Sanitation + phase 1 learnings

By Blue Planet Network Posted on Wed 19 Dec 2007, over 18 years ago

The Phase I of this project was completed with partial success. Can you expand on any adaptation to the learnings from the previous project?

In addition to the cow-dung issue, is anything being done about sanitation? Other than relocating away from water source?

Do people have adequate access?
Or is it just public space? If so, can we introduce ecosan or other sanitation?

Sanitation + phase 1 learnings

By Project Well Posted on Sat 22 Dec 2007, over 18 years ago

Construction of all the 20 dugwells were completed by June 2007. By partial success it means that people (600) have not started drinking water. By now a little more than 300 are using the well water and the remaining have not started due to (1) report of the bacteria tests are still pending and (2) there are few who do not like the taste of the water that has a slight organic or earthy smell and mainly the chlorine odor. Effort is and will be carried on to educate the people on the benefits of the dugwell water. It is very important that the members of the panchayet also cooperate because the government of West Bengal still does not support dugwells because of the issue of susceptibility of disease caused by bacteria overlooking the fact about chlorination altogether and discussion in the published articles and at conferences. In Gaighata there was enough support from the Block Development Office and the Public Health Officer is very much involved in the field who also attends some village meetings and health meetings whenever possible. We just need to wait and observe the response of the people in Gaighata PWSET2 area for which the data will be tracked monthly for one year followed by quarterly in the following years until the dugwells become sustainabe.

Technical issue and learnings: The depth of dugwells were tried to be increase by using longer pipes still could be increased due to severe sand boiling at around 14 feet in some areas and the maximum depth obtained this year is 23.5 feet instead of 30 feet that would have been ideal to get water through out the year. The average depth is 20 feet. So in the coming year at every proposed site a very small diameter hole will be bore prior to the construction to get the composition and depth of different layers of sediments that hopefully will also detect any historical cowdung pit. The cost of such boring will be less than US$20. Any suggestions from experts on deepening holes of 3 feet diameter considering the geology of Gaighata will be highly appreciated.

Sanitation: Most of the villagers in Gaighata (PWSET2 area) have pit latrines introduced by Dr. Mondol, the PH officer of BDO. For which I was informed that Dr. Mondol received some sort of acknowledgement for which he had to travel to New Delhi. I have seen few such latrines in November. Don’t have the exact data. But in the PWSET1 area including Habra may need a few. If BPR is interested in introducing sanitation would it be through PW-Aqua Welfare Society or other organization? PW-AWS has only arsenic safe water in their agenda of by-laws that will need to be revised if sanitation is introduced. Need to discuss.

government involvement

By A Single Drop Posted on Wed 19 Dec 2007, over 18 years ago

How do you include the local government? I see that the field workers do most of the campaigning. What is the ideal role that the local government would play?

government involvement

By Project Well Posted on Sat 22 Dec 2007, over 18 years ago

This is a tough question. The village representative called ‘panchayat’ are most powerful in determining what to be done in the village and where including the awareness programs, sites for water supply, roads too for their personal gain. Atleast with the selection of dugwell site we follow science that enabled us to rule out sites proposed by them in the past. But currently 8 historical dugwells have been either closed or will be closed due to installation of deep tubewell right next to dugwells and also there are plans for pipelines to traverse in those areas. It is excellent that pipelines are going where dugwells are because dugwells are considered as short term method as long as the pipelines are maintained well. Recently survey has been carried out in areas where pipelines have already been installed and people are using the pipeline water but they do not want the dugwell to be sealed (filled-in and closed) because they do not trust the quality of the pipeline water that may get turbid in the next monsoon or supply may fail due to power failure during severe storms. Such dugwells will be closed after one year of observation so that the materials can be re-used at other spots.

The government office at the district level is BDO (block development office) and at Gaighata they were very cooperative because their office did not receive any plan on pipeline distribution yet. They have allowed free access of the NGO, Aqua Welfare Society, to the villages and the medical doctor of BDO accompanied them at several village meetings. So far there was no protests in the villages except in one area that was encoutered during site selection. The site was cancelled and relocated.

For one year two field workers from the arsenic affected villages where dugwells are installed are engaged to help in selection of sites, forming CBGs (community based groups) at every dugwell and training them to administer chlorine and other wear and tear. The work of the field workers also include creating registers of the consumers and record the number of users and their complaints, if any, and also the quality of water monthly. The data is used for tracking to solve existing or any new problems that may be social, technical or even financial for maintenance. It is the political problem that is hard to solve. Any suggestions will be highly appreciated. We have tried many ways but failed in the PWSET1 area.

Role of the govt: In Gaighata at the preliminary meeting it has been discussed that after one year of paying the service of the 2 field workers by PW-AWS the BDO would pay. (Ideally the payment of these 2 field workers are supposed to come from the maintenance fund collected from the CBGs that is still in theory and discussed in the article on dugwell that was published in 2003. Practically it will take several more years, until they see the benefit of arsenic safe, chlorinated water). We still need to see what happens. If the BDO does recruit the existing field workers to oversee the dugwells it would be great and data tracking by Project Well through AWS will still be carried on by getting data from the recruits and the data will be cross checked from time to time.
Thank you very much for all the questions and I will be happy to send reports and articles, if they are not available from the website, upon request.

I may have inserted the wrong data in Number of people 'getting' safe drinking water.

By Project Well Posted on Mon 24 Dec 2007, over 18 years ago

Hi Rajesh,
1) In the section where "Number of people getting safe drinking water" the current number of people who are already 'getting' (present continuous tense) water from dugwells has been inserted. And I think, after going through the old proposals, it should be the number of people who will get water from the next year's water supply. If that is so, then the number would be 600 instead of 1491. I think this number is crucial to calculate the cost per head.
2) What is the cost for sanitation per head, USD30 as in case of water?
Thank you
Meera

I may have inserted the wrong data in Number of people 'getting' safe drinking water.

By Peer Water Exchange Posted on Mon 24 Dec 2007, over 18 years ago

Thanks for the correction.

It should be 600.
Also, when we say children getting safe drinking water, it refers to school projects, not to children included in the above number (no double counting).

2) Don't have a number yet, varies more wildly than the cost per person of drinking water. We have much less data (BPR). Also revenue models for sanitation are tough, making long-term sustainability an issue.

I may have inserted the wrong data in Number of people 'getting' safe drinking water.

By Project Well Posted on Wed 26 Dec 2007, over 18 years ago

Thanks for clarification. The number of children need to be taken off too since there is no school project.