HomeAboutActivitiesMapsPhotosPublicationsNews
 
Home >> Sick Water - The Central Role of Wastewater Manageme ... >> Centralized or decentralized? - Uganda. A study case
File type Download Size Language
.eps .eps Download 689 kb -
.jpg .jpg Download 327 kb -
Uploaded on Tuesday 21 Feb 2012 by GRID-Arendal

Centralized or decentralized? - Uganda. A study case

Year: 2010 Author: UNEP/GRID-Arendal
Description:
Looking at the costs and benefits, centralized systems may not be the answer in terms of best result for the investment. The chart on the left shows that the financial NPV does not change with increasing population size for centralized sewage and wastewater connection, however the economic NPV (which includes benefits to health and the environment) shows a positive trend with increas- ing populations. Centralized systems therefore generate a greater benefit as population increases, but show a significant loss with small community size. The chart on the right shows the situation where decentralized latrines have been installed, and where the excreta is reused for food production, and hence the overall benefits returned will depend on the current market price for food. With a good market, the reuse benefits of low-cost latrines can be realized by the households into a positive NPV, however those requiring greater investment, do not offer a return on the investment (WSP, 2006).
Views: 341     Downloads: 159     Rating: 3
Water for food
World fresh water supply
World population living in river basins with severe water stress
Sanitation sewage and treatment in big cities - Two study cases
Ratio of wastewater treatment
Child mortality rates
Population living in river basins where freshwater withdrawal exceeds 40 per cent of renewable resources
Water withdrawal and use