Design and Implementation of the KanchanTM Arsenic Filter

in the Nepal Terai

The World Bank Brown Bag Lunch October 19, 2004

Susan MurcottDept. of Civil and Environmental EngineeringMassachusetts Institute of Technology

20th century Western engineering design was comparatively simple

Technical Criteria

Economic/Financial Criteria (Cost-Benefit Analysis)

Technical Financial

Environmental Awareness Added another Dimension

Technical

Economic/Financial Criteria (Cost-Benefit Analysis)

Environmental

Technical Financial

Environmental

Balance: economic, social, environmental aspects

Equity…”meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”

- Our Common Future, 1987

“Sustainable development” has 2 widely accepted meanings:

“Engineering design for sustainable development” framework

Financial /Economic

* Low cost

* Supports local economies

* Self-sustaining

Technical

•Water quality evaluations

•WHO Guidelines

•National Standards

• Flow rate

• Use local materials

Social

• Socially acceptable

• Simple/user friendly

• Convenient

• Durable

The Design Process(text book version)

Information Gathering Problem DefinitionIdea GenerationConcept EvaluationLab Research, Experimentation &

AnalysisDetail DesignFabricationTesting & Evaluation (Lab and Field)

Co-Designing/Co-evolving for Development

(an iterative process)1. Problem Awareness

Co(m)-passion, and Partnership

2. Problem Co-Definition

3. Idea Co-Generation

4. Concept Co-Evaluation

5. Field Experience, Fabrication, Experiment, Lab Work, Analysis

7. Pilot studies

6. Refined Design (Field and lab testing, multiple sites, multiple countries)

10. Reiteration

9 Scale-up

8. Implementation

Co-designing/ co-evolving

equitable and sustainable

development

1. Problem Awareness, Co(m)-passion, Partnership

Problem AwarensssWhere is Nepal?

Where is Arsenic in Nepal?

(NASC and ENPHO, 2004)

Nawalparasi District

Rupandehi District Parsa & Bara

DistrictsRautahat District

Field Project Sites

Kathmandu

Kapilvastu District

PassionPassion

Co(m)-passionCo(m)-passion

Partnership

Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Support Programme (RWSSSP)

Environment and Public Health Organization (ENPHO)

2. Problem Co-Definition

Problem Co-Definition•Our proposal is to design a household drinking water treatment unit to remove arsenic and pathogens;

•Technical Performance: Remove arsenic, bacteria and parasites to National Standards or WHO Guidelines;

• Water Quantity: The flow rate should be > 10 L/hour;

• Cost: The cost/unit should be < $30. Yearly replacement parts <$2, designed for use by individuals in rural areas and urban slums who earn <$2/day;

• Manufacturing: To be produced by local people, using locally available materials, creating local jobs;

• Socially acceptable: ease of use and maintainence by women

Problem Co-DefinitionArsenic Technology Database

http://web.mit.edu/murcott/www/arsenic

Gather information for 50+ technologies:

• Arsenic removal mechanisms (physical, chemical, etc)• Technical performance• Construction, operation and maintenance• Cost• Flow rate• Strengths, weakness, limitations

Idea Co-Generation8 Arsenic Removal Technologies

(1) 3 Kolshi (in Nepali = 3 Gagri with zero valent iron filings);

(2) Iron filings in jerry can; (3) Coagulation/Filtration (2-Kolshi based on

Chakraborti’s arsenic removal system); (4) Iron oxide coated sand; (5) Activated alumina metal oxide #1 (Apyron Inc.); (6) Activated alumina metal oxide #2 (Aquatic Treatment

Systems Inc.); (7) Arsenic treatment plant; (8) Arsenic Biosand Filter

Three-Kolshi (Gagri) System

Raw waterIron filings

Fine sand

Filtered water

Jerry Can

1. Fill 10 L plastic jug with raw water.

2. Add iron filings

3. Wait 3 hours

4. Decant treated water

Coagulation/Filtration (2-Kolshi)

Raw Water

Chemical packet

Mixing & SettlingFiltration

Treated Water

Iron Oxide Coated Sand (IOCS)Raw Water

Treated Water

Sand and gravel

Iron Oxide Coated Sand (IOCS)

Activated Alumina Metal Oxide #1 (Apyron Aqua-Bind Media)

Influent

EffluentGAC

Sand

Activated Alumina

Raw Water

Treated Water

Raw Water

Alumina Manganese Oxide (A/M)

Treated Water

Activated Alumina Metal Oxide #2(Aquatic Treatment Systems, Inc.)

Arsenic Treatment Plants (ATPs)

Aeration Chamber

Sand Filter

Storage

Treated Water

KanchanTM Arsenic Filter (KAF)

Field Experience, Fabrication, Experiment, Lab

Engagement with: • local people and partners, • local environment• the problem and solutions

Stages 5-8 in Arsenic Mitigation

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005+Field Experience,Fabrication,Experiment, Lab Work , Analysis

Refined Design

Pilot Studies (Phase I)

Pilot Studies (Phase II)

Implementation

Refined Design Phase I Evaluation

1. Preliminary screening of technologies in database/ website.

2. Select 8 technologies to be field tested against following criteria:

Phase I Evaluation

Technical Performance:Meet National (50 ug/L) or WHO guidelines (ug/L)) for arsenic and microbial removal. Flow rate > 10 L/hour

Social: Customer satisfaction, specifically among women who are typically the managers of household water.

Financial: Affordable to people earning $1/day

Recommend for Phase II?

CostSocialTechnicalTechnology

Phase I Evaluation Summary

3-Kolshi

Jerry Can

Iron Coated Sand

Alumina #1

Alumina #2

2-Kolshi

Treatment Plants

KAF

Pilot Studies Phase II Evaluation

Coagulation/ filtration System(2-Kolshi)

KanshanTM

Arsenic Filter (KAF)

3 Kolshi

Phase II Pilot Studies of 3 Technologies

Phase II Evaluation Summary

= poor = moderate = good

Best3rd2ndOverall Ranking

Low running cost

User acceptance

Low initial cost

Long-term sustainability

Simple O&M

Easy construction

Materials availability

10-30L/hr1-5L/hr3-5L/hrFlow rate

93-99%Not testedNot testedIron removal

90-95%80-90%95-99%Arsenic removal

AKF2-Kolshi3-Kolshi

Technical Indicators

Average Results

Arsenic Removal 93 %

Total Coliform Removal

58 %

E. Coli Removal 64 %

Iron Removal 93 %

Flow Rate 14 L/hr

KAF Pilot Study Results (n=16)

Stages 5-8KanshanTM Arsenic Filter

(AKF)

KanchanTM Arsenic Filter

• Intended for arsenic and bacteria removal

• Constructed with easily available local materials

• Manufactured by trained local technicians

• Adequate flow rate for a large family (15L/hr)

• No chemical additives

• No replacement parts except iron nails

• Easy to operate and clean

• Developed in Nepal and at MIT based on improvement of slow sand filter

Diffuser Basin

Lid

Container

Pipe

KanshanTM Arsenic Filter Cross Section

Gravel

Coarse Sand

Water

Fine Sand

Iron Nails

Brick chips

Filter Operation

1. Pour water into top basin. Water will pass through filter and flow up the pipe

2. Collect filtered water at the pipe outlet

3. If flow rate is insufficient, then cleaning is required

Filter Cleaning/ Maintenance

Wash your hands with soap

Remove diffuser basin

Stir the uppermost ½ inch of sand with your fingers

Remove turbid water with a cup.Replace the basin and add more water.Repeat this process three times total

Discard the turbid water in a dug hole with some cow dung in it

Now the filter can be used again

Filter Cleaning/ Maintenance

Further Work – Refined Design

Concrete Square (2002)

Concrete Round (2003)

Plastic Hilltake (2003)

Plastic Gem505 (2004)

Technical Performance• Currently more than 1000 filters are in operation. 2000 by Jan.05

• We have monitored 800+ filters between February to May 2004 on arsenic and iron removal

• The average time between filter installation date and filter monitoring date is 93 days

• More than 500 were sold by NRCS, about 100 by Fund Board, about 450 by RWSSSP

• Filters were sold starting from September 2002 until today

Effluent Arsenic Concentration (ppb)

0 to 1011 to 5051 to 100101 to 250250 +

Influent Arsenic Concentration (ppb)

KAF Blanket MonitoringArsenic Removal (n=644)

500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 ND500 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 5450 3 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 1 8400 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 2 7350 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 3 14300 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 1 17250 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 2 1 1 23200 2 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 23150 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 14100 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 3 8 76

90 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 3 6 5380 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4370 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 3660 0 0 1 2 5 13 2950 0 0 0 1 3 4940 0 0 0 2 1530 0 0 0 1420 0 0 1910 0 10

ND 68

Effluent Arsenic Concentration (ppb)

Infl

uen

t Ars

enic

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n (

pp

b)

Unacceptable Acceptable

Figure indicates number of filters

KAF Blanket MonitoringArsenic Removal (n=644)

Filter Performance: Arsenic (n=650)

Distribution of Arsenic Influent and Effluent Concentrations

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

0 to 10 11 to 50 51 to 100 101 to 250 250 +Arsenic Concentrations (ppb)

% o

f al

l filt

ers

Influent

Effluent

1.5 Years Arsenic Monitoring on Filter A(Nim Narayan Chaudhary)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Oct-0

2

Nov-0

2

Dec-0

2

Jan-

03

Feb-0

3

Mar

-03

Apr-0

3

May

-03

Jun-

03

Jul-0

3

Aug-0

3

Sep-0

3

Oct-0

3

Nov-0

3

Dec-0

3

Jan-

04

Feb-0

4

Mar

-04

Apr-0

4

Time

Ars

enic

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n (

pp

b)

Raw Water

Treated Water

1.5 Years Arsenic Monitoring on Filter B(Lila Bdr. Pun)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Oct-0

2

Nov-0

2

Dec-0

2

Jan-

03

Feb-0

3

Mar

-03

Apr-0

3

May

-03

Jun-

03

Jul-0

3

Aug-0

3

Sep-0

3

Oct-0

3

Nov-0

3

Dec-0

3

Jan-

04

Feb-0

4

Mar

-04

Apr-0

4

Time

Ars

enic

Co

nce

ntr

atio

n (

pp

b)

Raw Water

Treated Water

1.5 Year Arsenic Monitoring on Filter C(Bhanu Primary School)

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Sep-0

2

Oct-02

Nov-0

2

Dec-0

2

Jan-

03

Feb-0

3

Mar

-03

Apr-0

3

May

-03

Jun-

03

Jul-0

3

Aug-0

3

Sep-0

3

Oct-03

Nov-0

3

Dec-0

3

Jan-

04

Feb-0

4

Mar

-04

Apr-0

4

May

-04

Jun-

04

Time

Ars

en

ic C

on

ce

ntr

ati

on

(p

pb

)

Raw Water

Treated Water

Insufficient flow Ideal flow Performance compromised

Average % As removal of AKF at various flow rates

82%

84%

86%

88%

90%

92%

94%

1 to 9.9 10 to19.9

20 to29.9

30 to39.9

40 to49.9

50 to74.9

75 to99.9

100 +

Flow rate (L/hr)

% A

s R

emov

al

n = 86

n = 46n = 75

n = 134

Note: For filtered water containing non-detect level of arsenic, a conservative value of 5 ppb is assumed in the % removal calculation

n = 40

n = 51

n = 59

n = 84

Filter Cost (Gem505)

$15.73

$0.74

$0.34

$0.74

$0.41

$0.27

$4.79

$0.04

$1.82

$1.03

$5.55

Gem505 ($US)

Transportation of container & piping

Tools

Documentation

Transportation of sand & gravel

Labour

Iron Nails 5 kg

Total Per Unit Cost

Sand & Gravel

Piping System

Basin

Container and Lid

Assume exchange rate of US$1 = 73 Nepali Rupees

Note:No replacement parts needed except iron nails (nails can last at least 1.5 years)

Implementation and Scale-up

Implementation – World Bank Project

Funding Source:• Won a US$115,000 award from the World Bank Development Marketplace Global Competition 2003

Project Objective:• To sustainably promote the AKF as an appropriate arsenic mitigation option throughout Nepal

Project Duration: • February 2004 to January 2005

Project Partners:• MIT, ENPHO, RWSSSP

World Bank Project - Key Activities

1. Establish an in-country KAF reference center at ENPHO to compile all ABF related information

2. Train local entrepreneurs from 10 arsenic-affected districts as “local KAF agents” on KAF construction, troubleshooting, water testing

3. Conduct workshops to 30 local governments bodies and 150 villages on health, water management, treatment options, and KAF information

World Bank Project - Key Activities

4. Monitor all filters that are in operation. 2000 filters will be in operation by Dec 2004.

6. Evaluate overall project implementation scheme and make recommendations to scale-up project

5. Research & develop better filter design based on lab experiment, field observations and feedbacks from users

Is this Project:

Appropriate? Green?

Sustainable? Co(m)-passionate?

Design Principles for Appropriate Technology (E.F. Schumacher: Small is Beautiful, 1973)

1. Simple design & production Yes!2. Inexpensive Yes!3. Use local materials for local use Yes!4. Rural focus Yes!

Green?

Safe drinking water, but we have not yet had to set up a mechanism to collect or store spent absorbent media (iron nails)

D esign for the Environm ent

W ater

A ir

C lim ate

S p ec ies

D es ig n fo r E n viron m en ta l P ro tec tionH ab ita t

W ater

M ateria ls

F ores t

S o il

D es ig n fo r R esou rce R ecoveryE n erg y

Sustainable Implementation?

• We select and train entrepreneurs whose businesses are easily accessible locations

• We provide detailed information to villagers such that they can make individual informed decision to protect their health

• We strengthen the capacity of existing local authorities to support safe water initiatives, rather than relying on remote central authority

• We use existing and functioning distribution networks and infrastructure; therefore reducing risk of failure and negative impacts

Entrepreneurs’ Financial Sustainability?

Financially sustainable:Margin per unit X unit sales > Fixed cost

Example: About $5.00/unit X 100 units = $500 > Fixed Cost

In our case:

• Fixed cost is minimal because the entrepreneurs are well- established organizations with their own financial support for their premises and staff.

• Temporary staff can be hired to construct filters based on demand

Co(m)-passionate Technology?

• Filter designed in local environment with local partners

•Filter designed based on collaborative, iterative, multi-disciplinary approach inherent in sustainable development concept

• Filter designed within social and economic constraints of rural Nepal

• Manufactured by local labor using materials available in rural Nepal

• Easy operation and maintenance

• Filtered water tastes and looks significantly better than untreated water (according to many users) so users like it and are continuing to use it

Future Plans and Challenges

• How to scale-up from 2,000 units (2004) to reach 0.7M in Nepal?

• Increase villagers’ awareness of health and water, targeting the poorest, the least educated, and in remote western areas.

• Address collection and disposal of spent media

• Continue to subsidize filters for the poorest villagers

• Provide entrepreneurs refresher training & certification

• Continue research on bacteria, viruses, protozoa removal

• Influence government and policy-makers

For Further InformationSusan Murcott,Lecturer and Principal InvestigatorMassachusetts Institute of Technologymurcott@mit.edu

Tommy Ngai,Lecturer and Research AffiliateMassachusetts Institute of Technologyngait@mit.edu

Roshan Shrestha,ChairpersonEnvironment & Public Health Organizationrshrestha@mos.com.np

Sophie Walejicksophiew@stanford.edu

Website:http://ceemeng.mit.edu/~water

AcknowledgementsIn Nepal:• Environment and Public Health Organization (ENPHO), Kathmandu• Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Support Programme (RWSSSP), Butwal• Nepal Red Cross Society (NRCS)• Rural Water Supply and Sanitation Fund Development Board (RWSSFDB)• Department of Education (DOE)• Department of Water Supply & Sewerage (DWSS)• Kathmandu University• Tribhuvan University

Internationally:• MIT Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Master of Engineering Program• MIT IDEAS Competition and Lemelson Foundation• The World Bank• UNICEF • Stanford University• University of Calgary, Canada• University of Texas at Dallas• Japanese Red Cross Society (JRCS)

Women who carry the water