And here's the Flickr set of the event via BMGF www.flickr.com/photos/gatesfoundation/se...548/with/7780869398/

(though Carol's PLUSH Flickr set is much better

Hi, everyone,

As promised, below is the list of the 35 exhibitors copied from the Reinvent the Toilet Fair program. Please note that they come from various categories: GCEG = Grand Cghallenges Explorations Grantee RTC = Reinvent the Toilet Challenge Grantee. OE = Other Exhibitor At the Fair, RTC university teams were awarded prizes and several GCEG grants were announced.

When you find good (or interesting) technical info on these projects, can you tell us here? Sorry not to have time to search and add links as Marijn suggests. Prototyping evolves and I think exhibitors will start posting more in light of the feedback exchanges among them. (As I've located details I've posted at bottom of our blog post www.phlush.org/2012/08/17/reinvent-the-toilet-fair/)

1. Fecal Sludge Omni-Ingestor. AGi Manufacturing, Synpase Product Development and DCI Automation, Beaumont Design, Inc. USA. OE

2. Educating children and their caregivers about good water, sanitation and hygiene practices. Sesame Workshop. OE

3. World Toilet Organization Singapore OE

4. Project Sammam Institute for Financial Management and Research [IFMR] represented by Quicksand. India OE

5. Improved latrine pans for pour flush systems. American Standard Brands. OE

6. The Great Wash Yatra: A sanitation and hygiene advocacy campaign Participating organizations: WASH United, quicksand Design, Germany and India. OE

7. Poop Games:Using Technology to design and improve sanitation. Hattery Labs LLC USA

8. An energy-producing, waterless toilet system. Loowatt, Ltd. United Kingdom. GCEG

9. A high-efficiency sanitary toilets with sewage treatment. Livvon LLC USA GCEG

10. A self-mixing biogas generator. Frontier Environmental Technology. GCEG

11. Developing fortified fertilizer pellets from human waste. International Water Management Institute, Ghana. GCEG

12. Sewage Containment and Mineralization Device. (SeCoM) Institute for Residential Innovation [IResl] GCEG

13. Tiger Toilet and Black Soldier Fly Larvae System "The Kone" Longon School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. United Kingdom GCEG

14. Bioelectric Toilet University of Colorado, Denver, USA GCEG

15.Developing chemicals to self-clean and disinfect toilets. American Environmental Systems. USA. GCEG

16. Modeling the next generation of sanitation systems. University College, London. GCEG

17. A toilet that converts human waste to fuel gas. Delft University of Technology. The Netherlands. RTC.

18. The Microflush Biofil Toilet. participating organizations: Ghana Sustainable Aid Project and Biofilcom Ltd. USA. GCEG

19. Diversion for safe sanitation participating organizations: EAWAG: Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology; EOOS. Switzerland. RTC

20. A community bathroom block that recovers clean water, nutrients, and energy. University of Kwazulu-Natal. South Africa. RTC

21. A toilet that produces biological charcoal, minerals and clean water. Longborough University, United Kingdom. RTC

22. A device that sterilizes fecal sludge. Oklahoma State University USA GCEG

23. The Earth Auger Toilet: Innovation in waterless sanitation [el taladro de la tierra]. Fundacíon Ub Terris. Ecuador. GCEG

24. A toilet that sanitizes feces and urine to recover resources and energy. University of Toronto. Canada. RTC

25. Safe sludge project. University of California, berkley. USA. GCEG

26. A vortex bioreactor that processes fecal sludge and wastewater. Plymouth Marine Laboratory, United Kingdom. GCEG

27. A device to improve latrine emptying. North Carolina State University. USA GCEG

28. A urine-diverting combustion toilet. National University of Singapore. Singapore. GCEG

29. Urban sanitation solutions for high-use flooded, and difficult to serve areas. Fontes Foundation, Norway/ Haiti. GCEG

30. A solar-powered toilet that generates hydrogen and electricity. California Institute of Technology, USA. RTC

31. Converting human waste to biological charcoal re:char, USA GCEG

32. A wind-driven sanitation systems. A wind-driven sanitation system. GCEG

33. On-site fecal sludge extraction and disposal system. Shijiazhuand University of Economics, China. GCEG

34. A solar steam sterilizer to theat human waste. Rice University, USA GCEG

35. A sanitation system that comverst human waste into biological charcoal. Participating organizations: Stanford University and the Climate Foundation, USA RTC

Here is a link to Sanitation Ventures homepage with information on the Black Soldier Fly and Tiger worm projects:

www.sanitationventures.com/innovation-bsf-additives.htm

More technical information on teh systems will likely be posted soon...

Sanitation ventures also have a blog that you might want to keep an eye on!

www.blog.sanitationventures.com/

Re: Reinvent the Toilet Fair

Happy to see that the Gates Foundation has posted a list of 10 videos on Reinvent the Toilet, eight of which are quick overviews of teams participating at the Fair. While there's not a lot of technical detail, at least you can see how prototypes are set up. www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLAA2616C5...C99&feature=plcp

I've also incorporated links to individual projects in my evolving blog post. www.phlush.org/2012/08/17/reinvent-the-toilet-fair/

A toilet that converts human waste to fuel gas. Delft University of Technology. The Netherlands.

Diversion for safe sanitation participating organizations: EAWAG: Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology; EOOS. Switzerland.

A community bathroom block that recovers clean water, nutrients, and energy. University of Kwazulu-Natal. South Africa.

A toilet that produces biological charcoal, minerals and clean water. Longborough University, United Kingdom.

A toilet that sanitizes feces and urine to recover resources and energy. University of Toronto. Canada.

A urine-diverting combustion toilet. National University of Singapore. Singapore.

A solar-powered toilet that generates hydrogen and electricity. California Institute of Technology, USA.

A sanitation system that comverst human waste into biological charcoal. Participating organizations: Stanford University and the Climate Foundation, USA

Dear all,
attached a scanned copy of an article from the Vienniese weekly newspaper "Falter" on the "Reinvent the toilet" challenge of the BMGF.
A Vienniese designer is interviewed, he is working together with EAWAG.
Sorry, but the article is in German only.
Best regards,
Guenter Langergraber

Dear all,

To be honest, I've been somewhat amazed about how the discussion about the „reinvent the toilet challenge" of the Gates Foundation has gone. If I have read the requirements of the foundation correctly, they have an aim of 5 US cents per user per day for the costs of the envisaged toilet. That's at least 25 cents, if not 30 or 40 cents per day for a family out of an income of possibly 2 US dollars per day (or less) - two dollars per day would actually be very decent, that's what my security people are earning. Under these circumstances, 25 cents would be more than 10% of daily family income!! Do you seriously think that anybody among the poor would spend that kind of money for a toilet?

In another post on Susana: forum.susana.org/forum/categories/34-uri...harge-on-water-bill,
I have mentioned a toilet that is costing less than 2 US cents per person per day - a UDDT that we have improved upon (and still do) here in Adjumani, Uganda. The locals that are having such toilets - admittedly usually more durable and expensive ones - built in Adjumani are among the more wealthy people. From my observations, the ONLY reason for the poor to shy away from these toilets are perceived costs. The Gates Foundation should aim at a toilet that costs ONE cent (US) per person per day, AND is hygienic, AND doesn't require water for flushing, AND doesn't require electricity, AND recovers the nutrient value of faeces (at least potentially). That would be the proper goals to reach the poor at least in Northern Uganda!

Kind regards to everybody,

Hanns-Andre

Here's another project with an onsite sanitation proposal: The Nano Membrane Toilet

==> water & sludge briquettes as end products, vacuum pump to be manually operated by toilet user

www.nanomembranetoilet.org/index.php

Great approach, imo, but what I don't like is this:


Also, I wonder how many UDDTs the fund could have financed (like the one by Woo Woo, the latest SuSanA partner org www.waterlesstoilets.co.uk/).

There seems to be some progress in the direction the challenge is developing, in the sense that they also want to address the issues of pre-digested sludge and that they now call on applicants to consider all the other stuff that goes down toilets.

It is too bad that there is so little information being made available on how the processes that are being researched work. The way things are presented thus far I get the feeling that actually none or very few of the solutions pioneered follow the design brief as in the challenge statement.

For example, solutions need to be off grid, but then a solar panel is allowed? How do they defend that? Solar voltage take is still more expensive then grid power in almost any place. To me saying you want to be off grid and then award a solution with a solar panel as the winner seems very strange.

Also with the Nano membrane toilet mentioned above, as far as I understand they will not deliver a product that is bio-safe. The briquettes they propose to make are essentially untreated thickened sludge. So unless I am missing something mayor in their texts they are not safe for re-use in agriculture, especially when we consider worm eggs.

As I am sure at least one person at BMGF is reading these posts, I would like to call on them to create an on-line platform where they share information and come to a dialogue on why they sometimes seem to go against their own design briefs. For many of us working in sanitation it would be a very interesting if the challenges would be more transparent and open source. I think ultimately that the groups involved in the challenge would also benefit from a more open approach.

Kind regards

Marijn Zandee

Hi Marijn,
I agree with your concerns and also find it a bit strange that most solutions we've heard about so far are focused on water treatment - and not on what's actually flushed down a toilet. Also, the miso test sausages (even though they are part of the official norm test for toilets) can't deliver the full picture.

I'd like to defend the solar approach though, because I guess they are looking at countries like Kenya where grid power is unavailable or unreliable so that many upcountry folks in Kenya have meanwhile resorted to solar panels which are hooked up to a (used car) battery. A solar panel also serves as a "multi-purpose machine" as it can recharge mobile phones or power something else that will be used to generate income. In fact, there's a (Dutch CEO!) company in Kenya already producing solar panels from imported silicium debris. The market leader is SunTech from China though. So solar panels are already widely available in those target markets and approved products. My understanding is that BMGF is looking at East Africa in particular.

And yes, it would be great to have an open platform where we can discuss these technologies and/or have more inventors openly sharing their approaches, but obviously, they come from a different background where such a point of view isn't part of the package and/or they are restricted by/afraid of IPR. I am glad that we have this forum here and don't have to use e.g. YouTube's comment section where we'd also be dealing with the usual pee & poo trolls. Still, BMGF would be well advised to allow a more open dialogue, especially since most forum members here are practitioners with an imagineering point of view.

Hi Juergen,

For me the solar, even if probably perfectly workable in a technical sense, is another example of how some of the solutions seem to go against the spirit of the challenge. If I recall correctly the suggestion at the start of the challenge was pretty much that off-grid meant with no electrical input. For instance in one presentation there was this message about the thermodynamics of the process showing that it could be energy neutral.

Cool that they are making solar panels in Kenia now, we need that here in Nepal:-). For next winter they project two 9 hour power-cuts per day.

It is good that we can discuss the projects here, it would just be nice if there was a platform through which the BMGF would actually interact with "practitioners" in stead of leaving us speculating .

Regards

Marijn

I have been reading through the posts on this topic and it makes me wonder....

How have telecomunications companies succeeded to convince most people of the economic and social benefits of telephones and we cannot convince people of the economic, social and environmental benefits of sustainable, designated places to defecate and/or urinate...?

RowanBarber wrote:


Jeroen also recently asked this question (we're all wondering about). My answer is here: forum.susana.org/forum/categories/39-mis...ne-applications#1511

In short, I believe the difference is: mobility. Mobile phones are mobile, most toilets aren't. It probably also has a lot to do with marketing, and that we still haven't found the "hot button" to the repitillian brain when it comes to toilet marketing (the Japanese have done so, btw, with their washlets).