Alternatives for the management of sludge from decentralized sewage treatment systems in rural areas
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2018 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
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_ |
1809730501637832704 |