EDP Sciences logo
Web of Conferences logo
Search
Menu
All issues Volume 455 (2023) E3S Web Conf., 455 (2023) 01014 References
Open Access
Issue
E3S Web Conf.
Volume 455, 2023
First International Conference on Green Energy, Environmental Engineering and Sustainable Technologies 2023 (ICGEST 2023)
Article Number 01014
Number of page(s) 12
Section Environmental Engg. & Agro Chemistry
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202345501014
Published online 05 December 2023
  1. N. Al-Atawneh, N. Mahmoud, P. Van Der Steen, and P.N.L. Lens, “Characterisation of septage in partially sealed cesspit,” J. Water Sanit. Hyg. Dev., vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 631–639, 2016, doi: 10.2166/washdev.2016.208. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  2. C. L. I. H. and V. S. W. J. Yee Yong Tan, Fu Ee Tang, “Dewatering and Treatment of Septage Using Vertical Flow Constructed Wetlands,” Technologies, vol. 5, no. 70, pp. 1–12, 2017, doi: 10.3390/technologies5040070. [Google Scholar]
  3. C. H. Jason Jie Xiang Bui, Yee Yong Tan, Fu Ee Tang, “No Title,” World J. Eng., vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 222–231, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  4. M. Gunady, N. Shishkina, H. Tan, and C. Rodriguez, “A review of on-site wastewater treatment systems in Western Australia from 1997 to 2011,” J. Environ. Public Health, vol. 2015, 2015, doi: 10.1155/2015/716957. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  5. E. Z. Harrison and M. Moffe, “Septage quality and its effect on field life for land applications,” J. Am. Water Resour. Assoc., vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 87–97, 2003, doi: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2003.tb01563.x. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  6. B. G. Katz et al., “Fate of Effl uent-Borne Contaminants beneath Septic Tank Drainfi elds Overlying a Karst Aquifer,” 2010, doi: 10.2134/jeq2009.0244. [Google Scholar]
  7. B. Kim, T. Bel, P. Bourdoncle, J. Dimare, S. Troesch, and P. Molle, “Uncorrected Proof considerations Uncorrected Proof,” pp. 1–7, 2017, doi: 10.2166/wst.2017.461. [Google Scholar]
  8. K. Mcgaughy and M. T. Reza, “Recovery of Macro and Micro-Nutrients by Hydrothermal Carbonization of Septage Recovery of Macro and Micro-Nutrients by Hydrothermal Carbonization of Septage,” 2018, doi: 10.1021/acs.jafc.7b05667. [Google Scholar]
  9. V. S. Chary and Y. M. Reddy, “Local action with international cooperation to improve and sustain water, sanitatation and hygiene services Operationalizing FSM regulations at city level : a case study of Warangal, India,” pp. 1–6, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  10. J. Paynet, “Septic Tank Problems and Practice,” Pergamon, vol. 30, no. 3, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  11. L. Strande et al., “Methods to reliably estimate faecal sludge quantities and qualities for the design of treatment technologies and management solutions,” vol. 223, no. February, pp. 898–907, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.06.100. [Google Scholar]
  12. R. Valencia, D. Den Hamer, J. Komboi, H. J. Lubberding, and H. J. Gijzen, “Alternative treatment for septic tank sludge : Co-digestion with municipal solid waste in bioreactor landfill simulators,” J. Environ. Manage., vol. 90, no. 2, pp. 940–945, 2009, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.02.007. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  13. C. Gan, P. Champagne, and G. Hall, “Pilot-scale evaluation of semi-passive treatment technologies for the treatment of septage under temperate climate conditions,” J. Environ. Manage., 2017, doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.05.079. [Google Scholar]
  14. “National Policy on Faecal Sludge and Septage Management (FSSM),” no. February, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  15. S. Fernando and H. Manthrithilake, “A Review - Septage Management Related Regulatory and Institutional Aspects and Needs in Sri Lanka,” no. November 2017, 2014, doi: 10.4038/suslj.v13i1.7658. [Google Scholar]
  16. I. W. A. Publishing and W. Science, “A review of sustainable septage management strategies on the islands in Croatia Jure Margeta,” pp. 1833–1843, 2019, doi: 10.2166/wst.2019.184. [Google Scholar]
  17. C. K. Peng and K. Kennedy, “Hydraulic performance of a reed bed / freezing bed technology for septage dewatering,” pp. 1–10, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  18. “Solid Waste Management Rules.” 2016. [Google Scholar]
  19. A. Peal, B. Evans, I. Blackett, P. Hawkins, and C. Heymans, “Fecal sludge management: A comparative analysis of 12 cities,” J. Water Sanit. Hyg. Dev., vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 563–575, 2014, doi: 10.2166/washdev.2014.026. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  20. S. Semiyaga, M. A. E. Okure, C. B. Niwagaba, P. M. Nyenje, and F. Kansiime, “Dewaterability of faecal sludge and its implications on faecal sludge management in urban slums: Faecal sludge pre-treatment by dewatering,” Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 151–164, 2017, doi: 10.1007/s13762-016-1134-9. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  21. A. Taweesan, T. Koottatep, and C. Polprasert, “Effective faecal sludge management measures for on-site sanitation systems,” J. Water Sanit. Hyg. Dev., vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 483–492, 2015, doi: 10.2166/washdev.2015.010. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  22. K. A. Kazora, A.S. Bizuhoraho, T. Mourad, “Improving Faecal Sludge Management System for Sustainable Sanitation, Rwanda. SciFed Biotechnol. Bioeng. J.,” Biotechnol Bioeng J Res. Artic., vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–10, 2018, [Online]. Available: http://www.scifedpublishers.com/open-access/improving-faecal-sludge-management-system-for-sustainable-sanitation-rwanda.pdf. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  23. M.P. del Durante Ingunza, G. Camarini, and F. Murilo Silva da Costa, “Performance of mortars with the addition of septic tank sludge ash,” Constr. Build. Mater., vol. 160, pp. 308–315, 2018, doi: 10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2017.11.053. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  24. I. Ahmed, D. Ofori-Amanfo, E. Awuah, and F. Cobbold, “A Comprehensive Study on the Physicochemical Characteristics of Faecal Sludge in Greater Accra Region and Analysis of Its Potential Use as Feedstock for Green Energy,” J. Renew. Energy, vol. 2019, pp. 1–11, 2019, doi: 10.1155/2019/8696058. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.