Cited by 45Wastewater Treatment and ReuseFecal contamination and water qualityLandfill Environmental Impact Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Modelling the filling rate of pit latrines

Open access
Brouckaert, CJ, Foxon, KM, Wood, K·2013·Water SA

Abstract

Excreta (faeces and urine) that are deposited into a pit latrine are subject to biodegradation, which substantially reduces the volume that remains. On the other hand, other matter that is not biodegradable usually finds itsway into pit latrines. The net filling rate is thus dependent on both the rate of addition of material and its composition. A simple material balance model is presented which represents the faecal sludge as a mixture of biodegradable organic material, un-biodegradable organic material and inorganic material. Measurements made on 2 pits in eThekwini, South Africa, were used to determine parameters for the model. Model predictions were then compared with data from 15 other pits in the same area and filling rate data from previous South African studies, which exhibit a 20th to 80th percentile range of 200 to 453 ℓ∙pit−1∙yr−1. These comparisons indicated that the pits studied exhibited relatively low filling rates resulting from orderly disposal practices. The average composition of the pit (COD, biodegradable material and inorganic fraction) changes with age, which will impact on any subsequent sludge treatment process. Pit filling rates are greatly affected by the disposal of solid waste in addition to the faecal material. For the pits studied, the model predicts that the filling time could have been extended from 15 years to over 25 years if all solid waste had been excluded from the pit.Keywords: Pit latrine, filling rate, biodegradation, solid waste disposal

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4314/wsa.v39i4.15

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 10 · Cited by 45

Metadata

Authors
Brouckaert, C., Foxon, K., & Wood, K.
Affiliations
University of KwaZulu-Natal (ZA)
Venue
Water SA
Published
2013-07-10
Volume
39
Issue
4
ISSN
0378-4738 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1964782098
Cited by
45
References
10
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
FWCI
5.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
Water SA (publishedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
  • Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
  • London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
  • Water Research Commission
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Wastewater Treatment and Reuse
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Fecal contamination and water quality
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Waste Management and Disposal › Landfill Environmental Impact Studies
Keywords
pit latrines, fecal sludge, biodegradation, mass balance model, solid waste disposal, sludge composition, chemical oxygen demand, sludge treatment, eThekwini

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review