Three Platforms for Sustainable Environmental Sanitation
Sarwoko Mangkoedihardjo *
1
Department of Environmental Engineering,
Sepuluh Nopember Institute of Technology (ITS),
Surabaya,
Indonesia
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12944/CWE.9.2.05
This paper proposed three platforms for sustainable environmental sanitation to strengthen three pillars of sustainable development. Understanding of the sanitation scope was identified. Problem on polluted environment was added and accompanied by the products as environmental resources.Environmental resources, repression and remediation were proposed for the task of sustainable environmental sanitation in the future.
Copy the following to cite this article:
Mangkoedihardjo S. Three Platforms for Sustainable Environmental Sanitation. Curr World Environ 2014;9 (2) DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.12944/CWE.9.2.05
Copy the following to cite this URL:
Mangkoedihardjo S. Three Platforms for Sustainable Environmental Sanitation. Curr World Environ 2014;9(2). Available from: http://www.cwejournal.org/?p=6155
Download article (pdf) Citation Manager Publish History
Select type of program for download
Endnote EndNote format (Mac & Win) | |
Reference Manager Ris format (Win only) | |
Procite Ris format (Win only) | |
Medlars Format | |
RefWorks Format RefWorks format (Mac & Win) | |
BibTex Format BibTex format (Mac & Win) |
Article Publishing History
Received: | 2014-05-17 |
---|---|
Accepted: | 2014-06-05 |
Introduction
Understanding of sanitation used by many references had been referring to the definition of sanitation by WHO.1,2 Next was the vision of ecological sanitation, shortly ECOSAN3,4 had extended the term sanitation with pollution prevention. In the context of pollution prevention, the important message was change the mindset of "throw away the waste as soon as possible" to "as much as possible utilizing the waste". In line with ECOSAN was sustainable sanitation, shortly SUSAN5 with the addition of sustainability criteria, namely health and hygiene, environment and natural resources, technology and operations, financial and economic issues, socio-cultural and institutional aspects. It also included the provision of drinking water and sanitation, biodiversity and ecosystem management, energy, agricultural productivity and health.6 Because sanitation was meant to sanitize the environment,3 the environmental sanitation term used by some countries in all continents,7-9 and also in this paper.
Most definitions of environmental sanitation were based on the measures or services and on its results. Little was known the definition of environmental sanitation in scientific perspective. However, the following definition could represent it:”Environmental sanitation means the art and science of applying sanitary, biological and physical science principles and knowledge to improve and control the environment and factors therein for the protection of the health and welfare of the public.”.7 Scientific definition was essential to identify the necessity of sciences and technologies, which supported the implementation of sanitation services and for scientific development as well as formal education curriculum.
Based on the definition provided for environmental sanitation, this paper proposed a concern regarding the environmental damage caused by natural events, and formulated environmental sanitation platforms to perform problem solving as well as scientific research in the future.
Special concern
Environmental sanitation as services had been devoted to the health of all human and environmental health simultaneously. Services also included process, which involved other environmental components, i.e. biological components, which consisted of animals and plants; physico-chemical components that covered air, waterand soil. In addition, the service alsoincludedtheprevention ofenvironmental damage.
It had been well known that environmental damage could occur due to the efficiency of the process never reaches 100%, resulted in the accumulation of persistent materials, which to some extent could be damaging to the environment. Moreover, it was important to note the environmental damage caused by natural processes, such as catastrophic hurricanes, which brought about physical damage in one place and accumulating contaminants on other places. Natural disasters certainly were difficult to be predicted and might be unavoidable, but the important thing was the efforts to minimize the negative impact of disasters. Facing to the post disaster conditions, the impacted environment had to be rehabilitated.
However, in thebestof myknowledgeso far, concerning theremediation, restoration, or rehabilitation ofthe pollutedenvironmenthad notexplicitlyexpressedin the coverage ofenvironmental sanitation. The addition ofsuch service wastocreate anenvironmental sanitationcapable ofstrengthening thethree sustainable development pillars: social-economic-environment and goals.
Three platforms
In addition to SUSAN criteria, environmental sanitation providedthe followingthreeplatforms for sustainability, i.e. Environmental Resources, Environmental Repression, Environmental Remediation, shortly 3ER.
Environmental Resources
In this platform, the environmental resources were air, water and land given naturally, with all the content of the physical materials, chemical substances and living beings.With the mindset that wastes were valuable, thus wastewater and solid waste were included in environmental resources. Also, with the obligation to restore the damaged environment, then the one was considered to be environmental resources.
Environmental Repression
What was meant by the environment repression was pollution prevention efforts. Pollution prevention was important for the purpose of safeguarding environmental resources so that it could continue to be used as a source of life. On this platform involved treatment or process for resources and all the waste materials for reuse.
Environmental Remediation
As described in the special concern, environmental remediation referred to the polluted/damaged endironment. One should not let the damaged environment remained on the conditions. Therefore, restoration of the environment needed to be done by any one or a combination of recovery methods.
The following described each of the platforms in connection to sustainable environmental sanitation. The list was limited to technical aspect in general, because millions of detailed engineering had been available. Moreover, in implemention stage, all SUSAN criteria should be applied.
Environmental resources |
Environmental repression |
Environmental remediation |
Products as |
Physico-chemicals components |
|
|
|
Air Treatment |
|
- |
Clean air |
Rain water, surfacewaters, groundwater as given naturally |
Treatment |
- |
Clean water |
Wastewater, solid wastes |
Treatment |
- |
Treated wastewater for irrigation, compost for soil improvement etc. as environmental resources. |
Damaged environments, such as pollutedair, waters,soil desertificatio10,11 solid waste post closure |
- |
Treatment |
The environmental |
Biologigal components |
|
|
|
Plant Phytotechnological proceses12-16 |
|
- |
Materials for producing membrane17 Renewable energies such as bioethanol, biogas, etc. Coagulant, antimicrobial agent18 Greenspace Suitable plant for treatment Pathogenic organisms Treatment |
|
|
- |
Closing pathways of disease transmission to prevent resources loss. |
Animal manures Treatment |
|
- |
Compost, fertilizer, biogas. |
Deforestation intentionally such as for agriculture and unintentionally such |
- |
Forest management,19 Phytotechnological processes12-16 To be environmental resources. |
|
Conclusion
The damaged of environment required special attention, and thus should be included in environmental sanitation services. Both environmental repression and environmental remediation efforts were direct benefit for environmental resources to be sustainable. These were identified as sustainable environmental sanitation.
References
2. http://www.who.int/topics/sanitation/en/, accessed on 15 May 2014.
3. Esrey S et al. Ecological sanitation. Sida, Stockholm, 1998.
4. Claudia Früh, 2003. Ecological Sanitation – An Introductionto the Philippines. General Paperprepared within the DILG-GTZ Water Program towards anIntegrated Water Resources Management for the Philippines.
5. SuSanA. Towards more sustainable sanitation solutions. Version 1.2 (February 2008).
6. Annan, KA. 2002. Toward A Sustainable Future. Environment, 44 (7): 10-15. ProQuest, USC, Los Angeles, 8 May 2004. Available at http://www.proquest.com
7. http://www.oregonlaws.org/glossary/ definition/environmental_sanitation, accessed on 16 May 2014
8. Government of Ghana. Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development. Environmental Sanitation Policy (Revised 2010).
9. Plan. 2004. Plan’s approach to water and environmental sanitation. Working paper series. Plan Ltd UK.
10. UNCCD (United Nations Convention toCombat Desertification), 2002a. Synthesis andpreliminary analysis of information contained inreports submitted by northern Mediterranean,central and eastern European and other affectedcountry Parties. ICCD/ CRIC(1)/5/Add.1.Report presented by the UNCCD secretariatat the first session of the Committee for theReview of the Implementation on theConvention (CRIC1, Rome, November).http://www.unccd.int/cop/ officialdocs/cric1/pdf/5add1eng.pdf.
11. UNCCD (United Nations Convention toCombat Desertification), 2002b. Synthesis andpreliminary analysis of information contained inreports submitted by affected Asian countryParties. ICCD/CRIC(1)/3/Add.1. Reportpresented by the UNCCD secretariat at thefirst session of the Committee for the Reviewof the Implementation on the Convention(CRIC1, Rome, November). http:// www.unccd.int/php/document.php?ref=ICCD/ CRIC(1)/3/Add.1.
12. ITRC-Interstate Technology Regulatory Council, 2001. Technical and Regulatory Guidance Document, Phytotechnology. Available at http://www.itrcweb.org
13. UNEP-United Nation Environmental Program, 2004. Integrated Watershed Management Ecohydrology&Phytotechnology — Manual – Available at http://www.unep.or.jp
14. USEPA-United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2000. Introduction to Phytoremediation. EPA/600/R-99/107. Available at http://www.epa.gov/clariton/ clhtml/pubtitle.html
15. USEPA-United States Environmental Protection Agency, 2001. Ground Water Issue. Phytoremediation of Contaminated Soil and Ground Water at Hazardous Waste Sites. EPA/540/S-01/500, February 2001.
16. USEPA-United States Environmental Protection Agency. 1999. Phytoremediation Resource Guide. EPA/542/B-99/003. Available at http://www.epa.gov/tio.
17. Radiman, C. L., Widyaningsih, S., &Sugesty, S., 2008. New applications of kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) as microfiltration membranes. Journal of Membrane Science, 315(1-2), 141- 146.
18. Nwaiwu N.E., Zalkiful M.A. and Raufu I.A., 2012. Seeking an Alternative Antibacterial and Coagulation Agent forHousehold Water Treatment. Journal of Applied Phytotechnology in EnvironmentalSanitation, 1 (1): 1-9.
19. http://environment.nationalgeographic.com/ environment/global-warming/deforestationoverview/, accessed on 17 May 2014.