many projects worldwide, but until now mainly from a technical and perhaps “cultural” point of view and less from financial and institutional of up scaling. There is a clear lack of proven up scaling projects in UD Technology.

In an holistic approach each solution can has its place and for decision it needs knowledge about the specific conditions (environmental, financial, social, health, institutional... ). In the reality the given conditions often limit the options and on the other hand conditions are changing form one part of the city to the other and have to be respond with different solutions. For instance: One part of the city has water supply and families already invested into water toilets; so, wastewater MUST be treated, sewer could be the only option and the kind of the WWTP depends on local conditions. In another part, families use pit latrines and the most urgent solution could be to organize fecal sludge management. In other parts leachate from Pit Latrines are a risk for public health or people perhaps have nothing that deserve the name sanitary facility (nor water supply) and a UDDT-solutions with adequate treatment could be the only option.

In this case we are still faced with questions as: How to finance or how to stimulate families to invest in own UDD-toilet? What is the adequate treatment? How can this be financed? How can it be controlled? Who has the institutional responsibility? Just to create a base to answer these questions, we resumed in the review the current technical status of UD-twin vault, UD-single vault and UD-VIP and all related treatment necessities. There are still different opinions, as you can see in the forum, but we tried to focus on those with upgrading potential. All decisions in sanitation should be taken on the assumption that all products (onsite or offsite) do not cause harm to health or environment, or at least the related risk must be acceptably low. In an urban context the “acceptable risk” should never be a personal decision, and the argument “still better than a given situation” is not valid for public investments.

In Durban/South Africa the utility for instance decided that onsite disposal of dried faces and urine has acceptable low risk for the whole city to justify public investment in 80.000 private UD-twin vault toilets. Another situation perhaps justifies support for private UD-VIP (more economic, but only possible in mostly dry and rural areas) which also are based on on-site disposal, which means: no public service effort. In El Alto/Bolivia the decision was to support the weekly collection, transport and offsite treatment of feces and urine from 1.000 single vault UD, but not (or only partly) the private UDD Toilet. At last but not least: mobile UDD solutions often aim to finance the toilet and the treatment service by selling the treated products, which is not working until now, as I know, but nevertheless it is an important vision.

Finally, lack of sanitation is primarily due to a lack of public responsibility, awareness and planning, and less (or not anymore) due to the lack of technical options, and not even necessarily due to the lack of financial resources or possibilities to get financing. Therefore upgrading projects must involve the institutional responsibility, and this is perhaps the biggest challenge with which we are facing now.

Heike]]> Urine diversion systems (includes UDDT and UD flush toilet) Sun, 28 Apr 2013 13:09:11 +0000 Re: New "Technology review of UDDTs" by GIZ now published - by: mwaniki http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3688-new-qtechnology-review-of-uddtsq-by-giz-now-published?limit=12&start=24#4242 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3688-new-qtechnology-review-of-uddtsq-by-giz-now-published?limit=12&start=24#4242
In his Forward, Mr. Conrad Thombansen mentions that the 'Technology' is intended for the developing and the countries in transition. So, could this point be emphasized that this 'Technology...' is applicable worldwide?

And in thermodynamics, we learnt that 'matter and energy can be transformed, and energy can be converted from one form to another but the total of the equivalent amounts of both must always remain constant’. So, with all the advantages of UDDTs, we still have to deal with the problem of collection,transportation and storage of the faecal material in urban areas especially in Africa where resources are scarce.Could point be revisited?

On wastewater there are interesting reports such as FAO Water Reports # 35 (The wealth of waste - it talks of economics of wastewater use in agriculture) quote.
And IWA also had a Technology review on wastewater treatment in 2011.

These reports support wastewater reuse. Is it a mistake especially for the developing countries to continue entertaining this as an evolution? How do we convince these countries to desist from investing in large wastewater treatment plants and go for the UDDTs?

Kind regards

Mwaniki]]> Urine diversion systems (includes UDDT and UD flush toilet) Wed, 24 Apr 2013 22:47:44 +0000 Re: New "Technology review of UDDTs" by GIZ now published - by: canaday http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3688-new-qtechnology-review-of-uddtsq-by-giz-now-published?limit=12&start=24#4234 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3688-new-qtechnology-review-of-uddtsq-by-giz-now-published?limit=12&start=24#4234
Thank you for looking at all of my numbered points (but also please have a look at the lettered points, in response to Heike, when you have a moment).

My intent is not that my options be stated in the Review as the best or only way to proceed, just that they be included in the list of viable options. In our desire to break Modern Society's status quo of water-based sanitation, I suggest we not make a new iron-clad status quo for UDDTs. Instead, I think it is better to say “Design options A and B work well and there are thousands of successful units in use in C and D conditions. Design options E and F are newer, but are promising especially for conditions G y H.”

We should acknowledge that, although the UDDTs we currently build are very functional, there are things to be improved upon if we want to reach a broader audience.

(1) I still see no justification for saying that the “biosolids” from interchangeable containers are less safe than those of two-chambered UDDTs, unless the containers are impermeable and sealed, such that humidity cannot get out (in which case, I would agree that they would be inferior).

The photo you attached of the basket with liquids coming out is clearly a problem. What would have happened if the builders had saved a considerable amount of expense (and environmental impact) and had simply not put the cement floor in that chamber? I imagine that the presumably dry African soils would have absorbed these excess liquids before anyone even knew they existed. To solve the problem now, I would suggest putting cut-off plastic jugs under these baskets to catch the leachate, without the basket sitting all the way down in, to keep the solids dry. Optimally the basket would fit snugly into the mouth of the plastic bin, so that smells cannot easily come out, and the liquids could be dumped into a soak pit when the basket is changed. By the way, the chamber is so large that many containers could be stored right there, maybe pushed into place with a stick and then pulled out with a hook on the same stick. This would also be a good case for woven sacks, placed in the basket when in use, then stored tied shut and marked with the date.

In new units like the one you showed, if it is preferred to have a cement floor, this could slope slightly toward the center and drain to a soak pit. Also, since this is almost certainly urine leaching out, more education is needed so that the students use the UDDTs correctly.

Thank you, Elke and Markus, for your comments concerning the benefits of interchangeable containers (forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-uri...stion-on-squat-plate). Please feel free to write that novel, Markus, and post it here.

(2) About using compost as cover material, this could also be compost from kitchen scraps (although fecal compost would arguably be better microbiologically) or fertile soil (sifted and dried), plus it could be mixed with sawdust, rice hulls or other more conventional cover materials and still inoculate the feces with beneficial microbes and help to control odors.

Of course, we have to be careful about all the potential diseases, but the current system in Developing Countries of directly dumping into rivers or open defecation is a recipe for spreading disease. We should remember that all the worst microbial diseases, like diarrhea, cholera and typhoid, die in less than 2 months in the conditions found in a UDDT and we aim for over 6 months or a year to also wipe out helminth eggs, which are the most resistant of our pathogens but are also not so life-threatening (Esrey et al. 1998. Ecological Sanitation; and why was that table taken out of the revised edition?). The scientist who did most of that research, Sir Richard Feachem, is still a professor at the University of California San Francisco (profiles.ucsf.edu/richard.feachem) and could be interviewed about the current state of knowledge on this (even though he does not respond very well to emails).

Furthermore, if we are aiming at scaling up UDDTs, this is a big solution to avoid having to constantly transport material to and from the city, in who knows what vehicle, with who knows how much petroleum. Also, where could we get enough wood ash or sawdust to supply the UDDTs of a big city, whereas, if the soil city-dwellers produce themselves does the job, the problem is solved. In addition, it is feasible to add cover material mechanically, without having to touch it with our hands.

(3) Elisabeth, you stated on this forum (1Mar13) that the Review says that the dried feces from a UDDT should never be considered pathogen-free, although it may not be stated exactly this way in the Review itself. Here is an excerpt of your post (with my underlining and emoticons) :
“What makes this technology review unique compared to other documents which speak about UDDTs:
1. I think we really explained well that a UDDT will not, never, get "complete" pathogen kill and one should not expect that from a UDDT.
2. A UDDT can but does not have to be operated in conjunction with reuse. Even without reuse, a UDDT can be a very good toilet with plenty of benefits compared to other toilet types.
3. The differences between single vault and double vault UDDTs, their pros and cons.
4. Explanations on UDDTs with containers inside the vaults and without.
5. It is extremely comprehensive, covering all design and O&M aspects in different contexts.
6. It contains a good section on costs - something with other publications about UDDTs often gloss over or omit completely.”


A lot of discussion has centered around the study in El Salvador that showed that users of 2-chambered UDDTs that used their compost in agriculture had more helminths (www.watersanitationhygiene.org/Reference...al%20Medecine%29.pdf). However, in reading the details, they were not even trying to apply any certain minimum detention time, but instead the feces were only stored "weeks to months and then emptied" (page 1822, first paragraph), presumably whenever the other chamber filled. Any system can go wrong, if not used right.

This whole discussion (and mystery ) of when or if treated feces can be considered safe rides on the fact that the diseases we are most worried about (e.g., cholera, diarrhea, typhoid, etc.) cannot easily be tested for in these “biosolids”. On the other hand, I believe there is an ample consensus that Ascaris eggs are the most resistant of all the fecal pathogens, so testing for these should give us sufficient peace of mind, since they can be seen conclusively under the microscope. (I also think that the methods for testing for Ascaris eggs can be refined and made more efficient, forum.susana.org/forum/categories/17-fer...imit=12&start=12)

I suggest more testing be done of Ascaris egg die-off over time under different conditions of cover materials (sawdust, rice hulls, soil, ash, recycled cover material, mixtures, etc.), treatments (solarization, thermophilic composting, earthworms, Black Soldier Fly larvae, etc.), and in the different climates of the world.

In any case, we should realize that, if we have a mindset that “once feces, always feces”, that would mean we are gradually converting the entire planet into feces, which hopefully is not entirely true.

Instead of worrying about the theoretical persistence of some microbial pathogen, we should first focus on the very real threat of fresh feces going straight into the environment, as it does today in much of the world. If someone actually gets sick while following our guidelines, we can revise them.

Rephrasing President Franklin D. Roosevelt, let me assert my firm belief that what we most have to fear, is fear itself.

We do not have a publication about the Ascaris study we did. It was part of the project of a student intern. I could potentially copy the relevant part and circulate it. Other confirmations of the absence of Ascaris eggs after 6 months were done independently in private laboratories in the cities of Puyo and Cuenca, here in Ecuador. I would be happy to send samples to anyone in the world who would like to analyze them.

(4) Thanks for contacting Sanergy about the Fresh Life UDDTs … and to them for their informative response.

(5) I think we could call this inertia.

(6) I do think it is worth stating clearly that this is a batch system, in which we have distinct collections of feces that are treated as units, as opposed to a continuous system, like the Clivus Multrum.

(7) I am glad you agree. One could potentially level the pile via the small door for digging out the biosolids, except that the pile often reaches above the bottom of this door … and this door is sometimes sealed with clay or something similar.

(Eight) Yes, there are many small errors in English that add up to the document not appearing very polished, even though it is not horrible.

Here is a sample. The Review says: “The toilet also includes a sub-structure that houses the necessary components for the collection and storage of excreta, so called faeces vaults.”
The use of “so called” indicates that this name is used, but is not correct. The text is generally too long, in my opinion, and I would suggest dropping this final clause. If one were to keep it, the term would be “faecal vaults”, to use the adjective. Also, the word excreta is being used incorrectly. Excreta is defined as “Waste matter, such as sweat, urine, or feces, discharged from the body” (www.thefreedictionary.com/excreta), whereas I believe we are referring here only to feces (or faeces in the British spelling which you seem to prefer). One could also drop “the necessary components for”. Why use the confusing term of "sub-structure" instead of just saying "underneath" or "in the lower part"?

I would be glad to help with such a revision of the text, if you want.

On p. 2, the Spanish word is Baño, with that hat on the n. I, personally, prefer not to use this term, as the UDDT is generally not a place for bathing. I call it “Inodoro Ecológico Seco con Separación de la Orina”.

I have no trouble calling the openings on the backs of UDDTs “small doors”. Other words, such as hatch, would be unnecessarily confusing for non-native English speakers, especially if we think of flies hatching out inside the hatch. Thank you, Tony, for confirming that it is correct to use the word “door” (Post #4215)

(9, new) The Review mentions several times the promotion of UDDTs in developing and transitional countries. I agree that this is where it is most urgent, but the UDDT is a great improvement on water-based toilets, especially in terms of environmental sustainability and public health, which should be promoted everywhere, not just where people are so poor that they cannot afford anything else.

As always, if any of these points need to clarified or corrected, please do not hesitate to tell me.

Best wishes,
Chris Canaday]]> Urine diversion systems (includes UDDT and UD flush toilet) Wed, 24 Apr 2013 11:04:04 +0000 Re: New "Technology review of UDDTs" by GIZ now published - by: TonyGuadagni http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3688-new-qtechnology-review-of-uddtsq-by-giz-now-published?limit=12&start=24#4215 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/3688-new-qtechnology-review-of-uddtsq-by-giz-now-published?limit=12&start=24#4215
With regards to the use of the term ‘vault access doors’, I believe this is the most accurate, appropriate, and common term to describe that particular UDDT hardware component, though other terms are also acceptable. I have provided a complete justification below.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines a ‘door’ as:

“A movable barrier of wood or other material, consisting either of one piece, or of several pieces framed together, usually turning on hinges or sliding in a groove, and serving to close or open a passage into a building, room, etc.”

A few things of note about this definition: 1) It is framed to be broadly applied, encompassing a number of different materials and opening-closing mechanisms; 2) It is used to describe a removable barrier to a building, room, etc.; and 3) There is nothing inherent to the definition regarding size, whom, or what is intended to pass through the entry.

When I reviewed the Tech Review, the word seemed appropriate and, therefore, I did not put much thought into the semantics. After evaluating this definition, I am confident that this is a good word choice to describe this particular UDDT component.

However, if you have reason to believe that the word ‘door’ is causing confusion for the readers, it could easily be changed to another word that is, at least, comparably descriptive. Elisabeth, you have suggested ‘vault access hatches’ and ‘vault opening covers’.

The word ‘hatch’ is primarily applied in nautical and aeronautical settings, and describes ‘…a square or oblong opening in the deck, by which cargo is lowered into the hold’ (marine) and ‘…an opening or door in an aeroplane or space capsule’ (aeronautics) (source: OED). Though there appears to be a few antiquated definitions that treat a ‘hatch’ as a cover to a small access port in, for example, a furnace, most modern usage defines a ‘hatch’ as the opening itself, rather than the cover. Therefore, the word ‘hatch’ is not appropriate here.

The term ‘vault opening covers’ appears to demand less scrutiny. All words in this phrase are well understood in the English-speaking world and are unlikely to be a source of confusion. One clear advantage of this term is universality: it effectively describes all hinged doors, as well as those covers that are plastered or cemented in place. ‘Vault access covers’ could be used synonymously.

I think there may be some value is establishing consistent terminology for different UDDT hardware components across different organizations and publications. A cursory review of literature found that the ‘vault doors’ and ‘chamber doors’ appear to be the most common terminology, and are used by Stockholm Environment Institute, Netherlands Waste Partnership, WaterAid, Japanese Association for Drainage and Environment, eawag, and many others.

In summary, ‘vault access doors’ is accurate, appropriate, and appears to be commonly used. If you receive feedback from readers that find this term confusing, ‘vault access covers’ would be just as accurate and appropriate, but would deviate from the bulk of literature on the subject.]]> Urine diversion systems (includes UDDT and UD flush toilet) Mon, 22 Apr 2013 23:55:28 +0000 Re: Looking for a mould for producing UDDT locally in Moldova - by: Florian http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/4120-looking-for-a-mould-for-producing-uddt-locally-in-moldova#4211 http://forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-urine-diversion-systems-includes-uddt-and-ud-flush-toilet/4120-looking-for-a-mould-for-producing-uddt-locally-in-moldova#4211 did you check already with the Swiss funded ApaSan project in Moldova (implemented by Skat)? (your colleague, Claudia Wendland, has already been in contact with our colleagues in Moldova some time ago). We use locally produced plastic squatting pans and also locally produced cement toilet seats.
We are building 20-30 UDDT school toilets this year and also household toilets, an exchange with your partner Ormax would certainly be interesting for us (I'll check with my colleagues, perhaps this has happend already) as we are very interested in also supporting other organisations implementing UDDT school toilets.
Please contact our project coordinator in Moldova: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
Best, Florian]]> Urine diversion systems (includes UDDT and UD flush toilet) Mon, 22 Apr 2013 15:45:30 +0000