Alternatives for the management of sludge from decentralized sewage treatment systems in rural areas

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Tonetti, Adriano Luiz
Data de Publicação: 2018
Outros Autores: Duarte, Natália Cangussu, Figueiredo, Isabel Campos Salles, Brasil, Ana Lúcia
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Labor & Engenho (Online)
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/labore/article/view/8649680
Resumo: The lack of wastewater collection and treatment is a common issue in Brazil. The usual solution adopted in rural areas is throwing the wastewater directly in dug-out holes, which are known as pit latrines. Brazilian regulations (NBR 7229, 1993 and NBR 13969, 1997) state that the most appropriate treatment system in these cases would be a septic tank followed by a post treatment system. However, this alternative produces sludge that needs to be properly managed. Thus, three options for management of sludge from a rural area from the city of Campinas (São Paulo) are discussed in this work. 1) Sludge removal by outsourced company; 2) Sludge management by city’s sanitation company; 3) Sludge management by local community. Considering only economic factors, it was concluded that the sludge management by city’s sanitation company would be the most beneficial alternative for the community.
id UNICAMP-15_37c396e1cb017a77646dbadcce66b6fc
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8649680
network_acronym_str UNICAMP-15
network_name_str Labor & Engenho (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Alternatives for the management of sludge from decentralized sewage treatment systems in rural areasAlternativas para o gerenciamento de lodo de sistemas descentralizados de tratamento de esgotos de áreas ruraisTratamento de esgoto. Tratamento de esgoto descentralizado. Lodo. Lodo. Gerenciamento. Tanque séptico.Wastewater treatment. Wastewater treatment decentralized. Sludge. Sludge management. Septic tank.The lack of wastewater collection and treatment is a common issue in Brazil. The usual solution adopted in rural areas is throwing the wastewater directly in dug-out holes, which are known as pit latrines. Brazilian regulations (NBR 7229, 1993 and NBR 13969, 1997) state that the most appropriate treatment system in these cases would be a septic tank followed by a post treatment system. However, this alternative produces sludge that needs to be properly managed. Thus, three options for management of sludge from a rural area from the city of Campinas (São Paulo) are discussed in this work. 1) Sludge removal by outsourced company; 2) Sludge management by city’s sanitation company; 3) Sludge management by local community. Considering only economic factors, it was concluded that the sludge management by city’s sanitation company would be the most beneficial alternative for the community.A inexistência de coleta e tratamento de águas residuais ainda é um problema comum no Brasil. Normalmente a solução adotada nas áreas rurais envolve o lançamento do esgoto em buracos escavados no solo, denominados de fossas negras ou rudimentares. As normas brasileiras (NBR 7229, 1993 e NBR 13969, 1997) apontam que o sistema mais apropriado a ser implantado nestes casos seria o tanque séptico associado a um sistema de pós-tratamento. No entanto, esse sistema produz um lodo que deve ser adequadamente gerenciado. Desse modo, este trabalho discute três opções de gerenciamento do lodo gerado nos tanques sépticos instalados em uma área rural do município de Campinas (São Paulo, Brasil): 1) Remoção do lodo por empresa terceirizada; 2) Gerenciamento do lodo pela empresa de saneamento do município; 3) Gerenciamento de lodo pela comunidade. Levando em conta somente fatores econômicos foi encontrado que a forma mais vantajosa seria o gerenciamento do lodo pela empresa de saneamento do município.Universidade Estadual de Campinas2018-03-31info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionAnálises de campoapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/labore/article/view/864968010.20396/labore.v12i1.8649680Labor e Engenho; Vol. 12 No. 1 (2018): jan./mar.; 145-152Labor e Engenho; Vol. 12 Núm. 1 (2018): jan./mar.; 145-152Labor e Engenho; v. 12 n. 1 (2018): jan./mar.; 145-1522176-8846reponame:Labor & Engenho (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)instacron:UNICAMPporhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/labore/article/view/8649680/17796Copyright (c) 2018 Labor e Engenhoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessTonetti, Adriano LuizDuarte, Natália CangussuFigueiredo, Isabel Campos SallesBrasil, Ana Lúcia2018-05-21T13:16:09Zoai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8649680Revistahttp://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/laborePUBhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/labore/oai||argollo@fec.unicamp.br2176-88461981-1152opendoar:2018-05-21T13:16:09Labor & Engenho (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Alternatives for the management of sludge from decentralized sewage treatment systems in rural areas
Alternativas para o gerenciamento de lodo de sistemas descentralizados de tratamento de esgotos de áreas rurais
title Alternatives for the management of sludge from decentralized sewage treatment systems in rural areas
spellingShingle Alternatives for the management of sludge from decentralized sewage treatment systems in rural areas
Tonetti, Adriano Luiz
Tratamento de esgoto. Tratamento de esgoto descentralizado. Lodo. Lodo. Gerenciamento. Tanque séptico.
Wastewater treatment. Wastewater treatment decentralized. Sludge. Sludge management. Septic tank.
title_short Alternatives for the management of sludge from decentralized sewage treatment systems in rural areas
title_full Alternatives for the management of sludge from decentralized sewage treatment systems in rural areas
title_fullStr Alternatives for the management of sludge from decentralized sewage treatment systems in rural areas
title_full_unstemmed Alternatives for the management of sludge from decentralized sewage treatment systems in rural areas
title_sort Alternatives for the management of sludge from decentralized sewage treatment systems in rural areas
author Tonetti, Adriano Luiz
author_facet Tonetti, Adriano Luiz
Duarte, Natália Cangussu
Figueiredo, Isabel Campos Salles
Brasil, Ana Lúcia
author_role author
author2 Duarte, Natália Cangussu
Figueiredo, Isabel Campos Salles
Brasil, Ana Lúcia
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Tonetti, Adriano Luiz
Duarte, Natália Cangussu
Figueiredo, Isabel Campos Salles
Brasil, Ana Lúcia
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Tratamento de esgoto. Tratamento de esgoto descentralizado. Lodo. Lodo. Gerenciamento. Tanque séptico.
Wastewater treatment. Wastewater treatment decentralized. Sludge. Sludge management. Septic tank.
topic Tratamento de esgoto. Tratamento de esgoto descentralizado. Lodo. Lodo. Gerenciamento. Tanque séptico.
Wastewater treatment. Wastewater treatment decentralized. Sludge. Sludge management. Septic tank.
description The lack of wastewater collection and treatment is a common issue in Brazil. The usual solution adopted in rural areas is throwing the wastewater directly in dug-out holes, which are known as pit latrines. Brazilian regulations (NBR 7229, 1993 and NBR 13969, 1997) state that the most appropriate treatment system in these cases would be a septic tank followed by a post treatment system. However, this alternative produces sludge that needs to be properly managed. Thus, three options for management of sludge from a rural area from the city of Campinas (São Paulo) are discussed in this work. 1) Sludge removal by outsourced company; 2) Sludge management by city’s sanitation company; 3) Sludge management by local community. Considering only economic factors, it was concluded that the sludge management by city’s sanitation company would be the most beneficial alternative for the community.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-03-31
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Análises de campo
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/labore/article/view/8649680
10.20396/labore.v12i1.8649680
url https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/labore/article/view/8649680
identifier_str_mv 10.20396/labore.v12i1.8649680
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/labore/article/view/8649680/17796
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2018 Labor e Engenho
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2018 Labor e Engenho
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Campinas
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Campinas
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Labor e Engenho; Vol. 12 No. 1 (2018): jan./mar.; 145-152
Labor e Engenho; Vol. 12 Núm. 1 (2018): jan./mar.; 145-152
Labor e Engenho; v. 12 n. 1 (2018): jan./mar.; 145-152
2176-8846
reponame:Labor & Engenho (Online)
instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron:UNICAMP
instname_str Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron_str UNICAMP
institution UNICAMP
reponame_str Labor & Engenho (Online)
collection Labor & Engenho (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Labor & Engenho (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||argollo@fec.unicamp.br
_version_ 1788168795590754304