Hi Cecilia,
I do not understand your comment. The video is in english??!!





Yours
Christoph


* Note by moderator: if you see only a black box where the video preview picture is meant to appear then please use the link provided above the box. This is an IT problem with some browsers that we've described here: forum.susana.org/forum/categories/135-qu...edded-youtube-videos

Hi Christoph,

Is there any chance that you got this video translated into English? Otherwise, can you recommend me something along these lines?

Thanks a lot in advance!
Cecilia.

Dear Chris,
sorry for the answering delay - seasonal aspect
Thanks for your interest.
Answering your questions:

The UD inserts seem very practical and sturdy. How much do they cost? Could they be sold to projects in neighboring Ecuador?

In general we sell the inserts to every place, but the best would be to produce it locally. We do not have very good experiences in sending the insert by mail, Once we sent to Haiti - It did not get through. So there is a risc. We might be able to send it to Ecuador with a friend wo travles on a regular basis. The cost for the insert in Lima is 30 US$.

The price you have to pay is the insert and the costs of building, a discussion about lowering the costs we had here.

I think 100 U$ is a very good price (all selfemade with local material) - impossible to do on a "sanitation as a business" level which is our regular focus.

Any plans to work with the indigenous Awajún (=Aguaruna) people near the border with Ecuador?

Our interest is always to work with water utilities. We do see the only possibility of scaling up in working with the water utilities to offer a non sewer service = fecal sludge management (Septic tank), feces recollection (UDDT), pit emptying (latrines).


Thanks again and all of success and happiness to all of you in 2015.

Christoph

Dear Christoph and everyone else involved,

Congratulations on this spectacular project. It was great to see (in the video) such a diversity of competant Peruvian professionals participating in the project.

Comments:
-- The UD inserts seem very practical and sturdy. How much do they cost? Could they be sold to projects in neighboring Ecuador?
-- The UDDTs are very beautiful, but it seems they could be made a bit simpler to bring the price tag down to maybe US$500.
-- The privacy wall of sticks woven together, built by the owner in Moyobamba, is a very practical option, as it allows more light and air to get in, while providing sufficient privacy. The user can see out much better than people on the outside can see in. (This is the way the indigenous Shuar people here in Ecuador build the walls of their homes.)
-- One of the biggest challenges in a program like this is to select the best users, for whom to build, those who will use them properly and set a good example for the rest of the community. On this front, I suggest testing potential users/beneficiaries by giving them inexpensive, portable UDDTs to use for a week and then check for proper use. This would put some pressure on the user to actually understand and use a UDDT ... and no one would want to be crossed off the list for being messy or not being able to follow instructions. Two examples of such portable UDDTs include the wood and linoleum sit-down unit shown in the Simple UDDT article I published in Sustainable Sanitation Practice
www.ecosan.at/ssp/issue-06-toilets/issue-06-toilets
... and this Minimalist UDDT ...
inodoroseco.blogspot.com/2013/10/a-free-...ist-uddt-part-1.html
-- Any plans to work with the indigenous Awajún (=Aguaruna) people near the border with Ecuador? (My wife is from the closely related Shuar of Ecuador, their languages are similar enough that they can understand each other, she even has Awajún relatives, and she is a big promoter of UDDTs.)
--I would be glad to help troubleshoot any technical problems, or translate or proofread texts.

Best wishes,
Chris Canaday

Dear Dennis I would like to come back to your question 7

7. There was limited mention of the challenges involved in deploying this seemingly widely suitable design approach (other than the normal cost factors) - as things are never as easy as they appear, perhaps you can explain where the significant challenges are in simply deploying this approach on large scale in multiple peri-urban locations around the world?

This is my main point of thinking around sanitation.

onsite service models..... why don´t they take off?

This was the reason as well we linked it to the City Partnerships for Urban Sanitation Service Delivery thread. We do see it exactly as that...Urban Sanitation Service Delivery.
And the challenge is to convince the utilities to work with something they do not consider as "their" job. Most see only the sewer and (maybe) the treatment plant as their job. You have to get to the decision makers (first), but then down all the command chain to convince that a service for onsite saniation IS OBLIGATION AND MISSION of an urban service provider.

I am (almost) sure you did not mean that aspect with your question. But it has been our main challenge.

I guess you are asking for the "problem to convince people to use UDDT" as there might be a "culture problem"?
Look this problem is nonexistent (at least in our 800 cases in different climate zones). Once explained in a very clear manner the "bath room concept" - almost everybody who has a latrine (or nothing) goes for that solution.
Obviously you have to overcome a resistance about "this is new to me - can I trust that it works?" But that is for every new solution and my main point against the usual market driven approaches without adequate promotion the solution. Coca Cola would not be in their position if they did not have marketing. So our market driven approach is different. What we do is, we do clear marketing for UDDT, when we go to the people we don´t say: would you like the black or the yellow lemonade! We say - take UDDT, it is the best solution for this and that reason. And if they don´t “buy”... no problem, the neighbor will buy. Today the settlements in Lima where we have been active, the people ask for this solution actively.

Problems are in:

• money - as in our case they had to construct the superstructure on their own
• what to do with the feces in an urban context

by the second we are back to the service model.
I hope this clarifies a bit of the main challenges.

Yours
Christoph

Dear Dennis,

I would like to give you follow up on your question about Economics:

The second case (SEDE Juliaca) requiered a more complex system (high water table). All SERVICE ACTiVITIES are included in the tariff (2,80 USD per month, for 750 households):
- Dried feces (twin vault): 6 month collection, treatment in vermicomposting followed by solarization
- Urine: collection (small bore sewer, storage and transport to co-treatment in the existent WWTP
- Greywater: collection (small bore sewer) and treatment in constructed wetlands

INVESTMENT costs are not included in tariffs (Peruvian regulation), so, $1,790 (2,750 soles) investment in treatment per household means - for the utility:
- Construction of Vermicomposting and solarization, 8 compartments each and station for reception/operation
- Installation of 64 Plastic tanks (5m³) with small bore sewer for urine drainage
- Installation of 7 constructed wetlands with small bore sewer for greywater
- Training for operation stuff
- Training for user of UD-toilets

In this case sewer connection for the settlement would be twice as expensive.

In the first case (Moyobamba) the service is less complex (onsite disposal/use of urine and greywater is acceptable) - and sewer would be no option. The solution was much cheaper.

Regards, Heike

Thank you Christoph

will read manuals and docs

Hi Dennis, Krishan and Elisabeth,
so many questions. I will try to answer at least some now.
Krishan:
we always do double vault because we don´t trust. A double vault has a need to collect every 6-12 month, a sack system is dependent on a well functioning service model. I think this might be the future but right now I do not trust these solutions. I think we discussed this aspect somewhere already.

Elisabeth:
we do have a short version but only in Spanish

we did it for the Latinamerican "market". for Africa or India other points have to be stressed.
Our aim was to show that "cultural" problems are not an issue for implementation (coastal, high mountain area and tropical climate) and that two different service provider (for different reasons) adopted the model.

Dennis:
too many questions to answer today everything.

If the UDDT technology and systems are as all-purpose as they seem, does this mean we can all stop building latrines tomorrow (as long as the funding is there)?

I am very convinced of UDDT double bench systems BUT.. WITH service model much better. And for service models perfect.

for your question 8: find attached the manual. www.susana.org/en/resources/library/details/1495

5. Vermiculture is post- removal and not expressed in the video we pretend to do a solar sterilization.

1. I don´t have the numbers on hand but yes obviously there is a breakdown of costs.
Have a look on this publication instead, it has a broad brakedown of costs for a slightly different situation.
www.susana.org/en/resources/library/details/961

3. have a look at the manual (see above) and you will find a broad set of solutions for local material

4. see the manual

The rest I have to leave for another post.

Thanks for asking

Christoph

Hi Christophe (and anybody involved these projects)

Some questions as I am still unclear on a few things

1. Is there a breakdown of the costings of $1,792 (2750 soles) per unit please?

2. Is cost highly variable due to local labour and material costs?

3. Is the design such that there is opportunity for local fabrication / manufacture using the same concept to ensure maximum affordability?

4. Also I didn't see the instructions for use of the UDDT as far as faeces management goes - can you point me to a link with those instructions please? Mentioned was sawdust and other materials as part of the process but not the specifics - how much per usage, application etc. I am still unsure of how the diversion of the urine (on it's own) actually achieves a better dry faecal outcome, so perhaps this is explained in the instructions for use?

5. Vermiculture was mentioned but I am unsure of this was in the drying period in the vault or post-removal?)

6. Are there any differences in usage and requirements (and results) with regard to whether cultural norms require / prefer anal washing vs dry wiping?

7. There was limited mention of the challenges involved in deploying this seemingly widely suitable design approach (other than the normal cost factors) - as things are never as easy as they appear, perhaps you can explain where the significant challenges are in simply deploying this approach on large scale in multiple peri-urban locations around the world?

8. If the UDDT technology and systems are as all-purpose as they seem, does this mean we can all stop building latrines tomorrow (as long as the funding is there)?

Can we for example simply get the (for example:) "GIZ Peri-Urban and Rural UDDT System Implementation Manual", find some funders and start community and government stakeholder consultation around the world tomorrow - or should we expect barriers that the Pilot Projects have come across, but weren't mentioned in the video?

9. As the dry faecal output is user-friendly and able to be immediately used as compost, does this remove the whole Faecal Sludge management (FSM) issue because, even if the collection services fail, the dried material should be able to be locally disposed of with no health and contamination results shouldn't it?

This is the subject of another question thread I had on this forum (that was answered by Blake thank you) and FSM is a huge issue generally - has this approach solved the whole FSM issue or only in certain circumstances?

Great video, thanks for sharing.

Maybe it would make sense to integrate exchangeable plasic fibre bags directly into the toilet design so that manually transferring the material from the vaults to the bags for transportation isn't necessary?

Hi Christoph,

This is really an excellent video you produced there together with GIZ in Peru - well done!

I really liked how so many different people spoke in the video (users, artisans and - very important - people from the different water utilities).
Getting these water utilities on board is so important and you seem to have achieved that!
Those 3D animations are also very well done.

My only tiny little criticism is that it is perhaps a little bit long (17 minutes), perhaps it might have been better to split it in two parts?

For people who are already well familiar with the urine-diverting dry toilet (UDDT) model, the Scenario 2 is probably the most interesting part. It starts here at 9:14:



What are now your next steps?
How do you plan to disseminate this video and how do you plan to get Scenario 2 off the ground?

Did I hear right that you want to take the collected urine to a wastewater treatment plant? That seems like a bit of a waste - is there no use for the urine as a fertiliser?

And on the page where you mention costs, it would be good to have the conversion to Eur or USD if the audience is meant for people outside of Peru, as well. As it's probably too much hassle to add that in now, I suggest you add such information into the description field of the Youtube video (which is currently totally empty?) - together with a link to the relevant website and perhaps this discussion thread.

Again, awesome work and awesome video!

Regards,
Elisabeth

P.S. We might eventually split this off into a separate thread if we discuss this work in Peru with UDDTs further?

Hello,

as I received questions „in off“ I would like to answer those here in general.
The second model is totally based on money of Perú (besides the consultancy to set up the model and the calculations).

The sum of 5100 S/. per houshould for the conventional system is about 1.782 US$.

The sum for the alternative model is 961 US$ per household. These cost comply a) central treatment plant for feces b) the urinetanks c) the greywater wetlands d) partial finance of the toilets (not the whole bathroom)

The system is calculated on a base that the operational and maintenance costs are totally covered by the tariff. The tariff has been calculated to 2,8 U$/month and household. Based on 5 persons and 1 use per day this is 2 Cent per use.

Feel free to ask as well here but I can answer your questions as well here.

Yours
Christoph