environmental survey in iraq 2010 (water - sanitation...
Post on 09-Aug-2018
220 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Environmental Survey in Iraq 2010
(water - sanitation - municipal services)
Detailed Report
Ministry of Planning / Central Organization for Statistics and Information Technology (COSIT)
Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works
Ministry of Environment
Baghdad Municipality
Ministry of Planning / Statistics Office / Kurdistan Region
Ministry of Municipalities / Kurdistan Region
Ministry of Environment / Kurdistan Region
In cooperation with UNICEF
June 2011
Bism Allah Ar-Rahman Ar-Raheem
"and all things We have enumerated in a clear
register"
Ya-Sin:12
i
Acknowledgment
The Ministry of Planning/Central Organization for Statistics and Information
Technology (COSIT) extends its gratitude to UNICEF/Iraq Office, Ministry of
Municipalities and Public Works, Ministry of Environment, Ministry of Higher
Education and Scientific Research, Baghdad Municipality and their counterparts in
Kurdistan Region.
It praises the efforts exerted during the preparation, implementation and report
publication stages by the members of the Higher Committee, Technical Committee,
Administrative and Financial Committee, central and local supervisors as well as
fieldwork teams from COSIT staff, Baghdad Municipality, the Ministry of
Municipalities and Public Works in Baghdad and in the governorates and their
counterparts in Kurdistan Region.
It extends thanks to all exerted efforts by participating experts in the Survey from
UNICEF, Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works, Ministry of Environment,
Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, Baghdad Municipality and
their counterparts in Kurdistan Region for their active participation in the preparation,
creation and design stages of the questionnaire and giving lectures.
It also extends it thanks to all employees in municipal administration, water and
sanitation administrations in Baghdad and the governorates for their cooperation in
providing accurate information leading to the success of the environmental survey.
ii
Participating Technical and Administrative Teams in Survey Implementation
The Higher Committee
Dr. Huda Muhsein Al-Allaq - General Secretary - Head of COSIT
Serwan Mohammad Muhyee Ed-deen - Head of Statistics Office Kurdistan
Region
Huda Hadawi Mohammad - Manager of Environmental Statistics - COSIT
Sa'di Abdul Sattar - Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works
Mohammad Salah Hashim - Baghdad Municipality
Sabah Mikha Omran - Ministry of Environment
Kawther Abbas Abdullah - Statistics Office Kurdistan Region
Mohammad Saber - Statistics Office Kurdistan Region
Samir Abdul Samad - Statistics Office Kurdistan Region
Laheeb Jaleel Aboud - COSIT
Technical Committee
Thana Abbas Salman - General Manager of Technical Affairs - COSIT
Huda Hadawi Mohammad - Manager of Environmental Statistics - COSIT
Dr. Jathwa Abdul Karim - Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific
Research
Sami Ali Abu Kateef - COSIT
Nada Hadi Zayer - COSIT
Samir Mohammad Sa'di - Statistics Office Kurdistan Region
Iyad Ahmad Mohammad - Irbil Statistics Directorate
Zozak Kamal Mohammad - Sulaimaniya Statistics Directorate
Kathim Ibraheem Abdul Rahman - Dahuk Statistics Directorate
Bushra Abdul Jawad - COSIT
Samia Nassir Hussein - Ministry of Environment
Taghreed Sadeq Ali - Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works
Rheem Muhsein Ismail - Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works
Osama Lateef Mohammad - Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works
Julnar Abdul Saheb - Baghdad Municipality
Saif Kareem abdul Hussein - Baghdad Municipality
Ali Mahmoud Fadel - Baghdad Municipality
Shaima Adnan Abdul Aziz - COSIT
iii
Administrative and Financial Committee
Nisreen Sami Suwadi - General Manager of Administrative and Financial
Affairs - COSIT
Huda Hadawi Mohammad - Manager of Environmental Statistics - COSIT
Hadeel Nauman Aziz - COSIT
Sabah Nouri - COSIT
Mazin Abdul Hassan - COSIT
Suad Hassan Fadel - COSIT
Ali Kathem - COSIT
Nawal Jasim Mohammad - COSIT
Report Preparation Team
Dr. Huda Muhsein Al-Allaq - General Secretary - Head of COSIT
Huda Hadawi Mohammad - Manager of Environmental Statistics - COSIT
Iyad Jawad Hassan - Analysis Unit Manager - COSIT
Sami Ali Abu Kateef - COSIT
Nada Hadi Zayer - COSIT
Laheeb Jaleel Aboud - COSIT
Shaima Adnan Abdul Aziz - COSIT
UNICEF Coordinators
Dr. Ali Al-Khateeb - Head of Water, Sanitation and Environmental Sanitation
Unite/acting
Eng. Sabbar Aliwi - Senior Assistant Programme Manager
Central Supervisors
Huda Hadawi Mohammad - Manager of Environmental Statistics - COSIT
Hutham Mohammad Hasim - HR Manager - COSIT
Abdullah Hassan Mathi - Manager of Training and Statistical Research Center
- COSIT
Suhaila Najim Mohammad - COSIT
Sami Ali Abu Kateef - COSIT
Laheeb Jaleel Aboud - COSIT
Nada Hadi Zayer - COSIT
Shaima Adnan Abdul Aziz - COSIT
Shaima Fakher Ali - COSIT
iv
Shaima Fareed Lazim - COSIT
Hadeel Nauman Aziz - COSIT
Rami Yousif Yacoub - COSIT
Audi Zaidan Hassan - COSIT
Adnan Qusai Abdul Hussein - COSIT
Monadel Khalil Ismail - COSIT
Osama Lafeef Mohammad - Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works
Zozak Kamal Mohammad - Sulaimaniya Statistics Directorate
Iyad Ahmad Mohammad - Irbil Statistics Directorate
Kathim Ibraheem Abdul Rahman - Dahuk Statistics Directorate
Local Supervisors
Nowfal Ismail Talab - Nineveh
Adna Rida Baba Adel - Kirkuk
Jasim Sa'id Hussein - Diala
Ala' Ad-Deen Mahmoud - Al-Anbar
Abdul Kareem Jasim - Baghdad
Sa'di Abdul Sattar - Baghdad municipalities
Abdul Amir Doboh Mohammad - Babil
Adeeb Mohammad Ali - Kerbala
Jasim Obeid Salman - Waset
Abdul Mortah Khair Allah - Salahuddin
Fayq Aziz Majeed - Al-Najaf
Fadel Abul Hur Abid - Qadisiya
Mani' Bahlose Atiya - Al-Muthana
Abbas Dawoud Shati - Thi-Qar
Khalaf Ali Abniya - Missan
Jasib Hassan Mhouder - Basrah
Jiyafan Abdul Razzak - Dahuk
Hussein Kamil - Irbil
Mahmoud Othman - Sulaimaniya
v
Fieldwork Teams in Governorates
Nineveh
Fahid Suleiman Ahmad -
Statistics
Iyad Tariq Yousif - Statistics
Abdullah Ali Aziz -
Municipalities
Omar Adnan Yahya -
Municipalities
Kirkuk
Diryah abdul Jalil Mohammad
- Statistics
Nermien Aba Baker -
Municipalities
Diala
Rasha rasheed Hussein -
Statistics
Adel Hassan Azim - Statistics
Mohammad Ibrahim Farman -
Municipalities
Hassan Khalil Ismail -
Municipalities
Al-Anbar
Zakariya Yahya Najeeb -
Statistics
Ayoub Sahab Matar - Statistics
Ra'ed Ali Mikhlif -
Municipalities
Akram Nouri Nourman -
Municipalities
Baghdad
Qasim Mohammad Sahib -
Statistics
Khalid Waleed - Statistics
Dawoud Salman Zeidan -
Satatistics
Mohammad Ali Abdul Wahid -
Municipalities
Ali Kathem Hilal -
Municipalities
Ali Mahmoud Fadel -
Municipalities
Babil
Hamid Gloub Mohammad -
Statistics
Majif Makki MAnthour -
Municipalities
Kerbala
Abdul amir Abbas Mohammad
- Statistics
Ra'ed Khalaf Abid -
Municipalities
Waset
Mahdi Sahyout Hussein -
Statistics
Ihsan Falih Hassan -
Municipalities
Sallahuddin
Abdul Mortah Khair Allah -
Statistics
Ahmad Khalil Ibrahim -
Statistics
Baseel Issa Ibrahim -
Municipalities
Osama Abdul Abbas Farhan -
Municipalities
Al-Najaf
Hussein Jabbar Abid - Statistics
Ahmad Furat Kathim -
Municipalities
vi
Qadisiya
Firas Mu'in abdul Rida -
Statistics
Osama Mohammad Kathim -
Municipalities
Al-Muthanna
Wahab Abduil Khadir Abdul
Hassan - Statistics
Bashar Ratib Abbas -
Municipalities
Thi-Qar
Muhannad Abdul Abbas Khalaf
- Statistics
Salam Kamil Kate'a - Statistics
Aqueel Abdullah Tahir -
Municipalities
Mohammad Adel Jasim -
Municipalities
Missan
Ali Iryan Salih - Statistics
Hassanein Shihab Ahmad -
Municipalities
Basrah
Ahmad Abdul Hafiz Salman -
Statistics
Shaheel Shaddad Faris -
Municipalities
Dahuk
Hakar Haji Nassar - Statistics
Hikmat Othman Rajab -
Statistics
Hassan Mohammad Sa'id -
Statistics
Mohammad Hasan Moustafa -
Municipalities
Nozad Ali Mohammad -
Municipalities
Sirbar Surur Sadeq -
Municipalities
Irbil
Mohammad Hamad Rasoul -
Statistics
Farhoud Saber Ibrahim -
Statistics
Sherko Abdul Kareem Yaseen -
Statistics
Sallahuddin Hidar Omar -
Statistics
Karwan Jabbar Hasan -
Municipalities
Tet Niya Jameel Ibrahim -
Municipalities
Sarteeb Qader Hamad -
Municipalities
Khalil Taha Ibrahim -
Municipalities
Sulaimaniya
Fraydon Mohammad Mahmoud
- Statistics
Danish Abdul Rahman Ahmad
- Statistics
Shiraz Najib Kareem -
Statistics
Ribwar Ali Faraj - Statistics
Naram Abdullah Qader -
Municipalities
Souran Jamal Moustafa -
Municipalities
Bet Yara wa Baizeed Hasan -
Municipalities
Diyar Aziz Ahmad -
Municipalities
vii
Table of Content
Survey methodology
1. Forward 1
1.1 Introduction 1
1.2 Survey objectives 1
1.3 Results and expected benefits of the survey 2
2. Work methodology and survey implementation 2
2.1 Level of representation 2
2.2 Survey questionnaire 3
2.2.1 Water sector questionnaire 3
2.2.2 Sanitation sector questionnaire 4
2.2.3 Municipal services questionnaire 4
2.3 Timeframe 5
2.4 Training 7
2.5 Data processing and checking 8
2.5.1 Programmes 8
2.5.2 SPSS for producing output tables and statistical analysis 8
2.6 Fieldwork 8
2.7 Desktop work 9
3. Analysis of results 10
3.1 Water sector 10
3.2 Sanitation sector 17
3.3 Municipal services sector 25
Detailed tables 35
Annex -1: Concepts and terminology 153
Annex -2: Survey questionnaire 161
viii
List of Detailed tables
1. Water Sector 36
Table-1: number and percentage of population connected to drinking water distribution network
by environment in Iraq for 2010
37
Table-2: percentage of crude water sources used in water production stations by type in Iraq for
2010
37
Table-3: number and percentage of water production stations, total designed capacity, output of
produced water and percentage from designed capacity by type in Iraq for 2010
38
Table-4: number and percentage of water production stations by status and type in Iraq for 2010 38
Table-5: percentages of governorates' need for new water production stations, availability of
alternative energy for stations working on solar energy and availability of water meters in
governorates in Iraq for 2010
39
Table-6: number and percentage of population connected to drinking water distribution network
by environment and governorate for 2010
40
Table-7: number and percentage of water production stations by type and governorate for 2010 41
Table-8a: number and percentage of operational water production stations by type and
governorate for 2010
42
Table 8b: number and percentage of partially operational water production stations by type and
governorate for 2010
43
Table 8c: number and percentage of non-operational water production stations by type and
governorate for 2010
44
Table-9: rate of crude water drawn from source to water production stations by type and
governorate for 2010
45
Table-10: percentage distribution of the rate of crude water drawn from source to water
production stations by type and governorate for 2010
46
Table-11: rate of drinking water produced in water production stations by type and governorate
2010
47
Table-12: percentage distribution of the rate of drinking water produced in water production
stations by type and governorate for 2010
48
Table-13: rate and percentage of water loss in water distribution network serving the population
from water production stations and assessment of amounts of drinking water needed by
environment and governorate for 2010
49
Table-14: individual's average share of drinking water serving the population by governorate for
2010
50
Table-15: number and percentage of projects, rate of crude water drawn from surface water and
its total design capacity, rate of available capacity, amount of water produced and percentage
from designed capacity by governorate for 2010
51
ix
Table-16: number and percentage of projects by status and governorate for 2010 52
Table-17: number and percentage of water collections and rate of amount of crude water drawn
from surface water, total design capacity, rate of available capacity, rate of water produced and
percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010
53
Table-18: number and percentage water collections by status and governorate for 2010 54
Table-19: number and percentage of wells and water production stations mounted on wells
(excluding desalination stations), total design and available capacity, rate of water produced and
percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010
55
Table-20: rate of water drawn from wells and used as crude water source in water production
stations (excluding desalination stations) and distributed to the population without treatment by
governorate for 2010
56
Table-21: number and percentage of water production stations mounted on wells (excluding
desalination stations) by status and governorate for 2010
57
Table-22: number and percentage of water desalination stations (RO) total design and available
capacity, rate of water produced and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010
58
Table-23: number of desalination stations (RO), rate of crude water drawn to desalination
stations and their percentage distribution by source of crude water used and governorate for
2010
59
Table-24: number and percentage of water desalination stations (RO) by status and governorate
for 2010
60
Table-25: number and percentage of stations powered by solar energy, rate of amount of crude
water drawn from surface water, total design capacity, rate of available capacity, rate of water
produced and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010
61
Table-26: number and percentage of stations powered by solar energy by status and governorate
for 2010
62
Table-27: number of tests conducted on crude and produced water at production stations and
water distribution networks by type and governorate for 2010
63
Table-28: percentage distribution of tests conducted on crude and produced water at production
stations and water distribution networks by type and governorate for 2010
64
Table-29: number of samples drawn for tests conducted on crude and produced water at
production stations and water distribution networks in the month preceding the survey by type
and governorate for 2010
65
Table-30: percentage distribution of the samples drawn for tests conducted on crude and
produced water at production stations and water distribution networks in the month preceding
the survey by type and governorate for 2010
66
Table-31: percentage of availability instances of produced water reaching consumers through
distribution networks for 2010
67
Table-32: percentage distribution of produced water by sector and governorate for 2010 68
Table-33: number of units with water standards (budget) out of units covered by the Public
Water Directorate in the governorate or Baghdad Municipality, number and percentage of units
with water meters by status and governorate for 2010
69
Table-34: percentage of main problems faced by the water sector for 2010 70
x
Table-35: number and percentage of water production stations under construction by type and
governorate for 2010
71
Table-36: number of employees at public water directorates and Baghdad Municipality by post
and governorate for 2010
72
2. Sanitation Sector 75
Table-37: summery of main statistical indicators in sanitation sector for 2010 76
Table-38: number and percentage of population connected to sanitation networks and shared-
networks and percentage of served areas by network type, rate of produced wastewater for
central treatment stations and small treatment stations, polluting activities and under
construction sanitation networks projects by governorate for 2010
78
Table-39: percentage of type and status of network, cases of wastewater spillage and spillage at
rain fall for 2010
79
Table-40: number of central treatment stations by type, status and governorate for 2010 80
Table-41: number of central treatment stations, total designed capacity, rate of actual capacity
and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010
81
Table-42: percentage of population connected to sanitation networks connected to central
treatment stations and amount of wastewater produced (treated and untreated), BOD
concentration in treated water discharged from central treatment stations by governorate for
2010
82
Table-43: percentage of discharge destinations of treated wastewater from central treatment
stations by type and stations absorption capacity of wastewater produced for 2010
83
Table-44: number of small treatment units total designed capacity, rate of actual capacity and
percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010
84
Table-45: number of small treatment units in served and un-served areas, polluting activities,
total designed capacity, rate of actual capacity and percentage from designed capacity by
governorate for 2010
85
Table-46: number of small treatment units in areas not served by sanitation networks by status,
amount of treated and untreated wastewater produced and percentage of treated wastewater to
that produced by governorate for 2010
86
Table-47: percentage of discharge destinations of treated wastewater from small treatment
stations in areas not served by sanitation networks for 2010
87
Table-48: number of small wastewater treatment units (in served areas/hospitals, residence
compounds, hotels…etc.) by type, status and governorate for 2010
88
Table-49: amount of treated and untreated wastewater produced in areas served by small
treatment units and percentage of treated wastewater by governorate for 2010
89
Table-50: number of small treatment units for polluting activities (health institutions, industrial
establishments, carwash and greasing garages, slaughter houses, agricultural activities, other) by
type and governorate for 2010
90
Table-51: rate of liquid waste produced and treated at small treatment units from polluting
activities and percentage of liquid waste treated to produced by governorate for 2010
91
xi
Table-52: percentage of existence of polluting activities and discharge destination of treated and
untreated liquid waste for 2010
92
Table-53: number of sewage water pumping stations by type and governorate for 2010 93
Table-54: number and percentage of pumping stations by status and governorate for 2010 94
Table-55: percentage of discharge destinations of wastewater for pumping stations for 2010 95
Table-56: percentage of main problems faced by sewage networks and treatment stations by
governorate for 2010
96
Table-57: number and percentage of population trespassing on rainwater networks by
governorate for 2010
97
Table-58: percentage of discharge destinations of water from rainwater networks by type for
2010
98
Table-59: number and percentage of population connected to independent treatment system
(septic tank) by governorate for 2010
99
Table-60: percentage of discharge destinations of wastewater for households connected to septic
tanks by destination for 2010
100
Table-61: percentage of discharge destinations of wastewater (households not connected to
sewage networks and septic tanks) by discharge destination for 2010
101
Table-62: amount of sludge produced by treatment operations of sanitation water and
percentage of disposal destinations of sludge produced by treatment operations of sanitation
water by governorate for 2010
102
Table-63: number of working, idle and broken machinery in sanitation sector by governorate for
2010
103
Table-64: number of employees in sanitation sector by post and governorate for 2010 105
3. Municipal Services Sector 108
Table-65a: summery of main indicators of municipal services sector for 2010 109
Table-65b: summery of main indicators of municipal services sector for 2010 110
Table-65c: summery of main indicators of municipal services sector for 2010 111
Table-66: number of municipalities by category and governorate for 2010 112
Table-67: number of population served by garbage collection, amount of lifted garbage per day
by governorate for 2010
113
Table-68: rate of garbage collected and lifted per day under municipal jurisdiction and
percentage distribution by area and governorate for 2010
114
Table-69: rate of hazardous waste collected per day and percentage of municipalities hazardous
waste is collected from by source and governorate for 2010
115
xii
Table-70: rate of treated hazardous waste and percentage by method of treatment and
governorate for 2010
116
Table-71: percentage of allocated containers present for garbage collection distributed across
areas and their numbers by governorate for 2010
118
Table-72: percentage of number of containers distributed across areas by governorate for 2010 119
Table-73: percentage distribution of container use distributed across areas, number of discharge
times per week and percentage of garbage separation on households' level by governorate for
2010
120
Table-74: percentage of available machinery to cover municipal services and number of
machinery (working, idle, broken down and rented) by governorate for 2010
121
Table-75: number of municipalities owning machinery, number and percentage of
municipalities with sufficient machinery , average number of garbage collection times from
households by machinery and press machinery per week by governorate for 2010
131
Table-76: percentage of municipalities contracting companies or garbage collection contractors,
number of machinery owned by the companies or contractors working within the jurisdiction of
the municipality and rate of collection per week by companies or contractors by governorate for
2010
132
Table-77: percentage distribution of city cleaning by the municipality and rate of cleaning per
week by area and governorate for 2010
133
Table-78: percentage distribution of city cleaning by companies or contractors and rate of
cleaning per week by area and governorate for 2010
134
Table-79: number and percentage of municipalities facing increasing rubble and remnants of
war problems by area and governorate for 2010
135
Table-80: percentage of the presence of regular transforming stations, temporary irregular
collection sites within municipal borders and their numbers and total area by governorate for
2010
136
Table-81: number of medical waste burial sites granted and not granted environmental approval
and their percentage and areas by governorate for 2010
137
Table-82: number of garbage burial sites according to initial municipal design, rate of
groundwater depth at these sites by governorate for 2010
138
Table-83: number of burial sites granted environmental approval and percentage of their type by
governorate for 2010
139
Table-84: percentage of availability at burial sites of required accessories by governorate for
2010
140
Table-85: number of burial machinery and equipment and percentage distribution by status
(working, idle and broken) for 2010
142
Table-86: number of burial sites with no environmental approval and percentage distribution of
their type by governorate for 2010
143
Table-87: number of employees at burial sites by post for 2010 144
xiii
Table-88: percentage of garbage treatment method by governorate for 2010 145
Table-89: percentage of main problems faced by municipal services sector in garbage collection
by governorate for 2010
146
Table-90: percentage of environmental awareness programmes implemented by municipal staff
during the year preceding the survey, number of programmes, number of participants and
percentage of benefit from preparing environmental awareness programmes by governorate for
2010
147
Table-91: number and percentage of environmental awareness programmes implemented by
bodies or organisations and number and percentage of governorates where programmes were
implemented for 2010
148
Table-92: number of employees in municipal sector by post and governorate for 2010 149
Table-93: indicators on rubble crushing plants in Baghdad Municipality for 2010 152
xiv
List of Graphs
Graph-1: percentage of population connected to drinking water distribution network by
environment for 2010
10
Graph-2: number of water production stations by type for 2010 11
Graph-3: percentage distribution of water production stations by status for 2010 11
Graph-4: rate of drinking water produced in water production stations by type for 2010 12
Graph-5: percentage rate of produced water to designed capacity of water projects for 2010 13
Graph-6: number of water complexes by status for 2010 14
Graph-7: percentage distribution of produced water by sector for 2010 15
Gragh-8: percentage of main problems faced by water sector for 2010 16
Graph-9: number of water production stations under construction by type for 2010 16
Graph-10: percentage of population connected to sanitation networks, shared-networks and
septic tanks and percentage of unconnected population for 2010
17
Graph-11: rate of produced wastewater from central treatment stations and small treatment units
and polluting activities by governorate for 2010
17
Graph-12: percentage of areas by type of network for 2010 18
Graph-13: percentage distribution of networks status in governorates for 2010 18
Graph-14: total designed capacity and rate of actual capacity at central treatment stations by
governorate for 2010
19
Graph-15: percentage of discharge destinations of treated wastewater at central treatment stations
by type of destination for 2010
20
Graph-16: number of small treatment units by area in Iraq for 2010 20
Graph-17: percentage of discharge destinations of liquid waste of polluting activities with no
small treatment units for 2010
21
Graph-18: number of pumping stations in Iraq by type for 2010 22
Graph-19: percentage of main problems faced by sanitation sector for 2010 22
Graph-20: percentage of water discharge destinations for households connected to septic tanks in
Iraq for 2010
23
Graph-21: percentage of water discharge destinations for households not connected to sanitation
networks and septic tanks by destination for 2010
24
Graph-22: percentage of disposal destination of produced sludge from wastewater treatment
process by type of destination for 2010
24
Graph-23: percentage distribution of types of municipalities for 2010 25
xv
Graph-24: percentage of population connected to garbage collection service for 2010 26
Graph-25: amount of lifted garbage (ton/day) for 2010 27
Graph-26: percentage distribution of amount of garbage collected and lifted per day by areas for
2010
27
Graph-27: percentage distribution of treatment method of hazardous waste for 2010 28
Graph-28: number of working, idle, broken down and rented machinery for 2010 29
Graph-29: percentage of city cleaning by municipalities, companies and contractors for 2010 30
Graph-30: percentage of municipalities facing increasing rubble and remnants of war problems
by area for 2010
30
Graph-31: number of medical waste burial sites granted and not granted environmental approval
for 2010
31
Graph-32: percentage distribution of type of burial sites granted environmental approval for 2010 31
Graph-33: percentage distribution of type of burial sites not granted environmental approval for
2010
32
Graph-34: percentage of treatment methods of garbage for 2010 33
Graph-35: percentage of main problems facing the municipal sector in garbage collection for
2010
33
1
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
1. Forward
1.1 Introduction
The ecosystem is characterised by the balance between its different elements such as
water, air and earth. It can adapt to changes within certain limits, however, the
development in life, technological advancement, the use of machinery and radioactive
chemicals, the great pressure on natural resources as well as pollutants produced by
human activities have all led to huge a imbalance. Hence, the environment and its
protection are considered one of the main tasks facing governments in general. In our
country, Iraq, this has gained an exceptional importance particularly owing to what
the country has through during over two decades of continuous destructive wars and
the deep environmental deterioration they inflected on all its elements; soil, water and
air.
Environmental protection and improvement must, therefore, be taken seriously and be
of priority concern for the state and citizen. Of utmost importance to consider is the
provision of accurate and updated information and data on the different environmental
elements compatible with international standards and criteria, which is considered
essential for international comparisons or comparing the scale of change in the
country over time. It also facilitates for decision and policy makers the adoption of
successful ways to develop and improve the environmental reality.
As a contribution by the Central Organization for Statistics and Information
Technology (COSIT) and the Statistics Office/Kurdistan Region in the active
participation in caring for the environment of Iraq and diagnosing its problems,
numerous surveys were implemented partially targeting the environment as well as
implementing a number of specialized environmental surveys, most important of
which:
1. Environmental Survey in Iraq for the year 2005 (water - sanitation - municipal
services); and
2. Environmental Survey of Medical Services Activities in Iraq for the year
2008.
The technical staff at COSIT has also implemented in cooperation with the staff of the
Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works, Baghdad Municipality, and the
Statistical Office and counterpart bodies in the Kurdistan Region with the support of
UNICEF the Environmental Survey in Iraq for the year 2010 (water - sanitation -
municipal services), hoping that the data in this report would achieve the set
objectives.
1.2 Survey objectives
The objective of the survey is to provide a database on all aspects related to the status
of institutions related to the water, sanitation and municipal services sectors through
the following indicators:
2
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
1. Provide data on water services and percentages of those served on urban, rural
and governorate levels;
2. Provide data on sanitation services and percentages of those served on
governorate level; and
3. Provide numeral indicators on municipal services and percentages of those
served, amount of garbage and methods of treatment on governorate level.
Through the provision of such data environmental policy makers in relevant
governmental institutions will be able to draw the right strategies for both
environmental and social protection from all harms.
1.3 Results and expected benefits of the survey
1. Identify the percentages of those served by clean drinking water to take into
consideration covering the whole of Iraq with clean drinking water networks
while preparing future plans;
2. Identify the percentages of those served with sanitation networks and degree
to which these networks and treatment stations adhere to environmental
conditions;
3. Identify the percentages of those served by municipal services in order to work
on developing and expanding delivered services to society;
4. Develop environmental awareness by broadcasting available information and
data from the survey through the media;
5. Identify the size of environmental problems in order to address them by all
means possible;
6. Good future planning to address pollution after identifying the quantity and
type of pollutants produced and the level of their hazard on the environment;
and
7. Identify future plans and projects on services provision to society.
2. Work methodology and survey implementation
2.1 level of representation
The survey covered all governorates in Iraq including the governorates of the
Kurdistan Region. Data was collected and presented for the water and sanitation
sectors on governorate levels. Jurisdiction on the water sector is divided in the
Governorate of Baghdad, Baghdad Municipality and the governorates in the
Kurdistan Region, therefore, data was collected on the levels of the governorate centre
and periphery while data on the sanitation sector was collected on governorate level
except for Baghdad.
3
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
As for the municipal services sector, it was on municipal level while results were
provided on governorate level. There are a few shared municipalities between the
governorates of Irbil and Nineveh, as well as Dahuk and Nineveh. According to the
Administrative Units Guide published by COSIT these shared municipalities are
under the governorate of Nineveh, but the data of the Kurdistan Region was adopted.
The table below shows the number of municipalities for each governorate in Iraq
included in the survey.
SN Governorate Municipalities (no.) SN Governorate Municipalities (no.)
1 Nineveh 27 11 Al-Najaf 9
2 Kirkuk 14 12 Qadisiya 15
3 Diala 21 13 Al-Muthana 11
4 Al-Anbar 20 14 Thi Qar 20
5 Baghdad Municipality 14 15 Missan 15
6 Baghdad Periphery 15 16 Basrah 15
7 Babil 16 17 Sulaimaniya 68
8 Kerbala 7 18 Irbil 61
9 Waset 17 19 Dahuk 43
10 Salahuddin 17 Total 425
2.2 Survey questionnaire
Three types of questionnaires were prepared for the Environmental Survey in Iraq for
2010 (water – sanitation – municipal services). The survey questionnaire was awarded
the utmost care for the importance of the subject. Therefore, the questionnaire of the
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2005 was studied and thoroughly discussed by
members of the higher and technical committees at COSIT and the ministries
(Municipalities and Public Works, Environment, Higher Education and Scientific
Research and Baghdad Municipality).
The questionnaire was also discussed with the Statistics Office/Kurdistan Region and
members of Municipal and Environment ministries in the Region, and presented to
technical experts at UNICEF to review. As a result, a number of important paragraphs
were added to the questionnaire arriving at the following form:
2.2.1 Water sector questionnaire
The water sector questionnaire included indicators on number of population
connected to clean drinking distribution networks, amount of prepared water, the
estimated need for clean drinking water in the governorate as well as the number of
water projects, complexes, well stations, solar energy and desalination stations
(Reverse Osmosis) showing their design capacity and amounts of water produced.
4
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
The water sector questionnaire also included the type and number of tests carried out
on clean drinking water at water production stations (water projects, complexes, well
stations, solar energy and desalination stations) and distribution networks. In addition
to type and number of tests carried out on crude water and governorates need for
water projects, complexes, well stations, desalination stations or solar powered
stations. It also considered the main problems faced by the drinking water sector in
the governorate and data on the directorate staff by specialisations.
2.2.2 Sanitation sector questionnaire
The sanitation sector questionnaire included indicators on the number of population
connected to sanitation and rain networks, shared networks, number of population
connected to septic tanks in the governorate, amounts of wastewater produced and
that treated indicating the number of central treatment stations and small treatment
units, their design and actual capacities as well as type of polluting activities (treated
and untreated) dumped into the sanitation network. It also considered the main
problems related to sanitation networks in the governorate and data on the directorate
staff by specialisations.
2.2.3 Municipal services sector questionnaire
The municipal services sector included three types of questionnaires where
questionnaires were designed according to the differences in jurisdictions between
municipal directorates in the governorates and municipal directorates in Baghdad
Municipality as follows:
1. Questionnaire (3-A): its data was collected from municipal directorates in the
governorates included Baghdad governorate.
The municipal services sector questionnaire included indicators ion the number and
percentages of population included in the garbage collection service under the
jurisdiction of the municipality, amount of normal and hazardous garbage collected
and lifted per day, their sources, methods of treatment and disposal.
The questionnaire also included data on the number of distributed containers by area,
number of times emptied by municipal directorates and number of available
machinery.
The questionnaire also included data on transforming stations (regular and irregular),
the area, burial sites (granted and not granted environmental approval) and adherence
to environmental standards and conditions, main problems facing municipal
directorates in garbage collection, implementing environmental awareness
programmes to directorate's staff and number of participants as well as data on
municipal staff by specialisation.
5
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
2. Questionnaire (3-B): its data was collected from municipal directorates under
Baghdad Municipality.
The questionnaire included indicators from questionnaire (3-A) excluding those on
burial sites granted and not granted environmental approval, their area, type as well as
regular and irregular transforming stations.
3. Questionnaire (3-C): its data was collected from the Environment and Solid Waste
Directorate at Baghdad Municipality.
The questionnaire included data on stations' management, temporary irregular
collection sites, regular and irregular burial sites as the Environment and Solid Waste
Directorate at Baghdad Municipality is responsible for managing these stations and
sites, therefore, questions related to these indicators were separated into a special
questionnaire. In addition to the above, questionnaire (3-C) included data on rubble
crushing plants under Baghdad Municipality, number of machinery, rubble sources
and amounts as well as data on separation and recycling sites under Baghdad
Municipality.
2.3 Timeframe
To ensure that all survey sages are subject to a clear methodology and to assure
controlling all its different activities, a detailed time schedule was prepared for the
different stages of the survey and generally adhered to, as shown in the table below.
The survey was implemented between 2/1 – 30/1/2010 in all the governorates of Iraq.
6
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Time schedule of the Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010
SN Activity Timeframe
First Preparation stage
- Forming the committees 1-4/8/2010
- Preparing output tables 1-4/8/2010
- Design of questionnaires and preparing the instructions 1-4/8/2010
- Discussing the questionnaire with experts 8/8/2010
- Conduct pre-test and pilot questionnaire 15/8/2010
- Adopting final draft of questionnaires 18/8/2010
- Preparing data checking and coding instructions 19/8/2010
- Preparing computerised data entry, output tables and reporting
programmes 22/8-23/9/2010
- Preparing for fieldwork 29-31/8/2010
- Identify and prepare requirements for courses and fieldwork (printing +
requirements + transport) 5-9/12/2010
Training courses
- First training course: for central supervisors and field researchers in
Baghdad 27-29/12/2010
- Second training course: for central supervisors, field researchers and
checking staff - in Irbil 3-5/1/2011
- Third training course: for data entry staff - in Baghdad 13-14/2/2011
- Fourth training course: for data entry staff - in Irbil 21-22/2/2011
Second Fieldwork stage
- Fieldwork 2-30/1/2011
Third Desktop work stage
- Checking and coding 1-15/2/2011
Forth Data entry and computing stage
- Computerising the questionnaire 16/2-6/3/2011
- Checking of final results 6/3-10/4/2011
Fifth Preparing and publishing reports stage
- Preparing report first draft stage 11/4-2/5/2001
- Evaluating first draft report (workshop) in Baghdad 8/5/2011
- Evaluating first draft report (workshop) in Irbil 23-25/5/2011
- Preparing report's final draft 29/5-5/6/2011
- Publication of final report 3/7/2011
- Launching workshop of survey results in Kurdistan Region 28/7/2011
7
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
2.4 Training
Training technical staff of all levels received great attention. Training was not limited
to technical staff but included committees' members, central supervisors, desktop
checking and data entry staff. Training courses included pilot field visits where a pre-
test was implemented for the water and sanitation questionnaires in the governorates
of Irbil, Dahuk and Basrah. The municipal services questionnaire was pre-tested in a
number of municipalities in Irbil and Basrah followed by a pilot survey in a number
of municipalities in Baghdad.
Training activities for the Environmental Survey fro 2010
Can be summed up as follows:
1. The total number of implemented training course was (4); two training courses
for (3) days targeting central supervisors and field researchers, the first course
was implemented in Baghdad between 27-29/12/2010 and the second in Irbil
between 3-5/1/2011, two course for data entry staff for two days in Baghdad
between 13-14/2001 and in Irbil between 21-22/2/2011. Desktop checking
staff were selected from members of the committees and central supervisors.
2. The number of participants was (179) distributed as follows:
Higher Committee 10
Technical Committee 20
Administrative and Financial Committee 8
Central Supervisors 19
Local supervisors 19
Field researchers 66
Desktop Checking Staff and Checking Supervisors 15
Systems and Programmes 4
Data Entry and Entry Supervisors 18
Total 179
8
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
2.5 Data processing and checking
2.5.1 Programmes
CSPro was used for data entry and processing. Checking rules were introduced on
most fields of the questionnaire to control and validate the data achieving the
following objectives:
Ensure data entry accuracy;
Check that instructions and special rules for filling the questionnaire were
adhered to correctly; and
Enable the diagnosis, monitoring and correction of cases of data inconsistency.
2.5.2 The use of SPSS to produce output tables and data analysis
2.6 Fieldwork
A detailed work plan was prepared to implement fieldwork that can be summarised as
follows:
1. The total number of central supervisors was (19) distributed across
governorates, one supervisor for each governorate, except for the Governorate
of Baghdad that had two central supervisors.
2. The total number of local supervisors was (19) represented by the statistics
manager in each governorate.
3. The total number of field researchers was (66) from statistics and municipal
directorates in all governorates. The number of researchers from statistics
directorates was (33) and another (33) researchers form municipal directorates
as shown in the table below:
SN Governorate Researchers (no.) SN Governorate Researchers (no.)
1 Nineveh 4 10 Al-Najaf 2
2 Kirkuk 2 11 Qadisiya 2
3 Diala 4 12 Al-Muthana 2
4 Al-Anbar 4 13 Thi Qar 4
5 Baghdad 6 14 Missan 2
6 Babil 2 11
5 Basrah 2
7 Kerbala 2 16 Sulaimaniya 8
8 Waset 2 17 Irbil 8
9 Salahuddin 4 18 Dahuk 6
Total 66
9
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Fieldwork continued for (20) days. To ensure efficient and effective implementation,
a means of transport was provided for each central supervisor and field researcher,
which researchers used for the duration of fieldwork .
2.7 Desktop work
1. After the completion of fieldwork and to ensure accuracy of collected data
from the directorates, the completed questionnaires underwent the following
series of checking process by:
The field researcher: the researcher checks all questions in the questionnaire
and by reviewing all sections responsible for completing the relevant data;
Local supervisor: the local supervisors checks all questions in the survey
questionnaire;
Central supervisor: the central supervisor checks the survey questionnaire in
the field and at the office in the governorate; and
Central auditor: the central auditor checks and codes the questionnaire at the
office and in case there are any notes or questions he contacts the persons in
charge of completing the questionnaire to correct the data;
2. After the completion of the training course of data entry staff, a sample of the
survey questionnaire was selected for the three sectors (water – sanitation –
municipal services) for a pilot data entry the heck the survey data entry
programmes and adjust them in light of questionnaires' data.
3. The questionnaires are checked by experts for the ministries of Municipalities
and Public Works and from Higher Education and Scientific Research.
4. After completing the central checking process, the data were automatically
entered using CSPro. To ensure accuracy and to avoid any mistakes, the data
were re-entered once again and the two entry processes were compared after
which corrections and data cleaning were made.
It should be noted that data entry and checking were conducted in two centres one
at COSIT HQ in Baghdad and the other at the Statistic Office/Kurdistan Region at
Irbil.
10
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
3. Analysis of results
The Environmental Survey of Municipal Services Sector in Iraq for 2010 is the
second specialised survey implemented in Iraq on the provision of services to Iraqi
citizens. An Environmental Survey of Municipal Services Sector in Iraq for 2005 was
previously implemented by the Environmental Statistics Directorate that included all
governorates in Iraq except for the governorates of Dahuk and Irbil.
The present survey included all governorates in Iraq including the governorates of the
Kurdistan Region. Baghdad Municipality and the Ministry of Municipalities and
Public Works/Baghdad Periphery were considered the sources for statistical data
collection since the responsibility for the services falls on them separately.
Below are the main indicators on the level of Iraq:
3.1 Water sector
The results of the environmental survey in Iraq for 2010 (table-1) showed that
the percentage of population connected to drinking water distribution networks
in all of Iraq was 78.7%. in urban areas the percentage was 86.1% and 62.1% in
rural areas as in graph-1. In 2005 the percentage of population connected was
73.7%; 79.9% in urban areas and 61.6% in rural areas.
By comparing the environmental surveys of 2005 and 2010, and after excluding
the governorates of Dahuk and Irbil that were not included in the 2005 survey, it
is noted that the percentage of those connected reaches 78.2%; 85.4% in Urban
areas and 62.8% in rural areas.
When comparing with neighbouring countries; it is noted that the percentage of
population connected to drinking water networks in Jordan is 98% for 2006 and
82% for Turkey in 2008.
0
20
40
60
80
100
urbanruraltotal
86.1
62.1
78.7
Graph-1: percentage of population connected to drinking water distribution network by environment for 2010
11
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Survey results in table-2 showed that the number of water production stations
reached (5578) divided into (water projects, water complexes, stations mounted
on wells, RO water desalination stations and solar powered stations) where their
numbers reached (321, 2796, 2022, 160 and 279) respectively as in ghraph-2.
Survey results also showed that that total design capacity of stations is 16.2 million
m3/day and produced water is 11.6 million m
3/day, i.e. the percentage of produced
water to design capacity was 71.8% as shown in graph-3. The percentage of
working stations reached 86.3%, partially working 8.4% and idle 5.3% as shown in
table-4 and graph-3.
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
projectswatercomplexes
wellsdeslinationstations
solarpoweredstations
321
2796
2022
160 279
Graph-2: number of water production stations by type for 2010
86.3
8.4 5.3
Graph-3: percentage distribution of water production stations by status for 2010
working
partailly working
idel
12
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Survey results in table-5 shows that all governorates need new water projects,
except for Baghdad Municipality, and they also need RO water desalination
stations, except for the governorates of the Kurdistan Region and Baghdad
Municipality. They also show that the number of governorates with water
meters are three; Nineveh, Kirkuk and Baghdad Municipality.
Table-11 shows that the total rate of produced drinking water reached 11.6
million m3/day and that the highest quantity produced was in Baghdad
Municipality at 2.5 million m3/day and the lowest in the governorate of
Dahuk/central at 101 thousand m3/day. The majority of produced water was
from water projects as it reached 7.7 million m3/day with a percentage of 66.5%
as shown in table-12 and graph-4.
Table-13 shows the percentage distribution of the rate of water prepared in
urban and rural areas as it reached 70.4% and 29.6% respectively. It is noted
that the highest percentage of water loss in the water distribution network was
40% in the governorates of Nineveh and Baghdad Municipality owing to
trespasses on the networks, pipe cracks and leaks as well as the lack of water
meters. The table also shows that the total estimated need for clean drinking
water has reached 14.7 million m3/day for all governorates.
The average individual share of prepared water for those connected in the
governorates reached 0.37 m3/day, equalling 370 litre/person/day. The average
individual share to the total population in the governorates reached 0.29 m3/day
equalling 290 litre/person/day [after exchanging cubic meter to litre] as shown
in table-14.
010000002000000300000040000005000000600000070000008000000
projectswatercomplexes
wellsdeslinationstations
solarpoweredstations
7721862
3303905
573134 13934 5713
Graph-4: rate of drinking water produced in water production stations by type for 2010
13
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
The total number of water projects in Iraq reached 321 in 2010 with a total
design capacity of 10.1 million m3/day and actual capacity of 7.7 million
m3/day. The percentage of produced water to design capacity reached 76.6%.
The governorate of Nineveh had the highest percentage of produced water from
projects to design capacity at 106.8% owing to the insufficiency in the amount
of water produced from central projects to meet the governorate's needs and
hence resorted to operating back-up pumps in addition to operating pumps to
increase production. This has led to the increase in actual production capacity
for some projects to the design capacity in the governorate as shown in table-15
and graph-5.
It should be noted that the percentage of working projects was 93.1%, partially
working 5.6% and idle 1.2% as shown in table-16.
Survey results also showed (table-17) that the number of water complexes
reached 2796 concentrated mostly in Al-Anbar governorate (366) complexes
followed by the governorate of Basrah (300), with a total design capacity of
4.9 million m3/day. The amount of produced water was 3.3 million m
3/day,
hence, the percentage of produced amounts to design capacity reached 66.6%.
the highest amount produced was in the governorate of Basrah at 625.7
million m3/day. The number of idle water complexes was 172 the highest
number of which was in the governorate of Salahuddin (65 water complexes)
as shown in table-18 and graph-6.
75
90 82.6
91.2
62 69
46
83.3
96
80 80 77.5 69.2
61.4
38.1
74.9 71
91.6
68.2
106.8
87.5
39.9
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Graph-5: percentage rate of produced water to designed capacity of water projects for 2010
14
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Table-19 shows that the number of water production stations mounted on
wells reached 2022 the majority of which are in the governorates of the
Kurdistan Region and Kirkuk with a total design capacity of 1.1 million
m3/day and a total actual capacity of 558.7 million m
3/day, which means that
the percentage of produced water to design capacity reached 53%, noting that
water drawn from wells and distributed without treatment to the population
reached 445.7 million m3/day as shown in table-20.
Table-22 shows that the number of RO water distillation stations reached 160
most of them were concentrated in the governorates of Basrah and Thi Qar
reaching 49 and 48 respectively, with a design capacity of 78 thousand m3/day
while desalinated produced water reached 13.9 thousand m3/day, hence the
percentage of produced desalinated water to design capacity was 17.9%.
behind the decrease in this percentage is the increase in the percentage of idle
stations as they represented 38.8% as shown in table-24.
Results in table-23 showed that the number of governorates producing
desalinated water reached 10 governorates and that the majority of water
sources used in desalination stations was form water projects and water
complexes reaching 89.7% while the other source was ground water at 10.3%.
Table-25 shows that the number of working water production stations using
solar energy was 279 with a total design capacity of 8.3 thousand m3/day and a
total actual production rate of 5.7 thousand m3/day, making the percentage of
produced amounts to design capacity at 69.2%. the majority of them were
concentrated in the governorate of Diala with 34 stations, followed by the
governorate of Nineveh with 10 stations. The governorates of the Region,
Baghdad Municipality, Al-Najaf and Thi Qar have no such stations although
the governorates of Al-Najaf and Thi Qar n=have stations under construction.
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
workingpartially workingidle
2227
397 172
Graph-6: number of water complexes by status for 2010
15
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Table-33 shows that 22.7% of governorates consume good quantities of water
reaching 300-400 litre/person/day and 4.5% of governorates consume below
average quantities at 100-200 litre/person/day.
Table-32 shows the percentage distribution of produced water by sectors
where the highest percentage of produced water went to household use at 87%
and the lowest went to the governmental sector at 5.7% as in graph-7.
Results show that the main problems facing the water sector in all
governorates are the weakness and instability of electrical power needed for
operating and lack of citizens' awareness on conservation at a percentage of
100%, followed by citizens trespasses on the network and not enough of
technical and administrative staff at a percentage of 90.9% and finally age of
the network (old) and its weakness at 86.4% of all governorates as shown in
table-34 and graph-8.
87
5.7 7.3
Graph-7: percentage distribution of produced water by sector for 2010
household
governmental
other
16
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Table-35 shows the number of water production stations under construction
that reached 504. Water complexes come in first place with 192 complexes
followed by solar powered stations at 122, well-mounted stations at 69 and
then water projects at 61. The majority of water projects and desalination
stations are in the governorate of Kirkuk as shown in graph-9.
Table-36 shows the number of employees in public water directorates in all
governorates and Baghdad Municipality that reached 46178, full-time staff
were 34497, part-time staff 4946 and day labourers 6735.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
projectswatercomplexes
well-mounteddesalinationstations
solar poweredstations
61
192
69 60
122
Graph-9: number of water production stations under construction by type for 2010
40.9
68.2
36.4
86.4
72.7
22.7
72.7
90.9
31.8
100
90.9
100
22.7
020406080100120
inefficiency of project
scarcity of crude water at water source
pollution of water source
network age and weakness
project production insufficient
weak maintenance & lack of sustainabilit
scarcity of spare parts and raw materials
lack of technical and administrative staff
inefficiency of technical staff
scarcity and instability of electrical power for operating
citizens trespassing on the network
citizens lack of awareness and conservation
other
Gragh-8: percentage of main problems faced by water sector
for 2010
17
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
3.2 Sanitation sector
The results of the Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 showed that 23.8% of
the population of Iraq are connected to sanitation networks and shared-
networks, and that 59.5% are connected to septic tanks. As for the population
neither connected to sanitation networks nor to septic tanks they represented
16.7% of the population of Iraq as shown in table-37 and graph-10.
Compared to neighbouring countries, population connected to the sanitation
networks in Jordan were 61% in 2006 and 73% in Turkey in 2008.
Survey results showed that the rate of wastewater produced for central treatment
stations and small treatment units and polluting activities reached 107 million
m3/day, the highest of which was in Baghdad Municipality were it reached 1.2
million m3/day as shown in table-38 and graph-11.
23.8
59.5
16.7
Graph-10: percentage of population connected to sanitation networks, shared-networks and septic tanks and percentage of
unconnected population for 2010
populatiopn connected tosanitation networks and share-networks
population connected to septictanks
population not connected tonetworks or septic tanks
0
200000
400000
600000
800000
1000000
1200000
70000 70000 93600
0 40405 25100 8125 0
67000 12000 0
1200000
47006 0 0 1248 0 15150 0
Graph-11: rate of produced wastewater from central treatment stations and small treatment units and polluting activities by governorate for 2010
18
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Survey results show that 12.5% of areas are connected to sanitation networks,
30.2% connected to rainwater networks and 7.6% connected to shred-networks
as in graph-12.
Table-39 shows that 73.7% of governorates the status of the three types of
networks (sanitation, rainwater and shared) was average, 21.1% was good and
5.3% was bad. The table also shows that 89.5% of governorates suffer from
sludge in sewage water after it rains as in graph-13.
12.5
30.2
7.6
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
sanitation networksrainwater networksshared-networks
Graph-12: percentage of areas by type of network for 2010
21.1
73.7
5.3
Graph-13: percentage distribution of networks status in governorates for 2010
good
average
bad
19
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Table-40 shows that the total number of central treatment stations reached 21 in
all of Iraq distributed by type to preliminary, elementary, secondary and tertiary.
The number of secondary stations was 20 with the governorate of Salahuddin
having the largest number (4). Elementary stations numbered one in the
governorate of Qadisiya, while the governorates of Dahuk, Nineveh,
Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk, Irbil, Dial, Baghdad Periphery, Waset ad Al-Muthana
have no central treatment stations. The table also shows that the number of
working stations reached 15.
Table-41 shows that the total design capacity of central treatment stations was
1.3 million m3/day the majority of which were in Baghdad Municipality, while
the actual capacity rate was 1.5 million m3/day, which represents a 15.7%
increase from its design capacity. This is owing to the load on central treatment
stations that is above their design capacity as it was evident in Baghdad
Municipality and the governorate of Qadisiya as shown in graph-14.
Table-42 indicates the percentage of the population connected to sanitation
networks connected to central treatment stations reached 29.5% and that the
amount of wastewater produced reached 1.6 million m3/day and that 44.7% of it
was treated.
Table-43 shows that 36.8% of governorates discharge wastewater into the river,
15.8% is discharged into sewage lagoons and 5.3% into neighbouring land. The
Majority of governorates discharge wastewater to more than one destination as
in graph-15.
Average design capacity of central
treatment station (m3/day)
Average actual production of
central treatment station (m3/day)
Basr
a
Missa
n
Th
i-Qar
Mu
than
na
Qad
issiya
Naja
f
Sala
h-A
l-Din
Wassit
Karb
ala
Bab
il
Bagh
dad
(sub
urb
s)
Bagh
dad
Mu
nicip
ality
An
bar
Diy
ala
Erb
il
Kir
ku
k
Su
laym
an
iya
Nin
ew
a
Doh
uk
Graph 14: average total design capacities and average actual production capacity of
central treatement stations by governorate for 2010
20
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
The table also showed that 26.3% of governorates have central treatment stations
that can absorb the produced wastewater and an equal percentage of governorates
cannot. The remaining 47.4% of governorates do not have central treatment
stations.
Table-45 shows that the number of small treatment units reached 29, 4 of them
for areas unconnected, 19 in connected areas and 6 units for polluting activities.
The percentage of the actual capacity to the design capacity reached 89.3% in
unconnected areas, 59.2% in connected areas and 27.9% for polluting activities
as in graph-16.
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
treatmentplant
riverneighbouringland
other
15.80%
36.80%
5.30% 5.30%
Graph-15: percentage of discharge destinations of treated wastewater at central treatment stations by type of destination
for 2010
0
5
10
15
20
unconnectedareas
connected areaspolluting activities
4
19
6
Graph-16: number of small treatment units by area in Iraq for 2010
21
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Table-46 shows that the amount of wastewater produced for small treatment
units in the unconnected areas reached 32 thousand m3/day and the treated
amount was 25 thousand m3/day and the percentage of the amount of treated
wastewater to the produced was 78.1%.
Tabkes-48 and 49 show the number of small treatment units in the connected
areas (hospitals, residential areas, hotels...etc.) reached 19 the majority of them
in the governorate of Nineveh (7) units, followed by the governorates of Kirkuk
and Qadisiya (3) unites each. The amount of wastewater produced in connected
areas reached 32.9 thousand m3/day where 50% of it is treated.
Table-50 shows that the number of small treatment units for polluting activities
was 6 all partially working and their treatment type is secondary.
Table-51 shows that the amount of wastewater produced (liquid waste for
polluting activities) reached 3.3 thousand m3/day and that 2.97 thousand
m3/day of produced wastewater was treated equalling 0.1%.
Table-52 shows that 52.6% of governorates that do not have treatment units
discharge liquid waste from polluting activities into the sanitation network and
47.4% into sewage lagoons and another 47.4% into the river. There are more
than one discharge destination for each governorate as in graph-17.
52.6
47.4 47.4
26.3
21.1
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
sanitation networktreatment plantriverneighbouring landother
Graph-17: percentage of discharge destinations of liquid waste of polluting activities with no small treatment units for 2010
22
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
The survey results revealed that the number of pumping stations reached 891
divided into four types: (rainwater pumping station, wastewater pumping
station, shared stations and submersible pumping station) numbering 458, 213,
116 and 104 respectively as shown in graph-18. The majority of them are
concentrated in Baghdad Municipality that has 251 stations. The least number
of stations was in the governorate of Kirkuk at (4) while there are no stations in
the governorates of Dahuk, Sulaimaniya and Irbil as shown in table-53.
The percentage of good pumping stations reached 39.3%, average to 57.6% and
bad 3.1% as shown in table-54.
It is noted from thable-56 that the main problems facing the sanitation sector are
trespasses on the sanitation and rainwater networks, lack of awareness and
misuse of sanitation networks with a percentage of 89.5% for each of all
governorates followed by scarcity and instability of electrical power needed for
operating treatment and pumping stations at 78.9% of governorates as in graph-
19.
458
213
116
104
Graph-18: number of pumping stations in Iraq by type for 2010
rainwater pumping stations
wastewater pumping station
shared pumping station
submersible pumping station
57.9
21.1
63.2
68.4
52.6
42.1
78.9
89.5 89.5
26.3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
inefficiency of networks
weak maintenance and sustainability
lack of technical and administrative staff
lack of machines
age, consumption and broken pumps
age of treatment station
scarcity and instability of electricity
trespasses
lack of awareness
othe
Graph-19: percentage of main problems faced by sanitation sector for 2010
23
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Tables-57 and 58 show that 27.6% of the population of Iraq trespass on the
rainwater networks with the biggest percentage in the governorate of Waset at
85%, followed by the governorate of Al-Anbar at 80%. 44% of governorates
discharge rainwater directly into the river and 34.9% into sewage lagoons.
Table-59 shows that 59.5% of the population of Iraq are connected to an
independent treatment system (septic tanks) with the highest percentage in the
governorates of Dahuk and Diala at 99% and the lowest in the governorate of
Missan at 11%.
Table-60 shows the discharge destination of wastewater for households
connected to septic tanks where the highest percentage was discharging into
neighbouring (adjacent) lands at a percentage of 39.5% followed by sewage
lagoons at 26.6% as in graph-20.
It is noted from table-61 that 52.6% of Iraqi governorates discharge wastewater
of households unconnected to sanitation networks or septic tanks into
neighbouring lands followed by rainwater networks at 42.1% then sewage
lagoons at 36.8% as shown in graph-21.
5
26.6
4.1
39.5
24.8
Graph-20: percentage of water discharge destinations for households connected to septic tanks in Iraq for 2010
transfered to central treatmentstations by trcuks
sewage lagoons
river
neighbouring land
other
24
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Survey results showed that the amount of sludge produced by central treatment
stations reached 32.4 thousand tons/year with the highest amount in Baghdad
Municipality at 15 thousand tons/year while the lowest amount was in the
governorate of Al-Anbar at 240 tons/year. No sludge is produced in 10
governorates. The disposal of sludge produced goes largely to agriculture 61.7%
as shown in table-62 and graph-22.
Table-64 shows that the number of employees in the sanitation sector has
reached 12576 the majority of them are full-time (11489), part-time (110) and
day labourers (977).
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
transfered tocentral treatmentstations by trcuks
rainwaternetworks
sewage lagoonsriverneighbouring landsother
10.5
42.1
36.8
10.5
52.6
26.3
Graph-21: percentage of water discharge destinations for households not connected to sanitation networks and septic tanks by destination for 2010
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
agricultureindustrymunicipalitieshygienic burial
61.7
0
16.1 22.2
Graph-22: percentage of disposal destination of produced sludge from wastewater treatment process by type of
destination for 2010
25
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
3.3 Municipal services sector
Table-65A gives a summary of most important indicators related to the
municipal services sector for 2010. The total number of municipalities included
in the survey is 425 across all governorates of Iraq. The table also shows that
802% of burial sites were granted environmental approval and the percentage of
burial in them was 8.2%.
The amount of lifted garbage (including garbage and construction and scrap
rubble) by municipal directorates reached 17.6 million tons/year while the
amount of hazardous waste was at 15.5 thousand tons/year.
Table-65B shows the number of municipalities divided by type in accordance
with the Ministry of Municipalities and Public Works categorisation (excellent
grade, grade one, grade two, grade three and grade four) based on special
standards adopted by the Ministry that includes the number of population served
under the jurisdiction of the municipality. Most municipalities are given grade
four totalling 132 with a percentage of 31.1% of remaining grades as shown in
graph-23.
Survey results indicate in table-65C that 96.7% of municipalities own
machinery to cover municipal services as working machinery reached 66.5%,
noting that they are insufficient for municipal needs with a percentage of 91.5%.
municipalities contracting companies and contractors to cover municipal
services were 5.2%.
Table-67 shows that the percentage of the population covered by garbage
collection and lifting services per day was 65.7% with 91.3% in urban areas and
7.5% in rural areas, noting that municipalities are not responsible for the
provision of services in villages and rural areas outside municipal boundaries in
accordance with the amended Municipal Administration Law number 165 for
1964, which led to lowering the percentage of covered population in rural areas.
5.6
11.8
24 27.5
31.1
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
excellentonetwothreefour
Graph-23: percentage distribution of types of municipalities for 2010
26
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
However, there are many campaigns that are implemented in rural areas for the
lifting of garbage, filling swamps and maintaining roads even though they are
beyond municipal tasks. It is noted from the table that the highest percentage of
covered population is in Baghdad Municipality (100%) where the percentage of
population covered by garbage collection by the municipalities in Baghdad
Municipality was 100% in urban areas and 1.4% in rural areas.
The 100% coverage in Baghdad Municipality means that the whole population
is covered by the services but that the efficiency of the service is 100%.
Performance efficiency varies between areas. The least covered population are
in the governorate of Qadisiya at a percentage of 38.2%.
The table also shows that the amount of garbage lifted has reached 48.1
thousand tons/day, the highest lifted was at the Baghdad Municipality reaching
12.2 thousand tons/year and the lowest in the governorate of Qadisiya at 674
tons/day as in graph-25.
72.4
62.2
51.8
44.1 38.2
70.3
45.8 51.3
62.6
43.2 41
100
46.2 42.6
81.1
56.5
83.6
66.8
77.3
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Graph-24: percentage of population connected to garbage collection service for 2010
27
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
The amount of lifted garbage per day was divided according to area
(agricultural, industrial, residential, economic activity, lifted rubble and scrap).
The average amount of collected and lifted garbage per day within municipal
jurisdiction reached 48.1 thousand tons/day. Lifted garbage from residential
areas was the highest at 20.5 thousand tons/day with a percentage of 42.6% of
total garbage, followed by lifted rubble where the rate of lifted amount was 19.1
thousand tons/day at a percentage of 39.7% of total garbage as shown in table-
68 and graph-26.
4535
845
5072
3005
674
2716
1739 1199 1149 955 1269
12245
1022 947
2772
1340
3648
1729 1168
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
14000
Graph-25: amount of lifted garbage (ton/day) for 2010
0.9 3.1
42.6
13
39.7
0.8
Graph-26: percentage distribution of amount of garbage collected and lifted per day by areas for 2010
agricultural areas
idustrial areas
residential arreas
economic activity
lifted rubble
scrap
28
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Table-65 shows that the average amount of hazardous waste collected per day
by municipal directorates reached 42.6 thousand kg/day, the highest lifted was 8
thousand kg/day by the municipalities of Baghdad Municipality and lowest
lifted amount was 63 kg/day by the municipalities of Baghdad periphery. No
hazardous waste was collected by the municipalities of Al-Najaf, Al-Muthana
and Basrah. Most municipalities lifted hazardous waste from health institutions
(41.2%). It worth noting that municipal directorates are not responsible for
lifting hazardous waste but forced to do so by the governorate council.
When studying the amount of hazardous waste, the existence of large amounts
is noted. This is owing to; mixing hazardous waste with normal garbage turning
the later to hazardous waste particularly by health institutions, and the
unavailability of modern large capacity incinerators at hospitals used for
incinerating medical waste.
The most commonly used treatment method of hazardous waste is burial at sites
specially allocated for the burial of medical waste at a percentage of 62.4%,
followed by collection in temporary allocated sites at 22.8% as shown in table-
70 and graph-27.
Survey results in tables-71 and 72 showed that the percentage of available
containers distributed across the areas (residential, commercial, government
institutions, public parks and public streets) has reached 79.5%, totalling
(997753) containers. Residential areas had the largest percentage of distributed
containers (94%). In comparison with the results of the 2005 environmental
survey, the total number of containers was 3565, showing a rise in the number
of containers owing to including the governorates of Dahuk and Irbil in the
2010 environmental survey as well as including plastic containers distributed
across areas and households in addition to large containers.
22.8
62.4
12
2.6 0.2
Graph-27: percentage distribution of treatment method of hazardous waste for 2010
collection in temporaryallocated sites
burial in medical wastesites
thown into empty lots
burning
other
29
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
The use of containers by households reached 86.4% as shown in table-73. The
rate of emptying small containers (1m3) and containers of different sizes was the
highest reaching 4 times/week. Survey results also showed that no garbage
isolation or separation is done on household level.
Table-74 shows that the percentage of available machinery to cover municipal
services has reached 96.7% and the number of machinery municipalities had
was 13882. Baghdad Municipality had the highest number (3072) out of which
1578 were working and 1294 rented. The governorate with the lowest number
of machinery is Al-Muthana (262), out of which 201 were working as shown in
ghraph-28.
Table-75 notes that the number of municipalities that have machinery was 411
out of the 425 municipalities in Iraq, and that only 8.5% of them had the needed
machinery to cover their services. This requires providing more support to
municipal directorates to develop the services they offer to citizens. Survey
results in table-76 also showed that the lack of machinery had led some
municipal directorates to contract companies and contractors to provide the
services and cover the shortage in machinery. The percentage of contracting
municipalities reached 5.2% and the number of machinery they had was 778.
Date in tables-77 and 78 indicated the percentages for cleaning per week of
streets, middle islands, squares and marketplaces by municipal directorate,
companies or contractors. The percentage for cleaning streets and middle
islands reached 94.4%, squares 76.5% and marketplaces 89.6% by municipal
directorates compare to 100%, 77.3% and 95.5% respectively by companies and
contractors as in graph-29.
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
workingidlebrokenrented
9229
483 1614
2556
Graph-28: number of working, idle, broken down and rented machinery for 2010
30
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Table-79 shows that 24.9% of municipalities face the problem of increasing
rubble and remnants of war in residential areas followed by streets at 15.1%
then commercial areas at 12.2 as in ghraph-30.
Survey results in table-80 that the number of regular transforming stations
within municipal limits reached 10 with a total area of 146500 m2. The highest
number of stations was in the governorate of Al-Najaf (5 stations), while there
were none in 15 governorates. The number of irregular temporary collection
sites reached 123 with a total area of 1128608 m2. The highest number of these
sites was in the governorate of Dahuk (34 sites).
89.6
76.5
94.4
95.5
77.3
100
020406080100120
marketpalces
squares
streets and middle islands
companies and contractors
municipalities
Graph-29: percentage of city cleaning by municipalities, companies and contractors for 2010
24.9
12.2
7.5
5.4
15.1
Graph-30: percentage of municipalities facing increasing rubble and remnants of war problems by area for 2010
residential areas
commercial areas
government institutions
public parks
public streets
31
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Survey results in tables 81 and 82 indicate that the number of burial sites
granted environmental approval reached 32, only one within the original design
of the municipality. It is worth noting that burial site with environmental
approval do not apply environmental conditions. The Baghdad Municipality
could not establish a medical waste burial site that could adhere to
environmental conditions because it faced difficulty in finding a suitable piece
of land. The number of medical waste burial sites not granted environmental
approval reached 357 as shown in graph-31.
Survey results in table-83 showed that the highest percentage for the type of
garbage burial sites with environmental approval went to open land at 40.6%,
followed by valleys at 31.3% as in graph-32.
389
357
32
Graph-31: number of medical waste burial sites granted and not granted environmental approval for 2010
total no. of medical burial sites
site not granted approval
site granted approval
15.6
40.6
9.4
31.3
3.1
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
regular medicalwaste site
open landquarriesvalleysother
Graph-32: percentage distribution of type of burial sites granted environmental approval for 2010
32
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Table-84 shows that burial sites granted environmental approval and have the
necessary requirements. The percentage of those with fences was 45.2% and for
those that have suitable roads to deliver garbage to site 74.2%. The weakness in
providing needed requirements at burial sites granted environmental approval
was evident as the percentage of sites with a collection system for seeping water
from garbage and sites with high density polyethylene padding was 3.2%, while
none of the site had scales at entrances to weigh garbage nor gas collection
system produced by garbage such as CH4.
Table-85 shows the number of burial machinery and equipment at burial site
granted environmental approval which reached 52; 84.6% were working, 15.4%
broken down and no idle machinery.
Survey results given in thable-86 indicated that the highest percentage for type
of garbage burial sites not granted approval was for valleys at 40.4%, followed
by open land at 31.9% as shown in graph-33.
Table-87 shows that the number of employees at garbage burial sites was 1565 in
Iraq; 51.7% of them were full-time, 34.8% part time and 13.5% day labourors.
Survey results in table-88 showed the percentages of garbage treatment methods. It
showed that the highest percentage for garbage disposal was by burial at sites not
granted environmental approval at 76.9%, which was close to garbage disposal by
burning or dumping into empty lots (27.3% and 24.2% respectively). Methods such as
recycling, reuse, turned to fertiliser or to energy were not used at all in garbage
treatment and disposal as shown in graph-34.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
open landquarriesvalleysother
31.9
26.8
40.4
0.8
Graph-33: percentage distribution of type of burial sites not granted environmental approval for 2010
33
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Table-89 shows the percentage of most important problems faced by municipal
services sector in garbage collection that have reduced service provision:
citizens lack of environmental awareness represented 90.4% followed by few
machinery, pressers…etc. at 87.5% then low wages at 83.8% as shown in
graph-35.
8.2
76.9
24.2 27.3
0.2 3.3
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
burial at sitewith approval
burial at siteswith no
approval
thrown intoempty lots
burningsale touncertifiedcontractors
other
Graph-34: percentage of treatment methods of garbage for 2010
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
10087.5
3.5
25.9
31.8
70.4
80.2 83.8
70.4
90.4
9.9
few machinery (pressers…etc.)
lack of machinery
weak maintenance andsustainability
scarcity of spare parts
low financial allocations
lack of staff
low wages
low avialability of garbagecollection requirements
lack of environmentalawareness
other
Graph-35: percentage of main problems facing the municipal sector in
garbage collection for 2010
34
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Survey results indicate that the percentage of implementing environmental
awareness programmes reached 18.6%, where the number of implemented
programmes was 266. The Baghdad Municipality ranked highest in programme
implementation at 92.9% followed by Baghdad Periphery at 73.3%. the
percentage of benefit from preparing such programmes reached 96.3%. It is
noted that no environmental awareness programmes were implemented in 5
governorates: Dahuk, Al-Anbar, Babil, Kerbal and Missan as shown in table-90.
Table-91 shows the number of environmental awareness programmes
implemented by bodies or organisations which reached a total of 125
programmes the majority of which were implemented by the Ministry of
Municipalities (37), a percentage of 29.6%, implemented in 5 governorates.
Municipal directorates implemented the largest number of environmental
awareness programmes in governorates, implementing 34 programmes in 9
governorates, i.e. in 47.4% of Iraq's governorates.
Table-92 indicates that the number of employees in the municipal sector
(engineers, supervisors, technicians, administrators, unskilled labour, drivers
and other posts) reached a total of 106241 across all governorates. The number
of full-time employees was 40950, part time employees 8844 and 56447 day
laborers. Baghdad Municipality had the largest number of employees at 25836,
followed by the governorate of Basrah at 11610 and Sulaimaniya at 9158.
Survey results, given in table-93, show that the number of rubble crushing
plants, under the Baghdad Municipality, reached (3). They are new plants that
reached the country that works on crushing rubble which has greatly increased
during the past years owing to reconstruction projects. None of these plants is
granted environmental approval, they contain 7 working machines. The source
of received rubble was from demolition and construction. The table also notes
that the amount of received rubble at the site reached 188m3/day and delivered
rubble after crushing was 168m3/day.
One of the important activities to reduce garbage and hence reduce the cost of
treatment and disposal is separation and recycling plants that would lead to greatly
benefiting from the different types of waste. Hence, Baghdad Municipality is
currently working on building 2 such plants that are under construction.
Detailed
Tables
1. Water Sector
Percentage of population connected to drinking water networks by governorate for 2010
% of connected population
Governorate boarder
Iraqi boarders
73
Table (1)
Number and percentage of population connected to drinking water distribution network by environment in Iraq for 2010
Percentage of connected % Number of population
connected Environment
86.1 18703135 Urban
62.1 5958239 Countryside
78.1 24661374 Total
Table (2)
Percentage of crude water sources used in water production stations by type in Iraq for 2010
Water production stations:
Solar powered
stations Desalination stations Well stations Water complex Projects
Crude water
resource
% No.
governorates %
No.
governorates %
No.
governorates %
No.
governorates %
No.
governorates
61.9 13 0.0 0 0.0 0 81.8 18 100.0 22 Surface water
22.7 5 50.0 11 Groundwater/
well water
0.0 0 22.7 5 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0
Project and
compound
water*
Total
* Water project and complexes are used as sources for desalination stations only.
** Dahuk, Irbil, Sulaimaniya and Baghdad are divided to central and periphery in all the tables.
Note: well mounted represent projects and water complexes that are based on wells only.
73
Table (3)
Number and percentage of water production stations, total designed capacity, output of produced water and
percentage from designed capacity by type in Iraq for 2010.
*Desalination stations draw water from projects, water complexes and ground water.
Table (4)
Number and percentage of water production stations by status and type in Iraq for 2010.
Idle working partially Working
%
No. %
No. %
No. Total No.
Water production stations
1.2 4 5.6 18 93.1 299 321 Projects
6.2 172 14.2 397 79.6 2227 2796 Water compounds
2.3 47 2.3 46 95.4 1929 2022 Well stations
38.8 62 0.0 0 61.3 98 98 160 Desalination stations
3.9 11 2.3 7 93.5 261 279 Solar powered stations
5.3 296 8.4 468 86.3 4814 5578 Total
Percentage from
designed
capacity
Output of
produced
water(M³/day)
Total designed
Capacity (M³ /day)
Percent% Number Water production station
76.6 7721682 10077658 50.1 321 Projects
66.6 3303905 4960608 50.1 2796 Water complex
54.4 573134 1053116 36.2 2022 Well mounted
17.9 13934 78042 2.9 160 *Desalination stations
69.2 5713 8251 5.0 279 Solar powered stations
71.8 11618368 16177675 100.0 5578 Total
73
Table (5)
Percentages of governorates' need for new water production stations, availability of alternative energy for stations
working on solar power and availability of water meters in governorates in Iraq for 2010.
Details
No. of
governorates
%
Governorate name
Percentages of
governorates'
need
for new water
production
stations
by type
Water projects
21 95.5 All governorates except Baghdad
municipality.
Water compounds
19 86.4 All governorates except central Dahuk,
central Sulaimaniya and Baghdad periphery.
Well stations
16 72.7 All governorates except central Dahuk,
central Sulaimaniya, Al-Anbar,
Baghdad municipality,
Missan and Basrah.
Desalination stations
15 68.2 All governorates except central Dahuk,
periphery Dahuk, central Sulimaniya,
periphery sulaimaniya, central Irbil,
periphery Irbil and Baghdad municipality.
Solar energy operating
stations
14 63.6 All governorates except central Dahuk,
Nineveh, central sulaimaniye,
Diala, Al-Anbar, Baghdad municipality,
Missan and Basrah.
Percentage for alternative energy for
stations working on solar power
0 0.0 0
Percentage of water meters in
governorates
3 14.3 Nineveh, Kirkuk, Baghdad Municipality.
04
Table (6)
Number and percentage of population connected to drinking water distribution network by environment and governorate for 2010.
Governorate No. population connected to drinking water % of population connected to drinking water
Urban Country Total Urban % Country % Total %
Dahuk / central 238766 9371 248137 80.0 65.0 79.3
Dahuk/ periphery 399097 202323 601420 94.0 90.0 92.6
Nineveh 1426798 720677 2147475 80.0 70.0 76.3
Sulaimaniya / central 678299 29105 707404 100.0 50.0 96.0
Sulaimaniya/periphery 635395 127907 763302 75.0 60.0 71.6
Kirkuk 951022 187889 1138911 100.0 50.0 85.8
Irbil / central 695958 0 695958 95.0 0.0 87.5
Irbil /periphery 532000 38400 570400 55.0 43.0 76.3
Diala 223962 471202 695164 34.0 66.0 50.6
AL-Anbar 590497 596885 1187382 82.0 78.0 79.9
Baghdad/municipality 5159991 0 515991 100.0 0.0 100.0
Baghdad periphery 528183 465003 993186 75.0 55.0 64.1
Babil 654365 548572 1202937 80.0 60.0 69.4
Kerbala 652814 272279 925093 96.0 80.0 90.7
Waset 600588 333949 934537 90.0 69.0 81.2
Salahuddin 427290 284428 711718 72.0 38.0 53.0
AL-Najaf 783581 265303 1048884 90.0 75.0 85.7
Qadisiya 487980 305038 793018 80.0 65.0 73.5
AL-Muthana 240080 230765 470845 80.0 60.0 68.8
Thi Qar 878817 388634 1267451 80.0 60.0 72.6
Missan 568696 191079 759775 85.0 75.0 82.2
Basrah 1348956 289430 1638386 70.0 60.0 68.0
Total 18703135 5958239 24661374 86.1 62.1 78.7
04
Table (7)
Number and percentage of water production stations by type and governorate for 2010.
Water production stations:
Governorate No. of
water
stations
Projects Water
complexes
Well
mounted
Desalination
stations
Solar powered
stations
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Dahuk / central 4 3 75.0 0 0.0 1 25.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Dahuk/ periphery 484 2 0.4 3 0.6 479 99.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Nineveh 148 33 22.3 90 60.8 15 10.1 0 0.0 10 6.8
Sulaimaniya / central 3 3 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/periphery 57 51 89.5 5 8.8 1 1.8 0 0.0 0 0.0
Kirkuk 248 16 6.5 98 39.5 104 41.9 11 4.4 19 7.7
Irbil / central 428 3 0.7 0 0.0 425 99.3 0 0.0 0 0.0
Irbil /periphery 976 8 0.8 0 0.0 968 99.2 0 0.0 0 0.0
Diala 236 25 10.6 176 74.6 0 0.0 1 0.4 34 14.4
AL-Anbar 408 21 5.1 366 89.7 0 0.0 2 0.5 19 4.7
Baghdad/municipality 45 9 20.0 36 80.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Baghdad periphery 210 10 4.8 180 85.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 20 9.5
Babil 313 18 5.8 272 86.9 0 0.0 1 0.3 22 7.0
Kerbala 145 7 4.8 120 82.8 0 0.0 2 1.4 16 11.0
Waset 285 21 7.4 202 70.9 19 6.7 19 6.7 24 8.4
Salahuddin 218 19 8.7 171 78.4 6 2.8 0 0.0 22 10.1
AL-Najaf 132 13 9.8 116 87.9 1 0.8 2 1.5 0 0.0
Qadisiya 231 15 6.5 195 84.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 21 9.1
AL-Muthana 102 4 3.9 54 52.9 3 2.9 13 12.7 28 27.5
Thi Qar 223 15 6.7 160 71.7 0 0.0 48 21.5 0 0.0
Missan 299 13 4.3 252 84.3 0 0.0 12 4.0 22 7.4
Basrah 383 12 3.1 300 78.3 0 0.0 49 12.8 22 5.7
Total 5578 321 5.8 2796 50.1 2022 36.2 160 2.9 279 5.0
04
Table (8a)
Number and percentage of operational water production stations by type and governorate for 2010.
Water production stations:
Governorate Projects Water
complexes
Well mounted Desalination
stations
Solar powered
stations
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Dahuk / central 1 33.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Dahuk/ periphery 2 100.0 2 66.7 460 96.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Nineveh 33 100.0 86 95.6 15 100.0 0 0.0 9 90.0
Sulaimaniya / central 2 66.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 51 100.0 5 100.0 1 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Kirkuk 16 100.0 44 44.9 68.0 65.4 11 100.0 19 100.0
Irbil / central 3 100.0 0 0.0 400 94.1 0 0.0 0 0.0
Irbil /periphery 8 100.0 0 0.0 960 99.2 0 0.0 0 0.0
Diala 24 96.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 100.0 34 100.0
AL-Anbar 20 95.2 366 100.0 0 0.0 2 100.0 19 100.0
Baghdad / municipality 9 100.0 36 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 8 80.0 150 83.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 20 100.0
Babil 12 66.7 182 66.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 22 100.0
Kerbala 7 100.0 120 100.0 0 0.0 2 100.0 16 100.0
Waset 21 100.0 202 100.0 19 100.0 19 100.0 22 91.7
Salahuddin 11 57.9 55 32.2 3 50.0 0 0.0 22 100.0
AL-Najaf 13 100.0 112 96.6 1 100.0 2 100.0 0 0.0
Qadisiya 15 100.0 150 76.9 0 0.0 0 0.0 21 100.0
AL-Muthana 4 100.0 34 63.0 2 66.7 13 100.0 15 53.6
Thi Qar 15 100.0 136 85.0 0 0.0 43 89.6 0 0.0
Missan 12 92.3 247 98.0 0 0.0 3 25.0 20 90.9
Basrah 12 100.0 300 100.0 0 0.0 2 4.1 22 100.0
Total 299 93.1 2227 79.6 1929 95.4 98 61.3 261 93.5
07
Table (8b)
Number and percentage of partially operational water production stations by type governorate for 2010.
Water production stations:
Governorate Projects Water
complexes
Well mounted Desalination
stations
Solar powered
stations
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Dahuk / central 1 33.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Dahuk/ periphery 0 0.0 1 33.3 19 4.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Nineveh 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya / central 1 33.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Kirkuk 0 0.0 51 52.0 24 23.1 0 0.0 0 0.0
Irbil / central 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Irbil /periphery 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Diala 0 0.0 140 79.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
AL-Anbar 1 4.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Baghdad / municipality 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0.0 15 8.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Babil 6 33.3 82 30.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Kerbala 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Waset 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Salahuddin 8 42.1 51 29.8 3 50.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
AL-Najaf 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Qadisiya 0 0.0 40 20.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
AL-Muthana 0 0.0 17 31.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 7 25.0
Thi Qar 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Missan 1 7.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Basrah 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Total 18 6.7 397 14.2 46 2.3 0 0.0 7 2.5
00
Table (8c)
Number and percentage of non-operational water production stations by type and governorate for 2010
Water production stations:
Governorate Projects Water
complexes
Well mounted Desalination
stations
Solar powered stations
No. % No. % No. % No. % No. %
Dahuk / central 1 33.3 0 0.0 1 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Dahuk/ periphery 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Nineveh 0 0.0 4 4.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 10.0
Sulaimaniya / central 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Kirkuk 0 0.0 3 3.1 12 11.5 0 0.0 0 0.0
Irbil / central 0 0.0 0 0.0 25 5.9 0 0.0 0 0.0
Irbil /periphery 0 0.0 0 0.0 8 0.8 0 0.0 0 0.0
Diala 1 4.0 36 20.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
AL-Anbar 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Baghdad / municipality 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 2 20.0 15 8.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Babil 0 0.0 8 2.9 0 0.0 1 100.0 0 0.0
Kerbala 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Waset 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 8.3
Salahuddin 0 0.0 65 38.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
AL-Najaf 0 0.0 4 3.4 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Qadisiya 0 0.0 5 2.6 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
AL-Muthana 0 0.0 3 5.6 1 33.3 0 0.0 6 21.4
Thi Qar 0 0.0 24 15.0 0 0.0 5 10.4 0 0.0
Missan 0 0.0 5 2.0 0 0.0 9 75.0 2 9.1
Basrah 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 47 95.9 0 0.0
Total 4 1.5 172 6.2 47 2.3 62 38.8 11 3.9
04
Table (9)
Rate of crude water drawn from sources to water production stations by type and governorate for 2010.
(m³ /day)
Rate of crude water drawn from sources
Governorate Projects Water
complexes
Well
mounted
Desalination
Stations *
Solar powered
Stations
Total
Dahuk / central 168400 0 0 0 0 168400
Dahuk/ periphery 90000 730 129270 0 0 220000
Nineveh 1121920 117412 14880 0 152 1254364
Sulaimaniya/ central 216000 0 0 0 0 216000
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 205801 2700 14860 0 0 223361
Kirkuk 575062 218453 147206 366 1571 942658
Irbil / central 228360 0 150000 0 0 378360
Irbil /periphery 50000 0 192000 0 0 242000
Diala 561860 55130 0 8 88 617086
AL-Anbar 291060 294000 0 700 236 585996
Baghdad municipality 2430689 229882 0 0 0 2660571
Baghdad / periphery 350000 200000 0 0 30 550030
Babil 289808 239871 0 0 503 530182
Kerbala 342982 155869 0 1210 404 500465
Waset 250000 260000 500 500 500 511500
Salahuddin 172013 69564 17600 0 682 259859
AL-Najaf 438910 154752 300 468 0 594430
Qadisiya 299000 95737 0 0 450 395187
AL-Muthana 195360 109984 1670 7800 275 315089
Thi Qar 314310 359612 0 5268 0 679190
Missan 88000 531652 0 2640 1500 623792
Basrah 293700 764775 0 936 1400 1060811
Total 8973235 3860123 668286 19896 7791 13529331
*Drawn water for desalination stations in Kirkuk, Diala, AL-Anbar, Waset and AL-Najaf governorates are ground water,
as to the rest governorates the crude water are from projects and water complexes.
04
Table (10)
Percentage distributions of the rate of crude water drawn from source to water production stations by type and
governorate for 2010.
Percentage distributions of the rate of crude water drawn from source to :
Governorate Projects Water
complexes
Well
mounted
Desalination
Stations *
Solar powered
Stations
Total
Dahuk / central 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Dahuk/ periphery 40.9 0.3 58.8 0.0 0.0 100.0
Nineveh 89.4 9.4 1.2 0.0 (.) 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 92.1 1.2 6.7 0.0 0.0 100.0
Kirkuk 61.0 23.2 15.6 (.) 0.2 100.0
Irbil / central 60.4 0.0 39.6 0.0 0.0 100.0
Irbil /periphery 20.7 0.0 79.3 0.0 0.0 100.0
Diala 91.4 8.6 0.0 (.) (.) 100.0
AL-Anbar 49.7 50.2 0.0 0.1 (.) 100.0
Baghdad municipality 91.4 8.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Baghdad / periphery 63.6 36.4 0.0 0.0 (.) 100.0
Babil 54.7 45.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 100.0
Kerbala 68.5 31.1 0.0 0.2 0.1 100.0
Waset 48.9 50.8 0.1 0.1 0.1 100.0
Salahuddin 66.2 26.8 6.8 0.0 0.3 100.0
AL-Najaf 73.8 26.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 100.0
Qadisiya 75.7 24.2 0.0 0.0 0.1 100.0
AL-Muthana 62.0 34.9 0.5 2.5 0.1 100.0
Thi Qar 46.3 52.9 0.0 0.8 0.0 100.0
Missan 14.1 85.2 0.0 0.4 0.2 100.0
Basrah 27.7 72.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 100.0
Total 66.3 28.5 4.9 0.2 0.1 100.0
(.) Represents water produced from well mounted and distributed to population without processing.
03
Table (11)
Rate of drinking water produced in water production stations by type and governorate for 2010
Percentage distributions of the rate of crude water drawn from source to :
Governorate Projects Water
complexes
Well
mounted
Desalination
Stations *
Solar powered
Stations
Total
Dahuk / central 101520 0 0 0 0 101520
Dahuk/ periphery 840000 690 105300 0 0 189990
Nineveh 1019927 106739 14880 0 138 1141684
Sulaimaniya/ central 216000 0 0 0 0 216000
Sulaimaniya/ periphery* 201933 2500 14860 0 0 219293
Kirkuk 396248 144153 95798 238 1022 637459
Irbil / central 182680 0 138000 0 0 320680
Irbil /periphery 42000 0 186240 0 0 228240
Diala 344809 49602 0 8 49 394468
AL-Anbar 277200 280000 0 700 236 558136
Baghdad municipality 2314924 218936 0 0 0 2533860
Baghdad / periphery 280000 200000 0 0 30 480030
Babil 245280 230277 0 0 402 475959
Kerbala 327560 145412 0 1100 308 474380
Waset 183200 200826 416 416 408 385266
Salahuddin 162005 67440 16000 0 620 246065
AL-Najaf 366050 128960 250 390 0 495650
Qadisiya 216900 92240 0 0 250 309390
AL-Muthana 161410 48480 1390 5568 250 217098
Thi Qar 285736 326920 0 2634 0 615290
Missan 72000 434988 0 2160 800 509948
Basrah 240300 625742 0 720 1200 867962
Total 7721682 3303905 573134 13934 5713 11618368
*Represents water produced from well mounted and distributed to population without processing.
03
Table (12)
Percentage distribution of the rate of drinking water produced in water production stations by type and
governorate for 2010.
(.) The value greater than zero but small enough to become zero when rounding to the number of displayed decimal mattresses
Percentage distributions of the rate of crude water drawn from source to :
Governorate Projects Water
Complexes
Well
mounted
Desalination
Stations
Solar powered
Stations
Total
Dahuk / central 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Dahuk/ periphery 44.2 0.4 55.4 0.0 0.0 100.0
Nineveh 89.3 9.3 1.3 0.0 (.) 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 92.1 1.1 6.8 0.0 0.0 100.0
Kirkuk 62.2 22.6 15.0 (.) 0.2 100.0
Irbil / central 57.0 0.0 43.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Irbil /periphery 18.4 0.0 81.6 0.0 0.0 100.0
Diala 87.4 12.6 0.0 (.) (.) 100.0
AL-Anbar 49.7 50.2 0.0 0.1 (.) 100.0
Baghdad municipality 91.4 8.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Baghdad / periphery 58.3 41.7 0.0 0.0 (.) 100.0
Babil 51.5 48.4 0.0 0.0 0.1 100.0
Kerbala 69.1 30.7 0.0 0.2 0.1 100.0
Waset 47.6 52.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 100.0
Salahuddin 65.8 27.4 6.5 0.0 0.3 100.0
AL-Najaf 73.9 26.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 100.0
Qadisiya 70.1 29.8 0.0 0.0 0.1 100.0
AL-Muthana 74.3 22.3 0.6 2.6 0.1 100.0
Thi Qar 46.4 53.1 0.0 0.4 0.0 100.0
Missan 14.1 85.3 0.0 0.4 0.2 100.0
Basrah 27.7 72.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 100.0
Total 66.5 28.4 4.9 0.1 (.) 100.0
03
Table (13)
Rate and percentage of water loss in water distribution network serving the population from water production stations and assessment
of amounts of drinking water needed by environment and governorate for 2010.
Governorate Rate of
Produced
water from
water stations
Rate of
water loss
in water
distribution
networks
water
loss in water
distribution
networks
%
Rate of water served
to population
Percentage of water
served to population
Estimated
need for the
amount of
drinking
water in the
governorate
Urban Country
Side
Total Urban Country
side
Total
Dahuk / central 101520 32000 31.5 89320 8200 97520 91.6 8.4 100.0 119000
Dahuk/ periphery 189990 20000 10.5 90000 80000 170000 52.9 47.1 100.0 200000
Nineveh 1141684 456673 40.0 513758 171253 685011 75.0 25.0 100.0 1729600
Sulaimaniya/ central 216000 23753 11.0 184000 8247 192247 95.7 4.3 100.0 277200
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 219293 4467 2.0 182212 36681 218893 83.2 16.8 100.0 303266
Kirkuk 637459 63108 9.9 347970.3 273225 621195.3 56.0 44.0 100.0 782911
Irbil / central 320680 57672 18.0 320680 0 320680 100.0 0.0 100.0 378352
Irbil /periphery 228240 14860 6.5 125532 98143 223675 56.1 43.9 100.0 295675
Diala 394468 39446 10.0 120705 234310 355015 34.0 66.0 100.0 502829
AL-Anbar 558136 79664 14.3 198000 280236 478236 41.4 58.6 100.0 5920000
Baghdad/municipality 2533860 1013551 40.0 1520326 0 1520326 100.0 0.0 100.0 3250000
Baghdad / periphery 480030 135000 28.1 275000 125000 400000 68.8 31.3 100.0 650000
Babil 475959 56151 11.8 190223 285334 475557 40.0 60.0 100.0 650000
Kerbala 474380 95469 20.1 272024 105787 377811 72.0 28.0 100.0 480000
Waset 385266 17285 4.5 228413 94587 323000 70.7 29.3 100.0 531941
Salahuddin 246065 68834 28.0 102087 58524 160611 63.6 36.4 100.0 342197
AL-Najaf 495650 95494 19.3 381250 73984 455234 83.7 16.3 100.0 546280
Qadisiya 309390 92817 30.0 121210 95293 216503 56.0 44.0 100.0 418631
AL-Muthana 217098 67570 31.1 126918 84612 211530 60.0 40.0 100.0 300000
Thi Qar 615290 177671 28.9 260991 173994 434985 60.0 40.0 100.0 785271
Missan 509948 96891 19.0 231822 181235 413057 56.1 43.9 100.0 550000
Basrah 867962 104069 12.0 534221 228951 763172 70.0 30.0 100.0 1100000
Total 11618368 2812445 24.2 6416662 2697596 9114258 70.4 29.6 100.0 14747250
44
Table (14)
Individual's average share of drinking water serving the population by governorate for 2010.
(m³ /day)
Governorate Rate of drinking water to
the population
Population connected to
drinking water networks
Individual's average share of
drinking water serving
connected population
Individual's average share of
drinking water serving
the total population
Urban Country Total Urban Country Total
Dahuk / central 89320 8200 97520 238766 9371 248137 0.39 0.31
Dahuk/ periphery 90000 80000 170000 399097 202323 601420 0.28 0.26
Nineveh 513758 171253 685011 1426798 720677 2147475 0.32 0.24
Sulaimaniya/ central 184000 8247 192247 678299 29105 707404 0.27 0.26
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 182212 36681 218893 635395 127907 763302 0.29 0.21
Kirkuk 347970 273225 621195 951022 187889 1138911 0.55 0.47
Irbil / central 320680 0 320680 695958 0 695958 0.46 0.40
Irbil /periphery 125532 98143 223675 532000 38400 570400 0.39 0.30
Diala 120705 234310 355015 223962 471202 695164 0.51 0.26
AL-Anbar 198000 280236 478236 590497 596885 1187382 0.40 0.32
Baghdad/municipality 1520326 0 1520326 5159991 0 5159991 0.29 0.29
Baghdad / periphery 275000 125000 400000 528183 465003 993186 0.40 0.32
Babil 190223 285334 475557 654365 548572 1202937 0.40 0.27
Kerbala 272024 105787 377811 652814 272279 925093 0.41 0.37
Waset 228413 94587 323000 600588 333949 934537 0.35 0.28
Salahuddin 102087 58524 160611 427290 284428 711718 0.23 0.12
AL-Najaf 381250 73984 455234 783581 265303 1048884 0.43 0.37
Qadisiya 121210 95293 216503 487980 305038 793018 0.27 0.20
AL-Muthana 126918 84612 211530 240080 230765 470845 0.45 0.31
Thi Qar 260991 173994 434985 878817 388634 1267451 0.34 0.25
Missan 231822 181235 413057 568696 191079 759775 0.54 0.45
Basrah 534221 228951 763127 1348956 289430 1638386 0.47 0.32
Total 6416662 2697596 9114258 18703135 5958239 24661374 0.37 0.29
44
Table (15)
Number and percentage of projects, rate of crude water drawn from surface water and its total design capacity, rate of available capacity, amount of water
produced and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010.
Governorate Projects % rate of crude water drawn
from surface water
(M³ /day)
total design capacity
(M³ /day)
rate of available
capacity
(M³ /day)
Amount of water
Produced
(M³ /day)
amount of water produced
and percentage from
designed capacity
Dahuk / central 3 0.9 168400 254400 233000 101520 39.9
Dahuk/ periphery 2 0.6 90000 96000 150000 84000 87.5
Nineveh * 33 10.3 1121920 955387 859848 1019927 106.8
Sulaimaniya/ central 3 0.9 216000 316800 230000 216000 68.2
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 51 15.9 205801 220000 210000 201933 91.8
Kirkuk 16 5.0 575062 558096 497263 396248 71.0
Irbil / central 3 0.9 228360 243760 228360 182680 74.9
Irbil /periphery 8 2.5 50000 110200 51100 42000 38.1
Diala 25 7.8 561860 561860 444797 344809 61.4
AL-Anbar 21 6.5 291060 400840 325820 2314924 69.2
Baghdad/municipality 9 2.8 2430689 2986849 2900000 2314924 77.5
Baghdad / periphery 10 3.1 35000 35000 245000 280000 80.0
Babil 18 5.6 289808 306600 260610 245280 80.0
Kerbala 7 2.2 342982 341280 327628 327560 96.0
Waset 21 6.5 250000 219840 219840 183200 83.3
Salahuddin 19 5.9 172013 351880 308800 162005 46.0
AL-Najaf 13 4.0 438910 530400 461448 366050 69.0
Qadisiya 15 4.7 299000 350000 300000 216900 62.0
AL-Muthana 4 1.2 195360 177050 167785 161410 91.2
Thi Qar 15 4.7 314310 346016 300023 285736 82.6
Missan 13 4.0 88000 80000 76000 72000 90.0
Basrah 12 3.7 293700 320400 267000 240300 75.0
Total 321 100.0 8973235 10077658 9064322 7721682 76.6
*Note: the actual capacity is larger than the design capacity due to operating projects to more than their energy to cover the needs of the governorate.
44
Table (16)
Number and percentage of projects by status and governorate for 2010.
Governorate
Projects by status : Percentage of projects by status:
Working Partially
working Idle Total Working
Partially
working Idle Total
Dahuk / central 1 1 1 3 33.3 33.3 33.3 100.0
Dahuk/ periphery 2 0 0 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Nineveh 33 0 0 33 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 2 1 0 3 66.7 33.3 0.0 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 51 0 0 51 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Kirkuk 16 0 0 16 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Irbil / central 3 0 0 3 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Irbil /periphery 8 0 0 8 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Diala 24 0 1 25 96.0 0.0 4.0 100.0
AL-Anbar 20 1 0 21 95.2 4.8 0.0 100.0
Baghdad/municipality 9 0 0 9 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Baghdad / periphery 8 0 2 10 80.0 0.0 20.0 100.0
Babil 12 6 0 18 66.7 33.3 0.0 100.0
Kerbala 7 0 0 7 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Waset 21 0 0 21 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Salahuddin 11 8 0 19 57.9 42.1 0.0 100.0
AL-Najaf 13 0 0 13 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Qadisiya 15 0 0 15 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
AL-Muthana 4 0 0 4 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Thi Qar 15 0 0 15 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Missan 12 1 0 13 92.3 7.7 0.0 100.0
Basrah 12 0 0 12 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Total 299 18 4 321 93.1 5.6 1.2 100.0
47
Table (17)
Number and percentage of water collections and rate of amount of crude water drawn from surface water, total design capacity, rate of available capacity, rate of
water produced and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010.
Governorate Number of
water collections
% Rate of crude water drawn
from Surface water (M³ /day)
Total design
capacity (M³ /day)
Rate of available
Capacity (M³ /day)
Rate of water
Produced (M³ /day)
%
Dahuk / central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Dahuk/ periphery 3 0.1 730 1840 920 690 37.5
Nineveh 90 3.2 117412 129558 123080 106739 82.4
Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 5 0.2 2700 3000 2500 2500 83.3
Kirkuk 98 3.0 218453 200232 178407 144153 72.0
Irbil / central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Irbil /periphery 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Diala 176 6.3 55130 276408 11526 49602 17.9
AL-Anbar 366 13.1 294000 322000 280000 280000 87.0
Baghdad/municipality 36 1.3 229882 369400 240829 281936 59.3
Baghdad / periphery 180 6.4 200000 350000 200000 200000 57.1
Babil 272 9.7 239871 287846 244669 230277 80.0
Kerbala 120 4.3 155869 306576 293802 145412 47.4
Waset 202 7.2 260000 240992 240992 200826 83.3
Salahuddin 171 6.1 69564 252956 126260 67440 26.7
AL-Najaf 116 4.1 154752 314640 131100 128960 41.0
Qadisiya 195 7.0 95737 110000 90000 92240 83.9
AL-Muthana 54 1.9 109984 133320 75000 48480 36.4
Thi Qar 160 5.7 359612 343920 330189 326920 95.1
Missan 252 9.0 531652 483320 459154 434988 90.0
Basrah 300 10.7 764755 834600 695250 625742 75.0
Total 2796 100.0 3860123 4960608 3723678 3303905 66.6
40
Table (18)
Number and percentage of water collections by status and governorate for 2010.
Governorate Water collections by status : Percentage of water collections by status:
Working Partially working Idle Total Working Partially working Idle Total
Dahuk / central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Dahuk/ periphery 2 1 0 3 66.7 33.3 0.0 100.0
Nineveh 86 0 4 90 95.6 0.0 4.4 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 5 0 0 5 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Kirkuk 44 51 3 98 44.9 52.0 3.1 100.0
Irbil / central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Irbil /periphery 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Diala 0 140 36 176 0.0 79.5 20.5 100.0
AL-Anbar 366 0 0 366 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Baghdad/municipality 36 0 0 36 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Baghdad / periphery 150 15 15 180 83.3 8.3 8.3 100.0
Babil 182 82 8 272 66.9 30.1 2.9 100.0
Kerbala 120 0 0 120 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Waset 202 0 0 202 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Salahuddin 55 51 65 171 32.2 29.8 38.0 100.0
AL-Najaf 112 0 4 116 96.6 0.0 3.4 100.0
Qadisiya 150 40 5 195 76.9 20.5 2.6 100.0
AL-Muthana 34 17 3 54 63.0 31.5 5.6 100.0
Thi Qar 136 0 24 160 85.0 0.0 15.0 100.0
Missan 247 0 5 252 98.0 0.0 2.0 100.0
Basrah 300 0 0 300 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Total 2227 397 172 2796 79.6 14.2 6.2 100.0
44
Table (19)
Number and percentage of wells and water production stations mounted on wells (excluding desalination stations), total design and availability capacity, rate of
water produced and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010
Governorate No. of
wells
% No. water production
stations mounted on
wells
Percent of water
production stations
mounted on wells
Total design
capacity
(M³ /day)
Total design
availability
(M³ /day)
Rate of water
produced
(M³ /day)
Rate of water produced
and percentage from
designed
Dahuk / central 127 5.4 1 (.) 0 0 0 0.0
Dahuk/ periphery 716 22.5 479 23.7 120000 105300 105300 87.8
Nineveh 124 3.9 15 0.7 14880 14880 14880 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 483 15.2 1 (.) 460 420 400 87.0
Kirkuk 226 7.1 104 5.1 134928 120220 95798 71.0
Irbil / central 425 13.4 425 21.0 220000 150000 138000 62.7
Irbil /periphery 968 30.4 968 47.9 528000 192000 186240 35.3
Diala 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
AL-Anbar 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Baghdad/municipality 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Babil 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Kerbala 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Waset 19 0.6 19 0.9 1248 1248 416 33.3
Salahuddin 45 1.4 6 0.3 28750 16000 16000 55.7
AL-Najaf 2 0.1 1 (.) 1200 500 250 20.8
Qadisiya 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
AL-Muthana 3 0.1 3 0.1 3650 3015 1390 38.1
Thi Qar 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Missan 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Basrah 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Total 3183 100.0 2022 100.0 1053116 603583 558674 53.0
(.) The value greater than zero but small enough to become zero when rounding to the number of displayed decimal mattresses
44
Table (20)
Rate of water drawn from wells and used as crude water sources in water production stations (excluding desalination stations) and distributed to the population
without treatment by governorate for 2010.
Governorate Rate of water drawn from wells and
used as crude water sources in
water production stations (M³ /day)
Percentage of water drawn from
wells and used as crude water sources
in water production stations (M³ /day)
Rate of water drawn from wells
And distributed to the population
Without treatment(M³ /day)
% of water drawn from wells
and distributed to the
population without
treatment(M³ /day)
Dahuk / central 0 0.0 0 0.0
Dahuk/ periphery 129270 19.8 107000 24.0
Nineveh 14880 2.3 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0.0 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 400 0.1 14460 3.2
Kirkuk 147206 22.5 0 0.0
Irbil / central 150000 22.9 138000 31.0
Irbil /periphery 192000 29.4 186240 41.8
Diala 0 0.0 0 0.0
AL-Anbar 0 0.0 0 0.0
Baghdad/municipality 0 0.0 0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0.0 0 0.0
Babil 0 0.0 0 0.0
Kerbala 0 0.0 0 0.0
Waset 500 0.1 0 0.0
Salahuddin 17600 2.7 0 0.0
AL-Najaf 300 0.0 0 0.0
Qadisiya 0 0.0 0 0.0
AL-Muthana 1670 0.3 0 0.0
Thi Qar 0 0.0 0 0.0
Missan 0 0.0 0 0.0
Basrah 0 0.0 0 0.0
Total 653826 100.0 445700 100.0
43
Table (21)
Number and percentage of water production stations mounted on wells (excluding desalination stations) by status and governorate for 2010.
Governorate No. of water production stations mounted on wells by status: % of water production stations mounted on wells by status:
Working Partially working Idle Total Working Partially working Idle Total
Dahuk / central 0 0 1 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0
Dahuk/ periphery 460 19 0 479 96.0 4.0 0.0 100.0
Nineveh 15 0 0 15 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 1 0 0 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Kirkuk 68 24 12 104 65.4 23.1 11.5 100.0
Irbil / central 400 0 25 425 94.1 0.0 5.9 100.0
Irbil /periphery 960 0 8 968 99.2 0.0 0.8 100.0
Diala 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Anbar 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad/municipality 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Babil 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kerbala 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Waset 19 0 0 19 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Salahuddin 3 3 0 6 50.0 50.0 0.0 100.0
AL-Najaf 1 0 0 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Qadisiya 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Muthana 2 0 1 3 66.7 0.0 33.3 100.0
Thi Qar 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Missan 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Basrah 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total 1929 46 47 2022 95.4 2.3 2.3 100.0
43
Table (22)
Number and percentage of water desalination stations (RO), total design and available capacity, rate of water produced and percentage
from designed capacity by governorate for 2010
Governorate No. of water
Desalination
stations (RO)
% Total design capacity
(M³ /day)
Rate of available
capacity (M³ /day)
Rate of produced
water from desalination
stations (M³ /day)
%
Dahuk / central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Dahuk/ periphery 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Nineveh 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Kirkuk 11 6.9 336 299 238 70.8
Irbil / central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Irbil /periphery 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Diala 1 0.6 8 8 8 100.0
AL-Anbar 2 1.3 700 700 700 100.0
Baghdad/municipality 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
Babil 1 0.6 180 0 0 0.0
Kerbala 2 1.3 1200 1150 1100 91.7
Waset 19 11.9 1248 1248 416 33.3
Salahuddin 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
AL-Najaf 2 1.3 1440 600 390 27.1
Qadisiya 0 0.0 0 0 0 0.0
AL-Muthana 13 8.1 15312 10000 5568 36.4
Thi Qar 48 30.0 3306 2660 2634 79.7
Missan 12 7.5 2400 2280 2160 90.0
Basrah 49 30.6 51912 800 720 1.4
Total 160 100.0 78042 19745 13934 17.9
43
Table (23)
Number of desalination stations (RO), rate of crude water drawn to desalination stations and their percentage distribution by source of crude water
used and governorate for 2010.
Governorate No. of desalination
stations (RO)
Rate of crude water used in desalination
stations (RO) by source (M³ /day)
% of crude water used in desalination
stations (RO) by source
Project and
complexes water
Surface
water
Ground
water
Total Project and
complexes water
Surface
water
Ground
water
Total
Dahuk / central 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Dahuk/ periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Nineveh 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kirkuk 11 0 0 366 366 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0
Irbil / central 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Irbil /periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Diala 1 0 0 8 8 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0
AL-Anbar 2 0 0 700 700 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0
Baghdad/municipality 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Babil 1 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kerbala 2 1210 0 0 1210 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Waset 19 0 0 500 500 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0
Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Najaf 2 0 0 468 468 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0
Qadisiya 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Muthana 13 7800 0 0 7800 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Thi Qar 48 5268 0 0 5268 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Missan 12 2640 0 0 2640 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Basrah 49 936 0 0 936 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Total 160 17854 0 2042 19896 89.7 0.0 10.3 100.0
44
Table (24)
Number and percentage of water desalination stations (RO), rate of crude water drawn to desalination stations and their percentage distribution
by source of crude water used and governorate for 2010.
Governorate No. of water desalination stations (RO) by status : % of water desalination stations (RO) by status :
Working Partially
working Idle Total Working
Partially
working Idle Total
Dahuk / central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Dahuk/ periphery 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Nineveh 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kirkuk 11 0 0 11 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Irbil / central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Irbil /periphery 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Diala 1 0 0 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
AL-Anbar 2 0 0 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Baghdad/municipality 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Babil 0 0 1 1 0.0 0.0 100.0 100.0
Kerbala 2 0 0 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Waset 19 0 0 19 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Najaf 2 0 0 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Qadisiya 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Muthana 13 0 0 13 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Thi Qar 43 0 5 45 89.6 0.0 10.4 100.0
Missan 3 0 9 12 25.0 0.0 75.0 100.0
Basrah 2 0 47 49 4.1 0.0 95.9 100.0
Total 98 0 62 160 61.3 0.0 38.8 100.0
44
Table (25)
Number and percentage of stations powered by solar energy, rate of amount of crude water drawn from surface water, total design capacity,
rate of available capacity, rate of water produced and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010.
Governorate
No. of stations
powered by
solar energy
%
Rate of crude water
drawn
from surface water
(m³ /day)
Total design
capacity
(m³ /day)
Rate of
design
availability
(m³ /day)
Rate of water
Produced
(m³ /day)
Rate of water
produced
and % from designed
capacity
Dahuk / central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Dahuk/ periphery 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Nineveh 10 3.6 152 230 219 138 60.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Kirkuk 19 6.8 1571 1440 1283 1022 71.0
Irbil / central 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Irbil /periphery 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Diala 34 12.2 88 98 88 49 50.0
AL-Anbar 19 6.8 236 236 236 236 100.0
Baghdad/municipality 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 20 7.2 30 63 30 30 48.0
Babil 22 7.9 503 402 402 402 100.0
Kerbala 16 5.7 404 336 322 308 91.7
Waset 24 8.6 500 816 816 408 50.0
Salahuddin 22 7.9 682 1240 620 620 50.0
AL-Najaf 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Qadisiya 21 7.5 450 252 250 250 99.2
AL-Muthana 28 10.0 275 400 300 250 62.5
Thi Qar 0 0.0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Missan 22 7.9 1500 1250 1200 800 64.0
Basrah 22 7.9 1400 1488 1364 1200 80.6
Total 3183 100.0 7791 8251 7130 5713 69.2
44
Table (26)
Number and percentage of stations powered by solar energy by status and governorate for 2010.
Governorate No. stations powered by solar energy by status : % stations powered by solar energy by status :
Working Partially
working Idle
Total Working
Partially
working
Idle Total
Dahuk / central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Dahuk/ periphery 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Nineveh 9 0 1 10 90.0 0.0 10.0 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kirkuk 19 0 0 19 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Irbil / central 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Irbil /periphery 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Diala 34 0 0 34 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
AL-Anbar 19 0 0 19 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Baghdad/municipality 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 20 0 0 20 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Babil 22 0 0 22 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Kerbala 16 0 0 16 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Waset 22 0 2 24 91.7 0.0 8.3 100.0
Salahuddin 22 0 0 22 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
AL-Najaf 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Qadisiya 21 0 0 21 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
AL-Muthana 15 7 6 28 53.6 25.0 21.4 100.0
Thi Qar 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Missan 20 0 2 22 90.9 0.0 9.1 100.0
Basrah 22 0 0 22 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Total 261 0 11 160 93.5 2.5 3.9 100.0
47
Table (27)
Number of tests conducted on crude and produced water at production stations and water distribution networks by type and governorate foe 2010
Governorate No. of tests conducted on crude water by type : No. of tests conducted on produced water by type :
Biological test Physiochemical test Total Biological test Physiochemical/except
Chlorine test
Chlorine test Total
Dahuk / central 0 0 0 1 13 1 15
Dahuk/ periphery 2 12 14 2 12 1 15
Nineveh 0 15 15 3 15 1 19
Sulaimaniya/ central 3 14 17 3 13 1 17
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 2 12 14 2 13 1 16
Kirkuk 0 14 14 3 15 1 19
Irbil / central 2 8 10 2 11 1 14
Irbil /periphery 2 8 10 2 11 1 14
Diala 0 14 14 3 15 1 19
AL-Anbar 0 16 16 3 16 1 20
Baghdad/municipality 6 32 38 2 31 1 34
Baghdad / periphery 0 11 11 3 12 1 16
Babil 0 16 16 3 16 1 20
Kerbala 1 16 17 4 16 1 21
Waset 0 15 15 4 17 1 22
Salahuddin 0 14 14 3 14 1 18
AL-Najaf 0 14 14 3 16 1 20
Qadisiya 0 15 15 3 15 1 19
AL-Muthana 0 14 14 3 15 1 19
Thi Qar 0 13 13 3 11 1 15
Missan 2 14 16 2 13 1 16
Basrah 0 14 14 3 14 1 18
Total
40
Table (28)
Percentage distribution of tests conducted on crude and produced water at production stations and water distribution networks by type and governorate for 2010
Governorate Percentage distribution of tests conducted on crude
water by type :
Percentage distribution of tests on produced water by type :
Biological test Physiochemical test Total Biological test Physiochemical/except
Chlorine test
Chlorine test Total
Dahuk / central 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.7 86.7 6.7 100.0
Dahuk/ periphery 14.3 85.7 100.0 13.3 80.0 6.7 100.0
Nineveh 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.8 78.9 5.3 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 17.0 82.4 100.0 17.6 76.5 5.8 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 14.3 85.7 100.0 12.5 81.2 6.3 100.0
Kirkuk 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.8 78.9 5.3 100.0
Irbil / central 20.0 80.0 100.0 14.3 78.6 7.1 100.0
Irbil /periphery 20.0 80.0 100.0 14.3 78.6 7.1 100.0
Diala 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.8 78.9 5.3 100.0
AL-Anbar 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.0 80.0 5.0 100.0
Baghdad/municipality 15.8 84.2 100.0 5.9 91.2 2.9 100.0
Baghdad / periphery 0.0 100.0 100.0 18.8 75.0 6.3 100.0
Babil 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.0 80.0 5.0 100.0
Kerbala 5.9 94.1 100.0 19.0 76.2 4.8 100.0
Waset 0.0 100.0 100.0 40.5 18.9 40.5 100.0
Salahuddin 0.0 100.0 100.0 16.7 77.8 5.6 100.0
AL-Najaf 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.0 80.0 5.0 100.0
Qadisiya 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.8 78.9 5.3 100.0
AL-Muthana 0.0 100.0 100.0 15.8 78.9 5.3 100.0
Thi Qar 0.0 100.0 100.0 20.0 73.3 6.7 100.0
Missan 12.5 87.5 100.0 12.5 81.3 6.3 100.0
Basrah 0.0 100.0 100.0 16.7 77.8 5.6 100.0
Total
44
Table (29)
Number of samples drawn for tests conducted on crude and produced water at production stations and water distribution networks durin the month preceding the
survey by type and governorate for 2010.
Governorate No. of samples drawn for tests on crude water by type /
in the month preceding the survey :
No. of samples drawn for tests on produced water in water stations by type/
In the month preceding the survey :
Biological test Physiochemical test Total Biological test Physiochemical/except
Chlorine test
Chlorine test Total
Dahuk / central 0 0 0 55 18 150 223
Dahuk/ periphery 45 45 90 45 45 45 135
Nineveh 0 37 37 211 43 211 465
Sulaimaniya/ central 300 80 380 300 80 200 580
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 75 20 95 65 20 50 135
Kirkuk 0 10 10 160 62 126 348
Irbil / central 60 60 120 60 60 150 270
Irbil /periphery 60 60 120 60 60 150 270
Diala 0 55 55 223 59 223 505
AL-Anbar 0 25 25 150 45 1500 1695
Baghdad/municipality 37 849 886 1001 4040 3523 8564
Baghdad / periphery 0 10 10 127 27 200 354
Babil 0 71 71 144 71 71 286
Kerbala 6 640 646 289 640 782 1711
Waset 0 70 70 150 70 150 370
Salahuddin 0 70 70 150 70 150 370
AL-Najaf 0 27 27 330 38 330 698
Qadisiya 0 70 70 150 70 100 320
AL-Muthana 0 60 60 150 60 150 360
Thi Qar 0 25 25 115 25 115 255
Missan 75 35 110 114 66 150 330
Basrah 0 32 32 304 304 304 912
Total 658 2351 3009 4353 5973 8830 19156
44
Table (30)
Percentage distribution of the samples drawn for tests conducted on crude and produced water at production stations and water distribution networks in the
month preceding the survey by type and governorate for 2010.
Governorate Percentage distribution of tests conducted on crude
water by type :
Percentage distribution of tests on produced water by type :
Biological test Physiochemical test Total Biological test Physiochemical/except
Chlorine test
Chlorine test Total
Dahuk / central 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.7 8.1 67.3 100.0
Dahuk/ periphery 50.0 50.0 100.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 100.0
Nineveh 0.0 100.0 100.0 45.4 9.2 45.5 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 78.9 21.1 100.0 51.7 13.8 34.5 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 78.9 21.1 100.0 48.2 14.8 37.0 100.0
Kirkuk 0.0 100.0 100.0 46.0 17.8 36.2 100.0
Irbil / central 50.0 50.0 100.0 22.2 22.2 55.6 100.0
Irbil /periphery 50.0 50.0 100.0 22.2 22.2 55.6 100.0
Diala 0.0 100.0 100.0 44.2 11.7 44.2 100.0
AL-Anbar 0.0 100.0 100.0 8.8 2.7 88.5 100.0
Baghdad/municipality 4.2 95.8 100.0 11.7 47.2 41.1 100.0
Baghdad / periphery 0.0 100.0 100.0 35.9 7.6 56.5 100.0
Babil 0.0 100.0 100.0 50.3 24.8 24.8 100.0
Kerbala 0.9 99.1 100.0 16.9 37.4 45.7 100.0
Waset 0.0 100.0 100.0 40.5 18.9 40.5 100.0
Salahuddin 0.0 100.0 100.0 40.5 18.9 40.5 100.0
AL-Najaf 0.0 100.0 100.0 47.3 5.4 47.3 100.0
Qadisiya 0.0 100.0 100.0 46.9 21.9 31.3 100.0
AL-Muthana 0.0 100.0 100.0 41.7 16.7 41.7 100.0
Thi Qar 0.0 100.0 100.0 45.1 9.8 45.1 100.0
Missan 68.2 31.8 100.0 34.5 20.0 45.5 100.0
Basrah 0.0 100.0 100.0 33.3 33.3 33.3 100.0
Total 21.9 78.1 100.0 22.7 31.2 46.1 100.0
43
Table (31)
Percentage of availability instances of produced water reaching consumers through distribution networks for 2010.
Availability instances of produced water reaching
consumers through distribution networks
No. governorate % Governorate
1 good (300-400) liters / person / day
5
22.7
Kirkuk, central Irbil, AL-Anbar, Waset, Missan
2 medium (200-300) liters/ person / day
16
72.7
Central Dahuk, periphery Dahuk, Nineveh,
central
Sulaimaniya, prephery Sulaimaniya,
prephery Irbil, central Irbil, municipality
Baghdad,
prephery Baghdad, Babil, Kerbala, AL-Najaf,
Qadisiya, AL-Muthana, Thi Qar, Basrah
3 below average (100-200) liters / person /day
1
4.5
Salahuddin
4 low ( 100- and below ) liters / person / day
0
0.0
Total 22 100.0
43
Table (32)
Percentage distribution of produced water by sector and governorate for 2010
Governorate Total amount of produced water (M³ /day)
Sectors
Domestic Governmental Other Total
Dahuk / central 101520 90.0 5.0 5.0 100.0
Dahuk/ periphery 189990 95.0 5.0 0.0 100.0
Nineveh 1141684 70.0 5.0 25.0 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 216000 92.4 1.1 6.5 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 219293 85.0 10.0 5.0 100.0
Kirkuk 637459 92.0 7.0 1.0 100.0
Irbil / central 320680 75.0 15.0 10.0 100.0
Irbil /periphery 228240 80.0 10.0 10.0 100.0
Diala 2719311 95.8 1.0 3.2 100.0
AL-Anbar 558136 95.0 1.0 4.0 100.0
Baghdad/municipality 2533860 86.2 0.8 13.0 100.0
Baghdad / periphery 480030 85.0 15.0 0.0 100.0
Babil 475959 95.0 3.0 2.0 100.0
Kerbala 474380 70.0 2.0 28.0 100.0
Waset 385266 94.4 1.4 4.2 100.0
Salahuddin 246065 93.3 1.5 2.2 100.0
AL-Najaf 495650 94.4 0.6 5.0 100.0
Qadisiya 309390 75.0 15.0 10.0 100.0
AL-Muthana 217098 95.9 1.5 2.6 100.0
Thi Qar 615290 80.0 15.0 5.0 100.0
Missan 509948 85.0 9.0 6.0 100.0
Basrah 867962 85.0 5.0 10.0 100.0
Total 13943211 87.0 5.7 7.3 100.0
43
Table (33)
Number of units with water standards (budget) out of units covered by the Public Water Directorate in the governorate or Baghdad Municipality,
Number and percentage of units with water meters by status and governorate for 2010.
Governorate Number of units with water meters % of units with water meters % of water standards by status :
working Idle Total
Dahuk / central 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Dahuk/ periphery 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Nineveh 89705 41.4 100.0 0.0 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kirkuk 65 0.0 70.0 30.0 100.0
Irbil / central 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Irbil /periphery 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Diala 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Anbar 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad/municipality 127032 58.6 75.0 25.0 100.0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Babil 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kerbala 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Waset 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Salahuddin 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Najaf 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Qadisiya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Muthana 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Thi Qar 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Missan 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Basrah 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total 216802 100.0 81.7 18.3 100.0
34
Table (34)
Percentage of main problems faced by the water sector for 2010
SN Main problems No. of
governorates % Name of governorate
1 Inefficiency of project 9 40.9 Nineveh, Sulaimaniya central, Sulaimaniya periphery, Al-ANbar,
Babil, Salahuddin, Qadisiya, Thi Qar, Missan
2 Scarcity of crude water at water source 15 68.2 All governorates excluding Dahuk, Irbil central, Irbil periphery,
Baghdad Municipality, Waset, Missan
3 Pollution of water source 8 36.4 Sulaimaniya periphery, Nineveh, AL-Anbar, Baghdad periphery,
Babil, Salahuddin, Qadisiya, Thi Qar
4 Network's age and weakness 19 86.4 All governorates excluding Baghdad Municipality, Kerbala, Al-Najaf
5 Insufficient project production 16 72.7 All governorates excluding Dahuk central, Dahuk periphery, Irbil
central, Irbil periphery, Qadisiya, Basrah
6 Weak unsustainable maintenance 5 22.7 Sulaimaniya periphery, Nineveh, Salahuddin, Qadisiya, Thi Qar
7 Scarcity of spare parts and raw material 16 72.7 All governorates excluding Dahuk central, Dahuk periphery, Kirkuk,
Diala, Al-Najaf, Al-Muthana
8 Lack of technical and administrative staff 20 90.9 All governorates excluding Kerbala, Al-Muthana
9 Inefficiency of technical staff 7 31.8 Nineveh, Sulaimaniya central, Sulaimaniya periphery, Salahuddin, Al-
Najaf, Qadisiya, Thi Qar
10 Scarcity and instability of electricity 22 100.0 All governorates
11 Citizens trespassing on network 20 90.9 All governorates excluding Al-Anbar
12 Lack of citizens awareness on conservation 22 100.0 All governorates
13 Other 5 22.7 Baghdad Municipality, Baghdad periphery, Babil, Al-Muthana, Missan
34
Table (35)
Number and percentage of water production stations under construction by type and governorate foe 2010.
Governorate Rate of crude water used in desalination
stations (RO) by source (M³ /day)
% of crude water used in desalination
stations (RO) by source
Projects Water
complexes
Well
mounted
Desalination
stations
Solar powered
stations
Total Projects Water
complexes
Well
mounted
Desalination
Stations
Solar powered
stations
Total
Dahuk / central 1 0 0 0 0 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Dahuk/ periphery 0 1 5 0 0 6 0.0 16.7 83.3 0.0 0.0 100.0
Nineveh 2 16 24 1 0 43 4.7 37.2 55.8 2.3 0.0 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ central 3 0 0 0 0 3 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 1 1 0 0 0 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Kirkuk 14 5 0 1 5 25 65.0 20.0 0.0 4.0 20.0 100.0
Irbil / central 1 0 8 0 0 9 11.1 0.0 88.9 0.0 0.0 100.0
Irbil /periphery 2 0 0 0 0 2 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Diala 0 4 0 7 0 11 0.0 36.4 0.0 63.6 0.0 100.0
AL-Anbar 2 18 0 0 0 20 10.0 90.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Baghdad/municipality 5 1 0 0 0 6 83.3 16.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Baghdad / periphery 1 25 0 0 5 31 3.2 80.6 0.0 0.0 16.1 100.0
Babil 7 35 31 10 22 105 6.7 33.3 29.5 9.5 21.0 100.0
Kerbala 3 1 0 19 0 23 13.0 4.3 0.0 82.6 0.0 100.0
Waset 5 16 0 0 0 21 23.8 76.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Salahuddin 1 20 1 4 22 48 2.1 41.7 2.1 8.3 45.8 100.0
AL-Najaf 2 4 0 0 26 32 6.3 12.5 0.0 0.0 81.3 100.0
Qadisiya 4 4 0 0 0 8 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
AL-Muthana 1 6 0 13 0 20 5.0 30.0 0.0 65.0 0.0 100.0
Thi Qar 3 17 0 5 15 40 7.5 42.5 0.0 12.5 37.5 100.0
Missan 3 8 0 0 27 38 7.9 21.1 0.0 0.0 71.1 100.0
Basrah 0 10 0 0 0 10 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Total 61 192 69 60 122 504 12.1 38.1 13.7 11.9 24.2 100.0
34
Table (36)
Number of employees at public water directorates and Baghdad Municipality by post and governorate for 2010.
Governorate Engineer Supervisor Technician
Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total
Dahuk / central 33 1 0 34 140 216 0 356 73 3 0 76
Dahuk/ periphery 77 2 0 79 39 5 0 44 392 613 0 1005
Nineveh 115 0 8 123 865 0 465 1330 182 0 0 182
Sulaimaniya/ central 77 1 0 78 267 58 0 325 373 0 0 373
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 80 0 0 80 0 0 0 0 148 210 0 358
Kirkuk 70 0 0 70 0 0 0 0 138 0 0 138
Irbil / central 51 0 0 51 9 0 0 9 62 1 0 63
Irbil /periphery 105 0 0 105 12 0 0 12 115 0 0 115
Diala 68 0 0 68 0 0 0 0 921 75 156 1152
AL-Anbar 95 0 0 95 0 0 0 0 175 0 0 175
Baghdad/municipality 216 14 0 230 0 0 0 0 1113 90 544 1747
Baghdad / periphery 92 0 0 92 0 0 0 0 719 0 285 1004
Babil 99 0 0 99 0 0 0 0 1171 0 1208 2379
Kerbala 91 3 0 94 0 0 0 0 992 10 0 1002
Waset 59 5 2 66 0 0 0 0 150 161 123 434
Salahuddin 51 0 0 51 0 0 0 0 76 0 0 76
AL-Najaf 97 0 0 97 0 0 0 0 142 0 0 142
Qadisiya 61 0 6 67 0 0 0 0 137 0 0 137
AL-Muthana 44 0 0 44 0 0 0 0 514 15 62 591
Thi Qar 89 0 0 89 0 0 0 0 1045 0 0 1045
Missan 42 0 0 42 0 0 0 0 107 70 0 177
Basrah 86 0 0 86 0 0 0 0 188 0 0 188
Total 1798 26 16 1840 1332 279 465 2076 8933 1248 2378 12559
37
Table (36)/cont.
Number of employees at public water directorates and Baghdad Municipality by post and governorate for 2010.
Governorate Manager Worker Driver
Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total
Dahuk / central 37 8 0 45 173 17 0 190 29 2 0 31
Dahuk/ periphery 79 19 0 98 516 89 0 605 72 27 0 99
Nineveh 128 0 3 131 244 0 94 338 145 0 2 156
Sulaimaniya/ central 122 0 0 122 171 0 0 171 73 0 0 73
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 298 130 0 428 1510 230 0 1740 109 0 0 109
Kirkuk 149 0 0 149 204 0 211 415 115 0 0 115
Irbil / central 204 0 0 204 419 0 0 419 39 0 0 39
Irbil /periphery 355 2 0 357 180 0 0 180 200 5 0 205
Diala 114 0 0 114 31 4 0 35 171 3 0 174
AL-Anbar 201 0 0 201 0 0 0 0 83 0 0 83
Baghdad/municipality 625 24 25 674 1420 5 85 1510 79 0 0 79
Baghdad / periphery 302 0 4 306 0 0 0 0 131 0 0 131
Babil 116 0 0 116 112 0 0 112 165 0 0 165
Kerbala 263 4 0 267 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Waset 96 2 3 101 0 0 0 0 144 5 0 149
Salahuddin 87 0 0 78 734 0 128 862 92 0 0 92
AL-Najaf 104 0 0 104 642 0 0 642 127 0 0 127
Qadisiya 205 10 27 242 0 447 160 607 101 0 0 101
AL-Muthana 101 0 1 102 0 0 0 0 90 7 0 97
Thi Qar 265 0 0 265 0 0 0 0 88 0 0 88
Missan 148 0 0 148 817 62 194 1073 120 0 0 120
Basrah 293 0 0 293 0 0 0 0 95 0 0 95
Total 4283 199 63 4545 7173 854 872 8899 2277 49 2 2328
30
Table (36)/cont.
Number of employees at public water directorates and Baghdad Municipality by post and governorate for 2010.
Governorate Other Total
Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges Total
Dahuk / central 0 0 0 0 485 247 0 732
Dahuk/ periphery 20 19 0 39 1195 774 0 1969
Nineveh 174 0 0 174 1862 0 572 2434
Sulaimaniya/ central 130 0 0 130 1213 59 0 1272
Sulaimaniya/ periphery 0 0 0 0 2145 570 0 2715
Kirkuk 529 0 0 529 1205 0 211 1416
Irbil / central 0 424 0 424 784 425 0 1209
Irbil /periphery 2565 913 0 3478 3532 920 0 4452
Diala 253 105 104 462 1558 187 260 2005
AL-Anbar 869 36 747 1652 1423 36 717 2206
Baghdad/municipality 0 0 29 29 3453 133 683 4269
Baghdad / periphery 117 0 247 364 1361 0 536 1897
Babil 130 0 0 130 1793 0 1208 3001
Kerbala 228 500 0 728 1574 517 0 2091
Waset 805 93 110 1100 1254 266 238 1758
Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 1031 0 128 1159
AL-Najaf 239 34 79 352 1351 34 79 1464
Qadisiya 781 0 0 781 1285 457 193 1935
AL-Muthana 114 17 0 131 863 39 63 965
Thi Qar 441 0 511 952 1928 0 511 2439
Missan 0 0 0 0 1234 132 194 1560
Basrah 1306 150 1112 2568 1968 150 1112 3230
Total 8701 2291 2939 13931 34497 4946 6735 46178
2. Sanitation Sector
Governorate boarder
Iraqi boarders
tanks by governorate for 2010 Percentage of population connected to sanitation networks, shared networks and septic
Population connected to septic tanks
Population connected to sanitation and shared networks
34
Table (37)
Summary of main statistical indicators in sanitation sector for 2010.
Details Data
Sanitation network exists
Number of population connected to sanitation
networks and shared networks
7461386
Percent of population connected to sanitation
networks and shared networks
23.8 %
Independent treatment system (septic tank) exists
Number of population connected to Independent
treatment system (septic tank)
18654754
Percent of population connected to Independent
treatment system (septic tank)
59.5%
No Sanitation network or Independent treatment
system (septic tank)
Number of population not connected to sanitation
networks and Independent treatment system
(septic tank)
5212561
Percent of population not connected to sanitation
networks and Independent treatment system
(septic tank)
16.7%
33
Table (37)/cont.
Summary of main statistical indicators in sanitation sector for 2010
Details No. of governorate % Governorate name
Percent of existing central treatment stations
10
52.6
AL-Anbar, Baghdad/municipality, Babil, Kerbala, Salahuddin,
AL-Najaf, Qadisiya, Thi Qar, Missan, Basrah
Percent of existing small processing units for sanitation for
Served areas (hospitals, residence compounds, hotels,… etc.)
7
36.8
Nineveh, Kirkuk, Irbil, Babil, AL-Najaf, Qadisiya
Thi Qar
Percent of existing small processing units for sanitation for
un-served areas
3
15.8
Kirkuk, Kerbala, Al-Muthna
Percent of existing for polluting activities (industrial
Facilities, garages, butchery, agricultural activities, other.)
That drain into sanitation networks
19
100.0
All governorates
Percent of existing small processing unit for polluting
activities
2
10.5
Kirkuk, Thi Qar
Percent of existing for pumping stations
16
84.2
All governorates except Kurdistan region
33
Table (38)
Number and percentage of population connected to sanitation networks and shared networks and percentage of served areas
By network type, rate of produced wastewater for central treatment stations and small treatment stations, polluting activities
And under construction sanitation networks projects by governorate for 2010
Governorate No. of population
connected to sanitation
networks and shared
networks
% of population
connected to sanitation
networks and shared
networks
% of served areas by network
type
Rate of produced wastewater
For central treatment stations
& small treatment stations &
Polluting activities
Under construction
Sanitation networks*
Sanitation Rain fall Shared
Dahuk 0 0.0 0.0 36.4 0.0 0 **12
Nineveh 112521 4.0 4.0 39.0 0.0 15150 0
Sulaimaniya 1147800 63.7 0.0 0.0 26.6 0 **47
Kirkuk 26536 2.0 0.0 28.0 2.0 1284 0
Irbil 0 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0 **18
Diala 0 0.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0 1
AL-Anbar 35649 2.4 13.0 50.0 0.0 47006 0
Baghdad/municipality 4231193 82.0 20.0 20.0 60.0 1200000 83
Baghdad / periphery 0 0.0 0.0 15.0 0.0 0 0
Babil 60628 3.5 3.5 20.0 0.0 12000 0
Kerbala 288763 28.3 29.0 56.0 0.0 67000 2
Waset 0 0.0 0.0 55.0 0.0 0 2
Salahuddin 241552 18.0 23.0 35.0 0.0 27000 0
AL-Najaf 159170 13.0 13.0 25.0 0.0 25100 1
Qadisiya 118719 11.0 30.0 39.0 0.0 40405 1
AL-Muthana 6847 1.0 1.0 20.0 0.0 10000 1
Thi Qar 349249 20.0 48.0 42.0 10.0 98100 0
Missan 369530 40.0 40.0 40.0 45.0 70000 0
Basrah 313230 13.0 13.0 13.0 0.0 70000 1
Total 7461386 23.8 12.5 30.2 7.6 1683045 169
*source: ministry of municipalities and public works/ the general decorate of stream – Baghdad municipality / Baghdad department of streams.
** source : Regional statistics of Kurdistan / including projects under construction and subjected in Kurdistan.
33
Table (39)
Percentage of type and status of network, cases of wastewater spillage and spillage at rain fall for 2010.
Details No. of governorates % Governorate
Sanitation
Network type Rain fall
Shared
11
18
5
57.9
94.7
26.3
All governorate except Dahuk, Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk, Irbil, Diala, Baghdad prephery,
Waset and AL-Muthana
All governorates except Sulaimaniya
Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk, Baghdad municipality, Thi Qar and Missan.
Good
Status of network Medium
Fair
4
14
1
21.1
73.7
5.3
Sulaimaniya, Waset, Thi Qar and Basrah
All governorates except Sulaimaniya, Waset, Thi Qar, Basrah, and AL-Muthana
AL-Muthana
Most areas
cases of wastewater spillage Some areas
No spillage
3
14
2
15.8
73.7
10.5
Irbil, Baghdad municipality and AL-Muthana
All governorates except Waset, Thi Qar, Baghdad prephery, AL-Muthana and Irbil
Waset and Missan
Spillage
spillage at rain fall
No spillage
17
2
89.5
10.5
All governorates except Dahuk and Sulaimaniya
Dahuk and Sulaimaniya
34
Table (40)
Number of central treatment stations by type, status and governorate for 2010
Governorate
Number of central
treatment stations
Number of central treatment stations by type Number of central treatment stations by status
preliminary Primary Binary Ternary working working partially
Idle
Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nineveh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Kirkuk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Irbil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diala 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Al-Anbar 3 0 0 3 0 2 1 0
Baghdad/ municipality
3 0 0 3 0 2 0 1
Baghdad/periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Babil 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
Kerbala 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0
Waset 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Salahuddin 4 0 0 4 0 3 0 1
Al-Najaf 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
Qadisiyah 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 0
Al-Muthana 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thi Qar 3 0 0 3 0 1 1 1
Missan 2 0 0 2 0 2 0 0
Basrah 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0
Total 21 0 1 20 0 15 3 3
34
Table (41)
Number of central treatment stations, total designed capacity, rate of actual capacity and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Number of central treatment stations
Total designed capacity (M³ /day)
Rate of actual capacity (M³ /day)
Percentage from designed capacity
Dahuk 0 0 0 0.0
Nineveh 0 0 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0.0
Kirkuk 0 0 0 0.0
Irbil 0 0 0 0.0
Diala 0 0 0 0.0
Al-Anbar 3 73600 6624 9.0
Baghdad/ municipality 3 680000 1200000 176.5
Baghdad/periphery 0 0 0 0.0
Babil 1 12000 12000 100.0
Kerbala 1 50000 48000 96.0
Waset 0 0 0 0.0
Salahuddin 4 48500 11000 22.7
Al-Najaf 1 35000 25000 71.4
Qadisiyah 2 15750 39705 252.1
Al-Muthana 0 0 0 0.0
Thi Qar 3 35000 25000 71.4
Missan 2 45000 45000 100.0
Basrah 1 286000 70000 24.5
Total 21 1280850 1482329 115.7
Note: the central treatment stations in Baghdad (municipality) and Qadisiyah afford more than there actual capacity, therefore the percentage is more than 100%
34
Table (42)
Percentage of population connected to sanitation networks connected to central treatment station and amount of wastewater produced (treated and untreated), BOD
concentration in treated water discharged from central treatment stations by governorate for 2010
Governorate
central treatment stations
BOD concentration in treated water discharged from
central treatment stations mg/liter (Ppm)
Percentage of population
connected to sanitation networks connected to central treatment stations
amount of wastewater
produced (M³ /day)
amount of wastewater produced/
treated (M³ /day)
amount of wastewater produced/ untreated (M³ /day)
Percentage from amount of wastewater
produced
designed capacity
actual capacity
Dahuk 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Nineveh 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kirkuk 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Irbil 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Diala 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Al-Anbar 7.0 47006 6624 40382 14.1 20.0 0.0
Baghdad/ municipality
70.0 1200000 475000 725000 39.6 40.0 40.0
Baghdad/ periphery
0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Babil 3.5 12000 12000 0 100.0 25.0 37.2
Kerbala 29.0 45000 45000 0 100.0 40.0 35.0
Waset 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Salahuddin 37.0 27000 11000 16000 40.7 40.0 0.0
Al-Najaf 13.0 25000 25000 0 100.0 16.0 27.0
Qadisiyah 20.0 39705 13705 26000 34.5 30.0 40.0
Al-Muthana 0.0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Thi Qar 10.0 93600 25000 68600 26.7 40.0 30.0
Missan 30.0 70000 45000 25000 64.3 30.0 30.0
Basrah 75.0 70000 69800 200 99.7 40.0 50.0
Total 29.0 1629311 728129 901182 44.7
37
Table (43)
Percentage of discharge destination of treated wastewater from central treatment stations by type and stations absorption
capacity of wastewater produced for 2010.
Type of discharge destination
of treated wastewater
No. of governorate % Governorate name
Trocar
3
15.8
Kerbala, Babil, Thi Qar
River
7
36.8
AL-Anbar, Baghdad/municipality, Salahuddin, AL-Najaf
Qadisiya, Thi Qar, Missan
Near land
1
5.3
Basrah
Other
1
5.3
Al- Anbar
Percent stations absorption
capacity of wastewater
produced
Has capacity for wastewater
produced
5
26.3
Babil, Kerbala, salahuddin, Al-Najaf and Basrah
Has no capacity for wastewater
produced
5
26.3
Al- Anbar, Baghdad/ muncipality, Qadisiya, thi Qar, Missan
No central treatment stations
9
47.4
Dahuk, Nineveh, Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk, Irbil, Diala,
Baghdad/ periphery, Waset and Al-Muthana
30
Table (44)
Number of small treatment units, total designed capacity, rate of actual capacity and percentage from designed capacity by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Number of small treatment units
Total designed capacity (M³ /day)
Rate of actual capacity (M³ /day)
Percentage from designed capacity
Dahuk 0 0 0 0.0
Nineveh 7 23000 15150 65.9
Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0.0
Kirkuk 9 8180 45.9 0.6
Irbil 1 200 150 75.0
Diala 0 0 0 0.0
Al-Anbar 0 0 0 0.0
Baghdad/ municipality 0 0 0 0.0
Baghdad/periphery 0 0 0 0.0
Babil 1 0 0 0.0
Kerbala 2 25000 25000 100.0
Waset 0 0 0 0.0
Salahuddin 0 0 0 0.0
Al-Najaf 2 200 100 50.0
Qadisiyah 3 814 700 86.0
Al-Muthana 1 5000 5000 100.0
Thi Qar 3 10100 3500 34.7
Missan 0 0 0 0.0
Basrah 0 0 0 0.0
Total 29 72494 49645.9 68.5
34
Table (45)
Number of small treatment units in served and un-served areas, polluting activities, total design capacity, rate of actual capacity and percentage
from designed capacity by governorate for 2010.
Governorate No. of small treatment units Total design capacity (M³ /day) Rate of actual capacity (M³ /day) %
Un-served Served Polluting
activity
Total Un-served Served Polluting
activity
Total Un-served Served Polluting
activity
Total Un-served Served Polluting
activity
Total
Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Nineveh 0 7 0 7 0 23000 0 23000 0 15150 0 15150 0.0 65.9 0.0 65.9
Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kirkuk 1 3 5 9 3600 3390 1190 8180 0 34 11.9 45.9 0.0 1.0 1.0 0.6
Irbil 0 1 0 1 0 200 0 200 0 150 0 150 0.0 75.0 0.0 75.0
Diala 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Anbar 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad/municipality 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Babil 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kerbala 2 0 0 2 25000 0 0 25000 25000 0 0 25000 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Waset 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Najaf 0 2 0 2 0 200 0 200 0 100 0 100 0.0 50.0 0.0 50.0
Qadisiya 0 3 0 3 0 814 0 814 0 700 0 700 0.0 86.0 0.0 86.0
AL-Muthana 1 0 0 1 5000 0 0 5000 5000 0 0 5000 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Thi Qar 0 2 1 3 0 500 9600 10100 0 500 3000 3500 0.0 100.0 31.3 34.7
Missan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Basrah 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total 4 19 6 29 33600 28104 10790 72494 30000 16634 3011.9 49645.9 89.3 59.2 27.9 68.5
34
Table (46)
Number of small treatment units in areas not served by sanitation networks by status, amount of treated and untreated wastewater
Produced and percentage of treated wastewater to that produced by governorate for 2010.
Governorate
Small treatment units in
areas not served
Amount of
produced
Wastewater
(M³ /day)
Amount of
treated
Wastewater
(M³ /day)
Amount of
untreated
Wastewater
(M³ /day)
% treated
wastewater
to
produced
wastewater
Working Partially
Working
Idle Total
Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Nineveh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Kirkuk 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0.0
Irbil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Diala 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
AL-Anbar 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Baghdad/municipality 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Babil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Kerbala 2 0 0 2 22000 20000 2000 90.0
Waset 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
AL-Najaf 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Qadisiya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
AL-Muthana 1 0 0 1 10000 5000 5000 50.0
Thi Qar 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Missan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Basrah 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.0
Total 3 0 1 4 32000 25000 7000 78.1
33
Table (47)
Percentage of destinations of treated wastewater from small treatment stations in areas not served by sanitation networks for 2010
Destinations of treated wastewater from
small treatment stations
No. of governorates % Governorate
Trocar
2
10.5
Kerbala and AL-Muthana
River
0
0.0
0
Near land
0
0.0
0
Other
1
5.3
Kirkuk
33
Table (48)
Number of small wastewater treatment unit (in served areas/ hospitals, residence compounds, hotels, etc.)
by type, status and governorate for 2010
Governorate No. of small wastewater treatment units by type No. of small wastewater treatment units by status
preliminary Binary Tertiary Total Working Partially working Idle Total
Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nineveh 0 7 0 7 5 2 0 7
Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Kirkuk 0 3 0 3 0 3 0 3
Irbil 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1
Diala 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AL-Anbar 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Baghdad/municipality 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Babil 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1
Kerbala 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Waset 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AL-Najaf 0 2 0 2 0 2 0 2
Qadisiya 2 1 0 3 2 1 0 3
AL-Muthana 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Thi Qar 0 2 0 2 0 1 1 2
Missan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Basrah 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 3 16 0 19 8 9 2 19
33
Table (49)
Amount of treated and untreated wastewater produced in areas served by small treatment units
and percentage of treated wastewater by governorate for 2010.
Governorate Amount of untreated wastewater produced in
areas served by small
treatment units
(M³ /day)
Amount of treated wastewater
produced in areas served
by small treatment units
(M³ /day)
Amount of
untreated Wastewater
in small treatment unit
(M³ /day)
% treated wastewater
to
produced wastewater
Dahuk 0 0 0 0.0
Nineveh 15150 15150 0 100.0
Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0.0
Kirkuk 15000 34 14966 0.2
Irbil 500 500 0 100.0
Diala 0 0 0 0.0
AL-Anbar 0 0 0 0.0
Baghdad/municipality 0 0 0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 0.0
Babil 0 0 0 0.0
Kerbala 0 0 0 0.0
Waset 0 0 0 0.0
Salahuddin 0 0 0 0.0
AL-Najaf 100 100 0 100.0
Qadisiya 700 700 0 100.0
AL-Muthana 0 0 0 0.0
Thi Qar 1500 0 1500 0.0
Missan 0 0 0 0.0
Basrah 0 0 0 0.0
Total 32950 16484 16466 50.0
34
Table (50)
Number of small treatment units for polluting activities (health institutions, industrial establishments, carwash and greasing garages, slaughter houses, agricultural
activities, other) by type and governorate for 2010
Governorate
No. of small treatment units of polluting activities by type No. of small treatment units of polluting activities by status
Elementary Secondary Tertiary Total Working Partially
working Idle Total
Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nineveh 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Kirkuk 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5
Irbil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diala 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AL-Anbar 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Baghdad/Municipality 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Babil 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Kerbala 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Waset 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AL-Najaf 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Qadisiya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AL-Muthana 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ThiQar 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
Missan 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Basrah 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total 0 6 0 6 0 6 0 6
34
Table (51)
Rate of liquid waste produced and treated at small treatment units from polluting activities and percentage of liquid waste treated to produced by governorate for
2010
Governorate Average amount of liquid waste
produced by polluting activities
(m3/day)
Average amount of liquid waste
treated at small treatment units for
polluting activities (m3/day)
Average amount of liquid waster not
treated at small treatment units for
polluting activities (m3/day)
% of treated liquid waste to
untreated
Dahuk 0 0 0 0.0
Nineveh 0 0 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0.0
Kirkuk 297.5 2.97 294.5 1.0
Irbil 0 0 0 0.0
Diala 0 0 0 0.0
AL-Anbar 0 0 0 0.0
Baghdad/Municipality 0 0 0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 0.0
Babil 0 0 0 0.0
Kerbala 0 0 0 0.0
Waset 0 0 0 0.0
Salahuddin 0 0 0 0.0
AL-Najaf 0 0 0 0.0
Qadisiya 0 0 0 0.0
AL-Muthana 0 0 0 0.0
ThiQar 3000 0 3000 0.0
Missan 0 0 0 0.0
Basrah 0 0 0 0.0
Total 3297.5 2.97 3294.5 0.1
34
Table (52)
Percentage of existence of polluting activities and discharge destination of treated and untreated liquid waste for 2010
Description Discharge destinations Number of governorates % Name of governorate
Percentage of polluting activities
presence in the governorate 19 100.0 All governorates
Percentage of discharge
destination of treated liquid
waste from polluting activities
Sanitation network 0 0.0
Sewage lagoon 1 5.3 Kirkuk
River 2 10.5 Kirkuk & Thi Qar
Neighbouring land 1 5.3 Kirkuk
Other 0 0.0
Percentage of discharge
destination of treated liquid
waste from polluting activities
that do not have small treatment
units
Sanitation network 11 52.6
Dahuk, Nineveh, Sualimaniya, Al-Anbar, Baghdad
Municipality, Babil, Kerbala, Salahuddin, Al-Najaf,
Thi Qar, Missan
Sewage lagoon 10 47.4
Kirkuk, Diala, Al-Anbar, Baghdad Municipality,
Baghdad periphery, Babil, Waset, Qadisiya, Al-
Muthana, Thi Qar
River 10 47.4
Nineveh, Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk, Al-Anbar, Baghdad
Municipality, Babil, Waset, Al-Muthana, Thi Qar,
Basrah
Neighbouring land 6 26.3 Kirkuk, Baghdad Municipality, Babil, Al-Muthana,
Thi Qar Basrah
Other 4 21.1 Nineveh, Irbil, Kerbala, Al-Muthana
37
Table (53)
Number of sewage water pumping stations by type and governorate for 2010
Governorate Rainwater pumping
station
Wastewater
pumping station
Shared pumping
station Submerged station Total
Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0
Nineveh 6 5 0 0 11
Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0 0
Kirkuk 3 0 1 0 4
Irbil 0 0 0 0 0
Diala 16 1 1 0 18
AL-Anbar 25 4 0 0 29
Baghdad/Municipality 34 41 72 401 251
Baghdad / periphery 26 0 0 0 26
Babil 25 12 0 0 37
Kerbala 15 5 0 0 20
Waset 80 0 0 0 80
Salahuddin 11 19 0 0 30
AL-Najaf 8 4 0 0 12
Qadisiya 19 25 0 0 44
AL-Muthana 39 1 4 0 44
ThiQar 53 0 7 0 60
Missan 8 14 31 0 53
Basrah 90 82 0 0 172
Total 458 213 116 401 891
30
Table (54)
Number and percentage of pumping stations by status and governorate for 2010
Governorate No. pumping
stations
No. pumping stations by status % of status
Good Average Bad Good Average Bad
Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Nineveh 11 0 11 0 0.0 100.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.00
Kirkuk 4 0 4 0 0.0 100.0 0.0
Irbil 0 0 0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Diala 18 18 0 0 100.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Anbar 29 10 14 5 34.5 48.3 17.2
Baghdad/Municipality 251 0 251 0 0.0 100.0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 26 2 23 1 7.7 88.5 3.8
Babil 37 0 31 6 0.0 83.8 16.2
Kerbala 20 0 20 0 0.0 100.0 0.0
Waset 80 40 40 0 50.0 50.0 0.0
Salahuddin 30 18 10 2 60.0 33.3 6.7
AL-Najaf 12 0 12 0 0.0 100.0 0.0
Qadisiya 44 44 0 0 100.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Muthana 44 0 44 0 0.0 100.0 0.0
ThiQar 60 60 0 0 100.0 0.0 0.0
Missan 53 50 3 0 94.3 5.7 0.0
Basrah 172 142 20 10 82.6 11.6 5.8
Total 891 350 513 28 39.3 57.6 3.1
34
Table (55)
Percentage of discharge destinations of wastewater for pumping stations for 2010
Discharge destination of wastewater from
pumping stations
No. of
governorates % Name of governorate
Central treatment stations 9 47.4 Baghdad Municipality, Babil, Salahuddin, Al-Najaf, Qadisiya, Thi Qar,
Missan Basrah
Sewage lagoon 14 73.7 All governorates excluding Dahuk, Nineveh, Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk,
Irbil
River 11 57.9 All governorates excluding Sulaimaniya, Irbil, Diala, Baghdad
periphery, Kerbala, Salahuddin, Basrah
Neighbouring land 2 10.5 Nineveh, Missan
Other 1 5.3 Nineveh
34
Table (56)
Percentage of main problems faced by sewage networks and treatment stations by governorate for 2010
Main problems No. of
governorates % Name of governorate
Inefficiency of networks 11 57.9 Ninevehm Irbil, Diala, Baghdad Municipality, Baghda periphery,
Babil, Kerbala, Waset, Al-Jajaf, Qadisiya, Basrah
Weak unsustainable maintenance 4 21.1 Irbil, Baghdad Municipality, Qadisiya, Basrah
Lack of technical and administrative staff 12 63.2 All governorates excluding Dahuk, Sulaimaniya, Irbil, Baghdad
periphery, Babil, Kerbala, Missan
Not enough machinery 13 68.4 All governorates excluding Dahuk, Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk, Baghdad
periphery, Salahuddin, Al-Muthana
Problems related to pumping station (age,
consumption, broken) 10 52.6
Nineveh, Kirkuk, Al-Anbar, Baghdad Municipality, Kerbala, Waset,
Salahuddin, Al-Najaf, Thi Qar, Basrah
Stations old and inefficient 8 42.1 Al-Anbar, Baghdad Municipality, Kerbala, Salahuddin, Al-Najaf,
Qadisiya, Thi Qar, Missan
Scarcity and instability of electricity 15 78.9 All governorates excluding Dahuk Sulaimaniya, Irbil, Kerbala
Trespasses in linking sanitation and rainwater
networks 17 89.5 All governorates excluding Dahuk Sulaimaniya
Lack of awareness on networks use 17 89.5 All governorates excluding Dahuk Sulaimaniya
Other 5 26.3 Kirkuk, Irbil, Diala, Al-Anbar, Al-Muthana
33
Table (57)
Number and percentage of population trespassing on rainwater networks by governorate for 2010
Governorate Number of population trespassing on rainwater network Percentage of population trespassing on rainwater network
Dahuk 60000 10.0
Nineveh 1426796 80.0
Sulaimaniya 0 0.0
Kirkuk 464380 35.0
Irbil 36540 5.0
Diala 260804 19.0
AL-Anbar 576094 80.0
Baghdad/Municipality 2961835 70.0
Baghdad / periphery 174342 75.0
Babil 658251 38.0
Kerbala 132830 46.0
Waset 313154 85.0
Salahuddin 29672 5.0
AL-Najaf 43532 8.0
Qadisiya 134908 25.0
AL-Muthana 116400 17.0
ThiQar 659112 60.0
Missan 28638 5.0
Basrah 578123 30.0
Total 8655414 27.6
33
Table (58)
Percentage of discharge destinations of water from rainwater networks by type for 2010
Governorate Percentage of rainwater by discharge destination
Sewage lagoon River Neighbouring land Other
Dahuk 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0
Nineveh 0.0 40.0 0.0 60.0
Sulaimaniya 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kirkuk 2.0 98.0 0.0 0.0
Irbil 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0
Diala 99.0 1.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Anbar 10.0 80.0 0.0 10.0
Baghdad/Municipality 30.0 50.0 0.0 20.0
Baghdad / periphery 90.0 10.0 0.0 0.0
Babil 85.0 15.0 0.0 0.0
Kerbala 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Waset 30.0 70.0 0.0 0.0
Salahuddin 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Najaf 10.0 90.0 0.0 0.0
Qadisiya 42.0 47.0 11.0 0.0
AL-Muthana 25.0 75.0 0.0 0.0
ThiQar 40.0 60.0 0.0 0.0
Missan 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0
Basrah 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total 34.90.0 44.0 11.1 4.7
33
Table (59)
Number and percentage of population connected to independent treatment system (septic tank) by governorate for 2010
Governorate Number of population connected to septic tank Percentage of population connected to septic tank
Dahuk 952626 99.0
Nineveh 2700513 96.0
Sulaimaniya 450471 25.0
Kirkuk 1286996 97.0
Irbil 1234630 80.0
Diala 1358926 99.0
AL-Anbar 1381380 93.0
Baghdad/Municipality 928798 18.0
Baghdad / periphery 1084792 70.0
Babil 1385793 80.0
Kerbala 469367 46.0
Waset 805911 70.0
Salahuddin 1100401 82.0
AL-Najaf 857067 70.0
Qadisiya 539631 50.0
AL-Muthana 136941 20.0
ThiQar 1396994 80.0
Missan 101621 11.0
Basrah 481892 20.0
Total 18654754 59.5
444
Table (60)
Percentage of discharge destinations of wastewater for households connected to septic tanks by destination and governorate for 2010
Governorate
Percentage of discharge destinations of wastewater for households connected to septic tanks by destination
Transferred to treatment
Stations by septic tanks
Trocar
River Near land Other
Dahuk 0.0 10.0 0.0 90.0 0.0
Nineveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 90.0
Sulaimaniya 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Kirkuk 0.0 0.0 0.0 99.0 1.0
Irbil 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0
Diala 0.0 80.0 0.0 20.0 0.0
AL-Anbar 0.0 0.0 0.0 75.0 25.0
Baghdad/municipality 20.0 60.0 3.0 17.0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Babil 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0
Kerbala 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0
Waset 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 85.0
Salahuddin 10.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 70.0
AL-Najaf 5.0 0.0 0.0 95.0 0.0
Qadisiya 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Muthana 0.0 25.0 75.0 0.0 0.0
Thi Qar 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Missan 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Basrah 60.0 30.0 0.0 10.0 0.0
Total 5.0 26.6 4.1 39.5 24.8
444
Table (61)
Percentage of discharge destinations of wastewater (households not connected to sewage networks and septic tanks) by
Discharge destination for 2010
Discharge destinations of wastewater
(households not connected to sewage
networks and septic tanks)
No. of governorates % Governorate
Transferred to discharge destination by septic
tanks
2
10.5
Salahuddin and Basrah.
Rain fall networks
8
42.1
Nineveh, Irbil, AL-Anbar, Baghdad periphery, Kerbala, Salahuddin,
Qadisiya and Basrah.
Trocars
7
36.8
Diala, AL-Anbar, Baghdad periphery, Qadisiya, Thi Qar, Missan
And Basrah.
River
2
10.5
AL-Najaf and Basrah.
Near land
10
52.6
Dahuk, Kirkuk, Diala, Baghdad municipality, Babil, Salahuddin,
AL-Najaf, Qadisiya, AL-Muthana and Missan.
Other
5
26.3
Nineveh, Sulaimaniya, Kirkuk, Waset, AL-Muthana.
444
Table (62)
Amount of sludge produced by treatment operations of sanitation water and percentage of disposal destination of
sludge produced by treatment operations sanitation water by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Amount of sludge produced by treatment operations of sanitation
water (ton/year)
percentage of disposal destination of sludge produced by treatment operations sanitation water
agricultural industrial municipal landfill Dahuk 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Nineveh 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kirkuk 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Irbil 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Diala 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Al-Anbar 240 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad/ municipality 15000 95.0 0.0 5.0 0.0
Baghdad/periphery 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Babil 337 20.0 0.0 80.0 0.0
Kerbala 360 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Waset 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Salahuddin 610 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Al-Najaf 1500 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Qadisiyah 1500 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Al-Muthana 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Thi Qar 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Missan 500 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0
Basrah 12337 40.0 0.0 60.0 0.0
Total 32384 61.7 0.0 16.1 22.2
447
Table (63)
Number of working, idle and broken machines in sanitation sector by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Cutting macnine Excavator Basin
Working Idle Broken Total Working Idle Broken Total Working Idle Broken Total
Dahuk 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 5 8 0 0 8
Nineveh 12 1 3 16 7 3 0 10 13 8 1 22
Sulaimaniya 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 2
Kirkuk 6 0 0 6 1 1 0 2 14 2 0 16
Irbil 4 0 1 5 3 0 0 3 1 1 0 2
Diala 11 0 0 11 7 0 0 7 23 0 1 24
Al-Anbar 10 0 2 12 16 0 3 19 36 1 7 44
Baghdad/ municipality 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Baghdad/periphery 24 0 0 24 4 0 0 4 16 0 0 16
Babil 22 1 3 26 2 0 0 3 35 2 4 41
Kerbala 21 0 5 26 3 0 2 5 34 0 5 39
Waset 11 5 0 16 7 2 1 10 24 10 0 34
Salahuddin 17 0 6 23 3 0 2 5 1 0 1 2
Al-Najaf 7 2 7 16 3 1 3 7 19 2 6 27
Qadisiyah 17 0 6 23 2 0 3 5 34 0 11 45
Al-Muthana 6 0 1 7 6 0 1 7 19 0 4 23
Thi Qar 16 3 4 23 8 3 7 18 45 11 4 60
Missan 15 0 2 17 6 0 0 6 22 0 1 23
Basrah 24 0 4 28 6 0 0 6 28 0 2 30
Total 225 12 44 281 90 10 22 122 374 37 47 458
440
Table (63)/cont.
Number of working, idle and broken machines in sanitation sector by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Aspirator Multi-purpose Others
Working Idle Broken Total Working Idle Broken Total Working Idle Broken Total
Dahuk 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nineveh 2 0 0 2 52 11 1 64 0 0 0 0
Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 4
Kirkuk 1 2 0 3 2 2 0 4 7 1 0 8
Irbil 0 0 0 0 19 0 0 19 0 0 0 0
Diala 3 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 67 0 9 76
Al-Anbar 3 0 1 4 5 0 1 6 38 2 6 46
Baghdad/ municipality 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Baghdad/periphery 4 0 0 4 3 0 0 3 33 0 0 33
Babil 2 0 0 2 4 0 0 4 42 3 9 54
Kerbala 3 0 0 3 3 0 0 3 23 0 9 32
Waset 2 0 0 2 2 1 0 3 6 1 0 7
Salahuddin 23 0 5 28 3 0 0 3 61 0 11 72
Al-Najaf 5 1 0 6 4 4 0 8 54 4 3 61
Qadisiyah 5 0 1 6 7 0 1 8 48 0 23 71
Al-Muthana 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 5 0 4 9
Thi Qar 3 0 0 3 13 1 6 20 43 0 19 62
Missan 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Basrah 32 0 9 41 6 0 0 6 18 0 0 18
Total 92 3 16 111 126 19 9 154 449 11 93 553
444
Table (64)
Number of employees in sanitation sector by post and governorate for 2010
Governorate
Engineer Supervisor Technician
Permanent Contract Daily wedges
Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges
Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges
Total
Dahuk 5 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Nineveh 49 2 3 54 22 0 0 22 68 0 3 71
Sulaimaniya 35 0 0 35 5 0 0 5 5 0 0 5
Kirkuk 42 0 1 43 0 0 0 0 65 0 1 66
Irbil 35 0 0 35 2 0 0 2 25 0 0 25
Diala 33 0 24 57 0 0 0 0 284 0 35 319
Al-Anbar 90 0 3 93 74 0 2 76 396 0 40 436
Baghdad/ municipality 111 3 0 114 5 0 0 5 180 6 0 186
Baghdad/periphery 47 0 8 55 0 0 0 0 232 0 8 240
Babil 83 0 25 108 0 0 0 0 291 0 8 299
Kerbala 89 0 4 93 0 0 0 0 62 0 3 65
Waset 58 0 8 66 426 0 128 554 69 0 16 85
Salahuddin 45 0 8 53 56 0 0 56 139 0 10 149
Al-Najaf 66 0 2 68 0 0 0 0 77 0 3 80
Qadisiyah 47 0 6 53 0 0 0 0 41 0 4 45
Al-Muthana 31 0 0 31 90 0 0 90 17 0 2 19
Thi Qar 53 0 2 55 0 0 0 0 79 0 6 85
Missan 25 0 2 27 0 0 0 0 47 0 6 53
Basrah 53 0 3 56 0 0 10 10 79 0 35 114
Total 997 5 99 1101 680 0 140 820 2156 6 180 2342
444
Table (64)/cont.
Number of employees in sanitation sector by post and governorate for 2010
Governorate
Administrator Unskilled worker Driver
Permanent Contract Daily wedges
Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges
Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges
Total
Dahuk 3 0 0 3 7 0 0 7 10 4 0 14
Nineveh 93 0 3 96 122 0 2 124 65 0 0 65
Sulaimaniya 15 0 0 15 22 11 0 33 6 38 0 44
Kirkuk 51 0 0 51 0 0 0 0 65 0 0 65
Irbil 39 7 0 46 37 27 0 64 14 7 0 21
Diala 61 0 10 71 72 0 0 72 63 0 0 63
Al-Anbar 163 0 0 163 107 0 20 127 65 0 0 65
Baghdad/ municipality 90 5 0 95 0 0 0 0 16 0 0 16
Baghdad/periphery 78 0 2 80 0 0 0 0 63 0 0 63
Babil 309 0 16 325 123 0 111 234 63 0 0 63
Kerbala 115 0 2 117 300 0 42 342 91 0 0 91
Waset 78 0 15 93 0 0 0 0 74 0 0 74
Salahuddin 50 0 6 56 265 0 17 282 44 0 4 48
Al-Najaf 40 0 1 41 58 0 8 66 70 0 0 70
Qadisiyah 60 0 4 64 249 0 36 285 75 0 0 75
Al-Muthana 59 0 0 59 154 0 10 164 39 0 0 39
Thi Qar 117 0 12 129 0 0 0 0 102 0 0 102
Missan 53 0 2 55 553 0 70 623 85 0 1 56
Basrah 106 0 14 120 204 0 7 211 244 0 0 244
Total 1580 12 87 1679 2273 38 323 2634 1254 49 5 1308
443
Table (64)/cont.
Number of employees in sanitation sector by post and governorate for 2010
Governorate
Others Total
Permanent Contract Daily wedges
Total Permanent Contract Daily wedges
Total
Dahuk 0 0 0 0 25 4 0 29
Nineveh 179 0 5 184 598 2 16 616
Sulaimaniya 1 0 0 1 89 49 0 138
Kirkuk 217 0 1 218 440 0 3 443
Irbil 5 0 0 5 157 41 0 198
Diala 0 0 0 0 513 0 69 582
Al-Anbar 11 0 0 11 906 0 65 971
Baghdad/ municipality 0 0 0 0 402 14 0 416
Baghdad/periphery 121 0 22 143 541 0 40 581
Babil 0 0 0 0 869 0 160 1029
Kerbala 226 0 1 227 883 0 52 935
Waset 49 0 0 49 754 0 167 921
Salahuddin 0 0 0 0 599 0 45 644
Al-Najaf 241 0 26 267 552 0 40 592
Qadisiyah 131 0 0 131 603 0 50 653
Al-Muthana 30 0 4 34 420 0 16 436
Thi Qar 828 0 84 912 1179 0 104 1283
Missan 71 0 0 71 834 0 81 915
Basrah 439 0 0 439 1125 0 69 1194
Total 2549 0 143 2692 11489 110 977 12576
3. Municipal Services
Sector
Percentage of population covered by garbage collection services by governorate for 2010
% of covered population
Governorate boarder
Iraqi boarders
443
Table (65 a)
Summary of main indicators of municipal services sector for 2010.
Indicator Value
Number of municipalities 425
Percent of transformiong stations (regular) 2.4
Percent of temporary collection sites (irregular) 28.9
Percent of burial sites with environmental approval 8.2
Percent of burial sites without environmental approval 91.8
Percent of burial at sites with environmental approval 8.2
Percent of burial at sites without environmental approval 76.9
Percent of garbage disposal by burning 27.3
Percent of garbage disposal by dumping into empty lots 24.2
Amount of lifted garbage (garbage, rubble, scrap) (ton/day) 48085
Amount of lifted garbage (garbage, rubble, scrap) (ton/year) 17550864
Amount of hazardous waste (ton/year) 15546
444
Table (65 b)
Summary of main indicators of municipal service sector for 2010
Types of municipalities Number Percentage % Excellent 24 5.6
First 50 11.8
Second 102 24.0
Third 117 27.5
Fourth 132 31.1
Total 425 100.0
444
Table (65 c)
Summery of main indicators of municipal services sector for 2010
Index Percentage % Percentage of the existence of machines to cover municipal services 96.7
Percentage of working machines 66.5
Percentage of idle machines 3.5
Percentage of broken machines 11.6
Percentage of rented machines 18.4
Percentage of municipalities which have enough machines 8.5
Percentage of municipalities which don’t have enough machines 91.5
Percentage of municipalities contracting with companies or contractors 5.2
444
Table (66)
Number of municipalities by category and governorate for 2010
governorate Number of municipalities
Type of municipal
Excellent First Second Third Fourth
Dahuk 43 0 3 9 15 16
Nineveh 27 1 4 8 9 5
Sulaimaniya 68 1 12 10 9 36
Kirkuk 14 1 1 2 5 5
Irbil 61 1 7 10 11 32
Diala 21 0 3 6 8 4
Al-Anbar 20 1 2 5 7 5
Baghdad / municipality 14 14 0 0 0 0
Baghdad / periphery 15 0 6 5 2 2
Babil 16 1 0 6 6 3
Kerbala 7 1 0 3 3 0
Waset 17 0 1 5 5 6
Salahuddin 17 0 3 5 7 2
Al-Najaf 9 1 1 2 2 3
Qadisiyah 15 0 1 6 5 3
Al-Muthana 11 0 1 2 1 7
Thi Qar 20 1 1 8 9 1
Missan 15 0 1 2 11 1
Basrah 15 1 3 8 2 1
Total 425 24 50 102 117 132
447
Table (67)
Number of population served by garbage collection, amount of lifted garbage per day by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Number of population served by garbage collection
Percentage of population served by garbage collection
amount of lifted garbage (ton/day)
Urban Country side Total Urban Country side Total
Dahuk 718824 25035 743859 99.4 10.5 77.3 1168
Nineveh 1750469 128120 187590 98.1 12.4 66.8 1729
Sulaimaniya 1471001 35232 1506233 96.1 13.0 83.6 3648
Kirkuk 747911 1342 749253 78.6 0.4 56.5 1340
Irbil 1229068 22666 1251734 95.8 8.7 81.1 2772
Diala 576529 8499 585028 87.5 1.2 42.6 947
Al-Anbar 669710 16070 685780 93.0 2.1 46.2 1022
Baghdad / municipality 5159991 4460 5164451 100.0 1.4 100.0 12245
Baghdad / periphery 553001 81935 634936 67.7 16.3 41.0 1269
Babil 695263 53143 748405 85.0 5.8 43.2 955
Kerbala 638243 0 638243 93.9 0.0 62.6 1149
Waset 590774 0 590774 88.5 0.0 51.3 1199
Salahuddin 562040 52835 614875 94.7 7.1 45.8 1793
Al-Najaf 838721 21617 860339 96.3 6.1 70.3 2716
Qadisiyah 412749 0 412749 67.7 0.0 38.2 674
Al-Muthana 294643 6993 301636 98.2 1.8 44.1 3005
Thi Qar 888154 16193 904347 80.9 2.5 51.8 5072
Missan 573155 1189 574344 85.7 0.5 62.2 845
Basrah 1650864 92939 1743803 85.7 19.3 72.4 4535
Total 20021110 568268 20589377 91.3 7.5 65.7 48085
Note: amount of lifted garbage includes garbage, destruction (Construction waste) and scrap
440
Table (68)
Rate of garbage collected and lifted per day under municipal jurisdiction and percentage distribution by area and governorate for 2010
Governorate
Agricultural areas Industrial areas Residential areas Economic activities
Lifted destruction Scrap Total
Amount (Ton /day)
% Amount (Ton /day)
% Amount (Ton /day)
% Amount (Ton /day)
% Amount (Ton /day)
% Amount (Ton /day)
% Amount (Ton /day)
%
Dahuk 49 10.8 67 4.5 650 3.2 171 2.7 222 1.2 10 2.6 1168 2.4
Nineveh 10 2.3 29 1.9 1132 5.5 260 4.2 298 1.6 0 0.0 1729 3.6
Sulaimaniya 175 38.9 118 8.0 2105 10.3 293 4.7 923 4.8 33 8.9 3648 7.6
Kirkuk 6 1.2 16 1.1 776 3.8 195 3.1 341 1.8 6 1.5 1340 2.8
Irbil 42 9.3 73 4.9 2064 10.1 258 4.1 331 1.7 5 1.4 2772 5.8
Diala 7 1.4 54 3.6 430 2.1 249 4.0 204 1.1 5 1.4 947 2.0
Al-Anbar 3 0.7 14 1.0 272 1.3 83 1.3 641 3.4 9 2.4 1022 2.1
Baghdad/ municipality
43 9.5 578 39.1 5370 26.2 2330 37.4 3819 20.0 105 28.6 12245 25.5
Baghdad/ periphery
5 1.0 7 0.4 529 2.6 128 2.1 598 3.1 2 0.6 1269 2.6
Babil 18 4.0 34 2.3 375 1.8 185 3.0 336 1.8 8 2.1 955 2.0
Kerbala 0 0.0 29 2.0 746 3.6 147 2.4 225 1.2 2 0.6 1149 2.4
Waset 7 1.6 41 2.8 501 2.4 165 2.6 452 2.4 34 9.1 1199 2.5
Salahuddin 27 6.1 37 2.5 629 3.1 88 1.4 1010 5.3 3 0.8 1793 3.7
Al-Najaf 2 0.4 93 6.3 809 3.9 226 3.6 1520 8.0 67 18.2 2716 5.6
Qadisiyah 10 2.3 46 3.1 183 0.9 71 1.1 355 1.9 9 2.4 674 1.4
Al-Muthana 0 0.1 20 1.4 359 1.8 180 2.9 2437 12.8 10 2.8 3005 6.3
Thi Qar 1 0.1 158 10.7 801 3.9 281 4.5 3830 20.1 1 0.3 5072 10.5
Missan 0 0.0 21 1.4 505 2.5 63 1.0 204 1.1 52 14.1 845 1.8
Basrah 47 10.5 46 3.1 2243 11.0 860 13.8 1331 7.0 8 2.3 4535 9.4
Total 450 0.9 1479 3.1 20479 42.6 6231 13.0 19078 39.7 367 0.8 48085 100.0
444
Table (69)
Rate of hazardous waste collected per day and percentage of municipalities' hazardous waste is collected from by source and governorate for 2010.
Governorate
Rate of hazardous waste (kg/day)
Percentage of municipalities
Health institutions Industrial institutions
Agricultural institutions
others
Dahuk 814 93.0 0.0 2.3 0.0
Nineveh 6113 44.4 0.0 0.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya 2381 77.9 8.8 29.4 0.0
Kirkuk 426 50.0 7.1 7.1 7.1
Irbil 6057 34.4 13.1 1.6 0.0
Diala 1120 14.3 0.0 0.0 0.0
Al-Anbar 5019 35.0 5.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad/ municipality 8000 14.3 7.1 0.0 0.0
Baghdad/periphery 63 40.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Babil 930 25.0 0.0 0.0 12.5
Kerbala 2250 28.6 14.3 0.0 0.0
Waset 7005 11.8 0.0 0.0 0.0
Salahuddin 81 17.6 0.0 0.0 0.0
Al-Najaf 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Qadisiyah 2000 6.7 6.7 0.0 6.7
Al-Muthana 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Thi Qar 137 45.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Missan 195 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Basrah 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total 42591 41.2 4.5 5.4 0.9
444
Table (70)
Rate of treated hazardous waste and percentage by method of treatment and governorate for 2010
Governorate
Collection in temporary
allocated sites
Burial in allocated
medical burial sites Dumping in empty lots Recycling Turned into fertiliser
Amount
(kg/day) %
Amount
(kg/day) %
Amount
(kg/day) %
Amount
(kg/day) %
Amount
(kg/day) %
Dahuk 0 0.0 40 4.9 105 13.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Nineveh 0 0.0 6088 99.6 25 0.4 0 0.0 0 0.0
Sulaimaniya 250 10.6 1368 58.2 562 23.9 0 0.0 0 0.0
Kirkuk 0 0.0 376 88.3 30 7.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Irbil 0 0.0 5238 86.5 767 12.7 0 0.0 0 0.0
Diala 0 0.0 120 10.7 1000 89.3 0 0.0 0 0.0
AL-Anbar 0 0.0 4509 89.8 510 10.2 0 0.0 0 0.0
Baghdad/Municipality 0 0.0 8000 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 63 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Babil 330 35.5 500 53.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Kerbala 2000 88.9 250 11.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Waset 7000 99.9 5 0.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Salahuddin 50 61.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
AL-Najaf 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Qadisiya 0 0.0 0 0.0 2000 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
AL-Muthana 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
ThiQar 5 3.6 20 14.6 102 74.5 0 0.0 0 0.0
Missan 0 0.0 45 23.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Basrah 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Total 9698 22.8 26559 62.4 5101 12.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
443
Table (70)/cont.
Rate of treated hazardous waste and percentage by method of treatment and governorate for 2010
Governorate
Burning Dumped into rivers
and sewage lagoons
Sold to uncertified
contractors Turned to energy Other Total
Amount
(kg/day) %
Amount
(kg/day) %
Amount
(kg/day) %
Amount
(kg/day) %
Amount
(kg/day) %
Amount
(kg/day) %
Dahuk 667.0 81.9 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2.0 0.2 814.0 100.0
Nineveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6113.0 100.0
Sulaimaniya 189.0 7.9 12.0 0.5 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2381.0 100.0
Kirkuk 20.0 4.7 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 426.0 100.0
Irbil 52.0 0.9 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6057.0 100.0
Diala 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1120.0 100.0
AL-Anbar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5019.0 100.0
Baghdad/Municipality 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8000.0 100.0
Baghdad / periphery 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 63.0 100.0
Babil 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 100.0 10.8 930.0 100.0
Kerbala 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2250.0 100.0
Waset 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7005.0 100.0
Salahuddin 31.0 38.3 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 81.0 100.0
AL-Najaf 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Qadisiya 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2000.0 100.0
AL-Muthana 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
ThiQar 10.0 7.3 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 137.0 100.0
Missan 150.0 76.9 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 195.0 100.0
Basrah 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total 1119.0 2.6 12.0 (.) 0 0.0 0 0.0 102.0 0.2 42591.0 100.0
443
Table (71)
Percentage of allocated containers present for garbage collection distributed across areas and their numbers by governorate for 2010
Governorate Number of
municipalities
Percentage of
containers
available
Number of distributed containers across areas
Total Residential Commercial Governmental
Public
parks
Public
streets
Dahuk 43 95.3 74642 2134 1299 233 243 78551
Nineveh 27 70.4 546 173 72 78 4 873
Sulaimaniya 68 48.5 160 526 1025 268 726 2705
Kirkuk 14 42.9 2155 530 840 250 10 3785
Irbil 61 59.0 15958 2046 771 414 356 19545
Diala 21 90.5 2632 870 237 36 273 4048
AL-Anbar 20 70.0 9294 966 652 270 495 11677
Baghdad/Municipality 14 100.0 381490 341 1064 250 728 383873
Baghdad / periphery 15 100.0 35083 1787 1300 69 1107 39346
Babil 16 100.0 79250 1051 924 457 1047 82729
Kerbala 7 100.0 100925 8690 1585 7469 1223 119892
Waset 17 100.0 21579 195 376 16 1078 23244
Salahuddin 17 100.0 15360 2809 1159 142 1297 20767
AL-Najaf 9 100.0 11360 983 482 242 857 13944
Qadisiya 15 100.0 663 273 95 74 104 1209
AL-Muthana 11 100.0 665 167 164 45 134 1175
ThiQar 20 100.0 46134 1227 189 139 422 78111
Missan 15 93.3 21826 96 69 5 307 22303
Basrah 15 100.0 117911 745 657 239 424 119976
Total 425 79.5 937653 25609 12960 10696 10835 997753
443
Table (72)
Percentage of number of containers distributed across areas by governorate for 2010
Governorate percentage of distributed containers across areas
% Residential Commercial Governmental Public parks Public streets
Dahuk 8.0 8.3 10.0 2.2 2.2 7.9
Nineveh 0.1 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.0 0.1
Sulaimaniya 0.0 2.1 7.9 2.5 6.7 0.3
Kirkuk 0.2 2.1 6.5 2.3 0.1 0.4
Irbil 1.7 8.0 5.9 3.9 3.3 2.0
Diala 0.3 3.4 1.8 0.3 2.5 0.4
AL-Anbar 1.0 3.8 5.0 2.5 4.6 1.2
Baghdad/Municipality 40.7 1.3 8.2 2.3 6.7 38.5
Baghdad / periphery 3.7 7.0 10.0 0.6 10.2 3.9
Babil 8.5 4.1 7.1 4.3 9.7 8.3
Kerbala 10.8 33.9 12.2 69.8 11.3 12.0
Waset 2.3 0.8 2.9 0.1 9.9 2.3
Salahuddin 1.6 11.0 8.9 1.3 12.0 2.1
AL-Najaf 1.2 3.8 3.7 2.3 7.9 1.4
Qadisiya 0.1 1.1 0.7 0.7 1.0 0.1
AL-Muthana 001 0.7 1.3 0.4 1.2 0.1
ThiQar 4.9 4.8 1.5 1.3 3.9 4.8
Missan 2.3 0.4 0.5 0.0 2.8 2.2
Basrah 12.6 2.9 2.1 2.2 3.9 12.0
Total 94.0 2.6 1.3 1.1 1.1 100.0
444
Table (73)
Percentage distribution of container use distributed across areas, number of discharge times per week and percentage of garbage separation on households' level
by governorate for 2010
Governorate Percentage of container use Average number of emptying containers / week by type % of garbage
separation on
household level Yes Sometimes No Total Large
containers (8m3)
Medium
containers (6m3)
Small
containers (1m3)
Different size
containers
Dahuk 85.4 14.6 0.0 100.0 0 0 0 5 0.0
Nineveh 78.9 21.1 0.0 100.0 1 0 1 1 0.0
Sulaimaniya 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 1 1 6 2 0.0
Kirkuk 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 1 1 3 4 0.0
Irbil 94.4 2.8 2.8 100.0 1 1 5 4 0.0
Diala 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 1 1 5 3 0.0
AL-Anbar 71.4 21.4 7.1 100.0 2 1 2 1 0.0
Baghdad/Municipality 85.7 14.3 0.0 100.0 4 1 7 5 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 40.0 60.0 0.0 100.0 0 0 4 5 0.0
Babil 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 2 1 6 5 0.0
Kerbala 85.7 14.3 0.0 100.0 0 0 6 7 7
Waset 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0 0 6 5 5
Salahuddin 52.9 47.1 0.0 100.0 0 1 4 5 5
AL-Najaf 88.9 11.1 0.0 100.0 1 0 5 7 7
Qadisiya 80.0 20.0 0.0 100.0 0 2 9 6 6
AL-Muthana 100.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0 0 5 9 9
ThiQar 90.0 10.0 0.0 100.0 0 0 7 5 5
Missan 85.7 14.3 0.0 100.0 0 0 7 5 5
Basrah 86.7 13.3 0.0 100.0 1 1 5 3 3
Total 86.4 13.0 0.6 100.0 1 1 4 4 0.0
444
Table (74)
Percentage of available machinery to cover municipal services and number of machinery (working, idle, broken down and rented) by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Municipalities
(no.)
% machines
to cover
services
Garbage pressers 6m3 capacity Garbage pressers 8m
3 capacity
Working Idle Broken Rented Total Working Idle Broken Rented Total
Dahuk 43 93.0 75 2 6 0 83 10 0 0 0 10
Nineveh 27 100.0 19 2 0 0 21 169 4 23 0 196
Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 123 1 4 0 128 25 1 0 0 26
Kirkuk 14 100.0 20 0 8 0 28 29 1 21 0 51
Irbil 61 85.2 86 0 3 0 89 44 0 10 0 54
Diala 21 100.0 55 7 10 0 72 28 4 27 0 59
AL-Anbar 20 100.0 70 0 3 0 73 17 0 8 0 25
Baghdad/Municipality 14 100.0 71 0 2 6 79 153 18 8 9 188
Baghdad / periphery 15 100.0 28 5 7 0 40 17 3 4 0 24
Babil 16 100.0 85 0 14 0 99 14 0 1 0 15
Kerbala 7 100.0 20 0 0 0 20 37 0 1 0 38
Waset 17 100.0 46 0 0 0 46 23 2 0 0 25
Salahuddin 17 100.0 44 0 1 0 45 25 1 31 0 57
AL-Najaf 9 100.0 44 1 0 0 45 31 1 2 0 34
Qadisiya 15 100.0 25 0 6 0 31 19 0 6 0 25
AL-Muthana 11 100.0 18 0 0 0 18 17 3 1 0 21
ThiQar 20 100.0 41 1 3 0 45 25 0 4 0 29
Missan 15 100.0 26 1 0 0 27 47 0 1 0 48
Basrah 15 100.0 42 0 5 0 47 25 0 4 0 29
Total 425 96.7 938 20 72 6 1036 755 38 152 9 954
444
Table (74)/cont.
Percentage of available machinery to cover municipal services and number of machinery (working, idle, broken down and rented) by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Municipalities
(no.)
% machines
to cover
services
Garbage pressers 16m3 capacity Garbage pressers different capacities
Working Idle Broken Rented Total Working Idle Broken Rented Total
Dahuk 43 93.0 7 0 1 0 8 17 0 1 0 18
Nineveh 27 100.0 49 4 4 0 57 17 0 1 0 18
Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 13 0 1 0 14 96 1 2 0 99
Kirkuk 14 100.0 12 4 0 0 16 29 1 3 0 33
Irbil 61 85.2 6 1 1 0 8 12 0 1 0 13
Diala 21 100.0 7 5 20 0 32 11 0 8 0 19
AL-Anbar 20 100.0 20 0 2 0 22 36 0 3 0 39
Baghdad/Municipality 14 100.0 137 5 13 0 155 184 2 15 6 205
Baghdad / periphery 15 100.0 21 4 18 0 43 6 0 0 0 8
Babil 16 100.0 23 2 5 0 30 4 0 0 0 4
Kerbala 7 100.0 22 12 3 0 37 26 0 0 0 26
Waset 17 100.0 11 1 5 0 17 26 0 0 2 28
Salahuddin 17 100.0 7 1 4 0 12 6 0 3 0 9
AL-Najaf 9 100.0 35 3 11 0 49 22 0 4 0 26
Qadisiya 15 100.0 19 0 7 0 26 29 0 4 0 33
AL-Muthana 11 100.0 28 3 7 0 38 2 0 0 0 2
ThiQar 20 100.0 20 5 10 0 35 68 1 19 0 88
Missan 15 100.0 27 5 1 0 33 9 0 3 0 12
Basrah 15 100.0 78 1 14 3 96 99 4 12 0 155
Total 425 96.7 542 56 127 3 728 699 9 79 8 795
447
Table (74)/cont.
Percentage of available machinery to cover municipal services and number of machinery (working, idle, broken down and rented) by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Municipalities
(no.)
% machines
to cover
services
Farm tractor Dunbar
Working Idle Broken Rented Total Working Idle Broken Rented Total
Dahuk 43 93.0 59 4 3 0 66 7 2 1 0 10
Nineveh 27 100.0 151 2 15 1 169 15 6 8 0 29
Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 156 2 1 14 173 41 3 11 0 55
Kirkuk 14 100.0 37 1 6 9 53 4 1 2 0 7
Irbil 61 85.2 89 1 11 1 102 10 0 6 0 16
Diala 21 100.0 46 11 4 44 105 30 8 7 0 45
AL-Anbar 20 100.0 38 3 11 0 52 18 2 4 0 24
Baghdad/Municipality 14 100.0 149 1 17 210 377 24 0 16 8 48
Baghdad / periphery 15 100.0 16 7 12 14 49 13 11 12 0 36
Babil 16 100.0 39 1 7 66 113 20 5 8 0 33
Kerbala 7 100.0 31 0 12 211 254 1 1 8 0 10
Waset 17 100.0 48 0 4 96 148 19 1 2 0 22
Salahuddin 17 100.0 54 2 19 106 181 11 0 5 0 16
AL-Najaf 9 100.0 35 4 7 324 370 16 7 8 0 31
Qadisiya 15 100.0 38 2 4 6 50 7 0 5 0 12
AL-Muthana 11 100.0 12 0 6 0 18 8 0 6 0 14
ThiQar 20 100.0 44 12 19 0 75 23 2 14 0 39
Missan 15 100.0 43 1 3 100 147 9 3 5 0 17
Basrah 15 100.0 39 2 5 27 73 27 0 6 0 33
Total 425 96.7 1124 56 166 1229 2575 303 52 134 8 497
440
Table (74)/cont.
Percentage of available machinery to cover municipal services and number of machinery (working, idle, broken down and rented) by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Municipalities
(no.)
% machines
to cover
services
Shovel Grader
Working Idle Broken Rented Total Working Idle Broken Rented Total
Dahuk 43 93.0 18 0 2 0 20 12 0 0 0 12
Nineveh 27 100.0 45 5 14 0 64 32 2 7 0 41
Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 59 0 3 3 65 27 1 1 0 29
Kirkuk 14 100.0 28 11 4 3 46 16 7 6 4 30
Irbil 61 85.2 17 0 5 0 22 9 0 1 0 10
Diala 21 100.0 27 2 16 0 45 14 3 8 0 25
AL-Anbar 20 100.0 30 0 2 0 32 26 2 7 0 35
Baghdad/Municipality 14 100.0 69 5 7 114 195 2 0 1 48 21
Baghdad / periphery 15 100.0 16 4 19 1 40 12 2 10 0 24
Babil 16 100.0 21 7 12 0 40 23 5 2 0 30
Kerbala 7 100.0 29 2 12 0 43 20 5 6 0 31
Waset 17 100.0 27 0 7 1 35 20 0 2 0 22
Salahuddin 17 100.0 26 1 12 17 56 24 0 11 2 37
AL-Najaf 9 100.0 38 5 6 3 52 25 5 6 0 36
Qadisiya 15 100.0 38 1 7 0 46 23 1 3 0 27
AL-Muthana 11 100.0 25 3 5 0 33 6 1 3 0 10
ThiQar 20 100.0 40 5 13 0 58 29 7 12 0 48
Missan 15 100.0 27 1 5 0 33 18 1 2 0 21
Basrah 15 100.0 52 2 14 14 82 31 0 9 2 42
Total 425 96.7 623 54 165 156 1007 369 42 23 22 531
444
Table (74)/cont.
Percentage of available machinery to cover municipal services and number of machinery (working, idle, broken down and rented) by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Municipalities
(no.)
% machines
to cover
services
Bulldozer Lorry
Working Idle Broken Rented Total Working Idle Broken Rented Total
Dahuk 43 93.0 6 0 0 0 6 15 1 0 0 16
Nineveh 27 100.0 7 0 2 0 9 73 4 3 0 80
Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 6 0 0 0 6 94 0 6 4 101
Kirkuk 14 100.0 9 0 2 0 11 29 0 6 41 49
Irbil 61 85.2 1 0 2 0 3 27 0 3 0 30
Diala 21 100.0 3 2 4 0 9 44 2 6 0 52
AL-Anbar 20 100.0 8 1 5 0 14 47 0 4 0 51
Baghdad/Municipality 14 100.0 0 0 0 18 18 182 0 12 276 570
Baghdad / periphery 15 100.0 3 1 4 0 8 38 3 6 2 49
Babil 16 100.0 9 0 1 0 10 54 2 2 0 58
Kerbala 7 100.0 6 0 4 0 10 45 2 2 0 49
Waset 17 100.0 9 1 2 0 12 54 1 2 0 57
Salahuddin 17 100.0 5 1 9 1 16 48 0 7 12 97
AL-Najaf 9 100.0 10 2 1 0 13 54 0 1 0 55
Qadisiya 15 100.0 7 0 3 0 10 89 0 4 0 93
AL-Muthana 11 100.0 1 2 2 0 5 31 0 3 0 34
ThiQar 20 100.0 5 1 4 0 10 69 3 5 0 77
Missan 15 100.0 3 0 3 0 6 48 0 2 0 50
Basrah 15 100.0 10 0 5 0 15 100 4 7 0 111
Total 425 96.7 108 11 53 19 191 1141 22 81 124 1679
444
Table (74)/cont.
Percentage of available machinery to cover municipal services and number of machinery (working, idle, broken down and rented) by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Municipalities
(no.)
% machines
to cover
services
Cutting machine Suction machine
Working Idle Broken Rented Total Working Idle Broken Rented Total
Dahuk 43 93.0 1 0 0 0 1 8 2 0 0 10
Nineveh 27 100.0 1 0 1 0 2 5 1 0 0 6
Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 5 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0
Kirkuk 14 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 0 5
Irbil 61 85.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Diala 21 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
AL-Anbar 20 100.0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1
Baghdad/Municipality 14 100.0 84 1 17 1 103 142 4 12 46 174
Baghdad / periphery 15 100.0 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 2 0 4
Babil 16 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2
Kerbala 7 100.0 4 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0
Waset 17 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Salahuddin 17 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 0 8
AL-Najaf 9 100.0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0
Qadisiya 15 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
AL-Muthana 11 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
ThiQar 20 100.0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 2
Missan 15 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 0 0 7
Basrah 15 100.0 0 0 0 0 0 8 0 1 0 9
Total 425 96.7 97 3 18 1 119 181 8 25 46 230
443
Table (74)/cont.
Percentage of available machinery to cover municipal services and number of machinery (working, idle, broken down and rented) by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Municipalities
(no.)
% machines
to cover
services
Trucks Container crane
Working Idle Broken Rented Total Working Idle Broken Rented Total
Dahuk 43 93.0 101 1 0 0 102 5 1 0 0 6
Nineveh 27 100.0 8 1 3 0 12 16 2 4 0 22
Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 77 0 0 1 78 11 1 1 0 13
Kirkuk 14 100.0 18 0 0 50 68 14 2 5 0 21
Irbil 61 85.2 34 0 0 4 38 11 0 1 0 12
Diala 21 100.0 43 0 5 0 48 5 1 9 0 15
AL-Anbar 20 100.0 4 0 1 0 5 6 0 2 0 8
Baghdad/Municipality 14 100.0 64 8 5 277 354 40 1 2 0 43
Baghdad / periphery 15 100.0 22 1 1 0 24 1 1 8 0 10
Babil 16 100.0 15 0 0 0 15 11 2 3 0 16
Kerbala 7 100.0 9 0 2 0 11 2 1 2 0 5
Waset 17 100.0 8 0 0 0 8 6 1 0 0 7
Salahuddin 17 100.0 24 0 3 14 41 8 0 10 0 18
AL-Najaf 9 100.0 18 0 0 0 18 11 1 4 0 16
Qadisiya 15 100.0 35 0 3 0 38 3 0 2 0 5
AL-Muthana 11 100.0 7 0 1 0 8 10 2 3 0 125
ThiQar 20 100.0 16 1 5 0 22 7 1 8 0 16
Missan 15 100.0 8 0 0 0 8 2 2 1 0 5
Basrah 15 100.0 152 0 13 25 190 9 4 2 0 15
Total 425 96.7 663 12 42 371 1088 178 23 67 0 268
443
Table (74)/cont.
Percentage of available machinery to cover municipal services and number of machinery (working, idle, broken down and rented) by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Municipalities
(no.)
% machines
to cover
services
Rollers Excavators / PC
Working Idle Broken Rented Total Working Idle Broken Rented Total
Dahuk 43 93.0 15 0 0 0 15 10 0 0 0 10
Nineveh 27 100.0 25 8 8 0 41 0 1 0 0 1
Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 17 0 1 0 18 5 0 1 0 6
Kirkuk 14 100.0 12 7 4 1 24 0 0 1 0 1
Irbil 61 85.2 7 0 2 0 9 2 0 0 0 2
Diala 21 100.0 4 5 10 0 19 1 0 1 0 2
AL-Anbar 20 100.0 22 1 8 0 31 1 0 0 0 1
Baghdad/Municipality 14 100.0 12 0 3 3 18 26 0 7 41 47
Baghdad / periphery 15 100.0 7 4 11 0 22 1 0 2 0 3
Babil 16 100.0 14 0 1 0 15 2 2 0 0 4
Kerbala 7 100.0 8 1 9 0 18 0 0 0 0 0
Waset 17 100.0 17 0 1 0 18 0 0 0 1 1
Salahuddin 17 100.0 17 0 25 0 42 1 0 2 4 4
AL-Najaf 9 100.0 14 3 1 0 18 0 0 0 0 0
Qadisiya 15 100.0 45 0 7 0 52 1 0 0 0 1
AL-Muthana 11 100.0 6 0 5 0 11 1 0 1 0 2
ThiQar 20 100.0 10 9 16 0 35 4 0 5 4 10
Missan 15 100.0 0 1 3 0 4 1 0 1 0 2
Basrah 15 100.0 8 1 3 0 12 9 0 1 4 11
Total 425 96.7 260 40 118 4 422 65 3 22 48 108
443
Table (74)/cont.
Percentage of available machinery to cover municipal services and number of machinery (working, idle, broken down and rented) by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Municipalities
(no.)
% machines
to cover
services
Tanker Street sweeper
Working Idle Broken Rented Total Working Idle Broken Rented Total
Dahuk 43 93.0 40 1 3 0 44 1 0 0 0 1
Nineveh 27 100.0 34 2 1 0 37 15 1 4 1 24
Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 20 0 1 0 21 8 0 2 0 10
Kirkuk 14 100.0 28 0 5 0 33 5 1 0 0 6
Irbil 61 85.2 30 0 2 0 32 13 1 7 0 21
Diala 21 100.0 24 0 14 0 38 9 0 5 0 14
AL-Anbar 20 100.0 37 0 2 0 38 9 0 5 0 14
Baghdad/Municipality 14 100.0 126 1 9 48 184 44 0 4 0 48
Baghdad / periphery 15 100.0 17 0 6 0 23 4 1 1 0 6
Babil 16 100.0 38 2 5 0 45 5 0 1 0 6
Kerbala 7 100.0 28 0 3 0 31 9 0 1 0 10
Waset 17 100.0 24 0 1 1 26 2 1 1 0 4
Salahuddin 17 100.0 23 1 16 4 44 6 0 12 0 20
AL-Najaf 9 100.0 28 1 3 0 32 10 2 3 0 15
Qadisiya 15 100.0 35 0 7 0 42 12 0 1 0 16
AL-Muthana 11 100.0 20 0 3 0 23 5 0 0 0 5
ThiQar 20 100.0 45 3 3 0 51 5 0 1 0 6
Missan 15 100.0 31 1 4 0 36 5 0 0 0 5
Basrah 15 100.0 43 1 3 0 47 11 0 0 0 11
Total 425 96.7 671 13 91 53 828 178 7 50 1 239
474
Table (74)/cont.
Percentage of available machinery to cover municipal services and number of machinery (working, idle, broken down and rented) by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Municipalities
(no.)
% machines
to cover
services
Other Total
Working Idle Broken Rented Total Working Idle Broken Rented Total
Dahuk 43 93.0 4 1 0 4 9 411 15 17 4 447
Nineveh 27 100.0 2 0 0 0 2 683 45 98 4 831
Sulaimaniya 68 97.1 38 0 3 0 41 821 10 38 49 888
Kirkuk 14 100.0 13 0 0 1 14 307 36 74 79 496
Irbil 61 85.2 26 0 6 0 32 424 3 61 4 493
Diala 21 100.0 16 10 3 0 26 364 60 158 11 626
AL-Anbar 20 100.0 19 0 3 0 22 410 9 70 0 489
Baghdad/Municipality 14 100.0 69 1 5 170 245 1578 45 155 4291 3072
Baghdad / periphery 15 100.0 9 1 5 0 15 233 51 128 7 429
Babil 16 100.0 24 0 2 0 26 403 28 64 66 561
Kerbala 7 100.0 1 0 0 0 1 298 24 65 244 598
Waset 17 100.0 10 0 4 0 14 350 8 61 101 490
Salahuddin 17 100.0 54 0 19 0 73 386 7 196 487 776
AL-Najaf 9 100.0 0 0 0 14 14 392 35 56 214 825
Qadisiya 15 100.0 24 0 4 0 28 449 4 73 6 532
AL-Muthana 11 100.0 4 0 0 0 4 201 14 47 0 262
ThiQar 20 100.0 8 1 0 4 13 459 53 143 4 660
Missan 15 100.0 2 0 1 0 3 312 17 35 400 464
Basrah 15 100.0 5 0 0 0 5 748 19 104 72 943
Total 425 96.7 325 14 55 193 587 9229 483 1614 2446 13882
474
Table (75)
Number of municipalities owning machinery, number and percentage of municipalities with sufficient machinery , average number of garbage collection times
from households by machinery and press machinery per week by governorate for 2010
Governorate No. Municipalities
having machinery
No. Municipalities
not having
machinery
Total
Number and percentage of municipalities with sufficient
machinery to cover its services Average rate of garbage
collection per week from
houses using machinery With sufficient
machinery %
With insufficient
machinery %
Dahuk 40 3 43 6 15.0 34 85.0 5
Nineveh 27 0 27 0 0.0 27 100.0 5
Sulaimaniya 66 2 68 9 13.6 57 86.4 6
Kirkuk 14 0 14 1 7.1 13 92.9 4
Irbil 52 9 61 6 11.5 46 88.5 5
Diala 21 0 21 1 4.8 20 95.2 5
AL-Anbar 20 0 20 0 0.0 20 100.0 3
Baghdad/Municipalit
y 14 0 14 2 14.3 12 85.7 8
Baghdad / periphery 15 0 15 2 13.3 13 86.7 5
Babil 16 0 16 0 0.0 16 100.0 5
Kerbala 7 0 7 1 14.3 6 85.7 7
Waset 17 0 17 3 17.6 14 82.4 6
Salahuddin 17 0 17 1 5.9 16 94.1 5
AL-Najaf 9 0 9 0 0.0 9 100.0 7
Qadisiya 15 0 15 0 0.0 15 100.0 9
AL-Muthana 11 0 11 0 0.0 11 100.0 7
ThiQar 20 0 20 2 10.0 18 90.0 7
Missan 15 0 15 1 60.7 14 93.0 7
Basrah 15 0 15 0 0.0 15 100.0 6
Total 411 14 425 35 8.5 376 91.5 6
474
Table (76)
Percentage of municipalities contracting companies or garbage collection contractors, number of machinery owned by the companies or contractors working
within the jurisdiction of the municipality and rate of collection per week by companies or contractors by governorate for 2010
Governorate
% of municipalities
contracting companies and
contractors
Number of machinery of
companies and contractors
Average number of garbage
collection by companies and
contractors
Dahuk 16.3 216 6
Nineveh 0.0 0 0
Sulaimaniya 1.5 102 7
Kirkuk 7.1 97 3
Irbil 18.0 153 6
Diala 0.0 0 0
AL-Anbar 0.0 0 0
Baghdad/Municipalit
y 7.1 28 7
Baghdad / periphery 0.0 0 0
Babil 0.0 0 0
Kerbala 0.0 0 0
Waset 0.0 0 0
Salahuddin 0.0 0 0
AL-Najaf 0.0 0 0
Qadisiya 0.0 0 0
AL-Muthana 0.0 0 0
ThiQar 0.0 0 0
Missan 0.0 0 0
Basrah 9.7 182 5
Total 5.2 778 6
477
Table (77)
Percentage distribution of city cleaning by the municipality and rate of cleaning per week by area and governorate for 2010
Governorate
Percentage distribution of city cleaning Average number of
cleaning/week Streets and middle islands Squares Markets
Yes No Total Yea No Total Yes No Total Streets Square Markets
Dahuk 81.4 18.6 100.0 62.8 37.2 100.0 81.4 18.6 100.0 5 4 5
Nineveh 100.0 0.0 100.0 96.3 3.7 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 5 2 6
Sulaimaniya 92.6 7.4 100.0 52.9 47.1 100.0 80.9 19.1 100.0 4 2 6
Kirkuk 100.0 0.0 100.0 85.7 14.3 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 4 2 5
Irbil 82.0 18.0 100.0 45.9 54.1 100.0 68.9 3.1 100.0 5 2 6
Diala 100.0 0.0 100.0 85.7 14.3 100.0 95.2 4.8 100.0 5 4 6
AL-Anbar 100.0 0.0 100.0 85.0 15.0 100.0 95.0 5.0 100.0 4 2 5
Baghdad/Municipality 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 11 8 11
Baghdad / periphery 100.0 0.0 100.0 93.3 6.7 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 5 1 6
Babil 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 6 1 8
Kerbala 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 9 7 10
Waset 100.0 0.0 100.0 82.4 17.6 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 6 5 7
Salahuddin 100.0 0.0 100.0 94.1 5.9 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 6 1 7
AL-Najaf 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 7 6 12
Qadisiya 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 9 7 12
AL-Muthana 100.0 0.0 100.0 90.9 9.1 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 8 8 8
ThiQar 100.0 0.0 100.0 95.0 5.0 100.0 95.0 5.0 100.0 7 6 7
Missan 100.0 0.0 100.0 93.3 6.7 100.0 93.3 6.7 100.0 7 6 10
Basrah 100.0 0.0 100.0 86.7 13.3 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 6 4 7
Total 94.4 5.6 100.0 76.5 23.5 100.0 89.6 10.4 100.0 6 1 7
470
Table (78)
Percentage distribution of city cleaning by companies or contractors and rate of cleaning per week by area and governorate for 2010
Governorate
Percentage distribution of city cleaning Average number of
cleaning/week Streets and middle islands Squares Markets
Yes No Total Yes No Total Yes No Total Streets Square Markets
Dahuk 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 7.1 4.7 6.0
Nineveh 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 7.0 2.0 14.0
Kirkuk 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 6.0 4.0 12.0
Irbil 100.0 0.0 100.0 54.5 45.5 100.0 90.9 9.1 100.0 5.6 1.2 5.7
Diala 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Anbar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad/Municipality 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 7.0 7.0 7.0
Baghdad / periphery 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Babil 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kerbala 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Waset 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Salahuddin 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Najaf 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Qadisiya 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Muthana 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
ThiQar 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Missan 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Basrah 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 100.0 0.0 100.0 4.0 2.0 6.0
Total 100.0 0.0 100.0 77.3 22.7 100.0 95.5 4.5 100.0 6.2 1.2 6.6
474
Table(79)
Number and percentage of municipalities facing increasing rubble and remnants of war problems by area and governorate for 2010
Governorate
Residential areas Commercial areas Government institutions Public parks Public streets
Municipalities
(no.) %
Municipalities
(no.) %
Municipalities
(no.) %
Municipalities
(no.) %
Municipalities
(no.) %
Dahuk 9 20.9 2 4.7 2 4.7 4 9.3 5 11.6
Nineveh 5 18.5 3 11.1 3 11.1 1 3.7 2 11.1
Sulaimaniya 2 2.9 2 2.9 1 1.5 2 2.9 0 0.0
Kirkuk 7 50.5 4 28.6 5 35.7 1 7.1 4 35.7
Irbil 14 23.0 7 11.5 4 6.6 3 4.9 7 11.5
Diala 0 0.0 1 4.8 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
AL-Anbar 4 20.0 2 10.0 1 5.0 1 5.0 2 10.0
Baghdad/Municipalit
y 8 57.1 3 21.4 4 28.6 2 14.3 4 35.7
Baghdad / periphery 3 20.0 1 6.7 1 6.7 0 0.0 0 0.0
Babil 14 87.5 9 56.3 2 12.5 1 6.3 44 68.8
Kerbala 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Waset 4 23.5 2 11.8 1 5.9 0 0.0 1 5.9
Salahuddin 9 52.9 5 29.4 3 17.6 3 17.6 7 41.2
AL-Najaf 1 11.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 4 11.1
Qadisiya 6 40.0 2 13.3 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 13.3
AL-Muthana 2 18.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 9.1 0 0.0
ThiQar 11 55.0 6 30.0 1 5.0 2 10.0 9 45.0
Missan 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0
Basrah 7 46.7 3 20.0 4 26.7 2 13.3 6 40.0
Total 106 24.9 52 12.2 32 7.5 23 5.4 61 15.1
474
Table (80)
Percentage of the presence of regular transforming stations, temporary irregular collection sites within municipal borders and their numbers and total area by
governorate for 2010
Governorate % of existence of
regular transforming
stations
Number of regular
transforming stations
Total area of regular
transforming station
(m2)
% of existence of
irregular transforming
stations
Number of irregular
transforming stations
Total area of irregular
transforming station
(m2)
Dahuk 0.0 0 0 79.1 34 5308
Nineveh 0.0 0 0 0.0 0 0
Sulaimaniya 0.0 0 0 10.3 7 6900
Kirkuk 14.3 2 100000 35.7 4 15000
Irbil 0.0 0 0 0.0 0 0
Diala 4.8 1 5000 28.6 6 55500
AL-Anbar 0.0 0 0 30.0 6 99000
Baghdad/Municipalit
y 0.0 0 0 92.9 42 25000
Baghdad / periphery 0.0 0 0 80.0 42 132750
Babil 12.5 2 10000 43.8 7 64000
Kerbala 0.0 0 0 57.1 1 327500
Waset 0.0 0 0 47.1 8 337000
Salahuddin 0.0 0 0 23.5 1 30000
AL-Najaf 55.6 5 31500 11.1 4 100
Qadisiya 0.0 0 0 60.0 9 13950
AL-Muthana 0.0 0 0 9.1 4 1000
ThiQar 0.0 0 0 10.0 2 3000
Missan 0.0 0 0 6.7 4 1800
Basrah 0.0 0 0 20.0 2 10800
Total 2.4 10 146500 28.9 4 1128608
473
Table (81)
Number of medical waste burial sites granted and not granted environmental approval and their percentage and areas by governorate for 2010
Governorate No. Of medical burial
sites with and without
environmental approval
Number of site with environmental approval Number of site without environmental approval
No. % Area/donom No. % Area/donom
Dahuk 51 0 0.0 0 51 100.0 156
Nineveh 29 2 6.9 336 27 92.4 402
Sulaimaniya 62 0 0.0 0 62 400.0 334
Kirkuk 14 3 21.4 444 44 78.6 61
Irbil 54 8 14.8 38 16 84.2 276
Diala 18 1 5.6 10 47 91.1 795
AL-Anbar 21 2 9.5 120 49 90.4 504
Baghdad/Municipalit
y 3 0 0.0 0 2 400.0 341
Baghdad / periphery 7 0 0.0 0 7 400.0 58
Babil 18 4 22.2 96 41 77.8 803
Kerbala 4 0 0.0 0 1 400.0 327
Waset 17 7 41.2 482 10 58.8 161
Salahuddin 19 0 0.0 0 49 400.0 401
AL-Najaf 7 1 14.3 30 6 84.7 894
Qadisiya 15 0 0.0 0 44 400.0 129
AL-Muthana 7 1 14.3 25 6 84.7 18
ThiQar 12 2 16.7 416 40 82.2 752
Missan 17 1 5.9 100 46 91.4 77
Basrah 14 0 0.0 0 41 400.0 631
Total 389 32 8.2 2097 247 94.8 6819
473
Table(82)
Number of garbage burial sites according to initial municipal design, rate of groundwater depth at these sites by governorate for 2010
Governorate
No. Of burial sites
with environmental
approval
Location as to original municipal design Average depth of
groundwater at sit
(m) Within limits Outside limits
Dahuk 0 0 0 (-)
Nineveh 2 0 2 19
Sulaimaniya 0 0 0 (-)
Kirkuk 3 0 3 72
Irbil 8 1 7 141
Diala 1 0 1 20
AL-Anbar 2 0 2 33
Baghdad/Municipalit
y 0 0 0 (-)
Baghdad / periphery 0 0 0 (-)
Babil 4 0 4 2
Kerbala 0 0 0 (-)
Waset 7 0 7 8
Salahuddin 0 0 0 (-)
AL-Najaf 1 0 1 15
Qadisiya 0 0 0 (-)
AL-Muthana 1 0 1 3
ThiQar 2 0 2 6
Missan 1 0 1 3
Basrah 0 0 0 (-)
Total 32 1 31
473
404
Table (83)
Number of burial sites granted environmental approval and percentage of their type by governorate for 2010
Governorate
No. Of burial sites
with environmental
approval
Percentage distribution of type of garbage burial site
Medical site (regular) Open land Quarries Valleys Other/excavation and
garbage burial
Dahuk 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Nineveh 2 0.0 0.0 40.0 40.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kirkuk 3 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Irbil 8 0.0 25.0 0.0 74.0 0.0
Diala 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 400.0 0.0
AL-Anbar 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 40.0 50.0
Baghdad/Municipalit
y 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Babil 4 0.0 75.0 24.0 0.0 0.0
Kerbala 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Waset 7 0.0 71.4 14.3 14.3 0.0
Salahuddin 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Najaf 1 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Qadisiya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Muthana 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
ThiQar 2 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Missan 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Basrah 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total 32 15.6 40.6 9.1 24.2 3.1
404
Table (84)
Percentage of availability at burial sites of required accessories by governorate for 2010
Governorate
No. Of burial sites
with environmental
approval
Percentage of burial sites having
Fence Suitable roads/garbage
delivery to site
Admin and guard
rooms and toilets
Scales at entrance to
weigh garbage
Garbage seep water
collection system
Dahuk 0 0.0 0.0 0. 0.0 0.0
Nineveh 2 0.0 50.0 40.0 0.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kirkuk 3 66.7 100.0 66.7 0.0 33.3
Irbil 8 37.5 50.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Diala 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Anbar 2 0.0 50.0 40.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad/Municipalit
y 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Babil 4 33.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kerbala 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Waset 7 71.4 85.7 0.0 0.0 0.0
Salahuddin 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Najaf 1 100.0 100.0 400.0 0.0 0.0
Qadisiya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Muthana 1 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
ThiQar 2 50.0 50.0 400.0 0.0 0.0
Missan 1 100.0 100.0 400.0 0.0 0.0
Basrah 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total 32 45.2 74.2 24.8 0.0 3.2
404
Table (84)/cont.
Percentage of availability at burial sites of required accessories by governorate for 2010
Governorate
No. Of burial sites
with environmental
approval
Percentage of burial sites having
Gas collection system
e.g. CH4
Site padded with
polyethylene HDPA
density
Place final layer of soil
after rolling
Machinery and
equipment for burial
Dahuk 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Nineveh 2 0.0 0.0 40.0 50.0
Sulaimaniya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kirkuk 3 0.0 33.3 400.0 33.3
Irbil 8 0.0 0.0 27.4 37.5
Diala 1 0.0 0.0 400.0 0.0
AL-Anbar 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0
Baghdad/Municipalit
y 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Babil 4 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.3
Kerbala 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Waset 7 0.0 0.0 42.9 28.6
Salahuddin 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Najaf 1 0.0 0.0 400.0 100.0
Qadisiya 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Muthana 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
ThiQar 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0
Missan 1 0.0 0.0 400.0 100.0
Basrah 0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total 32 0.0 3.2 14.9 38.7
407
Table (85)
Number of burial machinery and equipment and percentage distribution by status (working, idle and broken) for 2010
Machinery Working Idle Broken Total
Excavator PC 1 0 0 1
Shovel 11 0 1 12
Grader 5 0 0 5
Bulldozer 10 0 5 15
Lorry 6 0 0 6
Rollers for medical
burial sites 7 0 2 9
Other 4 0 0 4
Total 44 0 8 52
Percentage of
machinery status 84.6 0.0 15.4 100.0
400
Table (86)
Number of burial sites with no environmental approval and percentage distribution of their type by governorate for 2010
Governorate
No. Of burial sites
without
environmental
approval
Percentage of burial sites by type
Open land Quarries Valleys Other
Dahuk 51 11.8 17.6 70.6 0.0
Nineveh 27 3.7 11.1 84.2 0.0
Sulaimaniya 62 38.7 12.9 18.1 0.0
Kirkuk 11 36.4 18.1 26.1 9.1
Irbil 46 17.4 15.2 67.1 0.0
Diala 17 47.1 23.5 29.1 0.0
AL-Anbar 19 26.3 47.4 44.8 10.5
Baghdad/Municipality 3 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 7 66.7 16.7 46.7 0.0
Babil 14 71.4 28.6 0.0 0.0
Kerbala 4 75.0 25.0 0.0 0.0
Waset 10 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0
Salahuddin 19 26.3 31.6 12.4 0.0
AL-Najaf 6 33.3 66.7 0.0 0.0
Qadisiya 15 73.3 26.7 0.0 0.0
AL-Muthana 6 66.7 0.0 22.2 0.0
ThiQar 10 50.0 50.0 0.0 0.0
Missan 16 14.3 78.6 7.4 0.0
Basrah 14 42.9 57.1 0.0 0.0
Total 357 31.9 26.8 10.1 0.8
404
Table (87)
Number of employees at burial sites by post for 2010
Post Number of employees
Fulltime Contract Day labour Other
Engineer 27 8 2 37
Work supervisor 125 152 53 330
Technician 35 11 4 50
Administrator 6 16 7 29
Unskilled labour 145 189 106 440
Driver 468 162 23 653
Other 3 6 17 26
Total 809 544 212 1565
% 51.7 34.8 13.5 100.0
404
Table (88)
Percentage of garbage treatment method by governorate for 2010
Governorate
Burial at
sites with
environment
al approval
Burial at
sites without
environment
al approval
Dumping in
empty lots
Recycling
or reuse Burning
Turn to
fertiliser
Turn to
energy
Sold to
uncertified
contractors
Other
Dahuk 0.0 86.0 20.9 0.0 65.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Nineveh 3.7 96.3 7.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Sulaimaniya 1.5 80.9 60.3 0.0 44.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Kirkuk 42.9 57.1 14.3 0.0 14.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Irbil 14.8 52.5 9.8 0.0 65.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2
Diala 4.8 71.4 23.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Anbar 10.0 90.0 10.0 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0
Baghdad/Municipality 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Baghdad / periphery 0.0 60.0 26.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0
Babil 18.8 81.3 25.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.2
Kerbala 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Waset 29.4 52.9 23.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.8
Salahuddin 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 23.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 22.4
AL-Najaf 22.2 66.7 22.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Qadisiya 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
AL-Muthana 9.1 72.7 54.5 0.0 45.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.4
ThiQar 15.0 65.0 50.0 0.0 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Missan 6.7 86.7 6.7 0.0 6.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Basrah 0.0 80.0 33.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Total 8.2 76.9 24.4 0.0 27.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.2
403
Table (89)
Percentage of main problems faced by municipal services sector in garbage collection by governorate for 2010
Governorate Not enough
of machinery
No
machinery
Weak
maintenance
unsustainable
Scarcity of
spare parts
Lack of
financial
allocations
Not enough
employees Low wages
Lack of
needed
requirements
for garbage
collection
Lack of
environment
awareness
Other
Dahuk 76.7 2.3 18.6 32.6 69.8 83.7 74.4 81.4 97.7 2.3
Nineveh 100.0 0.0 55.6 66.7 100.0 92.6 100.0 96.3 96.3 7.1
Sulaimaniya 88.2 1.5 14.7 14.7 38.2 83.8 75.0 82.4 63.2 44.8
Kirkuk 92.9 0.0 7.1 7.1 92.9 100.0 92.9 92.9 100.0 24.1
Irbil 80.3 13.1 49.2 45.9 72.1 75.4 91.8 59.0 88.5 4.6
Diala 76.2 4.8 4.8 0.0 90.5 90.5 100.0 71.4 95.2 0.0
AL-Anbar 100.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 75.0 95.0 80.0 95.0 80.0 0.0
Baghdad/Municipality 92.9 0.0 21.4 28.6 85.7 35.7 71.4 28.6 100.0 7.4
Baghdad / periphery 86.7 0.0 26.7 33.3 80.0 80.0 66.7 86.7 100.0 26.7
Babil 93.8 6.3 6.3 18.8 50.0 43.8 62.5 18.8 100.0 6.2
Kerbala 85.7 0.0 28.6 14.3 71.4 85.7 42.9 14.3 100.0 0.0
Waset 70.6 11.8 5.9 29.4 35.3 58.8 70.6 70.6 100.0 0.0
Salahuddin 94.1 0.0 41.2 52.9 82.4 82.4 100.0 58.8 100.0 42.9
AL-Najaf 77.8 0.0 11.1 33.3 55.6 88.9 77.8 55.6 100.0 22.2
Qadisiya 93.3 6.7 20.0 20.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 93.3 100.0 26.7
AL-Muthana 100.0 0.0 18.2 0.0 63.6 90.9 100.0 63.6 90.9 9.4
ThiQar 90.0 0.0 55.0 60.0 100.0 95.0 95.0 65.0 100.0 4.0
Missan 93.3 0.0 0.0 6.7 80.0 66.7 80.0 20.0 93.3 0.0
Basrah 100.0 0.0 40.0 66.7 60.0 60.0 93.3 93.3 100.0 26.7
Total 87.5 3.5 25.9 31.8 70.4 80.2 83.8 70.4 90.4 9.9
403
Table (90)
Percentage of environmental awareness programmes implemented by municipal staff during the year preceding the survey, number of programmes, number of
participants and percentage of benefit from preparing environmental awareness programmes by governorate for 2010
Governorate % of implementing
environmental
awareness programmes
Number of
implemented
programmes
Total no. Of
participants
% of benefit from
preparing programmes
Dahuk 0.0 0 0 0.0
Nineveh 55.6 42 1636 92.2
Sulaimaniya 1.5 2 145 400.0
Kirkuk 14.3 5 121 400.0
Irbil 13.1 15 4500 400.0
Diala 14.3 4 245 400.0
AL-Anbar 0.0 0 0 0.0
Baghdad/Municipality 92.9 100 6128 400.0
Baghdad / periphery 73.3 34 125 90.9
Babil 0.0 0 0 0.0
Kerbala 0.0 0 0 0.0
Waset 23.5 9 130 100.0
Salahuddin 23.5 18 151 400.0
AL-Najaf 11.1 3 9 400.0
Qadisiya 13.3 3 80 400.0
AL-Muthana 45.5 10 450 400.0
ThiQar 10.0 3 110 400.0
Missan 0.0 0 0 0.0
Basrah 53.3 15 31 87.4
Total 18.6 266 13861 96.2
403
Table (91)
Number and percentage of environmental awareness programmes implemented by bodies or organisations and number and percentage of governorates where
programmes were implemented for 2010
Implementing body or
organisation
No. of
implementing
programmes
% of implemented
programmes
No. Of
governorates
programmes
implemented
% of governorates
programme
implemented
Ministry of Municipalities 37 29.6 5 26.3
UNICEF 4 3.2 1 4.2
Universities and institutions 2 1.6 2 40.4
Local council 1 0.8 1 4.2
Municipal departments 34 27.2 9 17.1
Directorates of areas and
districts 6 4.8 6 24.6
Municipal council 6 4.8 4 24.4
PRT 7 5.6 1 4.2
Baghdad Municipality 10 8.0 1 4.2
Baghdad Health
Department 4 3.2 4 24.4
Mercy Core 1 0.8 1 4.2
Environment Directorates 2 1.6 2 10.5
KOICA 1 0.8 1 4.2
IRD 1 0.8 1 4.2
UN 1 0.8 1 4.2
Jarakhan Rafiq 1 0.8 1 4.2
Cultural centres 3 2.4 1 4.2
VOGA 4 3.2 1 4.2
Total 125 100.0
444
444
Table (92)
Number of employees in municipal sector by post and governorate for 2010
Governorate
Engineer Work supervisor Technician
Fulltime Contract Day
labour Total Fulltime Contract
Day
labour Total Fulltime Contract
Day
labour Total
Dahuk 242 29 4 275 145 71 12 228 260 57 25 342
Nineveh 202 4 3 209 20 13 264 297 132 2 2 136
Sulaimaniya 336 23 0 359 441 23 0 646 875 59 0 934
Kirkuk 125 0 7 132 16 0 46 62 155 0 42 167
Irbil 377 7 0 384 238 142 0 380 485 29 0 514
Diala 142 0 0 142 77 0 0 77 67 0 0 67
AL-Anbar 246 0 3 249 252 1 5 258 187 1 0 188
Baghdad/Municipality 649 77 270 996 245 27 134 406 1020 83 486 1689
Baghdad / periphery 132 9 1 142 9 3 1 13 140 0 0 140
Babil 184 0 5 189 55 0 309 364 204 0 8 212
Kerbala 178 0 1 179 98 4 6 108 123 0 0 123
Waset 72 3 1 76 42 0 137 179 116 2 0 118
Salahuddin 149 0 2 151 19 0 91 110 122 0 0 122
AL-Najaf 159 1 0 160 47 0 271 318 118 2 0 120
Qadisiya 155 0 37 192 76 0 58 134 76 0 24 107
AL-Muthana 88 0 2 90 23 1 13 37 75 0 40 85
ThiQar 209 0 5 214 50 0 86 136 200 0 22 223
Missan 53 0 0 53 96 5 8 109 92 0 0 92
Basrah 263 0 4 267 31 0 91 122 376 0 8 384
Total 3961 153 345 4459 1980 290 1532 3802 4823 235 704 5763
444
Table (92)/cont.
Number of employees in municipal sector by post and governorate for 2010
Governorate
Administrator Unskilled labour Driver
Fulltime Contract Day
labour Total Fulltime Contract
Day
labour Total Fulltime Contract
Day
labour Total
Dahuk 622 108 6 736 697 904 96 1697 395 144 35 574
Nineveh 304 4 0 308 52 927 3561 4540 354 554 3 911
Sulaimaniya 1108 126 0 1234 2798 2309 0 5107 712 263 0 975
Kirkuk 459 4 48 511 72 22 460 554 293 42 22 357
Irbil 1115 265 0 1380 889 1047 15 1951 364 172 0 536
Diala 577 0 0 577 139 31 1218 1388 268 7 7 282
AL-Anbar 438 0 8 446 399 258 292 949 359 52 0 411
Baghdad/Municipality 1246 184 34 1464 813 84 17855 18752 1327 1 47 1375
Baghdad / periphery 247 0 0 247 23 17 290 330 264 4 3 271
Babil 675 0 43 718 140 0 3098 3238 427 0 203 630
Kerbala 212 0 0 212 163 0 3300 3463 266 0 0 266
Waset 140 2 2 144 214 0 1587 1801 239 0 63 302
Salahuddin 249 2 0 215 168 0 1708 1976 319 0 64 380
AL-Najaf 257 4 7 268 552 0 2649 3201 416 5 34 455
Qadisiya 320 0 87 407 568 0 1346 1914 394 0 176 570
AL-Muthana 108 0 14 122 156 0 1243 1399 192 0 5 197
ThiQar 370 0 62 432 276 0 1977 2253 463 0 65 528
Missan 320 3 0 323 570 89 2067 2726 375 0 40 415
Basrah 525 0 8 533 308 0 8731 9039 1192 4 14 1210
Total 9292 702 319 10313 8997 5688 51493 66178 8616 1248 781 10645
447
Table (92)/cont.
Number of employees in municipal sector by post and governorate for 2010
Governorate
Other Total
Fulltime Contract Day labour Total Fulltime Contract Day labour Total
Dahuk 0 0 0 0 2361 1313 178 3852
Nineveh 574 111 16 701 1638 1615 3849 7102
Sulaimaniya 54 31 0 85 6324 2834 0 9158
Kirkuk 31 2 148 181 1511 70 743 1964
Irbil 98 52 0 150 3566 1714 15 5295
Diala 138 0 0 138 1408 38 1225 2671
AL-Anbar 109 5 6 120 1990 317 314 2621
Baghdad/Municipality 684 256 214 1154 5984 712 19140 25836
Baghdad / periphery 110 0 0 110 925 33 295 1253
Babil 160 0 6 166 1845 0 3672 5517
Kerbala 176 0 0 176 1216 4 3307 4527
Waset 211 67 293 571 1034 74 2083 3191
Salahuddin 51 0 2 53 1074 2 1867 2943
AL-Najaf 188 0 152 304 1737 12 3113 4862
Qadisiya 403 0 333 736 1992 0 2068 4060
AL-Muthana 11 0 11 22 653 1 1298 1952
ThiQar 224 4 91 319 1792 4 2309 4105
Missan 4 0 0 4 1510 97 2115 3722
Basrah 55 0 0 55 2750 4 8856 11610
Total 3281 528 1272 5081 40950 8844 56447 106241
440
Table(93)
Indicators on rubble crushing plants in Baghdad Municipality for 2010
Indicator Number % Notes
Number of rubble crushing plants 3 100.0 Not granted environmental
approval
Plant with fence 3 100.0
Plant with suitable roads to deliver rubble 3 100.0
Plant with admin and guard rooms 3 100.0
Plant with machinery and equipment 3 100.0
Number of working machinery 7 100.0
Sources of received rubble - 100.0 Demolition and construction
Type of rubble crushing sites - 100.0 Regular sites
Amount of crushed rubble
242 m3/day - Received
188 m3/day - Crushed
168 m3/day - Delivered
Number of separation and recycling sites
0 - Currently working
2 - Under construction
Annex (1)
Concepts and Terminology
440
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Concepts and Terminology
The environment survey for the services sector in Iraq for 2010 was designed and
implemented based on the concepts and terminology of the Ministry of Municipalities
and Public Works and Baghdad Municipality as well as on international concepts and
terminology from the UNSD and UNEP taking into consideration the particular
circumstances of Iraqi society. Below is a list of most important concepts used in the
survey.
Water sector
Population connected to drinking water distribution networks: ate the population
receiving clean drinking water from distribution networks of produced water solely
from governmental water directorates responsible for the preparation.
Urban population: population within municipal boundaries.
Rural population: population outside municipal boundaries.
Water loss: the amount of water lost owing to leaks in transport from point of
extraction to point of use or owing to trespasses on the network by citizens or the
existence of cracks in network pipes transporting the water.
Estimated need of the amount of drinking water: is the amount of clean drinking
water that to be provided to meet the water needs of population.
Water project: is a group of connected stations that starts from drawing water from
different sources (river, lake, well, collection basin) through the distillation and
sterilisation stages and then pumping water directly to large cities through
strengthening stations.
Water complex: are small distillation units, part of a water project's stages of
galvanised steel structure for quick set up and are usually less efficient that projects
and used in villages and relatively small areas.
Well stations: are drinking water production stations mounted on wells and includes
water projects and complexes as well as solar powered stations.
Well water: is ground water 10 meters deep or more.
Water desalination stations (RO): are small stations that remove totally dissolved
salts, hardness salts and sulfurs from drinking water to be within acceptable
environmental levels.
444
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Solar powered stations: are solar powered water distillation and sterilisation stations
without the addition of potassium sulfate or chlorine.
Design capacity: is the capacity on which basis the project, water complex, well
stations, water desalination stations (RO) or solar powered stations are designed, their
unit of measurement is m3/hour or m
3/day.
Available capacity: is the capacity that could be produced at the project, water
complex, well stations, water desalination stations (RO) or solar powered stations are
designed, their unit of measurement is m3/hour or m
3/day.
Actual capacity: is the current production capacity of the project, water complex,
well stations, water desalination stations (RO) or solar powered stations are designed,
their unit of measurement is m3/hour or m
3/day.
Biological tests: are tests of harmful organisms such as:
T. E. Coli/100ml;
T. coliform/100ml
T. Plate count/1ml
These tests are carried out on crude water and water prepared for drinking or house
use so as not to posses any harmful elements transmitted by water. Every 100 ml
sample of drinking water not to include Escherichia Coli in addition to tests for
viruses and parasites carried out on drinking water.
Physiological tests: are the physiological characteristics of water that includes colour,
clarity, taste, smell and PH.
Chemical tests: are the concentration amount of organic and inorganic substances in
crude and drinking water that includes totally dissolved salts, sodium, potassium,
cadmium, Hexavalent chromium, fluoride, nitrate, aluminum, chlorines, brass,
brackish water, iron, sulfates, nickel…etc.
444
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Chlorine test: chlorine test is part of chemical tests but singled out in as a special
category owing to its importance, noting that it is not carried out in solar powered
stations.
Distribution of produced water by sector: includes the household, governmental
and other sectors.
Household sector: includes water prepared for residences.
Governmental sector: includes all institutions of the government.
Other: includes all private sector economical activities.
443
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Sanitation sector
Sanitation networks (sewage networks): are all extensions and preparations used to
collect, transport and deliver of sewage wastewater to treatment sites or discharge
including pipes, collection tanks, pumping stations, manholes, ventilation valves and
others.
Rainwater networks: are sanitation networks that collect, transports and discharge
rainwater from streets, rooftops and the like.
Produced wastewater: is all types of wastewater produced by different human
activity (home, economic, industrial) sometimes called sewage water or sanitation
water because it is generally transported through the general sanitation network.
Central treatment stations: are establishments in selected sites for oxidising organic
material and separation of solid impurities from sewage water to enable its discharge
without health hazards or its reuse.
Preliminary treatment: is the removal of suspended material in wastewater such as
rags, paper, tree branches, gravel, oils and grease to prevent damage to treatment
units.
Elementary treatment: includes the removal of proteins, suspended material and
organic material.
Secondary treatment: is the removal of biologically degraded organic material (in a
solution or suspended) and suspended solid material. This stage could include
sterilisation.
Tertiary treatment: is a group of operations following secondary treatment to ensure
a more efficient treatment such as removing organic load, turbidity, nitrogen,
phosphor and metals. These are physiochemical operations such as coagulation,
filtration, organic material adsorption using carbon catalyst, reverse osmoses, and
technologically advanced sterilisation.
Discharge destination: is any outpour for discharging rainwater or sewage water
(treated or untreated) to flow into a water stream, sewage lagoon, lake, direct use or
any other means.
443
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Treated wastewater: is the water that comes out of sewage water treatment stations
after being correctly treated in accordance with the standards of sewage water
treatment by use or disposal purposes.
BOD5 concentration: is the biochemical oxygen demand. It is the amount of oxygen
needed by organisms to break down organic matter in water. This measurement gives
information on the degree of organic matter pollution of water.
Small treatment units: are small unites designed for treating sewage water in small
residential areas and liquid waste from polluting medical and industrial activities.
Polluting activities: are all industrial, medical and agricultural activities that produce
polluting waste harmful to humans and the environment.
Produced liquid waste: is the discharged waste from residential, medical, industrial
and agricultural compounds containing a wide range of pollutants caused by waste
mixture from different sources.
Treated liquid waste: is the produced water from treatment processes in treatment
stations or units clear from harmful pollutants.
Pumping stations: are all stations used to support rainwater thrust to water source
and wastewater to central treatment stations and includes thrusting, pulling and
submerged stations.
Septic tanks: are underground tanks that collect wastewater from residential units not
connected to sanitation networks for transporting it to treatment stations or other
sources.
Sludge: is the amount of accumulating solid waste as a result of wastewater treatment
operations when purifying wastewater as it is separated from wastewater during
treatment.
443
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Municipal services sector:
Hazardous waste: is waste containing toxic material or high concentration of
inflammable, explosive, reactive or erosive material affect human, animal, plan or
environmental health either alone or after contact with other material.
Working machinery: are machinery currently used to provide municipal services.
Idle machinery: are machinery in working condition but not currently used in
providing municipal services.
Broken-down machinery: are damaged machinery not currently used in service
provision.
Rented machinery: are machinery rented by the municipality for direct use.
Regular transforming stations: are intermediate places for solid waste collection
that includes scales for weighing collected waste, pressing and emptying into special
large size trucks for transportation to burial sites.
Irregular transforming stations: are temporary collection sites of open spaces
where garbage is temporarily collected for transportation to burial sites. They are
usually irregular as they do not have environmental requirements.
Waste burial sites granted environmental approval: are sites of cheap land and
considered the cheapest most suitable way of solid waste disposal and most common
worldwide. The burial site is divided into a number of cells for waste collection, each
cell is covered by sand after it is filled with waste and the adjoining cell is opened.
The cell is insulated with a piping system for collecting waste seepage. Seeping liquid
is of two types:
Rainwater entering the site from upper surface layers through the waste; and
Water resulting from aerobic and anaerobic biodegradation of trapped garbage
underground.
They are leveled well then covered by a thin layer of sand at the end of a working day.
When the site is completely filled with layers of solid waste, it is covered by a final
thick layer of sand then disposal is moved to another site and the process starts all
over again.
444
Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010 (water- sanitation - municipal services)
Waste burial sites not granted environmental approval: are open lands or
depressions where waste is dumped irregularly and uncontrollably and hence, does
not follow any environmental requirements.
Environmental awareness programmes: are pregrammes implemented by
international organisations or relevant official bodies with the objective of raising
environmental and health awareness on the hazards and effects of waste on the
environment and society.
Percentages: the total of percentages to a question does not equal 100% because
answers to questions are multiple allowing the selections of more than one answer.
Percentage distribution: the total of percentages for the cases of a question equals
100% (i.e. there is only one answer to the question).
Annex (2)
Survey Questionnaires
Governorate …………………...............
Directorate ……………………………
Address ……………………………
Researcher's name ………………………. Signeture……………..email …………….
Mobile number …………………………..
Manager's name …………………………. Signeture……………………….
Name: central supervisor Signature Date
Name: local supervisor Signature Date
Name: field researcher Signature Date
Name: field researcher Signature Date
Name: desktop checking
person Signature Date
Name: data entry person Signature Date
The Government of Iraq
Ministry of Planning
Central Statistic Office
Environmental Statistics Directorate
Questionnaire (1)
The Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010
Water Sector
Kindly note the following:
1. Shaded fields to left blank filled by CSO;
2. Write English numerals using blue fountain pen;
3. Put a circle around the suitable choice; and
4. Questionnaire to be filled by engineer in charge at the directorate.
4
Q: 1
Percentage of population connected to drinking
water distribution networks produced by the
governorate
1 Urban %
2 Rural %
Q: 2 number of population connected to drinking water
distribution networks by the governorate
1 Urban %
2 Rural %
Q:3
Total rate of amount of crude water drawn from
source for drinking water production in projects,
water complexes, well stations and solar powered
in the governorate
m3/day
Q: 4
Total rate of amount of produced water in
projects, water complexes, well stations and solar
powered in the governorate
m3/day
Q: 5
Average amount of lost water from produced
water during transportation in water distribution
network
m3/day
Q: 6
Total rate of amount of prepared water for the
population from projects, water complexes, well
stations and solar powered in the governorate
1 Urban %
2 Rural %
Q: 7 Estimated need for drinking water in the
governorate
m3/day
Water Projects
Q: 8 Total number of projects in the governorate
Project
Q: 9 Total design capacity of projects
m3/day
Q: 10 Total rate of available capacity of projects m3/day
Q: 11 Total rate of amounts of produced water from
projects (actual capacity)
m3/day
4
Q: 12 Crude water sources used for projects
(can indicate more than one answer)
1 Surface water
2 Ground water / excluding wells
Q: 13 Total rate of amount of crude water drawn by
source for projects
1 Surface water m3/day
2 Ground water / excluding wells m3/day
Q: 14 Number of projects by status
1 Working Project
2 Partially working Project
3 Idle Project
Water Complexes
Q: 15 Total number of water complexes in the
governorate Water complex
Q: 16 Total of design capacity of complexes m3/day
Q: 17 Total rate of available capacity of complexes m3/day
Q: 18 Total rate of amounts of produced water from
complexes (actual capacity) m3/day
Q: 19 Crude water sources used for projects
(can indicate more than one answer)
1 Surface water
2 Ground water / excluding wells
Q: 20 Total rate of amount of crude water drawn by
source for complexes
1 Surface water m3/day
2 Ground water / excluding wells m3/day
Q: 21 Number of water complexes by status
1 Working Complex
2 Partially working Complex
3 Idle Complex
7
Well stations/excluding desalination stations
Q: 22 Are there feeding wells for water production
stations in governorate?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 31
Q:23 Total number of wells in governorate Well
Q: 24 Number of water production stations mounted on
wells Station
Q: 25 Total design capacity of water production stations
mounted on wells m3/day
Q: 26 Total rate of available capacity of water
production stations mounted on wells
m3/day
Q: 27
Total rate of amounts of produced water from
water production stations mounted on wells
(actual capacity)
m3/day
Q: 28 Total rate of amounts of drawn water from wells
distributed to population untreated m3/day
Q: 29 Total rate of amounts of crude water drawn form
wells m3/day
Q: 30 Number of water production stations mounted on
wells by status
1 Working Station
2 Partially working Station 3 Idle Station
Water desalination stations (RO)
Q: 31 Are there water desalination stations in
governorate
1 Yes
2 No Q: 39
Q: 32 Total number of desalination stations in
governorate Station
Q: 33 Total design capacity of water desalination
stations m3/day
Q: 34 Total rate of available capacity of water
desalination stations m3/day
Q: 35 Total rate of amounts of desalinated water
produced by desalination stations (actual capacity) m3/day
0
Q: 36
Crude water sources used in water desalination
stations
(can indicate more than one answer)
1 Water projects and complexes
2 Surface water
3 Ground water
Q: 37 Total rate of amounts of crude water drawn to
desalination stations by source
1 Water projects and complexes m3/day
2 Surface water m3/day
3 Ground water m3/day
Q: 38 Number of water desalination stations by status
1 Working Station
2 Partially working Station 3 Idle Station
Q: 39 Does governorate need water desalination station 1 Yes
2 No
Solar powered stations
Q: 40 Are there solar powered water production stations
in governorate
1 Yes
2 No Q: 49
Q: 41 Number of solar powered stations in governorate
Station
Q: 42 Total design capacity of solar powered stations in
governorate
m3/day
Q: 43 Total rate of available capacity of solar powered
stations
m3/day
Q: 44 Total rate of amounts of produced water by solar
powered stations (actual capacity)
m3/day
Q: 45
Crude water sources used in solar powered
stations
(can indicate more than one answer)
m3/day
Q: 46 Total rate of amounts of crude water drawn to
solar powered stations by source
1 Surface water m3/day
2 Ground water/excluding wells m3/day
4
Q: 47 Number of solar powered stations by status
1 Working Station
2 Partially working Station 3 Idle Station
Q: 48 Are there powered alternatives at solar powered
stations
1 Yes Indicate……….
2 No
Q: 49
Number of tests carried out on crude water by
type in water projects, complexes, well stations
and solar powered stations
1 Biological tests Test
2 Physiochemical tests Test
Q: 50
Number of crude water samples drawn by type in
water projects, complexes, well stations and solar
powered stations
1 Biological tests Sample
2 Physiochemical tests Sample
Q: 51
Number of tests carried out on produced water by
type in water projects, complexes, well stations
and solar powered stations
1 Biological tests Test
A2 Physiochemical
tests/excluding chlorine test Test
B2 Chlorine concentration test Test
Q: 52
Number of produced water samples drawn by
type in water projects, complexes, well stations
and solar powered stations
1 Biological tests Test
A2 Physiochemical
tests/excluding chlorine test Test
B2 Chlorine concentration test Test
Q: 53
Amount of produced water reaching consumer
through distribution networks
(one answer only)
1 Good (300 - 400) liter/person/day
2 Average (200 - 300) liter/person/day
3 Below average (100 - 200) liter/person/day
4 Little (100 and less) liter/person/day
4
Q: 54 Produced water by sector
1 household %
2 Governmental %
3 Other %
Q: 55
Does the governorate need new water projects,
complexes, well stations or solar powered
stations?
1 Projects 1 Yes
2 No reason………………
2 Complexes 1 Yes
2 No reason………………
3 Well stations 1 Yes
2 No reason………………
4 Solar powered
stations
1 Yes
2 No reason………………
Water meters
Q: 56
Are there water meters available at units covered
by the Public Water Directorate of Baghdad
Municipality?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 59
Q: 57 Number of unites with water meters Unit
Q: 58 Status of water meters and percentage of working
and idle
1 Working %
2 Idle %
Q: 59 Main problems faced by water sector in the
governorate
1 Inefficiency of project
2 Scarcity of crude water at water source
3 Pollution of water source
4 Age and weakness of network
5 Insufficiency of project's production
6 Weak and sporadic maintenance
7 Scarcity of spare parts and raw material
8 Not enough technical and administrative staff
9 Inefficiency of technical staff
10 Scarcity and instability of electricity
11 Citizens trespasses on network
12 Lack of citizens awareness on conservation
13 Other/state…………………………….
3
Q: 60
Number of under construction water projects,
complexes, well stations and solar powered
stations in governorate
1 Water projects
2 Water complexes
3 Well stations
4 Desalination stations
5 Solar powered stations
Q: 61 Employees at the Public Water Directorate
Post
Number of employees
Fulltime Contract Day labour Total
1 Engineer
2 Work supervisor
3 Technician
4 Administrator
5 Unskilled labouror
6 Driver
7 Other / specify……….
8 Total
Governorate …………………...............
Directorate ……………………………
Address ……………………………
Researcher's name ………………………. Signeture……………..email …………….
Mobile number …………………………..
Manager's name …………………………. Signeture……………………….
Name: central supervisor Signature Date
Name: local supervisor Signature Date
Name: field researcher Signature Date
Name: field researcher Signature Date
Name: desktop checking
person Signature Date
Name: data entry person Signature Date
The Government of Iraq Ministry of Planning
Central Statistic Office Environmental Statistics Directorate
Questionnaire (2)
The Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010
Sanitation Sector
Kindly note the following:
5. Shaded fields to left blank filled by CSO;
6. Write English numerals using blue fountain pen;
7. Put a circle around the suitable choice; and
8. Questionnaire to be filled by engineer in charge at the directorate.
4
Q: 1 Are there sanitation, rainwater, shared networks in
governorate
1 Yes
2 No Q: 23
Q: 2 Percentage of population connected to networks
in governorate %
Q: 3 Number of population connected to networks in
governorate People
Q: 4 Type of network
(can indicate more than one answer)
1 Sanitation network %
2 Rainwater network %
3 Shared network %
Q: 5 Status of network
1 Good
2 Average
3 Bad
Q: 6 Does governorate suffer sewage overflow in areas
connected to network
1 In most connected areas
2 In some connected areas
3 No
Q: 7 Are there overflow cases of sewage water after
rain fall
1 Yes
2 No
4
Q: 8
Average amount of produced wastewater for
central treatment stations and small treatment
units (connected and unconnected areas) and
polluting activities
M3/day
Central treatment stations
Q: 9 Are there central treatment stations 1 Yes
2 No Q: 23
Q: 10 Do these stations have the capacity to receive
produced wastewater?
1 Yes
2 No
Q: 11 Number of central treatment stations Station
Q: 12 Number of central treatment stations by type
(can indicate more than one answer)
1 Preliminary Station
2 Elementary Station
3 Secondary Station
4 Tertiary Station
7
Q: 13 Total design capacity of central treatment stations m3/day
Q: 14 Average actual capacity of central treatment
stations m3/day
Q: 15 Average amount of treated wastewater m3/day
Q: 16
Number of central treatment stations by status
(can indicate more than one answer if there were
more than one station)
1 Working Station
2 Partially working Station
3 Idle Station
Q: 17 Percentage of population connected to sanitation
networks connected to central treatment stations %
Q: 18 Number of population connected to sanitation
networks connected to central treatment stations People
Q: 19 Average amount of untreated wastewater
discharged to water sources m3/day
Q: 20 Discharge destination of treated wastewater
1 Sewage lagoon %
2 River %
3 Neighboring land %
4 Other (specify)………………. %
Q: 21 BOD concentration in treated water discharged
from treatment station according to design mg/liter (part in a million)
0
Q: 22 The actual BOD concentration in treated water
discharged from treatment station Mg/liter
Small treatment units/unconnected areas
Q: 23 Are there small treatment units in areas
unconnected to sanitation networks
1 Yes
2 No Q: 31
Q: 24 Number of small treatment units Unit
Q: 25 Total design capacity of small treatment units m3/day
Q: 26 Average actual capacity of small treatment units m3/day
Q: 27 Average amount of produced wastewater by small
treatment units m3/day
Q: 28 Total rates of treated wastewater by small
treatment units m3/day
Q: 29 Discharge destination of treated wastewater from
small treatment units
1 sewage lagoon %
2 River %
3 neighboring land %
4 Other (specify)………. %
Q: 30
Number of small treatment units by status
(can indicate more than one answer)
1 Working Station
2 Partially working Station
3 Idle Station
4
Small treatment units/connected areas
Q: 31
Are there small treatment units (hospitals,
residential compounds or hotels etc.) in the
governorate?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 39
Q: 32 Number of small treatment units (hospitals,
residential compounds or hotels etc.) Unit
Q: 33
Number of small treatment units in connected
areas by type
(can indicate more than one answer)
1 Elementary Unit
2 Secondary Unit
3 Tertiary Unit
Q: 34 Total design capacity of small treatment units
(hospitals, residential compounds or hotels etc.) m3/day
Q: 35 Total actual capacity of small treatment units
(hospitals, residential compounds or hotels etc.) m3/day
Q: 36 Average amount of produced wastewater by small
treatment units m3/day
Q: 37 Average amount of treated wastewater at small
treatment units m3/day
Q: 38
Number of small treatment units (hospitals,
residential compounds or hotels etc.) by status
(can indicate more than one answer)
1 Working Unit
2 Partially working Unit
3 Idle Unit
4
Small treatment units/polluting activities
Q: 39
Are there polluting activities (industrial
establishments, carwash and greasing garages,
slaughter houses, agricultural activities, other)
discharged into sanitation network?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 50
Q: 40
Are there small treatment units for polluting
activities (medical or industrial establishments,
carwash and greasing garages, slaughter houses,
agricultural activities, other)?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 49
Q: 41 Number of small treatment units for polluting
activities Unit
Q: 42
Number of small treatment units for polluting
activities by type
(can indicate more than one answer)
1 Elementary Unit
2 Secondary Unit
3 Tertiary Unit
Q: 43 Total design capacity of small treatment units for
polluting activities m3/day
Q: 44 Total actual capacity of small treatment units for
polluting activities m3/day
Q: 45 Average amount of liquid waste produced by
polluting activities m3/day
Q: 46 Average amount of liquid waste treated by small
treatment units for polluting activities m3/day
3
Q: 47
Number of small treatment units for polluting
activities by status
(can indicate more than one answer)
1 Working Unit
2 Partially working Unit
3 Idle Unit
Q: 48 Discharge destinations of treated liquid waste of
polluting activities
1 Sanitation network %
2 Sewage lagoon %
3 river % Q: 50
4 Neighboring land %
5 Other (specify)…... %
Q: 49
Discharge destinations of untreated liquid waste
of polluting activities that do not have treatment
units
1 Sanitation network
2 Sewage lagoon
3 river
4 Neighboring land
5 Other (specify)…...
Pumping stations
Q: 50 Are there pumping stations in the governorate? 1 Yes
2 No Q: 55
Q: 51 Type and number of pumping stations in the
governorate
1 Rainwater Station
2 Wastewater Station
3 Shared Station
4 Submerged Station
Total Station
Q: 52 Number of pumping stations by status
1 Good Station
2 Average Station
3 Bad Station
3
Q: 53 Discharge destination of pumping stations
1 Central treatment station
2 Sewage lagoon
3 River
4 Neighboring land
5 Other (specify)………………..
Q: 54 Main problems facing sanitation networks and
treatment stations
1 Inefficiency of networks
2 Weak and sporadic maintenance
3 Not enough technical and administrative staff
4 Not enough machinery
5 Problems relating to pumping stations (age,
consumption, broken pumps)
6 Age and inefficiency of water treatment stations
7 Scarcity and instability of electricity
8 Trespasses in connecting sanitation and rainwater
networks
9 Lack of awareness and misuse of sanitation network
10 Other / specify…………………………………
Rainwater networks
Q: 55 Percentage of population trespassing on rainwater
network %
Q: 56 Number of population trespassing on rainwater
network %
Q: 57
Discharge destination of rainwater networks
(can indicate more than one answer)
1 Sewage lagoon %
2 River %
3 Neighboring land %
4 Other (specify)……... %
3
Septic tank
Q: 58 Percentage of population connected to septic tank %
Q: 59 Number of population connected to septic tank %
Q: 60
Discharge destination of wastewater of
households connected to septic tank
(can indicate more than one answer)
1 Transported by tankers
to treatment stations %
2 sewage lagoon %
3 River %
4 Neighboring land %
5 Other (specify)……... %
Q: 61
Discharge destination of wastewater of
households not connected to sanitation networks
and septic tank
(can indicate more than one answer)
1 Transported by tankers to treatment stations
%
2 sewage lagoon %
3 River %
4 Neighboring land %
5 Other (specify)……... %
Q: 62 Amount of sludge produced by treatment of
wastewater %
Q: 63
Disposal destination of sludge produced by
wastewater treatment process
(can indicate more than one answer)
1 Agriculture %
2 Industry %
3 Municipalities %
4 Other (specify)……… %
44
Q: 64 Number of working, idle and broken machinery in the sanitation sector
Type of machinery
Status
Working Idle Broken Total
1 Cutting machine
2 Excavator
3 Tanker
4 Suction machine
5 Multipurpose machine
6 Other / specify…………..
7 Total
Q: 65 Employees at the Governorate Sanitation Directorate
Post
Number of employees
Fulltime Contract Day labour Total
1 Engineer
2 Work supervisor
3 Technician
4 Administrator
5 Unskilled labouror
6 Driver
7 Other / specify……….
8 Total
Governorate ………………….....District..................Area…….
Directorate ……………………………
Address ……………………………
Researcher's name ………………………. Signeture……………..
Mobile number ………………………….. email …………………
Name of Manager of Municipality.………………. Signeture……
Number of municipality:
Name: central supervisor Signature Date
Name: local supervisor Signature Date
Name: field researcher Signature Date
Name: field researcher Signature Date
Name: desktop checking
person Signature Date
Name: data entry person Signature Date
The Government of Iraq
Ministry of Planning Central Statistic Office
Environmental Statistics Directorate
The Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010
Sanitation Sector/Municipalities of Iraq governorates
Kindly note the following:
9. Shaded fields to left blank filled by CSO;
10. Write English numerals using blue fountain pen;
11. Put a circle around the suitable choice; and
12. Questionnaire to be filled by engineer in charge at the directorate.
Questionnaire (3a)
4
Q: 1 Percentage of population covered by municipal
garbage collection service
1 Urban %
2 Rural %
Q: 2 Number of population covered by municipal
garbage collection service
1 Urban %
2 Rural %
Q: 3 Average amounts of garbage collected and lifted
per day under municipal jurisdiction
1 Agricultural areas kg/day
2 Industrial areas kg/day
3 Residential areas kg/day
4
Economic activities
(commercial,
marketplaces…etc.)
kg/day
5 Amount of lifted rubble
from construction m3/day
6 Scrap kg/day
7 Total / excluding item 5 kg/day
Q: 4 Average amount of hazardous waste collected
per day
1 kg/day
2 No Q: 7
Q: 5 Sources of hazardous waste
1 Medical institutions
2 Industrial establishments
3 Agricultural establishments
4 Other (specify)……………….
Q: 6 Treatment methods of hazardous waste and
average amounts treated
1 Collection in temporary allocated
sites kg/day
2 Burail in allocated sites for medical
burial kg/day
3 Dumped into empty lots kg/day
4 Recucling kg/day
4
Q: 6
Treatment methods of hazardous waste and
average amounts treated/cont.
(can indicate more than one answer)
5 Turned to fertiliser kg/day
6 Burning kg/day
7 Dumped into rivers and
sewage lagoons kg/day
8 Sold to uncertified contractors kg/day
9 Turned to energy kg/day
10 Other (specity)………….. kg/day
11 total kg/day
Q: 7 Are there containers allocated for garbage
collection distributed across areas?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 11
Q: 8 Number of containers allocated for garbage
collection distributed across areas
1 Residential container
2 Commercail container
3 Government institutions container
4 Public parks container
5 Public streets container
6 Total container
Q: 9 Are distributed containers used?
1 Yes
2 Sometimes
3 No Q: 11
Q:10 How many times garbage containers emptied by
municipality per week?
1 Large containers 8 m3 Times
2 Medium size containers 6 m3 Times
3 Small containers 1 m3 Times
4 Differnet size container Times
5 Never
7
Q: 11 Is garbage separated on household level?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 13
Q: 12 Composition of garbage collected and
percentage per day
1 Types of paper %
2 Fibers %
3 Plastics %
4 Glass %
5 Metal %
6 Other inorganic material %
7 Organic material %
8 Foods and garden waste %
Q: 13 Are there machinery (pressers, tractors…etc.)
for garbage collection at municipality?
Yes
No Q: 17
Q:14 Number of working, idle, broken and rented machinery at municipality in the month preceeding the survey
Type of machine
Status
Working Idle Broken Rented Total
1 Garbag presser/6m3
2 Garbag presser/8m3
3 Garbag presser/16m3
4 Garbag presser/different sizes
5 Agricultural tractors
6 Dunber
7 Shovel
8 Grader
9 Bulldozer
0
Q:14 Cont.
Type of machine
Status
Working Idle Broken Rented Total
10 Lorry
11 Cutting machine
12 Suction machine
13 Truck
14 Container crane
15 Rollers
16 Excavator PC
17 Tanker
18 Street sweeper
19 Other (specify).........
20 Total
Q: 15 Are pressers and machinery sufficient for
municipal services?
1 Yes
2 No
Q: 16
How many times garbage is collected by
municipality from houses using municipal
machinery and pressers per week
1
2 Never
Q: 17 Dose the municipality contract companies or
contractors to cllect garbage?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 21
Q:18 Number of working, idle, broken and rented machinery at belonging to companies or contractors in the
month preceeding the survey
SN Type of machine Number SN Type of machine Number
1 Garbag presser/6m3 4 Garbag presser/different sizes
2 Garbag presser/8m3 5 Agricultural tractors
3 Garbag presser/16m3 6 Dunber
4
Q:18 Cont.
SN Type of machine Number SN Type of machine Number
7 Shovel 14 Container crane
8 Grader 15 Rollers
9 Bulldozer 16 Excavator PC
10 Lorry 17 Tanker
11 Cutting machine 18 Street sweeper
12 Suction machine
19 Other (specify).........
13 Truck
20 Total
Q: 19
How many times garbage is collected by
municipality from houses using municipal
machinery and pressers per week
1
2 Occasainally
Q: 20 Are these areas cleaned by companies or
contractors during the week?
1 Streets and middle
islands
Yes
No
1
2
No. of times
2 Square Yes
No
1
2
No. of times
3 Markets Yes
No
1
2
No. of times
4
Q: 21
Are these areas cleaned by companies or
contractors during the week?
(answer all choices)
1 Streets and middle
islands
Yes
No
1
2
No. of times
2 Square Yes
No
1
2
No. of times
3 Markets Yes
No
1
2
No. of times
Q: 22 Does the municipality suffer from increased
rubble and war remnants in these areas?
(answer all choices)
1 Resedintail Yes
No
1
2
2 Commercial Yes
No
1
2
3 Government
instituions
Yes
No
1
2
4 Public parks Yes
No
1
2
5 Public streets Yes
No
1
2
Q: 23 Are there transforming stations (regular) within
municipality?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 25
Q: 24 Number of trasforming stations (regular) and
size within municipality No. Size m2
Q: 25 Are ther temporary collections site (irregular)
within municipality?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 27
Q: 26 Number of temporary collection sites (irregular)
and size within municipality No. Size m2
3
Q: 27 Are there garbage burial sites with
environmental approval within municipality?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 34
Q: 28 Number and size of garbage burial sites with
environmental approval No. Size m2
Q: 29 Location of burial site according to original
design of municipality
1 Within design
2 Outside design
Q: 30 Depth of grooundwater at site m
Q: 31 Type of garbage burial site
(can indicate mor than one aswer)
1 Medical site (regular)
2 Open land
3 Quarries
4 Valleys
5 Other (specify)…….
Q: 32 Do garbage burial sites have :
(answer all choices)
1 Fences Yes
No
1
2
2 Suitable roads for garbage delivery Yes
No
1
2
3 Admin and guard rooms Yes
No
1
2
4 Scale at entrance to weigh garbage
trucks
Yes
No
1
2
5 Garbage seep water collection
system
Yes
No
1
2
3
Q: 32 Cont.
6 Garbage produced gas collection
system such as CH4
Yes
No
1
2
7 Site padded with polyeghelen density
HPDA
Yes
No
1
2
8 Placing final layer of soil after
rolling
Yes
No
1
2
9 Burial machinery and equipment Yes
No
1
2
Q: 33 Number of working, idle, broken and rented machinery solely at burial site:
Type of machine
Status
Working Idle Broken Rented Total
1 Excavator
2 Shovel
3 Grader
4 Bulldozer
5 Lorry
6 Rollers special for burial sites
7 Other (specify)...........
8 Total
Q: 34 Employees at garbage burial sites
Post
Number of employees
Fulltime Contract Day labour Total
1 Engineer
2 Work supervisor
3 Technician
4 Administrator
5 Unskilled labouror
6 Driver
7 Other / specify……….
8 Total
3
Q: 35 Are there garbage burial sites without
environmental approval within municipality?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 38
Q: 36 Number and size of garbage burial sites without
environmental approval No. Size m2
Q: 37 Type of garbage burial site
(can indicate more than one aswer)
1 Open land
2 Quarries
3 Valleys
4 Other (specify)…….
Q: 38 Treatment method of garbage
(can indicate more than one aswer)
1 Burial at sites with environmetal approval
2 Burial at sites without environmetal approval
3 Dumping in empty lots
4 Recycling and resuse
5 Burning
6 Turned to fertiliser
7 Turned to energy
8 Sold to unliesenced contractors
9 Other (specify)…………
Q: 39
Main garbage collection problems
(can indicate more than one aswer)
1 Not enough machinery
2 Lack of machinery
3 Weak and unsustained maintenance
4 Scarcity of spare parts
5 Scarcity of financial allocation
6 Not enough staff
7 Low wages
8 Not enough allocated containers and bags for
grabage collection
9 Lack of environmental awareness
10 Other (specify)……………….
44
Q: 40
Has awareness programmes been implemented
by municipality for municipa staff in the year
preceeding the survey?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 45
Q: 41 Number of implemented programmes programme
Q: 42 Name of body or organisation that implemented
the programme
(can indicate more than one body or
organisation)
1
2
3
4
5
Q: 43 Total number of participants in implemented
programmes person
Q: 44 Is there any benefit from preparing these
programmes
1 Yes
2 No
Q: 34 Employees at the municipality
Post
Number of employees
Fulltime Contract Day labour Total
1 Engineer
2 Work supervisor
3 Technician
4 Administrator
5 Unskilled labouror
6 Driver
7 Other / specify……….
8 Total
Governorate ………………….....District..................Area…….
Directorate ……………………………
Address ……………………………
Researcher's name ………………………. Signeture……………..
Mobile number ………………………….. email …………………
Name of Manager of Municipality.………………. Signeture……
Number of municipality:
Name: central supervisor Signature Date
Name: local supervisor Signature Date
Name: field researcher Signature Date
Name: field researcher Signature Date
Name: desktop checking
person Signature Date
Name: data entry person Signature Date
The Government of Iraq Ministry of Planning
Central Statistic Office Environmental Statistics Directorate
The Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010
Sanitation Sector/Municipalities of Baghdad Municipality
Kindly note the following:
13. Shaded fields to left blank filled by CSO;
14. Write English numerals using blue fountain pen;
15. Put a circle around the suitable choice; and
16. Questionnaire to be filled by engineer in charge at the directorate.
Questionnaire (3b)
4
Q: 1 Percentage of population covered by municipal
garbage collection service
1 Urban %
2 Rural %
Q: 2 Number of population covered by municipal
garbage collection service
1 Urban %
2 Rural %
Q: 3 Average amounts of garbage collected and lifted
per day under municipal jurisdiction
1 Agricultural areas kg/day
2 Industrial areas kg/day
3 Residential areas kg/day
4
Economic activities
(commercial,
marketplaces…etc.)
kg/day
5 Amount of lifted rubble
from construction m3/day
6 Scrap kg/day
7 Total / excluding item 5 kg/day
Q: 4 Average amount of hazardous waste collected
per day
1 kg/day
2 No Q: 7
Q: 5 Sources of hazardous waste
1 Medical institutions
2 Industrial establishments
3 Agricultural establishments
4 Other (specify)……………….
Q: 6 Treatment methods of hazardous waste and
average amounts treated
1 Collection in temporary allocated
sites kg/day
2 Burail in allocated sites for medical
burial kg/day
3 Dumped into empty lots kg/day
4 Recucling kg/day
4
Q: 6
Treatment methods of hazardous waste and
average amounts treated/cont.
(can indicate more than one answer)
5 Turned to fertiliser kg/day
6 Burning kg/day
7 Dumped into rivers and
sewage lagoons kg/day
8 Sold to uncertified contractors kg/day
9 Turned to energy kg/day
10 Other (specity)………….. kg/day
11 total kg/day
Q: 7 Are there containers allocated for garbage
collection distributed across areas?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 11
Q: 8 Number of containers allocated for garbage
collection distributed across areas
1 Residential container
2 Commercail container
3 Government institutions container
4 Public parks container
5 Public streets container
6 Total container
Q: 9 Are distributed containers used?
1 Yes
2 Sometimes
3 No Q: 11
Q:10 How many times garbage containers emptied by
municipality per week?
1 Large containers 8 m3 Times
2 Medium size containers 6 m3 Times
3 Small containers 1 m3 Times
4 Differnet size container Times
5 Never
7
Q: 11 Is garbage separated on household level?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 13
Q: 12 Composition of garbage collected and
percentage per day
1 Types of paper %
2 Fibers %
3 Plastics %
4 Glass %
5 Metal %
6 Other inorganic material %
7 Organic material %
8 Foods and garden waste %
Q: 13 Are there machinery (pressers, tractors…etc.)
for garbage collection at municipality?
Yes
No Q: 17
Q:14 Number of working, idle, broken and rented machinery at municipality in the month preceeding the survey
Type of machine
Status
Working Idle Broken Rented Total
1 Garbag presser/6m3
2 Garbag presser/8m3
3 Garbag presser/16m3
4 Garbag presser/different sizes
5 Agricultural tractors
6 Dunber
7 Shovel
8 Grader
9 Bulldozer
0
Q:14 Cont.
Type of machine
Status
Working Idle Broken Rented Total
10 Lorry
11 Cutting machine
12 Suction machine
13 Truck
14 Container crane
15 Rollers
16 Excavator PC
17 Tanker
18 Street sweeper
19 Other (specify).........
20 Total
Q: 15 Are pressers and machinery sufficient for
municipal services?
1 Yes
2 No
Q: 16
How many times garbage is collected by
municipality from houses using municipal
machinery and pressers per week
1
2 Never
Q: 17 Dose the municipality contract companies or
contractors to cllect garbage?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 21
Q:18 Number of working, idle, broken and rented machinery at belonging to companies or contractors in the
month preceeding the survey
SN Type of machine Number SN Type of machine Number
1 Garbag presser/6m3 4 Garbag presser/different sizes
2 Garbag presser/8m3 5 Agricultural tractors
3 Garbag presser/16m3 6 Dunber
4
Q:18 Cont.
SN Type of machine Number SN Type of machine Number
7 Shovel 14 Container crane
8 Grader 15 Rollers
9 Bulldozer 16 Excavator PC
10 Lorry 17 Tanker
11 Cutting machine 18 Street sweeper
12 Suction machine
19 Other (specify).........
13 Truck
20 Total
Q: 19
How many times garbage is collected by
municipality from houses using municipal
machinery and pressers per week
1
2 Occasainally
Q: 20 Are these areas cleaned by companies or
contractors during the week?
1 Streets and middle
islands
Yes
No
1
2
No. of times
2 Square Yes
No
1
2
No. of times
3 Markets Yes
No
1
2
No. of times
4
Q: 21
Are these areas cleaned by companies or
contractors during the week?
(answer all choices)
1 Streets and middle
islands
Yes
No
1
2
No. of times
2 Square Yes
No
1
2
No. of times
3 Markets Yes
No
1
2
No. of times
Q: 22 Does the municipality suffer from increased
rubble and war remnants in these areas?
(answer all choices)
1 Resedintail Yes
No
1
2
2 Commercial Yes
No
1
2
3 Government
instituions
Yes
No
1
2
4 Public parks Yes
No
1
2
5 Public streets Yes
No
1
2
Q: 23 Treatment method of garbage
(can indicate more than one aswer)
1 Burial at sites with environmetal approval
2 Burial at sites without environmetal approval
3 Dumping in empty lots
4 Recycling and resuse
5 Burning
6 Turned to fertiliser
7 Turned to energy
8 Sold to unliesenced contractors
9 Other (specify)…………
Q: 24
Main garbage collection problems
(can indicate more than one aswer)
1 Not enough machinery
2 Lack of machinery
3 Weak and unsustained maintenance
4 Scarcity of spare parts
5 Scarcity of financial allocation
6 Not enough staff
7 Low wages
8 Not enough allocated containers and bags for
grabage collection
9 Lack of environmental awareness
10 Other (specify)……………….
3
Q: 25
Has awareness programmes been implemented
by municipality for municipa staff in the year
preceeding the survey?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 45
Q: 26 Number of implemented programmes programme
Q: 27 Name of body or organisation that implemented
the programme
(can indicate more than one body or
organisation)
1
2
3
4
5
Q: 28 Total number of participants in implemented
programmes person
Q: 29 Is there any benefit from preparing these
programmes
1 Yes
2 No
Q: 30 Employees at the municipality
Post
Number of employees
Fulltime Contract Day labour Total
1 Engineer
2 Work supervisor
3 Technician
4 Administrator
5 Unskilled labouror
6 Driver
7 Other / specify……….
8 Total
Governorate ………………….....District..................Area……
Directorate ……………………………
Address ……………………………
Researcher's name ………………………. Signeture……………..
Mobile number ………………………….. email …………………
Name of Manager of Municipality.………………. Signeture……
Number of municipality:
Name: central supervisor Signature Date
Name: local supervisor Signature Date
Name: field researcher Signature Date
Name: field researcher Signature Date
Name: desktop checking
person Signature Date
Name: data entry person Signature Date
The Government of Iraq Ministry of Planning
Central Statistic Office
Environmental Statistics Directorate
The Environmental Survey in Iraq for 2010
Sanitation Sector/Solid Waste and Environment Directorate
Kindly note the following:
17. Shaded fields to left blank filled by CSO;
18. Write English numerals using blue fountain pen;
19. Put a circle around the suitable choice; and
20. Questionnaire to be filled by engineer in charge at the directorate.
Questionnaire (3c)
4
Q: 1 Are there transforming stations (regular) within
Baghdad Municipality?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 25
Q: 2 Number of trasforming stations (regular) and
size within Baghdad Municipality No. Size m2
Q: 3 Are ther temporary collections site (irregular)
within Baghdad Municipality?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 27
Q: 4 Number of temporary collection sites (irregular)
and size within Baghdad Municipality No. Size m2
Q: 5
Are there garbage burial sites with
environmental approval within Baghdad
Municipality?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 34
Q: 6 Number and size of garbage burial sites with
environmental approval No. Size m2
Q: 7 Location of burial site according to original
design of Baghdad Municipality
1 Within design
2 Outside design
Q: 8 Depth of grooundwater at site m
Q: 9 Type of garbage burial site
(can indicate mor than one aswer)
1 Medical site (regular)
2 Open land
3 Quarries
4 Valleys
5 Other (specify)…….
Q: 10 Do garbage burial sites have :
(answer all choices)
1 Fences Yes
No
1
2
2 Suitable roads for garbage delivery Yes
No
1
2
3 Admin and guard rooms Yes
No
1
2
4 Scale at entrance to weigh garbage
trucks
Yes
No
1
2
5 Garbage seep water collection
system
Yes
No
1
2
4
Q: 10 Cont.
6 Garbage produced gas collection
system such as CH4
Yes
No
1
2
7 Site padded with polyeghelen density
HPDA
Yes
No
1
2
8 Placing final layer of soil after
rolling
Yes
No
1
2
9 Burial machinery and equipment Yes
No
1
2
Q: 11 Number of working, idle, broken and rented machinery solely at burial site:
Type of machine
Status
Working Idle Broken Rented Total
1 Excavator
2 Shovel
3 Grader
4 Bulldozer
5 Lorry
6 Rollers special for burial sites
7 Other (specify)...........
8 Total
Q: 12 Employees at garbage burial sites
Post
Number of employees
Fulltime Contract Day labour Total
1 Engineer
2 Work supervisor
3 Technician
4 Administrator
5 Unskilled labouror
6 Driver
7 Other / specify……….
8 Total
7
Q: 13 Are there garbage burial sites without
environmental approval within municipality?
1 Yes
2 No Q: 38
Q: 14 Number and size of garbage burial sites without
environmental approval No. Size m2
Q: 15 Type of garbage burial site
(can indicate more than one aswer)
1 Open land
2 Quarries
3 Valleys
4 Other (specify)…….
Q: 16 Number of rubble crushing plants in Baghdad
Municipality Plant
Q: 17 Do rubble crushing plants have :
(answer all choices)
1 Fences Yes
No
1
2
2 Suitable roads for waste delivery Yes
No
1
2
3 Admin and guard rooms Yes
No
1
2
4 Machinery and equipment Yes
No
1
2 19
Q: 18 Number of working, idle, broken and rented machinery at rubble crushing plants:
Type of machine
Status
Working Idle Broken Rented Total
1 Excavator
2 Shovel
3 Grader
4 Bulldozer
5 Lorry
6 Rollers
7 Other (specify)...........
8 Total
Q: 19 Source of received rubble
(can indicate more than one aswer)
1 Dimolition and construction
2 Military activities
3 Other (specify)…….
Q: 20
Type of rubble crushing sites
(can indicate more than one aswer)
1 Regular site
2 Open land
3 Quarries
4 Valleys
5 Other / specify……………………….
0
Q: 21 Amount of crushed rubble: 1 Received
m3/day
2 Crushed
m3/day
3 Delivered
m3/day
Q: 22 Amount of crushed rubble: 1 Yes
2 No
Q: 23 Number of separation and recycling sites of
Baghdad Municipality Currently working Under construction
top related