Dear Elisabeth,

Thanks so much for the feedback; I think it makes a good starting point for a bigger discussion about sanitation program evaluation and nutrient recovery in general.

I do not see the price we pay as being “just for the urine”, but rather, as a small way of “nudging” (to use an economics term) the target population towards a behavior that they were hesitant to engage in previously. UDDTs, as we all know, are not intuitive or loved when they are first introduced. Education and marketing have been used with varying degrees of success to increase use and incite behavior change in the past: incentives are another way that we are testing now.

While I think it would be excellent to recover the nutrients from the urine we collect in a useable form and use it to offset the cost, I don’t see that as the goal of incentivized urine collection.

When posters, pamphlets, or home visits by community health workers are paid for, the impact, unfortunately, is rarely measured, let alone weighed against the cost recovered. After all the materials, printing costs, salaries, transport, etc., the costs for an education campaign could easily reach 25€ per person but these types of programs are considered necessary, and are easy to fund, despite having few quantifiable outcomes.

Certainly a whole range of behavior changing methods are needed (printed and digital media, along with person-to-person education) but I firmly believe that we need to

a) rigorously evaluate the methods that we currently use (in terms of what works, how well and at what price) and;

b) investigate new methods; incentives are one such method.

I think that nutrient recovery is a “plus”- it is a way of offsetting some costs associated with providing sanitation, but should not be viewed as something that is only successful if it is capable of achieving full cost recovery.

I don’t think it’s fair for governments to pay for centralized wastewater treatment for rich people (certainly more than 25€ per person) but push the full responsibility of sanitation onto poor people who use UDDTs.

Transferring small amounts of money to poor people to increase use, while generating a small benefit from nutrient recovery (as opposed to most centralized treatment) seems like a small price to pay for well-maintained, well-used sanitation facilities and the health benefits that come with complete sanitation coverage.

As always, very happy for this forum and the interesting discussion topics it presents.

Elizabeth

Dear Elizabeth,

Thanks for this information, much appreciated.

So assuming that one adult produces around 500 L per urine per year, the municipality would have to pay between 25 to 50 Eur per person per year (based on the range that you mentioned of 1 Eur per 20 L canister to 2 Eur per 20 L canister).

Does this amount in any way resonate with the municipality (e.g. compared to other costs like free water, free primary education or similar)?

It seems a bit high to me, just for urine (Ok, the assumption would be that the faeces would not attract any costs as they would be dried in the UDDTs an locally buried, right?).

I guess ultimately it only makes sense if there is a market for the urine-derived fertiliser. (This was one of the questions I asked above on 4 Feb).

Kind regards,
Elisabeth

Hi all,

I just wanted to quickly reply to the extra questions that were added onto Question 5.

We tested six different combinations of incentives: the lowest payment was 0.5 R/L (10 R per full 20 L container) and the highest was 1 R/L (20 R per full 20 L container).

Rand (R) is the currency in South Africa and currently is about 10 R / 1$, which would make the incentives about 0.05 $ - 0.1 $/L

It is important to note also that we did not hand out "cash" per se. Customers were given tokens, which were then exchanged at local participating shops for money. This was important not only for transparency, but also for the safety of the field staff.

During the pilot phase (about 8 months of experiments), the costs were covered by our research funds, but in the future, if the project was to be scaled up by EWS, the municipality would have to decide how to pay.

I hope this answered your questions, and hopefully I will have some publications available with all the details soon!

Best,

Elizabeth (Tilley)

P.S.
I just took a look at the factsheets about VUNA on your website:
www.eawag.ch/forschung/eng/gruppen/vuna/...n/Brochures/index_EN
They are really very pretty and informative (although naturally they don't go into much detail).

What actually happens with all the nice photos you are collecting as part of the VUNA project? Will they be made available, e.g. in someone's Flickr collection? I think that would be great. I know that e.g. Linda Strange from Eawag-Sandec has a flickr account where she has nice photos from their projects (www.flickr.com/photos/52096232@N03/sets/), so maybe some of the VUNA photos could also find a home on flickr.

The SuSanA flickr database is also an option for this (www.flickr.com/photos/gtzecosan/collections/). In fact, it is open for any SuSanA member who wants to make their sanitation photos available to the wider world. How to do this is described here:
susana.org/lang-en/videos-and-photos/ind...le&id=465&Itemid=455

Dear all,

The recording of the presentation of Kai Udert from our webinar number 5 on "Resource recovery and reuse" on 21 January 2014 is now available.*

Kai had to record his presentation a second time because the recording from the live event was unfortunately too choppy. Thanks to Kai for giving it twice.


VUNA - Valorisation of Urine Nutrients in Africa

Kai Udert, EAWAG, Switzerland

You can watch Kai's presentation here:


Powerpoint slides from his presentation are available in the attached file below.

And here is a summary of the main points that we discussed at the webinar after his presentation:

(1)
Someone asked about social acceptance for this kind of system.

Kai explained that the UDDTs are already there in the area since many years and are support by the municipality (in total: 75,000 of them). EWS (eThekwini Water and Sanitation Unit) accompanied the installation of the UDDTs with facilitators; the VUNA project staff are also using their acceptance and educational materials.
Steve Mecca, who was in the audience, talked about his micro-flush toilets in Ghana and said that they would have a higher acceptance because they have a flush, even if it is only a small flush (see also here: forum.susana.org/forum/categories/106-us...roject-usa-and-ghana) and was interested in the optimisation model for urine collection. In response to this, Kai mentioned the Eawag-RTTC toilet, which provides flushing and source separation as another possible option, however still at a research stage (forum.susana.org/forum/categories/106-us...tzerland-and-austria).

(2)
I asked Kai about the real difficulties and challenges with this project.

Kai said they would need to find a company who could produce the urine processing reactors (at a commercial scale). The second challenge is to optimise urine collection, because urine collection can cause high costs if it is not well done.

(3)
Someone asked about the energy requirements for the urine treatment reactor

Kai mentioned the values again (see slide 7 of his presentation below): about 45 Wh/L for nitrification and 80 Wh/L for distillation. Both electric. (when you are not dealing with these numbers on a daily basis, they are hard to grasp; can you please make a comparison for e.g. running such a reactor for 100 people's urine, I would need the energy equivalent per hour of having a household sized fridge running at the same time?)

+++++++

At the end of the second recording of Kai's presentation, Nelson Ekane asked some further questions (sorry, his voice is really low in the recording). I have written down the questions and answers here for those who cannot play Youtube videos easily (and while writing them down, I had further questions, these are marked in red):

(4)
What does VUNA mean?
Answer by Kai:
"VUNA is a word in the local language isi-Zulu und means "harvest" - we want to harvest the nutrients in urine."

(5)
What incentives are you providing for the urine collection to the people bringing their urine?

Answer by Kai:
"In the beginning there was a plan to use different incentives such as vouchers at a nearby shop. In the end we chose plain money as the incentive to bring the urine to the collection points. Liz Tilley from our team looked at different amounts of money per litre of urine. She is evaluating the results, and they should be available at the end of the project. (follow-up question: any interim figures available? Roughly? Are we talking about 1 Eur per L or 0.1 Eur per L? And who would ultimately pay for this? I guess it would be the municipality, EWS, and they would cover it from their water tariffs maybe?)"

(6)
How do you deal with the loss of ammonia when applying the urine as fertiliser (due to volatilisation)?

Answer by Kai:
"That's actually the reason why we use the nitrification process. With this proecess we can stabilise the ammonia, we have hardly any loss. The main loss would occur during the collection process from the toilets to the reactor (therefore the collection tanks must be well closed). We might loose 3% of the ammonia during the nitrification-distillation process. (comment: during the nitrification process, ammonia is converted to nitrate, but that is not regarded as a "loss" as the nitrogen is still available, just in a different forum)"

(7)
You mentioned your earlier work with urine and struvite in Nepal. Which lessons did you learn there and how did you apply them to the VUNA process?

Kai answered:
"Our lessons from Nepal: Just recovering phosphorus as struvite is not enough! We need to recover also all the nitrogen compounds. Therefore we switched to this nitrification-distillation process.
Also, transport of urine is really costly. We therefore focus now on these two aspects: treatment of urine to recover all of the nutrients and also urine collection.
We use a business model and computer simulations to optimise the urine collection. (could you explain a bit more what the variables are in your computer simulations? I am guessing transport distances and intermediate storage points? Also how does the business model help to reduce the costs of transport? Is it because the company doing the urine collection could sell the fertiliser product back to the farmers? Mind you, I was told the people in that area are not doing any farming (if they were, they wouldn't bring their urine to the collection points unless they get more money for it than for their produce). Therefore, who would be the buyers for the fertiliser, is it some commercial farms perhaps?)
Also, it is really important to make sure that the pathogens are removed and that the pharmaceutical residues content is low in the fertiliser product."

Please feel free to ask the VUNA team any follow-up questions or any other questions here on the forum! thanks, Kai, for being so patient with us. You probably get asked the same questions time and time again (might need an FAQ section on the VUNA website)

Regards,
Elisabeth


* More information about the webinar is available here: forum.susana.org/forum/categories/139-ge...mit=12&start=12#7107

Dear Susana forum users, if you interested in more news about the VUNA project, please join us for the webinar "Innovation in resource recovery and reuse" next week:

Tuesday 21 January 2014, 16:30 - 17:15
(CET - Central European Time; use this time converter if you are unsure of the time difference to your location: www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html)

Agenda:

16:30 Recording starts

(1)
VUNA - Valorisation of Urine Nutrients in Africa
By Kai Udert, EAWAG, Switzerland
see discussion above and www.vuna.ch

(2)
Structuring of the fecal sludge market for the benefit of poor households in Dakar, Senegal
By Mbaye Mbeguere, Senegal National Sanitation Utility, ONAS, Senegal
forum.susana.org/forum/categories/97-enabling-environment/5057-structuring-of-the-fecal-sludge-market-for-the-benefit-of-poor-households-in-dakar-senegal-onas#6845

(3)
Modeling the next generation of sanitation systems
By Luiza Campos, University College London, UK
forum.susana.org/forum/categories/97-enabling-environment-and-others/4741-modelling-the-next-generation-of-sanitation-systems-university-college-london-uk

17:15 End of webinar

For more information on how to participate, see in this posting here on the forum:
forum.susana.org/forum/categories/139-general-information-and-announcements/5624-5th-webinar-on-21-january-2014-sanitation-webinars-with-bmgf-grantees-organised-by-stockholm-environment-institute?limit=12&start=12#6746

Kind regards, Kai

Dear Kim

We aim to produce a valuable product (i.e. a fertilizer), prevent environmental pollution, ensure high hygienic standards and minimize the direct contact of the toilet users with urine. We think that these four goals can be achieved in the best way by bringing the urine to a collection point, where it can be treated with more complex technologies. I am not aware of any onsite technology, which can achieve the same results. However, with so many researchers working in this field right now, it is well possible that we will have highly efficient and easy-to-maintain urine treatment technologies for on-site reactors soon.

Two of our technologies, nitification/distillation and struvite precipitation, were first tested in the laboratory and later in pilot-scale reactors. Our main focus is on nitrification/distillation. One pilot plant has been running at Eawag's office building for than two years, another one is currently being installed at a horticultural center in Durban. For the next year, we are planning a third pilot plant.

As you pointed out, the effluent of the struvite precipitation process contains most of the nutrients, by the way by mass and by financial value (see the following paper for more details: Etter, B., Tilley, E., Khadka, R. and Udert, K.M. (2011) Low-cost struvite production using source-separated urine in Nepal. Water Research 45(2), 852-862.) Stuvite production has received a lot of attention, because it is a comparatively simple process and because it produces a phosphorus fertilizer. There is definitely a market for struvite, but in order to achieve all four goals that I mentioned above, struvite precipitation has to be combined with another process. One possibility is to treat the struvite effluent in the nitrification/distillation process. By this, we can produce two fertilizers, first a phosphorus fertilizer (struvite) and second an ammonium/potassium fertilizer. Furthermore, we produce distilled water.

A urine collection system has to be sustainable in various ways:
- as much urine as possible has to be collected to prevent environmental pollution and to recover most of the nutrients as fertilizer
- the collection system has to be financially viable
- urine collection must not be a burden for the local community
- urine pick-up has to be reliable
- urine collection should be a source of income for the local community

In VUNA, we investigate different approaches. In one approach, financial incentives are used to engage the local community in urine collection. In another approach, urine collection is organized and provided by the water and sanitation utility alone (institutionalized collection). Both approaches have their advantages and drawbacks. In the end of the project, we will be able to give you a more detailed answer about the key components.

Best regards, Kai

Dear Corine and VUNA research team,
It is excellent to see all your factsheets sharing your project progress. Your work is really showing great potential to contribute to rethinking the sanitation development in the future.

Still, I have some questions that I hope you can answer:
Urine processing technologies: From what I can see in your factsheets most technologies that you apply seems fairly high tech. What are the main challenges that you encountered in search for affordable and technically accessible methods? In the case of nitrification and distillation, are you planning to go beyond the laboratory level and set up a pilot plant for testing in a real setting? For the struvite production that you now also tested in field, what are your strategies for management of the remaining liquid sub-product (considering that 80% of the volume remain, and also the main content of nitrogen and other nutrients).

Urine collection system: From the lessons in your project, what would you say are key components that can create a sustainable collection system for urine (including economic, social, and environmental dimensions)?

Thanks and keep up the nice work!!

All the best,
Kim

Dear all,

Finally, our new brochures are online!

Each brochure is a compact and easy to understand summary of one research topic within the VUNA project.

The VUNA brochure collection:

Urine collection networks:

• Urine collection - Setting up a system
• Performance model - Optimising collection
• Optimise collection - Minimising costs

Urine treatment processes:

• Nitrification - Stabilising urine
• Distillation - Concentrating urine
• Electrolysis - Compact reactor
• Complete recovery - All nutrient solution
• Struvite production - Phosphorus fertiliser

Risks of urine use:

• Pathogens - Inactivation
• Pharmaceuticals - Degradation

Agricultural use

• Urine fertiliser - Greenhouse trials

Socio-economic aspects:

• Incentives - Encouraging collection
• Hygiene education - Improving health
• Social acceptance - Feedback from users

Check out the brochures !

Best regards,
Corine
www.vuna.ch

Dear all,
Please see below a paper our team at UKZN has produced, as part of the VUNA project described above. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to ask here on the forum. I am sorry but the paper has a copyright with IWA Publishing. If you would like to have a copy, you can e-mail me (simply use the contact button on the left of this post) or email me at This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.


Assessing perceptions and willingness to use urine in agriculture: a case study from rural areas of eThekwini municipality, South Africa.
Authors: A. E. Okem, S. Xulu, E. Tilley, C. Buckley and E. Roma

In Journal of Water, Sanitation and Hygiene for Development Vol 3 No 4 pp 582–591 © IWA Publishing 2013
doi:10.2166/washdev.2013.036

www.iwaponline.com/washdev/up/washdev2013036.htm

ABSTRACT

In recent years there has been a growing body of knowledge exploring the benefits of using sanitation-derived nutrients. Such studies aim to uncover strategies that facilitate nutrient recovery from urine and faecal sludge for agricultural use. This paper presents the findings of a study which assessed the willingness to handle and use urine in agriculture among people living in rural areas of eThekwini Municipality, South Africa. Results show that less than 5% of participants are using urine as a fertiliser. This could be attributed to limited awareness of the value of urine in agriculture since only 9.7% are aware that urine contains essential nutrients that can support plant growth. Furthermore, health concerns, smell and the opinions of others are identified as barriers to the handling of urine. The study therefore recommends that participatory field trials and promotional activities are conducted to improve users’ awareness and acceptance. The outcome of this research is of importance to help inform low- and middle-income countries’ governments as they address urban and environmental challenges such as access to adequate sanitation, poverty and food security.



CONCLUSIONS
Our research provided an overview of current perceptions of UDDT users in eThekwini Municipality on the re-use of urine for agricultural purposes, highlighting some of the hurdles encountered. Managing the re-use of urine as a resource requires a radical shift in perceptions and practices, which involves all stakeholders in the value chain, from local authorities to end users and consumers. Yet this study provides only an overview of existing perceptions on the re-use of urine. Further research is recommended to assess the impact of suggested interventions (i.e. participatory field
demonstrations, training and promotion activities) to increase users’ awareness of the value of urine-based fertiliser and acceptance of the practice.

Dear all,

I would like to point out the following news on the VUNA homepage:

Complete nutrient recovery
The paper „Udert, K.M., Wächter, M. (2012) [pdf] Complete nutrient recovery from source-separated urine by nitrification and distillation. Water Research 46(2), 453-464.“ is now available as pdf.

Documentation
In this register you find a lot of additional reading material. Now there are also the links to the following videos:

• SRF1 - Einstein: Urin gegen Dünger Engpass (German)
• Smart Studio featuring the VUNA nitrification reactor at Eawag (English)
• SABC -50|50: Excellence in eThekwini (English) (about the infrastructure projects in eThekwini)

Agriculture
Results from struvite crop trials at University of KwaZulu-Natal in South Africa
Fact-sheet: Odindo, A., Bame, I., Buckley, C. (2013) [pdf] Struvite crop trials. Crop and Soil Science, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa

Results from a plant growth study at ETH Zurich
Poster: Nutrient (re)cycling from human urine [pdf]. Christophe Bonvin, MSc candidate, ETH Zürich, Institute of Agriculture Sciences, Group of Plant Nutrition,


The homepage is updated constantly with new findings. I'll keep you informed.

About me: I am studying Environmental Engineering at ETH Zurich. Since January I am working alongside my studies at Eawag on the VUNA project. I am mainly involved in the communication and the documentation of the project.

I appreciate your interest!

Best regards
Corine

Dear Stefy,

Thanks for the interest in our project! Here some answers to your questions:

1. Of course, direct urine application is the simplest and most efficient way of urine fertilisation. However, there are several challenges to a large scale application, which we try to tackle in the VUNA project:
a) concentrating the nutrients in about 3 % of their initial urine volume and weight saves storage space and transportation costs.
b) processing the urine into a fertiliser product that does not smell bad improves user-friendliness.
c) processing the urine at higher temperatures kills pathogens and makes it safe to handle.
d) processing removes part of the organic pollutants and can be extended to remove all of them.

2. Faeces treatment is not part of the VUNA project. The eThekwini is running an interesting project to pelletise faecal sludge (www.parsep.co.za/pages/Malaysia-Poster1.pdf).

3. The economic and social acceptance studies are currently carried out in the field and the first results are being processed. We will publish any interesting intermediate and final results on our website www.vuna.ch. Stay tuned!

For videos, check out the "News" box on the left side of our website!

Best regards,
Bastian