Sanitation Status in India in 80s

During launching of the International Drinking Water

Supply and Sanitation Decade programme in India (1981-1990), sanitation status was reported to be dismal. Urban sanitation coverage was hardly 26.9% and rural coverage was negligible and as low as 0.5% in 1981. In last 3 decades, as reported in census 2011, the urban coverage has increased to 81.4% and rural sanitation to 30.7%.

Decade Targets for Sanitation Service

The decade targets for improving sanitation services were to be reached by March 1991. Sector Category
Urban Sanitation

Coverage
80%

Level of service
100% coverage for class-I cities with sewerage & sewage treatment facilities; low cost sanitation methods in other towns. Overall coverage of 80% in all cities and towns. Low cost sanitary methods of disposal

Rural Sanitation

25%

Urban Sanitation:
Class-I cities must be provided with sewerage and sewage treatment facilities. In fringe areas provides community toilets. Areas where sewerage system is not possible provide low cost sanitation.

Rural Sanitation:
Simple sanitary latrines will be used. Small per capita cash provision could be made as an incentive for the construction of sanitary latrines.

Sanitation Situation in India

Availability of Toilets for Households in India Rural and Urban 2008-2009
Location Without Toilets 49% Pit Latrine 12% Septic Tank/Flush Latrine 35% Service others Total

Total

1.40%

1.20%

99%

Rural
Urban

65%
11%

14%
8%

18%
77%

1%
1.60%

1%
1%

99%
99%

Type of Toilets used by Households in India- Rural and Urban 2008-2009

Location Total Without Toilets 49% Exclusive (own) Use 37% Shared 11% Public/Com Total munity 3% 100%

Rural
Urban

65%
11%

28%
58%

6%
24%

1%
6.50%

100%
100%

Source: NSS 65th Round, Report No. 535: Housing Condition and Amenities in India: July, 2008-June, 2009 (Nov 2010)

Type of Latrine (Census of India 2011)

Type of Latrine Facility India (246,692,667) Rural (167,826,730) Urban (78,865,937)

Piped sewer system

Septic tank Other system With slab/ventilated improved pit

11.9
22.2 2.3 7.6

2.2
14.7 2.5 8.2

32.7
38.2 1.7 6.4

Without slab/open pit Night soil disposed into open drain

Night soil removed by human Night soil serviced by animals

1.8 0.5
0.3 0.2

2.3 0.2
0.3 0.2

0.7 1.2
0.3 0.2

Public latrine
Open

3.2
49.8

1.9
67.3

6.0
12.6

World Scenario in Sanitation

According to JMP report 2012: Globally, 63% of the population use improved sanitation facilities. In 2010, an estimated 2.5 billion people were still without improved sanitation. Sanitation coverage in Southern Asia and sub-Saharan Africa are 41% and 30 % respectively. 1.1 billion people- 15% of the worlds population- still resort to open defecation. Open defecation is highest in rural areas of southern Asia, where it is practiced by 55 per cent of the population. Globally, 79 % of the urban population use an improved sanitation facility, compared to 47 % of the rural population.

Sanitation Technologies
The sanitation technologies are classified into two parts based on the basis of disposal site.
First is On-site in which waste is finally disposed or

treated on the site itself. Second is Off-site in which the waste is carried to some other place for the final disposal or treatment. The off-site technology covers sewerage system, dry latrines removed by bucket, truck, human beings etc. The Off-site technology has many constraints.

Generic classification of sanitation system

On-site

Dry
Overhanging Trench latrine Pit latrine

Wet
Pour flush (PF) latrine, soakaway PF latrine, aquaprivy, soakaway PF latrine, septic tank, vault

Reed Odorless Earth Closet (ROEC) Ventilated improved pit (VIP) latrine
Batch composting latrine Continuous composting latrine

Sullage-flush, aquaprivy, soakaway Sullage-flush, septic tank, soakaway

Convention septic tank

Generic classification of sanitation system Contd.

On-site or off-site
WET WET

Off-site

DRY

Low-volume cistern-flush, soakaway, or sewer Low-volume cistern-flush, aquaprivy, soakaway, or sewer Low-volume cistern-flush, septic tank, soakaway, or sewer

Conventional sewerage

Vault and vacuum tank Vault, manual removal, truck, or cart Bucket latrine (manual removal) Mechanical bucket latrine

Current sewerage system in Urban Areas

In Urban India, safe disposal of human excreta is the

biggest challenge. A 2009 study of 498 class I and 410 II towns reported that while sewage generated was more than 38,000 MLD (million litres per day), treatment capacities were only about 12,000 MLD- 31% of generation. (Central Pollution Control Board, 2009). 39% of the treatment plants did not confirm to discharge standards into water bodies. Only 13.5% of the sewage from Indian cities is treated. In 12 metropolitan cities like Bangalore, Amritsar, Meerut, Kochi, Coimbatore etc. there are no sewerage treatment plants. Most of cities have primary treatment facilities.

Constraints
To achieve sustainable sanitation, more areas need to be covered under well maintained piped sewerage systems. But there are some constraints in achieving the piped sewerage system. some of them are: Water Shortage Lack of operation and maintenance Lack of funds Lack of knowledge about nonconventional sanitation technologies Weak institutions with trained personel

Water Shortage
Minimum 130 lpcd (Per Capita Water Supply) is required

to sustain the sewer system in the area. Large number of class-I cities in India do not have minimum per capita water supply to sustain the sewerage system. With decrease in fresh water availability, most of the urban and even rural areas are facing crisis during dry months.

Lack of Operation and Maintanance

The existing treatment capacity is also not effectively

utilized due to operation and maintenance problem. Some treatment plants are underutilized and some are overloaded. Actual sewerage treatment due to inadequacy of the sewerage collection system shall be low compare to capacity. Nearly most of the treatment plants are not conforming to the general standards prescribed under the Environmental (Protection) Rules for discharge into streams.

Lack of Fund
According to census 2011, only 11.9% of total households are

covered under piped sewer system. To cover whole country in sewerage system a huge investment of money will be required. Per capita investment costs for sewerage systems ranges between Rs 20,000 to 50,000, an amount totally beyond the ability of the beneficiaries to pay and even investment agencies to sustain. Any technology whose total financial cost is more than 10-20 percent of user income probably should be excluded as financially unaffordable. The cost for excavation and pipe will be more in rocky area for conventional technologies as comparison to nonconventional technologies.

Lack of Knowledge of Nonconventional sanitation technologies

First priority of excreta disposal programs in developing

countries must be human health, that is, the reduction and eventual elimination of the transmission of excreta related diseases. This health objectives can be fully achieved by nonconventional sanitation technologies that are much cheaper than sewerage system. Lack of interest in sanitation technologies other than sewerage is in part because of the standardized education of most planners and engineers in developing countries. People do not know more about the nonconventional sanitation technologies. Planners feel they have to press for sewerage because without it public health will not be secure.

Weak Institutions with trained personnel

Most municipalities have difficulty in attracting and

retaining well-trained staff. STPs are usually run by personals that do not have adequate knowledge of running the STPs and know only operation of pumps and motors.

Consequences of lack of sewerage system

Thus, untreated and partially treated municipal waste

water finds its way into water sources such as rivers, lakes and ground water, causing water pollution. Organic matter and bacterial population of fecal origin continue to dominate the water pollution problemmean levels of biological oxygen demand have increased in six of the 18 major rivers accounting for 46% of the total river length nationally. Ground water is also polluted due to discharge of untreated sewage.

Septic tank
Septic tanks are also big problem in achieving sustainable

sanitation target. Majority of the septic tanks had openings into open drains, which drained the liquid effluents from the septic tanks. This also leads to a high probability of ground water pollution. Septic tank requires more space. The construction needs regular technical assistance and supervision. This needs ventilation, which adds to cost. Desludging of Septic tank is needed on regular basis. The sludge and effluent from a septic tank can not be used as a fertilizer straight away without causing health hazards. In some areas septic tank toilets are within 10 meters distance from water sources causing pollution. Majority of masons, without knowledge of safer technologies, opt for septic tanks.

Decentralized Wastewater Treatment Systems (DEWATS)

DEWATS, is an on-site technology, provides treatment for

wastewater flows from 1-500 m3 per day, from both domestic and industrial sources. DEWATS is based on four treatment systems: Sedimentation and primary treatment in sedimentation ponds, septic tanks or Imhoff tanks Secondary anaerobic treatment in fixed bed filters or baffled septic tanks (baffled reactors) Secondary and tertiary aerobic/anaerobic treatment in constructed wetlands (subsurface flow filters) Secondary and tertiary aerobic/anaerobic treatment in ponds. The above four systems are combined in accordance with the wastewater influent and the required effluent quality.

Pros and Cons of DEWATS

Type Kind of treatment Aerobic degradation, pathogen removal Used for type of wastewater Weak, mostly pre-treated wastewater from domestic and industrial sources Advantages Disadvantages Aerobic pond Simple in construction, reliable in performance if proper dimensioned, high pathogen removal rate, can be used to create an almost natural environment, fish farming possible when large in size and low loaded Large permanent space requirement, mosquitoes and odour can become a nuisance if undersized, algae can raise effluent BOD

Anaerobic filter

Anaerobic degradation of suspened and dissolved solids

Pre-settled domestic and industrial wastewater or narrow COD/BOD ratio

Simple and fairly durable if well constructed and wastewater has been properly pre-treated, high treatment efficiency, little permanent space required because of being underground.

Costly in construction because of special filter material, blockage of filter possible, effluent smells slightly despite high treatment efficiency

Pros and Cons of DEWATS contd.

Type Kind of treatment Used for type of wastewater Suitable for domestic and weak industrial wastewater where settleable solids and most suspended solids already removed by pre-treatment Advantages Disadvantages Horizontal gravel filter Aerobic facultative -anaerobic degradation of dissolved and fine suspended solids, pathogen removal High treatment efficiency when properly constructed, pleasant landscaping possible, no wastewater above ground, can be cheap in construction if filter material is available at site, no nuisance of odour High permanent space requirement, costly if right quality of gravel is not available, great knowledge and care required during construction, intensive maintenance and supervision during first 1-2 years.

Anaerobic pond

Sedimentation, anaerobic degradation and sludge stabilisation

Strong and medium industrial wastewater

Simple in construction, flexible in respect to degree of treatment, little maintenance

Wastewater pond occupies open land, there is always some odour, can even be stinky, mosquitoes are difficult to control

Pros and Cons of DEWATS contd.

Type Kind of treatment Used for type of wastewater Advantages Disadvantages

Baffled septic tank

Anaerobic degradation of suspended and dissolved solids

Pre-settled domestic and industrial wastewater of narrow COD/BOD ratio, suitable for strong industrial wastewater Wastewater of settleable solids especially domestic

Simple and durable, high treatment efficiency, little permanent space required because of being underground, hardly any blockage, relatively cheap compared to anaerobic filter

Requires larger space for construction, less efficient with weak wastewater, longer start up phase than anaerobic filter

Imhoff tank

Sedimentati on, sludge stabilisation

Durable, little space because of being underground, odourless effluent

Less simple than septic tank, needs very regular desludging

On-site Technology for Sustainable Sanitation

Sulabh two-pit, pour-flush, compost toilet
In the Sulabh toilets there are

two pits, one used at a time and the other is kept as standby. When the first pit fills up, the excreta is switched over to the other one.
Both

Sulabh Toilet with circular pits.

the pits are used alternately. In the first pit after a period of two years, human excreta gets converted into manure.

Water-seal or P -trap of Sulabh toilet

As water-seal or trap used in a Sulabh toilet is of 12-20 millimetres, therefore it requires only 1-1.5 litre of water to flush per use. So it saves enormous quantity of water compared to sewerage or septic tank systems where-in 10 litres of water is used for flushing per use.

Advantages of Sulabh two-pit, pour flush, compost toilet

Sulabh two-pit, pour flush, compost toilet is eco-friendly, costeffective, technically appropriate, indigenous and socioculturally acceptable. Sulabh two-pit, pour flush, compost toilet fulfills all the seven conditions of a sanitary latrine laid down in the WHO bookExcreta Disposal for Rural Areas and Small Communities. (by E.G.
Wagner & J.N. Lanoix, WHO, 1958).

Because of the presence of small quantity of gases inside the pits, the gases in contact with water in the water-seal, do not allow the water to freeze during winters. In 1984, in Srinagar, India, temperature went down to -140C and all the Sulabh toilets functioned very well whereas septic tanks and sewerage pipelines got frozen.

Recycling and Reuse of Human Waste

Recycling and reuse of human excreta for biogas generation is an important way to get rid of health hazards from human excreta. Sulabh International developed technology for recycling of human excreta through biogas generation and on-site treatment of effluents for safe reuse without health or environmental risk. Biogas produced is being used for different purposes e.g. cooking, lighting, electricity generation and body warming.
Sulabh Effluent Treatment (SET) System

Sulabh Effluent Treatment (SET) System

The effluent discharged from public toilet, after treatment, becomes so pure that its Biochemical Oxygen Demand is less than ten milligram per litre.

This water is safe for discharge into rivers or water bodies, without polluting them. Hence, this also prevents pollution from the sewage. It can also be used for cleaning of floors of public toilets.
Both these technologies are suitable for market places, housing colonies, high-rise buildings, public places, schools, colleges, hospitals etc.

Thank You