Paper 1-Hu2016

Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e 21 X
Contents lists available at ScienceDirectX
Journal of Cleaner Production
journal homepage: www . elsevier . com/locate/jcleproX
Review
Constructing the ecological sanitation: a review on technology and methods
*
Ming Hu, Bin Fan , Hongliang Wang, Bo Qu, Shikun ZhuX
State Key Laboratory of Environmental Aquatic Chemistry, Research Center for Eco-Environmental Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100085, China
Wastewa ed demands on other resources. The review
ter often comprehensively summarized the main components
contains of the Eco-San system (user interface, collection
valuable and conveyance, storage and primary treatment,
resource and reuse/disposal), the frequently-used evaluation
article info s (e.g. methods, and the framework of evaluation index
organic system. Some typical practical cases were
matter discussed to demonstrate the managerial
Article history: and implications and popularize the applications of the
nutrients Eco-San system. The results show that the Eco-San
). systems are beneficial to resource efficiency,
Received 29 April 2014 Received in revised form 29 February 2016 Accepted Differen agricultural use of the organic matters and
2 March 2016 Available online xxx t from nutrients, and energy recovery although some
con- shortages exist (e.g. high cost, cultural constraints,
Keywords: ventiona and complex operation and management). The
l evaluation methods can help to identify the
sanitatio restriction factors, contributing factors and
Ecological sanitation n measures to improve the efficiency of the future
approac Eco-San system. The setting, selection and
hes, the quantification are three critical steps when using the
Evaluation ecologic evaluation indices to complete the evaluation
al process. This study not only provides the methods
Wastewater treatment sanitatio for both developing novel Eco-San systems
n (Eco- (combinations of the components) and improving
San) the Eco-San systems (evalu-ation of the
Sustainability system combinations) to solve the wastewater problem in
is based rural areas. Considering the challenges or
on the limitations in the Eco-San research, the
Rural
closure recommendations for future research may mainly
of focus on the combination of different components,
material methods for sustainability assessment,
flow quantification of the evaluation index, and
cycles to implementation of more real Eco-San cases.
recover
abstract resource
s with
minimiz
© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . section . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
. ........................
1 . . . 00
. 2.2.1. Gravity sewage system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Contents
1 .............................................
. 2.1.2. Urine diverting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . W water-flush
...................................... a toilet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
...................................... t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2.2. Vacuum sewage system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .
rl . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
e
2. Facility and function units of Eco-San s
2.1.3. Vacuum 2.2.3. Motorized emptying and transport
systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . s
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .t toilet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
il ........................
e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3. Storage and primary
2.1. User interface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
...................................... .
...................................... . .............................................
2.2. Collection and . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 00 . conveyance
.
2.3.1. Septic tank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
......................................
......................................
. . . . . . . . 00
2.3.2.
Cesspit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
......................................
......................................
. . 00
Corresponding author. Tel./fax: þ86 10 62849142. E-mail

address: fanbin@rcees.ac.cn (B. Fan). X
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.012 0959-
6526/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Please cite this article in press

as: Hu, M., et al., Constructing
the ecological sanitation: a
review on technology and
methods, Journal of Cleaner
Production (2016),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jcle
pro.2016.03.012
2
M. Hu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e21
2.4.
Urine treatment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
2.4.1.
Separation and storage of urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
........ ........................................
00
2.4.2.
Stabilization of urine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
2.4.3.
Clinoptilolite loaded through ion exchange/adsorption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................... ...............................
00
2.4.4.
Struvite precipitation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
2.4.5.
Volume reduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
2.5.
Treatment of solid wastes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
2.5.1.
Prevention of pathogens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
2.5.2.
Composting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
2.5.3.
Anaerobic co-digestion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
2.5.4.
Pyrolysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
2.6. Treatment of black and brown water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

.................................................
00
2.6.1.
Anaerobic digestion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
2.6.2.
Evapotranspiration tank system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
........ ........................................
00
2.6.3.
Agricultural application . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
00
2.7. Treatment of gray water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

................................................
00
2.7.1.
Soil filter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
2.7.2.
Constructed wetland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
2.7.3.
Trickling filter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
3.
Managerial implications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
4.
Evaluation methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
4.1. Life cycle assessment (LCA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

................................................
00
4.2.
Multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.................................................
00
4.3. Economic evaluation method (EEM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

...... ..........................................
00
4.4. Data envelopment analysis (DEA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

................................................
00
4.5.
Fuzzy evaluation method (FEM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
5.
Evaluation indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
5.1.
Economic indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
5.2.
Environmental indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
5.3.
Social indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
5.4.
Comprehensive indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
...............................................
00
6.
Results . . . . . . .
.....................................................................
................................................
00
7.
Observations .
.....................................................................
................................................
00
8.
Conclusions . .
.....................................................................
................................................
00
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
................................................
00
References . . . .
....................................................................
................................................
00
Langergraber and Muellegger,

2005). The Eco-San aims to
meet socio-economic
1. Introduction Conference on Eco-Sanitation
requirements, prevent pollution
in Nanning, China ( Jfnsson, of surface and ground water,
Nearly a half of the global population currently live without sound 2001) but the events only sanitize urine and feces,
environment sanitation systems according to modern stan-dard, most continued for other two times recover nutrient for food
of them are in developing countries and many even haven't sanitary (2003 in Lubeck, Germany and production, and save water,
toilets. It is a grand challenge to provide environ-ment sanitation 2005 in Durban, the South energy and resources in a given
systems and services for these people in accor-dance with Africa). In 2003, IWA let ‘the local context. It is considered
affordability, durability, convenience, esthetic design, and Specialist Group on Eco-San’ more ready and suitable to be
effectiveness. Environmental degradation, resources shortfalls and to take over ‘the Sustainable applied in rural areas, where
population growth further fuel the vicious circle of poor sani-tation. Sanitation Group’, but it was the residence is more
The conventional sanitation (Con-San), which is symbolized by renamed to ‘the Resources decentralized and nearer to
water-flush toilets and mixed-wastewater collection (mainly via a Oriented Sanitation Group’ in farmlands than urban.X
gravitational sewer system with massive water as transportation 2007 ( IWA, 2007).X
medium), has so many disadvantages in the terminal treatments of
wastewater and wastes, such as requiring complex equipment and In last three decades, multiple
expertise to operate and maintain, consuming enormous amounts of The ecological sanitation (Eco- types of Eco-San systems have
energy and resources while still leaving a lot of emissions to eco- San) system is an alternative been advanced with different
environments ( Sala-Garrido et al., 2012; Mo and Zhang, 2013; approach to realize sustainable user interface, collection and
sanitation. It is known as the storage, treatment processes,
Thibodeau et al., 2014), that it is increasingly thought unsustain-able
resources-oriented sanitation and reuse or recycle of water
in last decades.X and based on ecosystem and nutrients. For example,
approaches, the closure of
Guzha et al. (2005) evaluated
material flow cycles, a novel
the effect of using sanitized
trend of pollution treatment
human excreta on maize
In past decades, scientist and engineers have made great efforts, of (from sewage disposal to
production and water produc-
which the ecological sanitation (Eco-San) is one representative. The resources reclamation), and a
tivity, which recommended that
term ‘Eco-San’ appeared in 1990's ( Esrey et al., 1998) and quickly re-conceptualization of ecological toilets should be
sanitation (from a ‘drop-flush-
got a shot at stardom of the new millennium concepts. The United added to the list of approved
forget’ mode to environment
Nations issued a declaration of ‘Eco-San-closing the loop in sanitation systems; Bdour et
protection at sources by means
wastewater management and sanitation’ in 2000 ( Winblad, 2004). al. (2009) dis-cussed several
of ‘drop and reuse’ mode) (
Then in 2001, IWA founded the Eco-San Group affiliating the Sus- options to achieve
Haq and Cambridge, 2012;
tainable Sanitation Group in Berlin and held the 1st InternationalX sustainability in wastewaterX
al., Constructing the methods, Journal of 1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.012
ecological Cleaner Production
sanitation: a review (2016),
Please cite this article in press as: Hu, M., et on technology and http://dx.doi.org/10.

3
treatment of feces from urine- of nutrients and project

diverting dry toilets to reduce examples and less are related to
treatment, and found that organic nutrient cycles and a closed
the pathogenicity of evaluation and selection of the
resource loop could provide an approach for managing valuable
microorganisms carried in fecal system technology and
wastewater resources; Werner et al. (2009) treated the Eco-San material to safe levels so that components of the Eco-San.
system as a new philosophy of dealing with waste and waste-water, the Eco-San systems could be Evaluation of the Eco-San
which were based on the systematic implementation of the reuse and effective in providing health systems is necessary since it
recycling of nutrients, organics and water as a hygieni-cally safe, and environmental pollution has many important functions
closed-loop and holistic alternative; and Magri et al. (2013) control. However, current in promoting the R&Ds and
studies emphasized mainly on applications. It can help to
evaluated the sanitizing effects of different additives for dry
principles, technologies, reuse select the suitable Eco-San
system among many different styles according to the study area and efficiency, resource reuse and
situation ( Malekpour et al., 2013), to compare advantages and residues, e.g. excreta and waste disposal ( Werner et al.,
disadvantages of the ecological and conventional sanitation systems ( kitchen wastes. Such materials 2009). One principle is that
compose the main sorted collec-tion of flow
Thibodeau et al., 2014), and to improve existing technology or to contamination sources of streams should be conducted
develop novel sanitation system ( Iglesias et al., 2012).X infections and environmental according to the different
damage. So the first principle of material stream characteristics
the Eco-San, either of kind and specific treatment demands
sani-tation, is to prevent so as to optimize economy and
infections. The second principle resources reclamation. Another
of the Eco-San is to digest is that unnecessary dilution
According to the available literature, researches on evaluation of the these materials by ecological should be avoided by using
Eco-San systems can be classified into many types. In terms of way instead of the con- waterless or low-flush toilets so
wastewater sources, some studies focused on urine application ( ventional wastewater and as to obtain high concentrations
wastes treatment/disposal, so as of recyclable re-sources. In
Guzha et al., 2005), urine treatment ( Wilsenach et al., 2007), to construct a more following sections, the system
composting of feces ( Magri et al., 2013), and co-composting of environment and resources technology of Eco-San which is
sustainable sanitation system. adaptable to the both principles
feces and kitchen waste ( Niwagaba et al., 2009c); in terms of perfor- The two principles were well is discussed according to the
mances, some studies focused on economic feasibility ( von Munch initiated in the by-far re- facility and function units of
searches and practices. user interface, collection and
and Mayumbelo, 2007), technical feasibility ( Lehtoranta et al., However, the third principle is conveyance, storage and
2014), and environmental or social impacts ( Lehtoranta et al., that any innovative sanitation primary treatment, and
system including Eco-San disposal/reuse.X
2014; Malekpour et al., 2013). In terms of treatment process, pre-
should be accord with the
vious studies mainly stressed different styles of toilet ( Anand and human beings' desire of better
Apul, 2014), the source-separation collection of the domestic life, which means the Eco-San
wastewater ( Bdour et al., 2009), the treatment technologies of should be comparable with the
2.1. User interface
Con-San in convenience and
different wastewater (black water, yellow water, brown water and
esthetic comfort too. This
gray water) ( Mo and Zhang, 2013), and the acceptability of society, principle is the request of User interface includes toilet,
human and managers. The spatial scale used to be selected at one sustainability in human wills, pedestal, pan, or urinal. Its pur-
house or building ( Benetto et al., 2009), one school ( Werner et al., but it was not always stick to in pose is to hygienically separate
past. The traditional toilets (e.g. human excreta from human
2009), one village or colony. Additionally, there were few studies on
pit latrines) are still widely contact so that exposure to
systematic assessment of the whole components of Eco-San ( employed in remote areas and fecal contamination can be
Malisie, 2007; Montangero et al., 2007; Thibodeau et al., 2014).X undeveloped societies. avoided ( Tilley et al., 2014).
Although some of the improved
The style of user interface
tradi-tional toilets contribute to
determines the following
enhancing the elemental
direction of technology strategy
hygiene for those vulnerable
For the purpose of filling the knowledge gap and facilitating the to realize Eco-San conception,
groups and can be made to
R&Ds and applications, the review tries to build a complete so toilet technology is always
accord with the second
framework for evaluating the Eco-San systems. Firstly, system the primary topic in the R&Ds
principle, they do not mean the
technology of the Eco-San is combed according to the facility and of Eco-San.X
direction of the Eco-San. So
function units of user interface, collection and storage, conveyance,
this review doesn't consider
treatment and reuse/disposal, respectively ( Tilley et al., 2014). Then these traditional toilets as
the evaluation methods and indices are reviewed. Fig. 1 shows the options of the Eco-San.
However, we still agree the
general framework of the review. The paper is organized as
traditional toilets and their
Evaluation method
following: Section 2 presents a comprehensive overview of the improved editions is an
facility and function units of Eco-San systems, including user expedient way to the Eco-San, Evaluation index
interface, collection and conveyance, storage and primary treat-ment, especially in undeveloped
and reuse/disposal of urine, solid wastes, black and brown water, and societies.
gray water. The managerial implications, evaluation methods,
Ecological sanitation
evaluation indices and results are presented in Sections 3e 6, system
respectively. Observations and limitations are presented in Section User interface
Collection and conveyance
7. Section 8 summarizes the conclusions and recommen-dations for Generally there are two Storage and primary
future research.X elementals to construct an Eco- treatment
San system for optimizing cost Reuse or disposal
function units of
Eco-San systems
2. Facility and Managerial implications
sanitation imi-tates the ecological processes to digest T
system that natural the human life h
The Eco-San aims to reconstruct a Fig. 1.
press as: al., g the ecological tech http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jc
Hu, M., et Constructin sanitation: a review on nol lepro.2016.03.012
Please cite this article in
4 M. Hu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e21
medium, but minor water so that slags in the front urn
used for cleaning is may be cleared away if
permitted. In this sense, necessary and it is usually
waterless toilet also implies equipped with a handled
it is generally unavailable to cover, with which the inlet of
a sewer system, and the toilet the front urn may be covered
wastes usually need stay after discharging. The
onsite temporarily. hydraulic retention time of
Therefore, the crucial the front urn cannot be less
challenge of such than 30 days. Materials in the
back urn and the cleared
slugs are designed to be
reused as fertilizer in the
toilets is how to ensure the context of local
sanitation performances of agriculture.X
hygiene, convenience and
comfort. There are two
strategies, one is the basic
sanitation that considers
Typically, the biogas toilet is
mainly to fulfill the elemental
installed jointly with
hygiene performance, and
Brush plug another is the advanced livestock, as shown in Fig.
sanitation that considers to 3. Usually, the biogas
fulfill the synchronous digester is designed with hy-
hygiene, convenient and draulic displacement and set
comfort per-formances underground with an inlet
according to the modern accepting toilet wastes and
standard. Generally, the basic livestock manures. Other
sanitation is vulnerable biogenic wastes, e.g. plant
Funnel Toilet groups oriented, and low cost waste, may also be acted as
is preference, so it used to filling materials of the biogas
improve traditional toilet, reactor. Toilet wastes along
e.g. pit latrine or cesspool. In with minor cleaning water
rural China, four main types passes a conduct into the
of the improved traditional biogas reactor. The biogas is
First urn toilet are used: the dual-urn used as household fuel after
Second urn funnel toilet basing on being desulfurization and
traditional cesspool, the deodorization. The effluent
biogas toilet basing on digestate flows via an outlet
biogas digester, the urine box into a storage tank and
diverting dehy-drated toilet, then may be used as fertilizer
and the alternating dual-pit or additive of feedstuff. Fig.
toilet basing on tradi-tional
Fig. 2. Dual-urn funnel toilet. 4 shows the general design of
latrine.
the urine diverting
dehydrated toilet, similar as
With the development of Eco-San what being used in others
technology, various types of toilets that than China. In the urine
may comply with the two principles are The dual-urn funnel toilet is
diverting toilet, urine is
now available in market, which are as shown in Fig. 2. It discharged into the front
typically made from plastic, ceramic, or comprises a funnel acceptor, drain and then be collected
fiberglass. Some mainstream toilet a front urn that is usually into a storage tank, which
technologies are discussed in following installed indoor, and a back volume should be more than
sections. urn that is installed outdoor. 10 days usage. The collected
A tube connects the two urns urine may be act as fertilizer
and let the fluids in the front after being diluted 5 times.
urn to pass into the back urn. Feces are dropped down via
2.1.1. Waterless toilet A little water, generally 3 L the back hole into the fecal
per person/day, is used after pit. Cleaning water (0.1e0.2
Waterless toilet is a type of toilet discharging. The funnel L/time) for the urinal is
unnecessary to use water as conveyance acceptor should be movable permitted, but it isX
Discharge
Holding
Toilet tank
tank
Feeding throat Biogas digester
Livestock Fig. 3. Three link biogas toilet.
Windpipe Cover
in press as: the ecological technology and Production (2016),
Hu, M., et al., sanitation: a methods, Journal http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepr
Please cite this article
Constructing review on of Cleaner o.2016.03.012
5
before being users' needs ( Anand
excavated as
and Apul, 2014). For
fertilizer.
most waterless toilets,
vertical channels
Some finer designs should be used to let
are employed to materials drop down
improve into recipient by
convenience and gravity. Powdery
comfort materials such as fine
performances of sands, sawdust, plant
the waterless toilet ashes and so on are
for it to be often used in such
acceptable by designs for wrapping
developed groups. excrement, avoiding
Compost toilets sticking and
are now facilitating wastes
commercially dropping. Foam toilet
Urine-faeces separation available with is a design that uses a
different types of mixture of
design: being self- biodegradable soap
contained or and water (ca. 0.2
centralized, having L/time) to cover the
single or multiple basin of toilet,
chamber tanks, facilitating user
being water-based comfort, cleaning, and
(slurries being waste dropping. Foam
treated off-site) or toilets may have
Cover dehydrated angled channel.
(slurries being However, waterless
treated on site), toilet is usually yet
collecting urine incompa-rable with
Faeces tank separately or the conventional
collecting urine water-flush toilets in
and feces together, convenience and
being operated comfort. It is more
Urine tank electrically or suitably acted as
manually, or being transitional solutions
Fig. 4. Urine diverting dehydrated toilet. installed in single or be adopted where
or multi-storied pipeline water supply
buildings is difficult.X
soils, and another pit is then put into use. In the sealed according to the
pit, materials should be stored for at least 6 months
to partially San system has
realize been built, the
prohibited in the back. It is
resources con-ventional
requested to cover the discharged Main reclamation. In toilets can be
feces every time with powdery sectional these toilets, a reformed into
materials, e.g. sawdust, plant ashes, profile intersect urine diverting
and fine sands. The coverings could
barrier is toilets with a
improve aesthetics and decrease Left sectional usually set to relatively
odor of feces. Different coverings profile separate toilet small expense.
result in different time requested for
basin into front Urine diverting
harmlessness, generally at least 3
Fig. 5. and back flush toilets are
months for plant ashes and 10 Alternating drains, urine is currently well
months for sawdust or sands. After dual-pit toilet.
discharged accepted in
then, the excavated materials may
through the some
be used as fertilizer. Because urine
2.1.2. Urine front drain and European
comprises most of the nutrition
diverting then collected countries (
elements of human excreta and is
water-flush and reclaimed
more readily to be conveyance Lienert and
toilet as fertilizer,
(liquid) and to be reused (less Larsen,
and feces is
infectious potential than feces),
dis-charged 2009).X
urine diverting dehydrated toilet has Urine through the
been strongly recom-mended in diverting back drain into
others than China. The alternating water-flush sewer and then
dual-pit toilet is as shown in Fig. 5. toilet is treated
designed to together with
The two pits are employed
separately other
alternatingly. Urine and feces are 2.1.3. Vacuum
collect urine wastewater by
both discharged into the pits and toilet
so as to
covered using soils, which usage the
reduce load conventional
had better be enough to absorb the
of the Joel
liquids and isolate the excrements way. In urban
wastewater areas where a Liljendahl, a
from air. When one pit is full, it is Feces
tank treatment Swedish
sealed up withX complete Con-
plants while engineer,
designed the first vacuum toilet in the gravity sophisticated Urine diverting
1950s. Its first applications were in sewer. toilets and vacuum toilet
Except for the
recreational estates and ships, and Therefore, pump station is available.
abovementione
later in airplanes and trains. Now the total than the The shortages
d three kinds
vacuum toilets are allowed for constructi latter. of vacuum
of toilet
different configurations and sizes. on cost of Operation of toilets include
technolo-gies,
Such a vacuum sys-tem normally the the vacuum more
innovative
consists of vacuum toilets, pipe vacuum collection sophisticated
toilets are
work and a vacuum pump station. collection system is equipment and
continuously
These toilets may use as less as 0.2 system also more probably more
advanced for
L water per flush to obtain may be economy in expert
fulfilling the
comparable sanitation performances lower than water and maintenance
principles of
as the conventional water-flush that of the energy request
toilets in hygiene, convenience, and conventio consumption comparing the Eco-San (
comfort. Addi-tionally because its nal gravity s comparing with Reinvent the
in-pipe transportation is driven by collection with the conventional Toilet
vacuum suction, installation of the system gravity water-flush Challenge:
toilets and pipes is little limited by although collection toilets.X China,X
dif-ference of elevation, and the the former system (
required pipe diameter of the may have
Fan, 2011).
vacuum sewer is about the third of more
Constr ical on Journal of http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j
ucting sanitatiotechnolog Cleaner .jclepro.2016.03.012
the n: a y and Productio
press as: Hu, M., et al.,
ecolog review methods, n (2016),
Table 1
X
The basic information of different toilets ( Berger, 2009; Anand and Apul, 2014).
Toilet
The volume of flushing (L/flush)
Price ($ USD)
Web address
Composting toilet
0.17e0.47
1000e4000
http://www.biolet.com/ X
http://www.clivusmultrum.com/
Urine source separating dry toilet
/
3000e5000
http://www.ecotoilets.co.nz/
Urine source separating flush toilet
2e3
8000e12,000
http://www.ecosanres.org
Vacuum flush toilet
0.2e0.5
23,457e396,172
X
http://www.pikkuvihrea.fi/fi
Waterless toilet
/
600e1000
Cistern low-flush toilet
2e3
1200e1800
Conventional flushing toilet
4e6
800e1000
http://www.kohler.com.cn/
pipes into the ground, sensitivity

towards subsidence and leakage
(infiltration and exfiltration), potential
2013). Additionally as an improvement of the conventional cistern toilets, low- 2.2.1. Gravity sewage system formation of hydrogen sul-fide, and
possible sediment accumulations in
flush cistern toilets are currently popular products in market. Although these
the pipes or other parts of the gravity
toilets are developed mainly for the pur-pose of saving water, they are potentially The gravity sewage system ensures
sewer network. As for an Eco-San
applied in the Eco-San. Now the low-flush cistern toilets can lower water the collection of the free flowing
system, gravity sewer is adaptable to
consumptions to 3e6 L/flush comparing with 6e9 L/flush of the conventional water and requires no energy input,
low solid concentration flows such as
cistern toilets. However, 3e6 L/flush is still a little excessive dilution for the which is more often found and
gray water and yellow water, but it
following: storage, possible truck conveyance, and resources oriented treatment recommended in areas with high
cannot be used to convey high
and reuse. The more dilution of the stream, the less economy is in the following slopes of the land. It is composed of
concentration black water and brown
processes. Table 1 shows basic information of different toilets.X domestic manholes and a pipeline
water offsite.
network. Dimen-sioning of gravity
sewers is based on hydraulic and
self-cleaning capacities. Typical
diameters of gravity sewers outside
2.2. Collection and conveyance section
buildings range from 250 to 1500
mm. In flat areas, this leads to 2.2.2. Vacuum sewage system
The collection and conveyance section is to deal with the waste products maximum transport distances of 2e3
generated at the user interface by removing and/or transporting them to a km without the installation of
Vacuum sewers for human excreta
subsequent treatment offsite. They are either sewer-based technologies or pumping stations. To cross either
collection and conveyance were
container-based motorized emptying and transport technologies. Generally, the obstacles or upward sloping terrains
firstly introduced in the second half
selection of collection and conveyance depends on types and quantities of waste re-quires additional pumping
of the 19th century by the Dutch
products, distance, accessibility, topography, financial re-sources and stations. Disadvantages of gravity
engineer, Liernur (1828e1893). The
management. sys-tems are the construction
Liernur system can be considered as
workload required for installing large
a combined solution for the drainage both inside and outside buildings. By the reach from the serviced areas.X
end of the 19th century, the systems were installed in several European cities.
2.2.3. Motorized emptying and
However, the system became uneconomic in the early 20th century because of
transport system
the advent of mineral fertilizer and the dilution of excreta by flushing water.
Comparing with motorized emptying
A motorized emptying and transport
and transport, pipeline transportation
system includes a vehicle equipped
is more adaptable to frequent and
Vacuum systems also are allowed to collect gray water from shower sinks, with both a motorized pump and a
massive convey-ance, but its
washbasins, bath tubes, washing machines, dishwashers and kitchen sinks. In storage tank for emptying and
installation may be uneconomical if
this case, automatic interface units are required to transport water from sanitary transporting fecal sludge, urine and
the distance is too long and the
appliances by gravity. Once a certain volume is reached, the collection chamber gray water. A vacuum truck is fitted
volume is too small. However, piping
is automatically evacu-ated towards the vacuum system. Typical diameters are with a pump connected to a hose,
is a user friendly way to instantly
about 40 mm for vacuum service lines, 50 mm for vacuum collection lines, and which is lowered down into an
remove the domestic wastes away
70 mm for main collection lines. The vacuum pump can be located within a excreta storage tank or pit, while the
from residence, so it is preferred
building complex or at a central location in the neighborhood to serve several waste is pumped up into the holding
being used for waste collection and
buildings. In flat areas, the maximum vacuum sewer branch lengths achievable tank on the vehicle ( Tilley et al.,
conveyance inside residential area.
without additional air intake facilities are roughly 6 km. Since the instant flow
2014). The storage capacity of a An actual collection and conveyance
velocity may reach a very high speed and sediment accumu-lation cannot happen 3 system of the Eco-San must be an
in vacuum sewer, it may be used to convey high concentration flow streams of vacuum truck is 3e12 m based on
optimized assembly of the different
the Eco-San. However for conveying a specific volume of liquids, vacuum sewer the requirement. To avoid the clog,
technologies.
may consume 3 times of energy than gravitational elevation, so its economy will garbage and sand are not allowed in
be lower when used for dilute flow conveyance. Additionally, operation and the storage tank or pit. When the
maintenance of vacuum sewer is more complex than that of gravitation sewer, sludge is too dense to be easily
but today this question is not a baffle because of the progresses in manufacture, pumped, it is necessary to dilute the
2.3. Storage and primary treatment
intelligent control and remote information. sludge with water. On narrow or non-
drivable roads or in remote areas, the
system would not be employed to Generally, some user interfaces, such
collect the excreta because of the as the toilet with com-posting
feasibility and economy. Therefore, chamber, have the self-storage
the treatment site must be within containers. Two main types
Constructing the review on technology Cleaner Production (2016),
ecological sanitation: a and methods, Journal of http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.012
Please cite this article in press as: Hu, M., et al.,

7
The cesspit is appropriate for rural combination necessitate some

and peri-urban areas, especially for processes before application in order
of collection and storage containers (septic tank and cesspit) are frequently used
the areas where water is in short to ensure safety and hygiene.X
to meet the requirements of temporary storage and primary treatment. Those
supply, but not suitable for densely
factors, such as space availability, type and quantity of input products, and user
populated areas because of
preference, determinate the choice of the containers.
insufficient space for emptying and
infiltration.
2.4.1. Separation and storage of urine

2.3.1. Septic tank
Separation of human urine at source

As a common facility to store and treat the black/gray water, a septic tank is a
2.4. Urine treatment enhances the sustainability and
watertight chamber made of concrete, fiberglass, PVC or plastic. When the liquid
efficiency of wastewater management
flows through the tank, the heavy parts sink to the bottom and become degraded
since it significantly improves
anaerobically with the scum floating to the top. Considering the low rate of Human urine is a liquid waste
effluent quality and save energy
decom-position in the tank, the accumulated sludge and scum should be product of the human body, which is
consumption and
periodically removed to prevent the overflow. The key factors, such as the secreted by the kidneys through
number of users, the amount of water used per capita, the desludging frequency urination and excreted through the
and the characteristics of the wastewater, determine the design to ensure the urethra ( Karak and Bhattacharyya, investment costs of the wastewater
normal and safe operations. For the densely populated areas, the onsite treatment plants ( Wilsenach and
2011). Human urine is the main
infiltration should not be employed to disperse or transport the effluent
constituent of yellow water, which Van Loosdrecht, 2003). In this
originating from septic tank. Otherwise, the ground will become oversaturated
has become a sig-nificant subject in manner, some technologies, such as
and contaminated, which poses serious health risk to people living nearby.
the field of Eco-San research and the urine diversion toilet, or no
Therefore, the septic tank should be connected to convey-ances and transported
practice. Generally, urine contains mixing toilet, have been designed for
to a subsequent treatment or disposal site.
over 80% of nitrogen, 50% of better recycling of nutrients.
phosphorus, and 50% of potassium in Generally, the urine would be stored
wastewater ( Otterpohl et al., 2004), for a long time before its application
in farms so that the potential health
which is a potential fertilizer because
risks from fecal pathogens can be
of its high nutrient contents. The use
2.3.2. Cesspit reduced. Three factors, which are
of urine as fertilizer is a practice to
storage time, temperature and pH,
serve the idea of sustainability. Urine
influ-ence the storage process. For
A cesspit can be named as a pit latrine without the above-ground part to protect may be applied onto soil through
example, losses of nitrogen can be
privacy. It is the most rudimentary form of a dry sanitation system by employing direct or indirect routes. Despite
minimized through reducing
the locally available materials to cover a defecation hole (a pit dug in the ground improvements in plant growth due to
3
temperature and avoiding aeration
to collect waste). The volume of the pit should be designed as at least 1 m . The direct urine usage are reported, some
above the liquid surface. High pH,
important issues, such as pathogens,
pit may be functional for 20 or more years without emptying according to the high temperatures, concentrated form
pharmaceu-ticals, and hormones,
solids excreta cumulative rate of 40e60 L per person/year. The bottom of the pit of urine and long storage periods are
should be at least 2 m above groundwater level to prevent groundwater need to be considered ( Karak and required to attain the safe and
contamination. The treatment pro-cesses in the pit are limited so that pathogen Bhattacharyya, 2011). In indirect hygienic liquid fertilizer. Generally,
reduction and organic degradation are not significant. Other treatment processes routes, ion exchange/adsorption, the storage period of 6 months at 20
should be proposed to reduce the human health risk and ensure the safe reuse. struvite precipitation, and their
ion exchange/adsorption
C or higher is safe for unrestricted use of human urine with respect to pathogens stripping ( Basakcilardan-Kabakci et
and viable viruses.X al., 2007) and subsequently be
absorbed in sulfuric acid to form Clinoptilolite is a typical composition
ammonium sulfate, a liquid fertilizer. given by the manufacturer (68.3%
Phosphorus (P) is essential for all SiO2, 12.55% Al2O3, 1.03% Fe2O3,
living organisms, as it represents the
energy currency for organisms at the 0.02% TiO2, 2.33% CaO, 1.09%
cell level ( Le Corre et al., 2009). MgO, 0.88% Na2O, and 2.32% K2O)
2.4.2. Stabilization of urine Although P is the eleventh most ( Kocatürk and Baykal, 2012). In the
abundant element on the earth, loading process, the pH of the
mineral resources of P fertilizers are solutions was adjusted to 7 with HCl,
During separation, storage and transport of urine, several spontaneous processes,
not abundant in most areas, so it is as phosphates in urine would
such as urea hydrolysis, precipitation or volatilization, may occur and change the
valuable to reclaim P nutrition from precipitate at pH > 7. Pre-conditioned
urine composition. The urea in urine would be rapidly degraded by urease to
excreta. Unlike nitrogen, phosphorus clinoptilolite was fed in 3.6-cm-
ammonium and water, elevating the pH value up to 9 ( Udert et al., 2003). The contained in human urine has to be diameter columns, which were
volatilization loss of ammonia has adverse effects on environment and human transformed into a solid form of operated under a 100% recycled up-
health. Therefore, stabilization of urine should be necessarily conducted to struvite precipitation ( Harada et al., flow mode. Cli-noptilolite could
produce adequate and stable fertilizers so that degradation of organic matter, successfully remove all three
2006), which could be used as a
precipitation processes, and volatilization of NH3 can be prevented. Acidification nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus and
fertilizer.X potassium) with the efficiency of
can achieve the objective. The side effects of acidification are positive with
respect to hygiene due to detrimental effects on pathogenic organisms at pH around 90% for urine concentrations
exceeding 50%. Recovery of
below 4 ( Hellstrom€ et al., 1999). Low pH values can also have an impact on
orthophosphate was more sensitive to
pharmaceuticals present in the urine. At pH ¼ 2, an inactivation level of between urine concentration than that of
50% and 95% could be found for an-tibiotics and the anti-inflammatory drug nitrogen. Nutrient loaded
diclofenac ( Escher et al., 2005). The prevention of urine hydrolysis is much clinoptilolite was as effective as
more econom-ical than subsequent neutralization. The neutralization of already chemical fertil-izers. Direct
hydrolyzed urine requires four times more than preventive acid addition. application of urine, either undiluted
Ammonia can be easily removed from the liquid phase of urine through air or diluted, usu-ally produced worse
2.4.3. Clinoptilolite loaded through
yields than the indirect route.X
Constructing the review on technology Cleaner Production (2016),
ecological sanitation: a and methods, Journal of http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.012
Please cite this article in press as: Hu, M., et al.,
only in cold-climate places microorganisms carried in
with ‘cheap’ freezing energy. fecal materials to safe levels
2.4.4. Struvite precipitation
In addition, reverse osmosis ( Winker et al., 2009). The
is also a feasible technology
success of a reducing
Through precipitation, the majority of to reduce the urine volume.
pathogens process depends,
phosphorus in urine can be crystallized In reverse osmosis
in general, on both its
into a white, odorless powder called membranes, the retention of
retention time and the
struvite or magnesium ammonium ammonium is better than its
created environment that can
phosphate hexahydrate (MAP, un-charged form (ammonia)
inactivate and avoid re-
MgNH4PO4$6H2O). Struvite is an and the retention
growth of particular
performance depends
effective phosphorus fertilizer ( Johnston strongly on the pH. At a organisms ( Austin and
and Richards, 2003), which can be stored pressure of 50 bar, a Cloete, 2008). However, the
and trans-ported easily. Basically, struvite maximum concen-tration dy-namics of pathogen
is an orthophosphate, containing factor of 5 could be removal processes are still
magnesium, ammonium, and phosphate in achieved, resulting in the not clear, which does not
equal molar concen-trations. The general following recoveries of guarantee improved
formula of minerals of the struvite group is nutrients in the retentate: sanitation for the respective
AMPO4$6H2O, where ‘A’ corresponds to 70% for ammonium, 73% for pop-ulations. The
þ phosphate, and 71% for thermophilic conditions that
potassium (K) or ammo-nium ion ðNH 4Þ potassium. The energy could effectively reduce
and ‘M’ corresponds to cobalt (Co), consumption of reverse pathogens are reached only
magnesium (Mg), or nickel (Ni) ( Bassett osmosis depends on with addition of
and Bedwell, 1933). Struvite in the form operational and technical amendments. It is difficult to
of a magnesium ammonium phosphate parameters and energy ensure a homogeneously
recovery systems can be high temperature and to ach-
hexahydrate (MgNH4PO4$6H2O) installed in large-scale appli- ieve a uniform reduction in
crystallizes as an orthorhombic structure
cations ( Avlonitis et al., organisms in feces (
(i.e., straight prisms with a rectangular
base) when human urine is treated with 2003).X Niwagaba et al., 2009b),
2þ which is essential for full
magnesium ion (Mg ). It can then be
used as an important slow-release sanitary in that process.X
phosphatic fertilizer ( Udert et al., 2006).
Besides struvite, other minerals, such as
epsomite (MgSO4$7H2O), brucite It is common in dry toilets to
(Mg(OH)2) and montgomeryite sprinkle dry substances (e.g.
2.5. Treatment of solid plant ashes, fine sands, oyster
(Ca4MgAl4(-PO4)(OH)4$12H2O), may wastes shell powders) on top of the
also be formed depending on the amount feces in order to decrease
of other divalent or trivalent metal cations odor and repel insects. The
The solid wastes produced in
available in urine ( Karak and alkaline ash is conducive to
an Eco-San system include
inactivating some pathogens.
Bhattacharyya, 2011).X the feces (of dry toilets),
Oyster shells consist almost
kitchen wastes (sorted) and
completely (99%) of calcium
the other abiotic solid wastes
carbonate and thus has
(metals, plastics, cloth, paper
neutral to alkaline
and etc.). Here mainly
characteristics, which can
discusses the treatment of
2.4.5. Volume reduction increase and buffer the pH of
feces and kitchen wastes.
feces during storage and also
These two materials have
Urine contains a lot of water while the similar physicalechemical promote desiccation ( Magri
nutrient content in urine is small. properties although their et al., 2013; Vinneras,
Therefore, concentrated urine would be compositions are a little
2007). Desiccation, pH and
beneficial to transportation and storage different. The other abiotic
ammonia would affect the
purposes. Several water extraction solid wastes may be
result of the inactivation.
techniques have been investigated and treated/disposed like the
Oyster shells with urea as an
conventional ways.
developed for long-term space flights ( additive is more effective for
Maurer et al., 2006). Evaporation, such as inactivation of Salmonella
vapor compression distillation, through typhimurium, since it
thermoelectrically integrated membrane 2.5.1. Prevention of promoted higher ammonia
and air evaporation systems, is one of the pathogens concentrations in the feces.
most straightforward technologies for The use of oyster shells, ash,
removing water from urine. And the and urea improved
lyophilization is also one of the feasible The major health risk of fecal inactivation of Enterococcus
approaches to reduce the volume of the matters is of pathogens ( faecalis since the mixture
also raises pH in the fecal
urine. If urine is frozen at 14 C, Prüss et al., 2002).
approximately 80% of the nutrients can be Ecological and improved layer ( Magri et al., 2013).
concentrated in 25% of the original A combination of these
volume. However, data from commercial traditional sanitationX factors (pH, desiccation, and
freeze concentrators indicated that an ammonia content) shows
3 promising results for
energy consumption of 1100 MJ/m is for technologies can be effective
sanitizing feces.
a five-fold volume reduction. Therefore, in providing health safety
Maximization of individual
evaporation is more efficient with respect and envi-ronmental pollution
effects in a combined process
to energy efficiency than lyophilization. control if they can effectively
can make it possible to
The freeze-thaw process will be an option reduce the pathogenicity of
produce a safe additive for
urine-diverting dry toilets, especially for grass clippings, vegetable
those low-level sanitation systems.X scraps, straw, husks and
2.5.3. Anaerobic co-digestion
wood shavings, could
increase the C:N ratio,
provide oxygen to the pile, Anaerobic co-digestion can
and help achieve rapid and be applied to generate biogas
complete decomposition. Co- while tackle public health
2.5.2. Composting composting of excreta with and environmental problems
organic waste has potential associated with poor solid
for application in rural areas waste and fecal sludge
Composting is often be used to treat feces
to recover nutrients. Com- management ( Jha et al.,
and kitchen wastes. Compost toilet is a
posts are used as a soil
typical application. When feces and 2011). The types of
conditioner to improve
kitchen wastes are composted together, anaerobic digesters as part of
better biodegradation performance can be agricultural yields ( Gaunt the onsite and decentralized
achieved with an optimum carbon to and Lehmann, 2008; sanitation systems approach
nitrogen ratio ( Niwagaba et al., 2009a). A Steinbeiss et al., 2009). The include continuous wet and
limitations to application of dry fixed domes, continuous
rapid inactivation of pathogens occurs
composting in rural areas plug flow and batch dry fixed
during composting due to antibiosis, pH-
include lack of space, capital domes ( Münch, 2008).
shift, redox-potential, antagonism
cost for the facility
(hostility among bacterial groups), nutrient Their operational conditions
infrastructure and aeration
de-ficiencies and exothermic metabolism. are: temperature range of
re-quirements, and odor
The main factors influencing the 20e35 C for mesophilic
inactivation of pathogens are temperature, problems.X
digestion, total solids content
water content, exposure time, and carbon
below 20% for wet systems
to nitrogen (C:N) ratio of 15:1 to 30:1 ( and 25e50% for dry systems,
Martens and Bohm,€ 2009). Green and the hydraulicX
Constructing the review on of Cleaner Production (2016),
ecological technology and http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016
sanitation: a methods, Journal .03.012

9
the solid phase not only provide better

subjected to py-rolysis hygiene conditions but
retention of 15e30 days ( Müller, 2007). The volatile for biochar production also increase local
3 at a high temperature of supply of cooking fuels
solid loading rate ranges from 1.6 to 4.8 kg/m of
active digester volume per day during the complete 400 Ce700 C ( Gaskin ( Paraknowitsch et al.,
mix mesophilic anaerobic digestion. The biogas yield et al., 2008). As a 2009). The challenges
3 special type of to application of this
rate ranges from 0.25 to 0.95 m /kg volatile solids
pyrolysis, hydrothermal technology in rural
depending on the feed stock ( Appels et al., 2008). carbonization (HTC) is areas include: the high
The solid wastes can be collected using containers defined as the cost of energy, the
and bins at the household level and transported to conversion of biomass explosion risk to the
digesters using hand carts and small trucks supported into coal under wet public due to high
by institutional arrangements with private sector conditions and low temperature and
involvement. The current trend in research focuses on temperature (around pressure, and the
develop-ment of cost-effective technologies for market for the bio-char.
effluent post treatment and recovery of mineral 200 C). Coalification of
The net emissions of
concentrates to make anaerobic co-digestion a core biomass is a natural green-house gases
technology for treating mixed solid waste, manure chemical process, but
linked to the bio-char
takes place on the time
and human excreta ( Chen et al., 2008). Some cycle are uncertain due
scale from some
challenges of operating digesters include the highly hundreds (for peat) to to limited experimental
skilled labor and seeding required. The disad- millions (black coal) of data.X
vantages of anaerobic digesters include potential years. Recently, it was
public health risks and negative environment impacts. discovered that the
The pathogen content of the feed stock and the presence of iron can
digestate poses risks to human health. There may be effectively accelerate
risks of fire, explosion and eventual ground water HTC, which shortens
contamination from leachate. Therefore, some the process to only a
measures should be taken in order to successfully few hours. Since then, 2.6. Treatment of black
implement the anaerobic co-digestion.X HTC has been and brown water
demonstrated with a
vast variety of wet
Black water is the
organic wastes in
mixture of urine, feces,
simple and inexpensive
flush-water, anal
experimental set-ups ( cleaning water and or
Titirici et al., 2007). dry cleaning materials (
2.5.4. Pyrolysis Pro-ducing bio-char
Tilley et al., 2014). The
from fecal sludge or
pathogens of feces and
The pyrolysis has potential to be applied to resource organic solid waste in nutrients of urine are
recovery. The liquid concentrate can be recovered as densely populated areas diluted in the flush-
can have various
nitrateephosphate fertilizer ( Aiyuk et al., 2004) and beneficial effects. These water, which increase
the total volume of
black water. As produced in less volume than gray to be partially digested.
water, black water contains more than 95% of the The upperpart of the
total nitrogen, 90% of the total phosphorus and 50% tank is filled with
of the total COD present in domestic wastewater ( An innovative Sulabh coarse materials such as
biogas toilet that tiles, gravel, bricks and
Kujawa- Roeleveld et al., 2005). Except for with utilizes biogas digestion rocks, which can act
lower contents of nitrogen and phosphorous, brown was developed in India. both as filtrating media
water is similar as black water in phys-icalechemical The facility consists of and biofilm carriers.
properties.X a toilet connected to a The top of the tank is
biogas digester, of covered by a soil layer,
which the produced on which fast growing
biogas is stored under a and high water
fixed dome by hydraulic consumption plants are
2.6.1. Anaerobic digestion
displacement of the planted. When the
digesting slurry inside water rises up into the
Anaerobic digestion is a regular way to treat black or the digester ( Pathak, upper layers, filtration
brown water. It employs complex actions of and biological
1999). This technology
anaerobic microbiology and physical chemistry to degradation will firstly
has been implemented
have fecal matters decompose, stabilize and separate. take place, and then
for household and
Septic tank is the first anaerobic digestion technology capillary forces, wind
public excreta disposal
and heat, as well as
and nutrient recycle in
uptake by plants' roots
invented by human beings. For its simple structure, slums ( Jha et al.,
causes elimination of
easy installa-tion and low maintenance, septic tank is
2011). A similar facility the water by
often used as a temporal storage and primary
was built for excreta evapotranspiration,
treatment facility for black and brown water, and it is
and food residues while the nutrients are
promising to act as an onsite terminal treatment if
treatment of a removed by
being combined with a suitable farmland application
restaurant in Kibera incorporation in the
technology. If the retention time is enough (>60
slum, Kenya ( biomass of the plants.
days), septic tank can inactive 90% of pathogens.
Except from few
Schouten and
occasions of severe
Mathenge, 2010), and
Biogas reactor is one other regular option for black hydraulic over-loading,
the biogas was used for
and brown water treatment. It may obtain higher no effluent leaves the
cooking and heating
digestion efficiency and reclaim bioenergy comparing system normally. The
with septic tank. However, biogas reactor is more water.X use of planted systems
complicated than septic tank in construction and might also contribute to
operation. Its operation needs stable source of feeding local production of
material, suitable temperature and careful food, orna-mental
maintenance. Biogas reactor has various styles, such 2.6.2. plants and landscaping,
as conventional anaerobic reactors (anaerobic Evapotranspiration tank as well as contribute to
sequencing batch reactors, continuous stirred tank system an improvement of the
reactors, and anaerobic plug-flow reactors), sludge microclimate in
retention reactors (anaerobic contact reactors, up-flow neighborhoods.X
The evapotranspiration
anaerobic sludge bed reactors, and in-ternal
tank (TEvap) is an
circulation reactors), and anaerobic membrane
integrated household
reactors (anaerobic filter reactors, anaerobic fluidized
black or brown water
bed reactors, and expanded granular sludge blankets)
treatment system that
( Mao et al., 2015). In order to ensure pathogen combines anaerobic
2.6.3. Agricultural
prevention, the hydraulic retention time (HRT) of digestion, wetland
application
biogas reactors should be at least 15 days in summer treatment and plant
and 25 days in winter. If the feeding materials are evapotranspiration (
highly pathogenic, the HRT should be extended to 60 It is a long history in
days. The mesophilic biogas reaction is the most Paulo et al., 2013). A East Asia to use the
common, which the favorable operation temperature typical design of TEvap stored feces and urine
is a tank-type facility. mixture as fertilizer and
ranges from 30 to 38 C. However, thermophilic
In-side the bottom of this tradition is still in
reaction by heating operation temperature to 50e57 C the tank, an anaerobic practice in Chinese
is more effective in biogas production and pathogens compartment is set to rural areas. Although
deactivation.X receive the black or currently chemical
brown water and allows fertilizers are cheap and
the solids to settle and
ecological technology Cleaner Production (2016),
sanitation: a and methods, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.
Please cite this article in press as:
review on Journal of 2016.03.012
Hu, M., et al., Constructing the
infiltration surface as applied used, which are Free Water
to vertical filtration in both Surface (FWS) systems and
ready to obtain, some rural villagers
natural and artificial filter horizontal- or vertical-flow
persist in using fecal fertilizers to crop
systems ( Ridderstolpe, Subsurface Flow (SSF)
cereals, vegetables and fruits for
themselves, because the feed cropped by 2007). Physical and systems ( Zhang et al.,
using fecal fertilizers have better taste and mechanical straining can also 2009). The FWS systems,
are considered healthier. Chinese people be utilized by using locally similar to natural marshes,
used to eat cooked food and drink boiled available filter media to tend to occupy shallow
water, which is helpful to prevent remove particles larger than channels and basins, through
intestinal infectious diseases. However, to the pore space. In filter which water flows at low
directly use fecal fertilizers becomes more systems, particulate Kjeldahl velocities above and within
and more inapplicable in modern time. nitrogen is also removed by the substrate. In the SSF
Firstly, such a practice has all in all risks filtration in the upper filter systems, wastewater flows
of health. Secondly, the traditional layer and the dissolved part horizontally or vertically
application pro-cesses of the fecal by adsorption onto media through the substrate, which
fertilizers are laborious and unsanitary, and particles ( Metcalf et al., is composed of soil, sand,
young peoples are unwilling to do such rock or artificial media. In
1972). Ammonia is removed
works. It is a future chal-lenge to develop the horizontal subsurface
by adsorption and
safe, sanitary and convenient application flow system, the influent flow
nitrificationedenitrification
tech-nology of the fecal fertilizers or such is under the surface of the
while phosphorus is removed
things made from black or brown water. bed following a horizontal
through chemical
path until it reaches the outlet
precipitation and adsorption ( zone. In the vertical
Panuvatvanich et al., 2009). subsurface flow system,
Soil and sand filters can be however, the wastewater is
applied in rural areas because fed onto the whole surface
2.7. Treatment of gray water
they are robust systems made area through a distribu-tion
of locally available materials system and passes through
Gray water is domestic wastewater which and can be implemented at the filter in a vertical path. As
originates from bathroom, kitchen and the house-hold level.X gray water from various
laundry use, excluding wastewater from sources are generally difficult
the toilets. It accounts for 65%e75% of the to treat in a single-stage
domestic wastewater con-sumption in peri- wetland system, hybrid
urban areas of developing countries where wetland systems which
water consumption ranges from 20 L/ca.d consist of various types of
to 30 L/ca.d ( Al-Jayyousi, 2004). Gray natural systems staged in
series have gained increasing
water contains many different 2.7.2. Constructed wetland
contaminants, such as sus-pended solids, interest in Europe ( Vymazal,
pathogens, nutrients, grease, organic 2005). For example, to
Constructed wetlands (CWs)
micro-pollutants from household combine ponds and vertical
are artificial systems
chemicals, and pharmaceuticals that may flow CWs or to combine
designed to simulate the
be present due to urine contamination ( infiltration percolation and
function of natural wetlands
horizontal flow CWs have
Eriksson et al., 2009; Li et al., 2009). for water quality
improvement. CWs have proven to be effective (
Gray water contains a higher level of COD
great potential as an optimal Brissaud, 2007).X
and total suspended solids (TSS) from
alternative for gray water
kitchens than from both bathrooms and
treatment in rural areas
laundry ( Li et al., 2009). Other sources of because of low cost and
gray water have low concentrations of energy savings. The three
nitrogen and phosphorus. Quantity and main components of CWs
quality of gray water vary with living are substrates composed of
standards, population characteristics sand, gravel and other
2.7.3. Trickling filter
(customs, habits) and the sanitation level materials in appropriate pro-
of service. Gray water is considered only portion, a variety of
suitable for non-potable use after treatment microorganisms and selected Trickling filter is a fixed-bed,
which depends on the effluent quality and pollution-resistant plants. biological reactor that
reuse application.X Gray water is purified by the operates under aerobic
triple (physical, conditions. Some materials
with high specific surface
areas, such as rocks, gravel,
chemical and biological)
shredded PVC bottles, or
synergy of the natural
special pre-formed plastic
2.7.1. Soil filter ecosystem ( Zhang et al., filter media, have been
2012). Other advantages of selected to fill the reactor (
CWs would be multi-purpose
Soil filter systems utilize filtration to treat Tilley et al., 2014). These
re-use of the high quality
gray water. Filtration involves multiple materials are an ideal filter
effluent, self-remediation and
pollutant removal mechanisms, such as media since they are low-
self-adaptation to the
biodeg-radation, straining, sedimentation, cost, light, durable, in a high
surrounding conditions and
adsorption, nitrification and denitrification. surface to volume ratio, and
Biodegradation is the primary removal environment ( Brissaud, allowing air to circulate.
mechanism of organic matter in both solid 2007).X High specific surface
and liquid phases performed by the active provides an abundant area
biomass attached to solid surfaces ( Rauch for growing biofilms. The
Two types of constructed pre-treated gray water is
and Drewes, 2005). The highest biomass wetlands systems are trickled over the filter by
activity occurs in the first 10e30 cm of the commonly designed and using a rotating sprinkler.
The filter media can be recycled by dosing implemented worldwide for digesters for household
and exposing to air. Oxygen is depleted practicing and exploring the sanitation of a 686,000
within the biomass and the inner layers resources oriented thinking, population. Most projects
would be anoxic or anaerobic. Larger having benefited about 3 used urine diverting
pores and primary treatment are essential million peoples in about one technology both in
for preventing clogging and improving air hundred countries ( GIZ, developing and advanced
circulation. Adequate air flow is a key countries. The general
2012). Most of these projects
factor to ensure sufficient treatment technology routes of these
were done in developing
performance and deodorization. The projects were similar: water-
countries with international
characteristics of gray-water, filter media, saving and source-separation
finance and technology aids,
temperature and discharge requirements toilets þ onsite or offsite
mainly aiming to help
will determine the hy-draulic and nutrient treatment þ organic fertilizer
vulnerable groups obtain
loading rates.X applica-tion, and the
elemental hygiene
differences were mainly in
conditions, and some were
the modernizing levels of
done in advanced countries
toilet related with convenient
(most in Europe) mainly for
and comfort performances.
demonstrating more
Some projects involved
sustainable sanitation. The
3. Managerial implications attempts of social
reported project with the
mobilization, education
highest number of users was
According to a statics issued in 2012, moreexecuted in Nepal in 1992, andX
than 300 engineering projects were which applied biogas
press as: Hu, M., sanitation: a of Cleaner Production (2016),
et al., review on http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016
Constructing the technology and .03.012
Please cite this article in ecological methods, Journal

11
months as a treatment
to increase the pH and
organization as well as system management. Fig. 6 small quantity of water eliminate pathogens to
after urinating. The
shows the treatment processes of different projects. collection and trans- produce a safe liquid
fertilizer. The greywater
Table 2 shows the main components and managerial portation of the sub-
from the shower and
implications of different projects.X products was done by
hand-washing basin
professional teams,
was used to provide
once a week for urine
water for small
An ecological sanitation project was carried out in a containers and every
wetlands in the
peri-urban area and benefited around 4485 persons in 1.5 months for feces
backyards of the
El Alto city, Bolivia. The applied technology is a con-tainers by van. The
houses, with
urine diversion dehydration toilet (UDDT), treatment fecal matter was
ornamental and edible
of gray water at the household level, and collective composted for 8e9
plants.
management of the urine and feces collection, months with red
conveyance and reuse. Sawdust was applied to cover Californian worms, the
the feces after defecation and a urine was stored for 3
EI Alto, Bolivia
Shower
Grey water
Wetland
Irrigation
Sanitation
Hand-washing
Feces
Composting
UDDT
building
Fertilizer
Holding Tank
Urine
Anal cleansing
Bathrooms,
laundry
Irrigation
Gujarat, India
Grey water
water
Filter
Irrigation
Sanitation
Washbasins
building
Feces
Composting
SVUSDT
Fertilizer Urine
Holding Tank
Irrigation
water
Anal cleansing
Grey water
Flintenbreite-
Lubeck,
Germany
Constructed
Discharge
Domestic
kitchen, shower
wetland
Storm water
Vacuum
wastewater
vacuum toilets
sewerage
digestion
treatment plant
Black water
Anaerobic
Sludge
system
Organic waste
Biogas
Changshu,
China
Bathrooms, laundry
Gravity
sanitation
Grey water
Discharge
Domestic
Washbasins
Irrigation
sewage
Supernatant
Vacuum toilet
Vacuum sewerage system
Black water
Agriculture
Compost
Fermentation tank
Sediment
Black-water tank
Waste treatment:
composting;
Waste treatment: natural treatment þ

anaerobic digestion;
Fig. 6. The Resource

treatment recycling: no
processes in involvement
different projects. India
SVUSDT
Gravity
Table 2 Holding tank
Composting Resource recycling: biogas
Filter China
The main
/ VT
components and
Source separation: Vacuum
managerial
SVUSDT þ Fermentation
implications of
waterless urinal; Composting
different projects.
/
/
Study area Source separation: vacuum toilet;
Toilet
Sanitation
Urine
Feces
Gray water
Solid waste
Managerial
implications
Waste treatment:
natural treatment
þ composting;
Waste treatment: natural treatment systems;
Bolivia
UDDT
Gravity
Holding tank Resource
Composting recycling: Resource recycling: fertilizer
Wetland fertilizer þ
/ irrigation
Source separation: Germany
UDDT þ VT
waterless urinal; Vacuum
Anaerobic
digestion
Constructed
wetland
Anaerobic
digestion
Source separation:
vacuum toilet;
press as: Constructi sanitation: a review on Production (2016),

Hu, M., et ng the technology and methods, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j
al., ecological Journal of Cleaner .jclepro.2016.03.012
and mixed together with the designed to serve for the
black water. A central whole Hehuageng
The technology was shown to be effective
anaerobic digester was used Settlement, which totally has
and lower in cost than centralized
to treat the mixed biogenic 55 families, but another half
sanitation technologies.
waste, which was initially of the settlement failed to be
treated by thermic connected into the system for
In 2005, Navsarjan Trust established a disinfection. The liquid non-technology reasons. The
sanitation building including toilets, residue was stored for a black water (urine and fecal
showers and washing facilities, for a new further stabilization and solid mixture) collected is stored
primary school in rural areas of Gujarat, res-idue is composted, and for about two months and
India. The new school has a total capacity then both of them were used then used respectively as
of 210 pupils. Under the conception of as organic fertilizers. The liquid fertilizer (by a piping
sustainability and ecology, the sanitation is biogenic wastes treatment irrigation system) and solid
designed to provide sanitary appliance to plant was still in its startup fertilizer (two times per year
pupils and staff so that the recovery of phase, as the settlement was along with plowing) for the
urine, feces and water for productive not yet fully inhabited due to nearby farmlands. The gray
purposes is allowed. Two sets of toilets, water are now drained
including eight single-vault-urine- together with rain water (the
separation dehydration toilets (SVUSDT), designed subsurface filtration
are operated in batches to facilitate the various reasons related to the system hasn't be installed).
harvest of the finished compost. Only four real estate market. The The total construction cost
toilets are in use at the same time and greywater (wastewater from covering the vacuum toilets
receive daily de-posits until the the kitchen and bathroom) and sewer system was
dehydration chamber below the squatting was transported by gravity 480,000 RMB (about 73,000
slab is “full”. Moreover, four waterless pipes to several constructed USD), which was
urinals for the male pupils and staff wetlands. The investment for approximately equivalent to
members were installed in the toilet to the integrated sanitation the planned Con-San system
separately collect the urine in a container system was about EUR using gravity sewer and SBR
and reuse it as fertilizers. The gray water 600,000. Invest-ment costs wastewater treatment
from bathrooms, washbasins and the for the sanitation system technology. About 70% of
laundry area is treated through vertical were approximately 40% the total construction cost
flow filters and reused for irrigation in the higher than for the common was spent in indoor vacuum
kitchen garden. The anal cleansing water wastewater system, while toilets installations, including
from the toilets is infiltrated into a sub- operation costs were to dismantle the originally
surface irrigation for ornamental flowers. estimated to be 25% less than installed water-flush toilets
in conventional settlements. and restore the bathroom for
the villagers. The system has
worked properly since it
The authors ever hosted a
A vacuum source-separation system for being completed in the
rural sanitation project using
domestic sanitation was built at a housing January of 2011, being
vacuum source-separation
estate that had 350 inhabitants in a densely maintained by a company
technology in Hehuageng
populated rural area of Flintenbreite, that also operates the
Settlement, Cheng-tang
Lübeck, Germany in 2002. The settlement regional rural decentralized
Village, Guli Town,
was not connected to the public wastewater treatment
wastewater system. The rainwater of roofs Changshu, China ( Fan, systems of Con-San. The
and sealed areas was collected in small 2011). The project installed measured water consumption
gutters and infiltrated to the groundwater 41 household vacuum toilets (from April 2011 to March
via decentralized swales. Vac-uum toilet (pedestal pan) in 23 families 2013) of the toilets was 0.51
(VT) with low water consumption (about 100 villagers), which L/time, and the total
(0.7e1.2 L/time) was used in households, were connected to the electricity con-sumption of
and the black water (feces and urine) was vacuum sewer system that the vacuum pump station
collected via the vacuum sewer system. included a vacuum pump was about 1.98 kWh/day.
The sorted solid kitchen refuse was station and a 750 m pipe The authors are now
collected via conventional way to a network. The vacuum pump planning to collect the
conditioning plant, where it was crushed station installed was kitchen refusesX
Fig. 7. Yearly numbers of

different toilets installed in
rural China in 1999e2012.
in press as: the ecological technology and Cleaner Production (2016),
Hu, M., et al., sanitation: a methods, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro
Please cite this article
Constructing review on Journal of .2016.03.012

13
the urine tanks where
Table 3 the urine was collected
(including solids and liquids) of the 23 families into
and stored for 3
the vacuum system by a home appliance with grinder.
months. A tanker truck
If so, the total cost of the domestic solid waste The comparative was used to empty the
collection, transportation and disposal would be cut environmental damage of
urine tanks and the
down 80%, and the pollutant concentrations of gray Eco-San and Con-San.
stored urine could be
water would be largely decreased, furtherly raising
applied as a fertilizer to
the system technological-economic performances. improved. Similarly, local agriculture. The
just to pursuit the greywater in the system
The largest sanitation project related with the global sustainability by came from the kitchen
resources ori-ented thinking is launched and abating the human sinks, showers and
prompted by the Chinese central and local aspires for nice bathtubs. It flowed into
governments, though its original intention is to sanitation conditions a separate pipe system
improve the poor rural sanitation conditions. This either dooms to an on-site grey-water
project can be traced back to 1950's, when the central unpromising. The Erdos treatment plant. The
government launched ‘the Movement of Patriotic Eco-town Project which plant used primary
Sanitation’ and the governments at all levels set a was launched in sedimentation,
‘Patriotic Sanitation Committee’ that was responsible Haozhaokui anaerobic treatment,
for promo-tion, organization and implementation of Community, activated sludge and
the rural hygiene. In 1990's, the ‘Toilet Revolution’ Dongsheng District, aerobic bio-film treat-
began to run fast, and the sanitary toilet owning rate Inner Mongolia ment, secondary
in rural areas was lifted up from 39.8% in 1993 to Autonomous Region of sedimentation and a
75% in 1999. And in 2004, rural toilet reformation China in 2003 is a holding pond to treat
was officially listed in the inventory of the transfer profound lesson ( the water. The bins
payment from central gov-ernment budget. From then Winblad et al., 2004). were collected with a
on, six types of toilets are subsidized by the central This project installed truck by the
government and local governments (generally centralized urine maintenance workers
50%:50%), among which four types of waterless diverting dry toilet and taken to the on-site
toilets are dual-urn toilet, biogas toilet, urine system to serve for indoor thermal
diverting dehydration toilet, and alter-nating dual-pit 3000 residents (832 composting plant where
toilet. Fig. 7 presents the yearly number of the apart-ments in 42 the feces were
processed into an
different household toilet installed in Chinese rural buildings with 4e5
stories and one building organic fertilizer
areas from 1999 to 2012 ( China Health Statistical with 2 stories). The product for agricultural
Yearbooks, 1999e 2012). It can be seen that the sanitation system application. The
treatment measures
biogas toilet and the dual-urn funnel toilet is the two consisted of: 832 urine
within the system, i.e.
most applied waterless toilets. From 1999 to 2012, diversion dry toilets,
urine storage and
number of the biogas toilet kept on rising while that 832 low-flush urinals,
thermal composting at
of the dual urn funnel toilet is relatively steady and 832 faeces collection
even appeared to decrease in recently. Because of the bins in the basements 50e60 C, all resulted in
biogas toilet being considered not only sanitation but (with ventilation a reduction of
also with additional benefits such as fuel reclamation systems), 22 urine tanks pathogens. Although
and livestock pollution control, it gained an in the base-ments, one maintenance personnel
additional subsidy from the Agricultural Ministry, greywater treatment contacts with fecal
which just in 2006e2010 had subsidized 21.2 billion plant, and one matters are unavoidable
RMB (about 3.3 billion USD) for rural biogas. composting plant. The during collection and
However since biogas digester had special requests urine and feces flow transportation, no
on raw material supply and professional operation, streams started at the incidences of disease
about half of the biogas toilet cannot yet produce urine diversion dry were re-ported
toilets and waterless throughout the project
biogas after 3 years later ( Hou et al., 2012). As a urinals which diverted period. Objectively to
general trend, the Chinese rural peoples are preferred the liquid and solid
speak, this project well
water-flush toilets, as shown in Fig. 7.X excreta from each other. implemented the
A “turning bowl feces resources oriented
receptacle” in the dry thinking, and it tried to
toilet was connected to use certain advanced
a vertical pipe chute technology for fulfilling
with a diameter of 280 a high-level sanitation.
mm so that after use the However, the project
feces dropped vertically was failed at last.
down into the basement Because of the residents
Although these projects more or less testified the where they were rigorously protesting,
concepts and technological feasibility of the collected in 120 L bins. all the dry toilets had to
resources oriented thinking and achieved much in 60e80 ml of sawdust be removed and
practice as well as in academia, the resources orientedwas manually added to
substituted by water-
sanitation cannot yet really challenge Con-San in the feces after each flushed toilets. This
tech-nology. The questions are in variety, but the first toilet use in order to
project has severe
lies in idea. By far, most of the regarding R&Ds and keep the contents of the
negative effects on
engineering practices are facing to undeveloped bins dry and reduce advocating and
peoples, trying to develop some low-cost solutions to odor. The feces
practicing the resources
those absolute poverties yet not enjoying the collection bins were oriented thinking in
elemental hygiene. Although this is a great respecting connected to a
China till today. In this
charity, it entangles with social problems and cannot ventilation system that
project, finance was not
be solved by only technology. The technolo-gies was meant to vent odor a problem. Superficially
developed and applied facing to this situation have from the bins to vent
the residents were lack
hardly any attraction to those in normal society, pipes on the roof. The of patience to endure a
especially where economy is pipes from the urine little comfortlessness
section in the toilet and (e.g. odor) and
the urinals were led to inconvenience (e.g.
excessive toilet fault), but the elementals lay in that have been set at a fairly high-X
people's desire of good sanitation conditions, which
Index
A a X
B
b
X
C
c
X Note: The higher
the score, the
higher the
potential
environmental
impact.
Eco-San Benetto et al.
Con-San
(2009). X
Eco-San
Con-San
Eco-San Remy (2010). X
Con-San
Climate change
98.98%
100% Thibodeau et al. (2014). The score of this literature
75% was the result from the exclusion of the process of
100%
recycling. X
84.28%
100%
Resources
98.99%
100%
80%
100%
66.03%
100%
Human health
106.52%
100%
90%
100%
39.13%
100%
Ecosystem quality
97.96%
100%
95%
100%
62.14%
100%
of the Eco-San include user life treat-ment, disposal or
interface, collection and recycling (i.e. cradle-to-
level by Con-San. Anyhow the resources
conveyance, storage and grave). Generally, an LCA
oriented sanitation would accord with this
primary treatment, and consists four phases. Phase I
desire. Otherwise, it cannot be accepted by
reuse/disposal. Each is to scope the system
the contemporary main society.
component has many boundary and level of details,
different sub-styles for which depends on the subject
4. Evaluation methods selection. Therefore, the and the intended use of the
challenge to rural study. The depth and the
environment management breadth of LCA can differ
The above mentioned components are the
lies in the selection of the considerably depending on
basic elements of Eco-San, and their
most suit-able type of Eco- its particular goal. Phase II is
combinations would form many different
San. Several tools can be to make and analyze a life
Eco-San systems with different
employed to evaluate and cycle inventory of the
environmental impacts on soil, water and
select the elements. The input/output data with regard
atmosphere. The comparison between the
information provided by to the system being studied.
Eco-San and the Con-San systems can be
these tools may be integrated Phase III is to make a life
found in existing literature. Malisie in a multi-criteria decision cycle impact assessment,
(2007) built a pilot-scale source-separation analysis (MCDA) framework aiming to provide additional
domestic wastewater system to study the that facilitates decision informa-tion to help assess a
potential of nutrient recovery and reuse. It making with diverse opinions product system's LCI results
was found that up to 86% and 12% of from a variety of for better un-derstanding
nitrogen, 21% and 68% of phos-phorous, stakeholders ( Sala-Garrido their environmental
and 69% and 20% of potassium from urine significance. The final phase
et al., 2011). Many factors
and fecal matters respectively could be is life cycle interpretation, in
are involved in the decision-
recovered by using urine diverting toilets; making process while data which the results of life cycle
inventory or a life cycle
Benetto et al. (2009) compared an Eco-San are available only for a few
impact assessment, or both,
system and conventional systems at an of these criteria. Many
are summarized and
office building with practical data. candidate evalua-tion
discussed as a basis for
Compared with conventional systems, methods can be used for
conclusions,
Eco-San could reduce the contribution to evaluating particular types of
recommendations and
ecosystem quality damage by more than ecological sanitation.X
decision-making in
60%. However, Eco-San may lead to
accordance with the goal and
higher damages on resources and human
scope definition.
health and higher impact on climate
change; Haq and Cambridge (2012)
thought that conventional sanitation
4.1. Life cycle assessment
systems had high capital, operational and
(LCA)
maintenance costs. However, agricultural
use of human excreta from Eco-San
systems provided a strong financial Life cycle assessment (LCA)
incentive as it reduced expenditure on is one of the most accepted
4.2. Multiple-criteria
waste management and chemical eval-uation tools in the
decision-making (MCDM)
fertilizers; Thibodeau et al. (2014) framework of sustainability,
as it enables to estimate the
compared the environmental performances
cumulative environmental Multiple-criteria decision-
of ecological sanita-tion systems based on
impacts of a product or a making (MCDM) has
black water source-separation (BWS) and
process from ‘cradle to grave’ widespread application to
conventional sanitation system (CSS) in
environmental decision-
terms of environmental damage. And the ( Pasqualino et al., 2009). It
making problems, such as
results showed that BWS generated higher may provide an accurate
environmental planning,
impact scores than CSS, which were picture of the true
selection of soil cleaning
100%, 89%, 24% and 25% more in terms environmental trade-offs
technology, landfill site
of the human health, ecosystem quality, when selecting technology or
selection, and ranking
and climate change and resources indices, process among different
different contaminated areas
respectively. According to these literatures, options. It can also assist to
according to their need for
these advantages and disadvantages identify opportunities for
environmental management.
existing in the Eco-San system and improving theX The MCDM methods use a
conventional sanitation system could be
structured and logical
found, which is beneficial to improving
approach to select the best
their evaluation. Table 3 shows environmental performances
strategy or alternative for
of a certain product or
comparative environmental damage of continuous or discrete
process, to inform decision-
Eco-San and Con-San. For each index, the decision-making problems
makers of industry,
relative score of Eco-San is presented encountered ( Kalbar et al.,
government or non-
proportionally to Con-San score (100%).
government organization in 2012b). The MCDM has two
Higher scores represent higher potential
strategic planning, priority categories: multiple-attribute
environmental impacts.X setting, product or processes decision-making (MADM)
design or redesign, to select and multiple-objective
relevant indices for decision-making (MODM) (
environmental impact
assessment. LCA addresses Zanakis et al., 1998).
the poten-tial environmental Generally, the MADM
impacts throughout a methods can handle the
product's life cycle from raw discrete de-cision problems,
material acquisition, which involve a finite set of
According to Section 2, the components production, use, and end-of- well-defined alter-natives.
These alternatives have to be evaluated to estimate the overall utility methods are based on an
and prioritized using a set of multiple or score. The more complex outranking approach, where
conflicting attributes ( Zhou et al., 2006). utility function can be used the decision maker can
to capture the preferences of express a strict preference,
The MODM can handle the continuous
decision makers in the form indifference, or a weak
decision problems involving an infinite
of various attributes. Multi- preference for each criterion
number of feasible alternatives ( Huang et attribute utility theory when comparing one
al., 2011). The MODM methods are (MAUT), another commonly alternative to another (
multiple-objective mathematical program- used MADM method, aims
ming models in which a set of conflicting to produce a complete Sepp€ ala€ et al., 2001).
objectives are optimized and subjected to a ranking of alternatives. The two most popular groups
set of defined constraints.X of outranking methods are:
Huber (1974) and Keeney the elimination and choice
(1975) developed various translating reality
models to apply MAUT. (ELECTRE) methods and the
Most of the MAUT models preference ranking
One of the most commonly used MADM
use additive and organization method for
methods is the weighted summation ( multiplicative forms of utility enrichment evaluation
Howard, 1991). In the weighted measurement. The simple (PROMETHEE) methods.
summation, the criteria is represented on a multi-attribute rating The ELECTRE methods
commensurate scale (usually 0e1, where 1 technique (SMART) is the classify preferred alternatives
represents the best performance), simplest form of MAUT. and non-preferredX
multiplied by weights, and then summed Another set of MADM

15
(CBA) and the cost- indifferent regarding

effective analysis cash amounts received
ones by establishing outranking relationships. To
(CEA). CBA is made to at different points of
date, the ELECTRE families include ELECTRE I, II,
compare the economic time. The net present
III, and IV as well as some improved ELECTRE
feasibility associated value (NPV) of an
methods. The ELECTRE approach uses concordance
with the investment is calculated
and discordance indices and threshold values to
implementation of as aX
analyze the outranking relations among the
different proposals. The
alternatives.
main premise of CBA
considers that pro-jects
Two very popular methods which have their own should only be
mathematical foundations are analytical hierarchy commissioned when its
process (AHP) and the tech-nique for order benefits exceed the Table 4
preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS) aggregate costs. The
method ( Vaidya and Kumar, 2006). The basic idea of CBA is based on the net The advantages,
profit (the difference disadvantages and
AHP is to convert subjective assessments of relative applications of the evaluation
between benefits and
importance to a set of overall scores or weights ( methods.
costs) calculation for
Vaidya and Kumar, 2006). In AHP, a preferred each one of the avail-
alternative is selected using pair-wise comparisons of able options. The costs function of the net
the alternatives based on their relative performance involve operation and profit and the discount
against each cri-terion. The basis of AHP is that maintenance costs
rate ( Aulong et al.,
humans are more capable of making relative (O&MC) and
2009). However, some
judgments than absolute judgments. AHP uses a well- investment cost (IC)
benefits, e.g.
defined scale to capture the preferences of the adjusted for the time
environmental quality,
decision maker, and the consistency of preferences period on which they
are difficult to be
can also be checked. AHP is most widely used for occur. The total
valued in monetary. In
weight elicitation of attributes in most of the MADM annualized equivalent
this situation, cost-
methods. In comparison, the TOPSIS ( Lai et al., cost (TAEC), as one of
effectiveness analysis
important cost indices,
1994) com-pares a set of alternatives by identifying (CEA) is a good choice
must be calculated by
weights for each dimen-sion, normalizing scores in
adding the annualized ( Yuan et al., 2010). For
each dimension, and calculating a distance between
IC to the annual O&MC the same objectives
the ideal (best on each dimension) and the negative
( Molinos-Senante et (quantified in physical
ideal alternatives (worst) across the weighted
terms), CEA can be
dimensions based on possible distance measures al., 2012a). Not only
used to identify an
(e.g., Euclidean distance). Finally, the ratio between costs but also the
alternative that
the distance (separation) from the negative ideal and benefits for
minimizes actual cost
the sum distance from the ideal and negative ideal implementing a
or maximizes output for
alternatives is used to calculate alternatives.X treatment facility must
a certain cost,
be expressed in present
value. Therefore, the alternatively ( Van
net benefits must be
Engelen et al.,
discounted into present-
value terms. By means 2008).X
4.3. Economic evaluation method (EEM) of a properly chosen
discount rate, the
investor becomes
The commonly used EEM is the cost-benefit analysis
4.4. Data envelopment analysis (DEA) and Aparicio, 2010). A efficient units (
unit is considered to be
Sueyoshi and Goto,
efficient if and only if it
In the field of production economics, the term of 2011). Most production
is not possible to
efficiency de-notes the rational use of available pro-cesses have
increase its output
resources, which means all production inputs are multiple inputs and
quantities while its
employed optimally based on the available outputs, while the radial
input quantities are
technology ( Hernandez-Sancho et al., 2011). Farrell fixed, and it is not DEA model does not
provide information on
(1957) pio-neered the study of frontier functions as possible to decrease its
the efficiency of specific
reference points to mea-sure efficiency for each input quantities without
inputs or outputs
production unit. This was the starting point for the altering the resulting
(depending on the
data envelopment analysis (DEA). DEA may handle output quantities (
model's orientation). To
multiple output/input situations and aggregating
Seiford, 1996). Those solve this problem,
performance indices into a single performance index.
efficient units represent
Basically, the DEA is a mathematical programming Fare et al. (1994)
best practices serving as
method that builds an envelopment surface or effi- developed a series of
reference for evaluating
cient production frontier to assess the efficiency of all non-radial DEA
the efficiency of the
production units under study or Decision Making methods where
remaining DMUs. DEA
Units (DMUs, Charnes et al., 1978). Those DMUs measures the global individual input
reductions (increase of
that establish the envelopment surface are considered effi-ciency for each unit
outputs) are measured.
efficient units (the efficiency index is equal to one), studied. That is, it
In other words, the non-
while those not based on the surface are considered measures the maximum
radial DEA provides an
inefficient units (the efficiency index is less than one). radial (proportional)
ef-ficiency index for
Likewise, DEA can be used to determine the relative reduction in all inputs
each of the variables in
efficiency of each DMU, as long as they are (increment in all out-
comparable in the sense that they all consume the puts) that would raise the process. Its greatX
same inputs (in different quantities) and produce the the unit's efficiency to
same set of outputs (in different quantities) ( Pastor the level of the most
MCDM judgment
It can It only makes
Method simultaneously evaluation in the limitation of dimension and weight.
Advantages solve the discrete economic difficult in forming the effective frontier.
Disadvantages and
Applications Hernandez- et al., 2011; Sala-Garrido et al., 2012;
It is difficult to
calculate the
evaluation
Sancho et al.,
2010; Molinos-
Sala-Garrido et al., 2011.X
Senante et al., FEM
Demirtas and It has simple model, and can deal with the
Üstün, 2008; 2013; X It has the difficult in forming the
Huang et al., Chen et al., 2010; Chen and Chang, 2007;
2011; Kalbar et
LCA X
al.,
from the
economic aspect.
Karimi et al., 2011; Lu X
It is a holistic, long-term and mature aspect, with the
evaluation technology
It is inadequate to deal with complicated multifactorial and uncertain problems.
continuous ignored.
membership function and eliminating
Wang et al., 2012; Benetto et al., 2009; evaluation
problems. Molinos-Senante
et al., 2010. X
Gallego et al., 2008; Ortiz X result, which may et al., 2012b;
Zhou et al.,
need some special
process, which can attain reliable evaluation

2012a,b. X 2010.X
DEA repeated data.
and economic evaluation problems.
It has wide range
et al., 2007; Rodriguez-Garcia et al., of application,
without the
2011. X It need a large
number of data,
software. and has the
results.
Hernandez X
-Sancho and
EEM Sala-Garrido,
It can help 2009; Hernandez-
decision maker
attain direct Sancho X
selection of the treatment the economic benefit index,
systems while some of them which involves reuse of
advantage is the ability to identify the
are so important that they wastewater, resource
specific inputs on which to act in order to
tend to dominate the recovery (possibility of
increase the efficiency of the study unit.
decision. The selection of nutrient recovery from
This method has grown in use with
Eco-San indices is an proposed technology for
contributions of many studies ( Zhou et important step, which would agricultural use), biogas
al., 2007; Zhong et al., 2011; Chen et al., determine the selection of the recovery and electric power
Eco-San systems. An Eco- recovery ( Hernandez-
2011).X San system means limited
Sancho et al., 2010). To
usage and degradation of
reflect the feasibility of the
resources through harmful
4.5. Fuzzy evaluation method (FEM) sanitation, economic
emissions, with the waste
feasibility indices were
export avoided in time or
proposed, which include the
Decision process for selecting an space. An overview of the
cost of sewage treatment
appropriate alternative usually faces with different indictors could be
(CST), net present value
uncertainties, which may be associated found in literatures. The
(NPV) and payback period
with human judgment regarding relative evaluation indices of Eco-
weights, inadequate information, and San could be divided into (PP) ( Hernandez-Sancho et
evaluation criteria values. The process is three classes. Each class of al., 2010; Molinos-Senante et
also affected by many economic, index has many sub-indices, al., 2012b, 2013).X
technological and environmental factors, which constitute the
such as oper-ational maintenance cost, evaluation index system.
treatment process and pollutants reduction.
The conventional evaluation methods are
inadequate for dealing with the imprecise
or vague information of linguistic 5.2. Environmental indices
assessment ( Karimi et al., 2011). 5.1. Economic indices
Combining fuzzy sets with the Although a set of Eco-San
conventional evaluation methods, fuzzy indices are different, there
As one of the first class
evaluation method can overcome the seems to be a consensus on
indices, economic index is
above difficulties and deal with the the environmental indices.
often decisive in technology
uncertain infor-mation in the real world. Potential environmental
decision in a practical
The conventional evaluation methods impacts are presented based
require exact or crisp judgments which the situation ( Balkema et al., on the indices of
decision maker may be more reluctant to 2002). Generally, economic environmental loads,
provide than fuzzy ones. Moreover, index includes several ecosystem quality and
individual judgments of events are second class indices. Four resource utilization. The
invariably subjective and the in- important economic indices environmental loads index
terpretations attached to the same words are construction invest-ment includes risk of pollutants
may differ ( Zhao et al., 2011). That is costs, operational and emission to the environment
maintenance costs, economic (e.g. nutrients and organic
why fuzzy sets and fuzzy numbers have
benefits and economic matter), the removal rates of
been pro-posed to characterize linguistic
feasibility. In detail, the biochem-ical oxygen demand
variables and to represent the imprecise
construction processes of (BOD), chemical oxygen
nature of human judgment ( each sanitation project need a demand (COD), and total
Anagnostopoulos et al., 2007).X large amount of money, suspended solids (TSS), the
which could determine the depletion of natural
economic feasibility of the resources, and climate
project to some extent. The change (greenhouse gas
construction investment emissions and ozone hole).
index is based on the The ecosystem quality
Table 4 summarizes the advantages, investment required for the indices include aquatic and
system, such as the terrestrial ecotox-icity (ATE),
disadvantages and appli-cations of above
equipment, pipe installation, aquatic and terrestrial
all evaluation methods according to the
the excavation and recovery acidification (ATA), aquatic
current literatures. Each method has its
eutrophication (AE) and land
own characteristics, applicable object and of road ( Molinos-Senante et
use. The optimal resource
limitations. Therefore, selection of the al., 2013).X utilization index, particularly
suitable evalua-tion methods is so
to address water, nutrients,
important that it would determine the
and energy, includes required
evalua-tion result. In practice, the Operation and maintenance
land area, land fertility, and
disadvantages of the evaluation method require resources (time,
biodiversity. The resources
should be avoided and their advantages money and energy) for the
index expresses the used
should be promoted. Different evaluation system to serve its design
amount of non-renewable
methods can be coupled to form a better life. Therefore, the operation
primary energy related to the
one.X and maintenance indices
fossil energy resources and
include the costs of human
the additional energy needed
resources, transportation,
for further extraction of
electric power and chemicals
minerals considering their
5. Evaluation indices ( Molinos- Senante et al., pro-gressive depletion.
2012b). Wastewater Another group of
treatment technologies could environmental indices
Due to the diversity of rural sanitation
bring benefits to environment include the quality of effluent
tasks and local contexts of engineering, it
or society. It is very and sludge, combined sewer
is impossible to employ a general index to
important to select the overflows, and gaseous
evaluate the environment sanitation
suitable sanitation based on emissions.
system. Many indices can influence the
carcinogenic, respiratory include the need to explain to
effects, ionizing radiations visitors how to use the
effects, stratospheric ozone separation toilet, unhappiness
layer depletion, and exposure with the proposed technology
to pathogens and fecal matter option from proportion of
5.3. Social indices
during toilet use and waste users, users' accessibility
collection. The customers' (convenience), reuse centers'
Both social and cultural indices are acceptance index is to accessibility, applicability of
difficult to quantify therefore they are evaluate different perceptions direct reuse of on-site toilet
often not addressed. However, these of waste and sanitation from products (e.g. Eco-San) to
indices play an important role in people with different the facilities. The
evaluations of the technology cultures. New sanitation employment index is to
implementation. This is especially the concepts, including different evaluate employment
cases in water use, sanitation, and small- toilet sys-tems, may opportunities generated by
scale on-site treatment when the end-user encounter socialecultural the Eco-San system since the
is directly involved. The indices in this difficulties in the imple- novel sanitation needs much
category could be classified as human mentation. For instance, the equipment to support the
health, cus-tomers' acceptance, and reasons to remove these operation. The
employment. In detail, the human health toilets from the houses at an
index includes carcinogenic, non- ecological village would

17
Water
Deplation ATA
Ecosystem
Land
Resource utilization
AE
Nutrient
quality
Others
Others
Others
Pollutant
Productivity
Remove
Environmental
Replicability
ATE Industrialization
Promotion
load
Operation
Reliablity
Others
Maintainability
Equipment
Durability Others
Investment cost
Pipe
Flexibility
Robustness
Recoverbility
Complexity
Road
Water quality
Technical
Others
Sludge
feasibility
Others
Water supply
Others
maintenance
Others
Reagents
index
Staff
Environmental
Economic
Operational and
Transportation
index
CST
benefits
Recovery
Feasibility
NPV
Fertilizer
Others
PP
Evaluation indicators
Others
Economic
Biogas
Social index
Human
Respiratory
Laborer
health
Exposure
Others
Employment
Market
Groundwater
Society
Enterprise
Comprehensive
User
index
Others
Acceptance
Reuse
Others
Fig. 8. The components of

the evaluation indices.
indices evaluate the of viewed by the institutional
are used level of beneficiar intended infra-structure
to show expertise for ies to beneficiary of the country
related market and enterprise also the more installation and participat community. or region. The
may have the opportunities of detailed operation of the e in The policy index is
growth and development. characteri selected operation institutional related to
stics of technology. If and requirements government
the the exper-tise is maintena index is to strategies to
5.4. Comprehensive indices
comprehe not locally nce. The quantify if increase
nsive available it use- different sanitation
Comprehensive indices are also not indices. may be gained ability regulations coverage and
easy to quantify but described with For through index is and control service
linguistic terms. These indices can example, imports or about the mechanisms
be classified as technical feasibility, the training. The easiness that Eco-San
reliability, robustness, expertise complexity to use the systems
industrialization and resources index is index is to proposed require fit in level to the
consumption. The following to address ability facility as the existing poor people in
rural areas. The adoptability index reliability prospective enquiries. y on a certain However, a
is the ability of the beneficiary to , system water supply However, index. For potential
use the technology. The maintaina coverage. in a rapid instance, a disadvantage
management index is to evaluate bility. assessme composting may be
the overseeing system that the The nt, many toilet may ‘acceptance’
facility serves its intended purpose. resilience Fig. 8 shows of these have a because the
The index of stimulation of Eco- index the components indices potential end user may
San behavior is to quantify the refers to of the may be advantage for perceive
manners which make Eco-San compatib evaluation estimated ‘stimulation of sanitation
behavior the most convenient ility of indices. All using Eco-San without water
option. These manners include the these indices averages behavior’ as unhy-gienic
revising technological design and system should be and no water is and may not
increasing the end-user's with quantified indication used and the be willing to
awareness, participation, and popu- through s for the end user use the
responsibility. The reliability index lation measurements, in-fluence recycles the compost in
is to evaluate water supply growth cost calcula- of a compost his/her garden.
reliability, users' operation and/or tions, or technolog locally. InX
press Constructin a ogy and Productio 1016/j.jclepro.2016.03.01
as: Hu, g the review methods, n (2016), 2
M., et ecological on Journal of http://dx.d
Please cite this article in al., sanitation: technol Cleaner oi.org/10.
areas. A great deal of practicality, come from the
experience has been obtained refer-ences, real projects and
this way, these indices can be used as to-go
from the projects, and a recommendation by experts,
or not-to-go decision variables in decision
number of solutions could be and can help decision makers
making. Many methods can be set in the
recommended for large-scale complete the evaluation
opti-mization procedure to only select
appli-cations according to process easily.
technologies with potential ad-vantages or
local physical, cultural and
to abandon technologies with potential
socio-economic conditions. It
disadvantage.
is beneficial to identify the
key factors affecting and 7. Observations
6. Results determining the
implementation Eco-San
In recent years, many
projects, and take some
The Eco-San systems aim to recover successful Eco-San projects
improved measures to
resources from wastewater with the have been implemented in
promote its development.
minimized demands on other resources, rural and sparsely settled
The evaluation methods in
particularly for water and energy. urban areas in different
this review have been
Therefore, the separate collection and countries. Experiences
recommended based on their
treatment of water flow is not a resulting from these projects
characteristics, such as
prerequisite in Eco-San systems, since the can be employed to drive the
theory maturity, wide
centralized and combined flow systems are large-scale applications in
applications, and simplicity
also possible. The re-covery and accordance with local
and efficiency of evaluation
agricultural use of the organic matters and physical, cultural and socio-
processes. The project eval-
nutrients contained in sewage would economic conditions. The
uation before its
improve soil structure and fertility as well Eco-San is also an alternative
implementation is beneficial
as increase agricultural productivity. The to solve the problem of
to select the suitable
recovery of energy through the anaerobic resource shortage in the
components to develop the
digestion of feces and organic waste repre- future. Evaluation and
optimal Eco-San system. The
sent a significant step towards energy selection of suitable
evaluation during the
efficiency ( Werner et al., 2009). components to form an
implementation can help the
innovative Eco-San system
However, the Eco-San systems are still far planners adjust the project
are essential to develop the
from wide-spread applications due to the timely when there are some
system according to the
following reasons: (a) the costs for obstacles and difficulties.
environmental, economic and
employing innovative systems are often The evalu-ation after the
social sustainability.
higher than those of already established implementation is helpful to
Although the review has
treatment systems; (b) the existing cultural verify the feasibility and
introduced many
constraints on the usage of treated excreta validity of the project, to
components, evaluation
and sewage have to be overcome by the summarize experience
methods and indices, and real
awareness raising campaigns and capacity constantly, and to improve
cases from references and
building measures for Eco-San; and (c) the efficiency of the future
projects, evaluation and
limited expertise and pro-fessionalism on Eco-San system.
selection of Eco-San system
the operation and management of the Eco-
would face many other
San systems hinder the further
challenges or limitations. In
development of the Eco-San systems.X detail, (a) increasing
Although it is very important
sustainability of technical
to select suitable evaluation
systems in society is a major
method for the Eco-San
challenge in the near future,
system, the evaluation index
As no particular technical solution is which requires a fundamental
is another key factor for the
prescribed, the styles of Eco-San system change regarding our
evaluation process, which
are very different because of the different perception to wastewater; (b)
offers scientifically evalu-
combi-nations of the components. Since the evaluation method should
ation basis for the
every component has its char-acter and be developed to suit the new
performance evaluation. The
suitable area, it is necessary to evaluate evaluation object; (c) the
setting, selection and
these components within the study area in uncertainties, coming from
quantification of the
order to obtain suitable combinations. The data collection, incomplete
evaluation index are three
components, introduced in the review, information and possible
critical steps during the
provide a set of complete alternatives to fluctuation, have to be
evaluation process. The
decision-makers so that optimal decisions considered during the
setting of evaluation index
can be made quickly and efficiently. With practical evaluation; (d) the
helps
the develop-ment of the Eco-San system, evaluation indices need
many innovative components would be further investigations,
developed to meet the requirement of the to obtain a set of candidate especially, more attention
rural sewage treat-ment and result in the indices for preparing the should be paid to the
appearance of the new Eco-San systems. coming evaluation. The quantitative techniques; (e)
The costs of some components (e.g. selection of evaluation index the application of organic
vacuum toilets, vacuum pipes and is useful to determine the key fertilizers, especially the
solideliquid separators) may decrease as factors in order to reduce the liquid organic fertilizers,
the manufacturing development and mass difficulty and complexity of would most likely lead to
production, which could improve the the evaluation. The increased atmospheric
dilemma of high costs for introducing the quantification of evaluation emissions of NH3 and the
Eco-San systems. index is to transfer the potential acidification of soils
language terms into the data and surface waters, which
information so that all would hinder the
available information can be development of the Eco-San
In recent years, a lot of Eco-San projects employed. The indices in this system; and (f) the sub-
have been implemented successfully in review have certain stantial TP in gray water
different rural and sparsely settled urban representativeness and could not reach a reasonably
low con-centration by the natural can form many different projects and experts'
treatment, which would lead to combinations of complete recommendation have certain
eutrophication of surface waters. alternatives, which could representativeness and
Therefore, more research is required to help decision makers make practicality, which can help
select suitable Eco-San systems by perfect decisions quickly and decision makers to complete
comprehensive evaluations so that these efficiently. These typical real the evaluation process easily.
obstacles can be overcome. projects can guide The review provides the
implementation of construc- methods for both developing
tion items and offer many novel Eco-San systems and
feasible and successful improving the existing Eco-
materials for further study. San systems to solve the
The recommended waste-water problem in rural
evaluation methods can help areas.
8. Conclusions planners make the pre-,
interim- and post-evaluations
of the project, identify the
The review comprehensively summaries
restriction factors and Considering the challenges
the main components of the Eco-San
contributing factors, and take or limitations existing in the
system, typical real cases in different
measures to promote the Eco-San research, the
countries, the frequently-used evaluation
Eco-San development. These recommendations for future
methods and the framework of evalu-ation
indices from references, real research may mainly
index system. The introduced components
Constructing the review on of Cleaner Production (2016),
ecological technology and http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016
sanitation: a methods, Journal .03.012

19
Anand, C.K., Apul, D.S., Desalination 157, 151e

focus on the combination of different components, 2014. Composting toilets as 158.X
methods for sustainability assessment, quantification a sustainable alternative to
of the evaluation index, and implementation of more
real Eco-San cases. The Eco-San sys-tems should be urban sanitation e a Balkema, A.J., Preisig,
recognized as a new, promising, holistic and sus- review. Waste Manage. 34
H.A., Otterpohl, R.,
tainable approach to provide safe and decent (2), 329e 343.X Lambert, F.J., 2002.
sanitation, reduce poverty, contribute to food security,
Appels, L., Baeyens, J., Indexes for the sus-
preserve our environment, and maintain the natural
tainability assessment of
basis of life. Thus, rural environmental man-agement Degreve, J., Dewil, R., wastewater treatment
will gradually change from past treatment to a future 2008. Principles and systems. Urban Water 4
resource recycling. potential of the anaerobic (2), 153e 161. X
digestion of waste-activated
sludge. Prog. Energy
Combust. Sci. 34 (6), 755e Basakcilardan-Kabakci,
Acknowledgments S., Ipekoglu, A.N., Talinli,
781.X I., 2007. Recovery of
The research was financially supported by the Major ammonia from human
Science and Technology Program for Water Pollution urine by stripping and
Aulong, S., Bouzit, M.,
Control and Treatment of China (No. 2011ZX07301- absorption. Environ. Eng.
003 and No. 2014ZX07204-005) and the National Dor€ fliger, N., 2009. Sci. 24 (5), 615e 624. X
Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51278484
Coste effectiveness Bassett, H., Bedwell,
and No. 51308528). We are deeply grateful to the
reviewers and editor for their insightful and careful analysis of water W.L., 1933. 210. Studies
of phosphates. Part I.
suggestions, which have greatly helped to improve management measures in
the quality of manuscript. two River Basins of Jordan Ammonium magnesium
and Lebanon. Water phosphate and related
compounds. Q. J. Chem.
Resour. Manage. 23 (4),
731e 753. X Soc. 854e 871. X
References
Bdour, A.N., Hamdi,
M.R., Tarawneh, Z., 2009.
Austin, L., Cloete, T., Perspectives on
Aiyuk, S., Amoako, J., Raskin, L., Van Haandel, A., Verstraete,
2008. Safety aspects of sustainable wastewater
W., 2004. Removal of carbon and nutrients from domestic handling and using fecal
treatment technologies and
material from urine- reuse options in the urban
wastewater using a low investment, integrated treatment
areas of the
concept. Water Res. 38 (13), 3031e 3042. X diversion toilets e a field
investigation. Water Mediterranean region.
Environ. Res. 80 (4), 308e Desalination 237 (1e3),

Al-Jayyousi, O., 2004. Greywater reuse: knowledge management
315.X 162e 174. X
for sustainability. Desalination 167 (15), 27e 37. X
Anagnostopoulos, K., Gratziou, M., Vavatsikos, A., 2007. Using Benetto, E., Nguyen, D.,
Avlonitis, S., Kouroumbas,
K., Vlachakis, N., 2003. Lohmann, T., Schmitt, B.,
the fuzzy analytic hierarchy process for selecting wastewater
Energy consumption and Schosseler, P., 2009. Life
X
facilities at prefecture level. Eur. Water 19, 15e 24.
membrane replacement cycle assessment of
cost for seawater RO ecological sanitation
desalination plants. system for small-scale
from-excreta-or-faecal-
wastewater treatment. Sci. Total Environ. 407 (5), 1506e Haq, G., Cambridge, H.,
sludge/4949-low- cost- 2012. Exploiting the co-
1516. X decentralized-sanitation- benefits of ecological
system-based-on-vacuum-
sanitation. Curr. Opin.
Berger, W., 2009. Technology review of composting toilets, list of collection-and-reuse- of- Environ. Sustain. 4 (4),
excreta-and-kitchen-waste-
manufacturers and commercially available composting toilets.
chinese-academy-of- 431e 435. X
http://www.susana.org/docs_ ccbk/susana_download/2-876- sciences-china. X
gtz2009-technology-review-compostingtoilets- appendix.pdf. X Harada, H., Shimizu, Y.,
Miyagoshi, Y., Matsui, S.,
Fare, R., Grosskopf, S., Matsuda, T., Nagasaka, T.,
Brissaud, F., 2007. Low technology systems for wastewater Lovell, C.K., 1994.
Production Frontiers. 2006. Predicting struvite
treatment: perspectives. Water Sci. Technol. 55 (7), 1e 9. X Cambridge University
formation for phosphorus
recovery from human
Charnes, A., Cooper, W.W., Rhodes, E., 1978. Measuring the
Press. X urine using an
efficiency of decision making units. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2 (6), equilibrium model. Water
429e 444. X Farrell, M.J., 1957. The

Sci. Technol. 54 (8), 247e
measurement of productive 255.X

efficiency. J. R. Stat. Soc.
Chen, J.C., Chang, N.B., 2007. Mining the fuzzy control rules of
Ser. A e Gen. 120 (3),
aeration in a sub- merged biofilm wastewater treatment process. Hellstrom,€ D.,
253e 290. X Johansson, E., Grennberg,
Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 20 (7), 959e 969. X K., 1999. Storage of
human urine: acidifi-
Gallego, A., Hospido, A., cation as a method to
Chen, Y., Cheng, J.J., Creamer, K.S., 2008. Inhibition of Moreira, M.T., Feijoo, G., inhibit decomposition of
2008. Environmental
anaerobic digestion process: a review. Bioresour. Technol. 99 urea. Ecol. Eng. 12, 253e
performance of wastewater
(10), 4044e 4064. X treatment plants for small 269.X
populations. Resour.
Chen, G.R., Shi, J.L., Deng, J.L., Lei, L., Xiong, Q., Ieee, 2010.
Conserv. Recycl. 52 (6),
An industrial wastewater pollution degree evaluation method Hernandez -Sancho, F.,
931e 940. X Sala-Garrido, R., 2009.
based on improved fuzzy evaluation the- ories. In: 8th World Technical efficiency and
Congress on Intelligent Control and Automation. Jun 06e 09, cost analysis in
Gaskin, J., Steiner, C.,
pp. 1662e 1667. X Harris, K., Das, K., Bibens,
wastewater treatment
processes: a DEA
B., 2008. Effect of low- approach. Desalination
Chen, J.-X., Deng, M., Gingras, S., 2011. A modified super-

temperature pyrolysis 249, 230e 234. X
conditions on biochar for
efficiency measure based on simultaneous inpute output agricultural use. Trans.
ASABE 51 (6), 2061e Hernandez-Sancho, F.,
projection in data envelopment analysis. Com- put. Oper. Res. 38
Molinos-Senante, M.,
(2), 496e 504. X 2069. X Sala-Garrido, R., 2010.
Economic valuation of
environmental benefits
Gaunt, J.L., Lehmann, J.,
China Health Statistical Yearbooks, 1999e 2012. National from wastewater treatment
2008. Energy balance and
Health and Family Plan- ning Commission of the People's emissions associated with processes: an empirical
approach for Spain. Sci.
Republic of China, Beijing (in Chinese). X biochar sequestration and
pyrolysis bioenergy
Total Environ. 408 (4),
X
€
Demirtas, E.A., Üstün, O., 2008. An integrated multiobjective production. Environ. Sci. 953e 957.
Technol. 42 (11), 4152e
decision making process for supplier selection and order
allocation. Omega 36 (1), 76e 90. X 4158. X Hernandez-Sancho, F.,

Sala-Garrido, R., 2011.
GIZ, 2012. Worldwide List
Eriksson, E., Andersen, H.R., Madsen, T.S., Ledin, A., 2009. of 324 Documented Ecosan Energy efficiency in
Projects by Various Organi- Spanish wastewater
Greywater pollution variability and loadings. Ecol. Eng. 35 (5), zations. Gesellschaft für treatment plants: a non-
Internationale radial DEA approach. Sci.
661e 669. X Zusammenarbeit (GIZ)
GmbH, Eschborn, Total Environ. 409,
Escher, B.I., Bramaz, N., Maurer, M., Richter, M., Sutter, D., von
Germany. 2693e 2699. X
Kanel,€ C., Zschokke, M., 2005. Screening test battery for http://www.susana.org/en/re
sources/library/details/1423.
pharmaceuticals in urine and wastewater. Environ. Toxicol.
Chem. 24 (3), 750e 758. X X Hou, J.W., Qu, B., Li,

X.L., Fan, B., 2012. The
utilization situation of
Guzha, E., Nhapi, I., rural biogas and its
Esrey, S.A., Gouch, J., Rapaport, D., Sawyer, R., Simpson-
Rockstrom, J., 2005. An significance on rural
H'ebert, M., Vargas, J., 1998. Ecological Sanitation. Swedish assessment of the effect of domestic wastewater
treatment: example of
human faeces and urine on
International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA),
maize production and water Hebei and Shandong
Stockholm, Sweden. X productivity. Phys. Chem. Province. China Biogas 30
Fan, B., 2011. Low-cost decentralized sanitation system based on Earth e A/ B/C 30 (1), 47e 51. X
vacuum collection and reuse of excreta and kitchen waste.
(11e16), 840e 845. X
http://forum.susana.org/forum/ categories/98-resource-recovery-
Howard, A.F., 1991. A
critical look at multiple
Ecological Sanitation,
criteria decision making techniques with reference to forestry
Nanning, PR China, 5 (8),
applications. Can. J. For. Res. 21, 1649e 1659. X Kalbar, P.P., Karmakar,
pp. 39e 45. X S., Asolekar, S.R., 2012b.
Huang, I.B., Keisler, J., Linkov, I., 2011. Multi-criteria decision Technology assessment
analysis in environmental sciences: ten years of applications and for wastewater treatment
Jha, A.K., Li, J., Nies, L.,
trends. Sci. Total Environ. 409, 3578e 3594. X Zhang, L., 2011. Research
using multiple-attribute
decision-making. Technol.
advances in dry anaerobic
Soc. 34 (4), 295e
digestion process of solid
Huber, G.P., 1974. Multi-attribute utility models: a review of
organic wastes. Afr. J. 302.X
field and field-like studies. Manage. Sci. 20, 1393e 1402. X Biotechnol. 10 (65), 14242e
14253. X Karak, T., Bhattacharyya,

Iglesias, L., Laca, A., Herrero, M., Díaz, M., 2012. A life cycle P., 2011. Human urine as a
Johnston, A., Richards, I., source of alternative
assessment comparison between centralized and decentralized 2003. Effectiveness of
different precipitated natural fertilizer in
biodiesel production from raw sun- flower oil and waste cooking agriculture: a flight of
phosphates as phosphorus fancy or an achievable
oils. J. Clean. Prod. 37, 162e 171. X sources for plants. Soil Use
reality. Resour. Con- serv.
Manage. 19 (1), 45e 49. X
IWA, 2007. IWA Specialist Group “Resources Oriented
Recycl. 55, 400e 408. X
Kalbar, P.P., Karmakar, S.,
Sanitation”. http://www. ecosan.org/. X Asolekar, S.R., 2012a.
Selection of an appropriate
Karimi, A.R., Mehrdadi,
wastewater treatment N., Hashemian, S.J.,
Jfnsson, H., 2001. Source separation of human urine-separation technology: a scenario- Bidhendi, G.R.N.,
based multiple-attribute
efficiency and effects on water emissions, crop yield, energy Moghaddam, R.T., 2011.
decision- making approach. Selection of wastewater
usage and reliability. In: First In- ternational Conference on J. Environ. Manage. 113, treatment process based on
158e 169. X the analytical hierarchy X
ecological and Production (2016),
sanitation: a methods, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.
review on Journal of 2016.03.012
technology Cleaner
uncertainty; a probabilistic review. Water Sci. Technol.
evaluation framework for
65. X
process and fuzzy analytical hierarchy process decision-making about sanitation
systems in low-income countries. Molinos-Senante, M.,
methods. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 8, 267e
J. Environ. Manage. 118, 106e Hernandez -Sancho, F., Sala-
280. X Garrido, R., Cirelli, G., 2013.
Keeney, R.L., 1975. Energy Policy and Value
114.X
Eco- nomic feasibility study for
Tradeoffs. IIASA. X intensive and extensive
Malisie, A.F., 2007. The potential wastewater treatment
of nutrient reuse from a source- considering greenhouse gases
Kocatürk, N.P., Baykal, B.B., 2012. Recovery of emissions. J. Environ. Manage.
separated domestic wastewater
plant nutrients from dilute solutions of human urine system in Indonesia e case study:
123, 98e 104. X
and preliminary investigations on pot trials. Clean e ecological sanitation pilot plant
Soil Air Water 40 (5), 538e 544. X in Surabaya. Water Sci. Technol. Montangero, A., Le, C.,
Nguyen, V.A., Vu, D.T., Pham,
56 (5), 141e 148. X T.N., Belevi, H., 2007.
Kujawa-Roeleveld, K., Fernandes, T., Wiryawan, Optimising water and

phosphorus management in the
Mao, C.L., Feng, Y.Z., Wang,
Y., Tawfik, A., Visser, M., Zeeman, G., 2005.
X.J., Ren, G.X., 2015. Review on urban environmental sanitation
Performance of UASB septic tank for treatment of
system of Hanoi, Vietnam. Sci.
research achievements of biogas
concentrated black water within DESAR concept.
from anaerobic digestion. Renew. Total Environ. 384, 55e 66. X
Water Sci. Technol. 52 (1e2), 307e 313. X Sustain. Energy Rev. 45, 540e
555. X Müller, C., 2007. Anaerobic

Lai, Y.-J., Liu, T.-Y., Hwang, C.-L., 1994. Topsis Digestion of Biodegradable
Martens, W., Bohm,€ R., 2009.
for MODM. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 76 (3), 486e Overview of the ability of Solid Waste in Low- and
Middle-income Countries.
500. X different treatment methods for
liquid and solid manure to Sandec Report. X
Langergraber, G., Muellegger, E., 2005. Ecological inactivate pathogens. Bioresour.
sanitationd a way to solve global sanitation Technol. 100 (22), 5374e

Münch, E.v., 2008. Overview
problems? Environ. Int. 31, 433e 444. X 5378. X of Anaerobic Treatment Options
for Sustainable Sanitation
Systems. Coupling Sustainable
Le Corre, K., Valsami-Jones, E., Hobbs, P., Maurer, M., Pronk, W., Larsen,
Sanitation and Groundwater
T.A., 2006. Treatment processes
Parsons, S., 2009. Phosphorus recovery from Protec- tion, pp. 14e 17. X
wastewater by struvite crystallization: a review. Crit. for source-separated urine. Water
Rev. Env. Sci. Technol. 39, 433e 477. X Res. 40, 3151e 3166. X
Niwagaba, C., Kulabako, R.N.,
Lehtoranta, S., Vilpas, R., Mattila, T.J., 2014. Metcalf, L., Eddy, H.P.,
Mugala, P., Jonsson, H., 2009a.
Tchobanoglous, G., 1972.
Comparison of carbon footprints and eutrophicationWastewater Engineering: Comparing microbial die-off in
impacts of rural on-site wastewater treatment plants separately collected faeces with
Treatment, Disposal, and Reuse.
in Finland. J. Clean. Prod. 65, 439e 446. X ash and sawdust additives. Waste
McGraw-Hill. X Manage. 29, 2214e 2219. X
Niwagaba, C., Nalubega, M.,
Li, F., Wichmann, K., Otterpohl, R., 2009. Review
Mo, W.W., Zhang, Q., 2013. Vinnerås, B., Sundberg, C.,
of the technological approaches for grey water Energy-nutrients-water nexus: Jonsson,€ H., 2009b.
treatment and reuses. Sci. Total Environ. 407, 3439e integrated resource recovery in Substrate composition and
municipal wastewater treatment
3449. X moisture in composting source-
plants. J. Environ. Manage. 127, separated human faeces and
Lienert, J., Larsen, T.A., 2009. High acceptance of
255e 267. X food waste. Environ. Technol.
urine source separation in seven European
30, 487e 497. X
countries: a review. Environ. Sci. Technol. 44, 556e
Molinos-Senante, M., Garrido-
566. X Niwagaba, C., Nalubega, M.,
Baserba, M., Reif, R., Hernandez
Lu, X.W., Li, L.Y., Lei, K., Wang, L.J., Zhai, Y.X., Vinneras, B., Sundberg, C.,
-Sancho, F., Poch, M., 2012a.
Zhai, M., 2010. Water quality assessment of Wei Jonsson, H., 2009c. Bench-
Assessment of wastewater
River, China using fuzzy synthetic evaluation. scale composting of source-
treatment plant design for small
separated human faeces for
Environ. Earth Sci. 60 (8), 1693e 1699. X commu- nities: environmental and
sanitation. Waste Manage. 29
economic aspects. Sci. Total
Magri, M.E., Philippi, L.S., Vinneras, B., 2013.
Environ. 427e 428, 11e 18. X (2), 585e 589. X
Inactivation of pathogens in feces by desiccation
and urea treatment for application in urine-diverting
dry toilets. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 79, 2156e Ortiz, M., Raluy, R.G., Serra,
L., 2007. Life cycle assessment
2163. X Hernandez-Sancho, F., Sala-
of water treatment
Garrido, R., 2012b. Economic
technologies: wastewater and
feasibility study for new
water-reuse in a small town.
Malekpour, S., Langeveld, J., Letema, S., Clemens, technological alternatives in
Desalination 204, 121e
wastewater treatment processes: a
F., van Lier, J.B., 2013. Judgment under
131. X
Africa. EcoSanRes Programme, Clean. Prod. 67, 45e 57. X
Stockholm Environment Institute,
Otterpohl, R., Braun, U., Oldenburg, M., 2004.
Stockholm, Sweden. X Tilley, E., Ulrich, L., Lüthi, C.,
Innovative technologies for decen- tralised water-, Reymond, Ph., Zurbrügg, C.,
wastewater and biowaste management in urban and Rodriguez-Garcia, G., Molinos- 2014. Compendium of
Senante, M., Hospido, A., Sanitation Systems and
peri-urban areas. Water Sci. Technol. 48, 23e
Technologies, 2nd Revised
Hernandez -Sancho, F., Moreira,
32. X M.T., Feijoo, G., 2011.
Edition. Swiss Federal Institute
of Aquatic Science and
Environmental and economic Technology (Eawag),
Panuvatvanich, A., Koottatep, T., Kone, D., 2009.
profile of six ty- pologies of Duebendorf, Switzerland.
Influence of sand layer depth and percolate
wastewater treatment plants. Water http://www.susana.org/en/resour
impounding regime on nitrogen transformation in
vertical- flow constructed wetlands treating faecal
Res. 45, 5997e 6010. X ces/library/details/454. X
sludge. Water Res. 43, 2623e 2630. X
Sala-Garrido, R., Molinos- Titirici, M.M., Thomas, A., Yu,
Senante, M., Hernandez -Sancho, S.-H., Müller, J.-O., Antonietti,
Paraknowitsch, J.P., Thomas, A., Antonietti, M.,
M., 2007. A direct synthesis of
F., 2011. Comparing the
2009. Carbon colloids prepared by hydrothermal mesoporous carbons with
efficiency of wastewater treatment
carbonization as efficient fuel for indirect carbon bicontinuous pore morphology
technologies through a DEA
fuel cells. Chem. Mater. 21, 1170e 1172. X metafrontier model. Chem. Eng.
from crude plant material by
hydrothermal carbonization.
J. 173 (3), 766e 772.X Chem. Mater. 19, 4205e
Pasqualino, J.C., Meneses, M., Abella, M., Castells,
4212. X
F., 2009. LCA as a decision support tool for the Sala-Garrido, R., Hernandez-
environmental improvement of the operation of a Sancho, F., Molinos-Senante, M.,
municipal wastewater treatment plant. Environ. Sci. 2012. Assessing the efficiency of Udert, K.M., Larsen, T.A.,
Gujer, W., 2003. Estimating the
Technol. 43, 3300e 3307. X wastewater treatment plants in an
precipitation potential in urine-
uncertain context: a DEA with
collecting systems. Water Res.
tolerances approach. Environ. Sci.
Pastor, J.T., Aparicio, J., 2010. The relevance of
Policy 18, 34e 44. X 37, 2667e 2677. X
DEA benchmarking information and the Least- Udert, K., Larsen, T., Gujer, W.,
Distance Measure. Comment Math. Comput. 2006. Fate of major compounds
Modell. 52, 397e 399. X Schouten, M., Mathenge, R.,
2010. Communal sanitation
in source-separated urine.
Pathak, B., 1999. Sanitation is the key to healthy Water Sci. Technol. 54, 413e
alternatives for slums: a case
cities e a profile of Sulabh Inter- national. Environ. study of Kibera, Kenya. Phys. 420.X
Urban. 11, 221e 230. X Chem. Earth e A/B/C 35, 815e Vaidya, O.S., Kumar, S., 2006.
822. X Analytic hierarchy process: an
overview of applications. Eur.
Paulo, P.L., Azevedo, C., Begosso, L., Galbiati, Seiford, L.M., 1996. Data
envelopment analysis: the J. Oper. Res. 169, 1e 29. X
A.F., Boncz, M.A., 2013. Natural systems treating
evolution of the state of the art Van Engelen, D., Seidelin, C.,
greywater and blackwater on-site: integrating
Van der Veeren, R., Barton,
treatment, reuse and landscaping. Ecol. Eng. 50 (4), (1978e 1995). J. Prod. Anal. 7,
95e 100. X 99e 137. X D.N., Queb, K., 2008. Cost-

effectiveness analysis for the
implementation of the EU Water
Seppal€a,€ J., Basson, L., Framework Directive. Water

Prüss, A., Kay, D., Fewtrell, L., Bartram, J., 2002.
Estimating the burden of disease from water,

Norris, G.A., 2001. Decision Policy 10 (3), 207e 220. X
analysis frameworks for life-cycle
sanitation, and hygiene at a global level. Environ.
impact assessment. J. Ind. Ecol. 5,
Health Perspect. 110, 537e 542. X 45e 68. X Vinneras, B., 2007. Comparison
of composting, storage and urea
treatment for sanitising of
Rauch, T., Drewes, J.E., 2005. Quantifying
Steinbeiss, S., Gleixner, G., faecal matter and manure.
biological organic carbon removal in groundwater Antonietti, M., 2009. Effect of Bioresour. Technol. 98, 3317e
recharge systems. J. Environ. Eng. 131, 909e biochar amendment on soil
carbon balance and soil microbial
3321. X
923. X activity. Soil Biol. Biochem. 41, von Munch, E., Mayumbelo,
Reinvent the Toilet Challenge: China, 2013. Gates-
1301e 1310. X K.M.K., 2007. Methodology to
foundation. http://www. gatesfoundation.org/. X compare costs of sanitation
Sueyoshi, T., Goto, M., 2011.
options for low-income peri-
DEA approach for unified
urban areas in Lusaka, Zambia.
Remy, C., 2010. Life Cycle Assessment of
Conventional and Source-separation Sys-tems for efficiency measurement:
assessment of Japanese fossil fuel
Water SA 33, 593e 602. X
Urban Wastewater Management (Ph.D. thesis).
Department of Water Quality Control, Technische power generation. Energy Econ.
Universit€at Berlin, Berlin, Germany. http://opus. 33, 292e 303. X Vymazal, J., 2005. Horizontal
kobv.de/tuberlin/volltexte/2010/2543/pdf/remy_chris sub-surface flow and hybrid
tian.pdf. X Thibodeau, C., Monette, F.,
constructed wetlands systems
for wastewater treatment. Ecol.
Bulle, C., Glaus, M., 2014.
Ridderstolpe, P., 2007. Mulch Filter and Resorption Comparison of black water
Eng. 25, 478e 490. X
source-separation and
Trench for Onsite Greywater Management. Report conventional sanitation systems
for a Demo Facility Built in Kimberley, South Wang, X., Liu, J., Ren, N.-Q.,
using life cycle assessment. J.
project examples for sustainable
Duan, Z., 2012. Environmental profile of typical Technol. 48, 103e 110. X
anaerobic/anoxic/oxic wastewater treatment systems wastewater and excreta
management. Desalination 248, Wilsenach, J.A., Schuurbiers,
meeting increasingly stringent treatment standards C.A., van Loosdrecht, M.C.,
392e 401. X
from a life cycle perspective. Bioresour. Technol. 2007. Phosphate and po-
tassium recovery from source
126, 31e 40. X separated urine through struvite
Wilsenach, J., Van Loosdrecht,
M., 2003. Impact of separate urine precipitation. Water Res. 41,
Werner, C., Panesar, A., Rud, S.B., Olt, C.U., 2009. collection on wastewater 458e 466. X
treatment systems. Water Sci.
Ecological sanitation: principles, technologies and
Constructing review on Journal of Cleaner Production (2016),
the ecological technology http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016
sanitation: a and methods, .03.012

21
select methods. Eur. J. S.X., Huang, Z., 2011. The

performance evaluation of
Oper. Res.107, 507e
Winblad, U., 2004. Development of eco-san systems. In: Ecosan- regional R& D
529. X investments in China: an
Closing the Loop in Wastewater Management and Sanitation,
application of DEA based
Zhang, D., Gersberg,
Proceedings of International Sym- posium, Sweden, pp. 58e R.M., Keat, T.S., 2009. on the first official China
62. X Constructed wetlands in economic census data.
China. Ecol. Eng. 35, Omega 39, 447e 455. X
Winblad, U., Simpson-Hebert, M., Calvert, P., Morgen, P.,
1367e 1378. X
Zhou, P., Ang, B., Poh,
Rosemarin, A., Sawyer, R., Xiao, J., 2004. Ecological Sanitationd
K., 2006. Decision
Zhang, T., Xu, D., He, F.,
Revised and Enlarged Edition. Stockholm Environment analysis in energy and
Zhang, Y., Wu, Z., 2012.
Institute. X Application of constructed
environmental modeling:
an update. Energy 31,
wetland for water pollution
control in China during 2604e 2622. X
Winker, M., Vinnerås, B., Muskolus, A., Arnold, U., Clemens, J.,
1990e 2010. Ecol. Eng. Zhou, P., Poh, K.L., Ang,
2009. Fertiliser products from new sanitation systems: their
47, 189e 197. X B.W., 2007. A non-radial
DEA approach to
potential values and risks. Bio- resour. Technol. 100, 4090e
measuring environmental
4096. X Zhao, X., Shen, Z., performance. Eur. J. Oper.
Yuan, Z., Jiang, W., Bi, J., 2010. Cost-effectiveness of two Xiong, M., Qi, J., 2011. Res. 178, 1e 9. X
Key uncertainty sources
operational models at industrial wastewater treatment plants in Zhou, C.B., Liu, J.R.,
analysis of water quality
Wang, R.S., Yang, W.R.,
China: a case study in Shengze town, Suzhou City. J. Environ. model using the first order Jin, J.S., 2010. Ecological-
error method. Int. J.
Manage. 91, 2038e 2044. X economic assessment of
Environ. Sci. Technol. 8,
ecological sanitation
137e 148. X development in the cities
Zanakis, S.H., Solomon, A., Wishart, N., Dublish, S., 1998. of Chinese Loess Plateau.
Multi-attribute decision making: a simulation comparison of Ecol. Complex. 7 (2),
Zhong, W., Yuan, W., Li,
162e 169. X

ecological sanitation: a review on
technology and methods, Journal of
Cleaner Production (2016),
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2
016.03.012

Paper 1-Hu2016

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Paper 1-Hu2016

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e 21 X

Contents lists available at ScienceDirectX

Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www . elsevier . com/locate/jcleproX

Constructing the ecological sanitation: a review on technology and methods

Corresponding author. Tel./fax: þ86 10 62849142. E-mail

Please cite this article in press

M. Hu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e21

2.6. Treatment of black and brown water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

2.7. Treatment of gray water . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.1. Life cycle assessment (LCA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.3. Economic evaluation method (EEM) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

4.4. Data envelopment analysis (DEA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Langergraber and Muellegger,

M. Hu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e21

treatment of feces from urine- of nutrients and project

pipes into the ground, sensitivity

M. Hu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e21

The cesspit is appropriate for rural combination necessitate some

2.4.1. Separation and storage of urine

Separation of human urine at source

M. Hu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e21

the solid phase not only provide better

M. Hu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e21

Vacuum sewerage system

Waste treatment: natural treatment þ

Fig. 6. The Resource

press as: Constructi sanitation: a review on Production (2016),

Fig. 7. Yearly numbers of

M. Hu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e21

M. Hu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e21

(CBA) and the cost- indifferent regarding

process, which can attain reliable evaluation

M. Hu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e21

Fig. 8. The components of

M. Hu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e21

Anand, C.K., Apul, D.S., Desalination 157, 151e

Environ. Res. 80 (4), 308e Desalination 237 (1e3),

429e 444. X Farrell, M.J., 1957. The

measurement of productive 255.X

Chen, J.-X., Deng, M., Gingras, S., 2011. A modified super-

allocation. Omega 36 (1), 76e 90. X 4158. X Hernandez-Sancho, F.,

Chem. 24 (3), 750e 758. X X Hou, J.W., Qu, B., Li,

14253. X Karak, T., Bhattacharyya,

Kujawa-Roeleveld, K., Fernandes, T., Wiryawan, Optimising water and

555. X Müller, C., 2007. Anaerobic

sanitationd a way to solve global sanitation Technol. 100 (22), 5374e

95e 100. X 99e 137. X D.N., Queb, K., 2008. Cost-

Seppal€a,€ J., Basson, L., Framework Directive. Water

Estimating the burden of disease from water,

M. Hu et al. / Journal of Cleaner Production xxx (2016) 1e21

select methods. Eur. J. S.X., Huang, Z., 2011. The

Please cite this article in press as:

You might also like